Monday, May 12, 2008

New York Times examines movement for new attempt at voter I. D. law in Missouri

An effort in the Missouri Legislature to put a photo I. D. issue on the ballot is explored in an article in today's New York Times:

The Missouri secretary of state, Robin Carnahan, a Democrat who opposes the measure, estimated that it could disenfranchise up to 240,000 registered voters who would be unable to prove their citizenship.

In most of the states that require identification, voters can use utility bills, paychecks, driver’s licenses or student or military ID cards to prove their identity. In the Democratic primary election last week in Indiana, several nuns were denied ballots because they lacked the required photo IDs.

Measures requiring proof of citizenship raise the bar higher because they offer fewer options for documentation. In most cases, aspiring voters would have to produce an original birth certificate, naturalization papers or a passport. Arizona and Missouri, along with some other states, now show whether a driver is a citizen on the face of a driver’s license, and within a few years all states will be required by the federal government to restrict licenses to legal residents.

Critics say that when this level of documentation is applied to voting, it becomes more difficult for the poor, disabled, elderly and minorities to participate in the political process.

“Everyone has been focusing on voter ID laws generally, but the most pernicious measures and the ones that really promise to prevent the most eligible voters from voting is what we see in Arizona and now in Missouri,” said Jon Greenbaum, a former voting rights official at the Department of Justice and now the director of the voting rights project at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a liberal advocacy group.

Aside from its immediacy, the action by Missouri is important because it has been a crucial swing state in recent presidential elections, with outcomes often decided by a razor-thin margin.

Supporters of the measures cite growing concerns that illegal immigrants will try to vote. They say proof of citizenship measures are an important way to improve the accuracy of registration rolls and the overall voter confidence in the process.


How can anyone claim with a straight face that this added burden is needed because illegal immigrants are going to try to vote?

1 comment:

judi said...

Oddly enough, today's St. Louis Post Dispatch has a roundup of bills pending in the legislature, and this bill is not even mentioned! I read the Times article online and then my local dead tree edition and it sounds like we are talking about two different states. I'm not sure why the PD is missing this big story. I care because my 70-year-old husband is one of those people with an irregular birth certificate from Kansas, and he would probably be disenfranchised by this bill, after voting for almost 50 years!