 |
|
Add to My Group
|
November 20, 2007 at 23:14:03
2008 Voter Suppression Hangs on Supreme Court Decision by Project Vote Page 1 of 3 page(s) |
|
|
Weekly Voting Rights News Update By Erin Ferns In the new year, a case that will determine the state of American voting rights will be considered by the Supreme Court. Called “the most important voting rights case since Bush v. Gore” by the Brennan Center for Justice, Indiana's voter ID case (Crawford v. Marion County Elections Board) may throw a monkey wrench into getting eligible voters to cast ballots in the 2008 presidential election. The constitutionality of the nation’s most restrictive voter identification law is under scrutiny by the country’s highest court and more than two dozen scholars, advocates, and voting rights organizations have filed amicus briefs challenging the law in the hopes of expanding access to the ballot while still maintaining election integrity. Powered by unfounded allegations of voter fraud – an issue often conflated with election administration issues, such as list maintenance problems and voter caging efforts – voter ID laws like the one being challenged, are a solution in search of a problem. They end up effectively inhibiting voters rather than encouraging them.
For example, a recent study by the Washington Institute for the Study of Ethnicity and Race noted, “Institutional burdens to participating have long been established to have the largest impact on individuals who have fewer resources, less education, smaller social networks and are more institutionally isolated”.
“Increasing barriers to voting are likely to have the largest impact on these groups, and we find strong evidence to support our thesis that strict voter identification laws would substantially effect these groups negatively.”
Last Tuesday, the 24 filers challenging the voter ID law (including Project Vote) put forth several arguments that ultimately assert that Indiana's law hurts more voters than it helps. The following are some points from the amicus briefs:
Voter fraud is exceedingly rare (Current and Former Secretaries of State; Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, et al.; Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now; Brennan Center, et al.)
Indiana's voter ID law is an unnecessary response to the unlikely threat of polling place fraud, the Brennan Center, Project Vote and other organizations wrote. None of the examples cited by the court of appeals indicate genuine voter fraud, the brief said.
Voter ID puts a burden on voters (League of Women Voters; Rock the Vote, et al.; Current and Former Secretaries of State; Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law et al.; R. Michael Alvarez, et al.; Rep. Keith Ellison; Asian American Legal Defense; and NAACP Legal Defense Fund)
- Several briefs emphasized the impact of voter ID on minority voters: “A large percentage of Indiana’s African-American voters are included in the more than 2.5 million Indiana households that do not own a motor vehicle, and they most likely will not have the requisite photo ID for voting purposes,” wrote Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), who recently introduced legislation banning voter ID laws. “A 6-point gap exists in access to valid photo ID with 84.2% of White registered voters reporting proper ID, compared to 78.2% of Black registered voters,” the Washington Institute Study reported.
- Young voters would be “severely” affected, according to the Rock the Vote amicus brief, which cited a study that showed young people are more likely to vote if allowed to register and vote at campus addresses.
- The R. Michael Alvarez amicus brief cited three studies that show the impact of voter ID on the elderly.
Voter ID is an unconstitutional poll tax (Rep. Ellison; Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund)
-“The striking similarities between voter identification laws and the poll taxes this Court rejected less than half a century ago demonstrate that identification requirements are unconstitutional regardless of the level of scrutiny the Court applies. Nevertheless, voter identification requirements should be subject to the same searching scrutiny this Court historically has applied to statutes that target the franchise,” MALDEF wrote.
- Voter ID laws like Indiana's have been rejected by Congress for unconstitutionality, Ellison wrote. “Indeed, the Senate Conference Report on HAVA highlights this concern: [A]s with the other methods of disenfranchisement in American history, such as literacy tests and poll taxes, the photo identification requirement would present barriers to voting and have a chilling effect on voter participation. There are voters who simply do not have identification and requiring them to purchase photo identification would be tantamount to requiring them to pay a poll tax.”
www.projectvote.org
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 7 comments |
|
It is a foregone conclusion
There's really no question that this court will vote 5-4 in favor of any state law that limits or decreases voter participation in elections. After all, voters that are impacted by these types of laws are almost always predominantly minority, poor, and NON-RETHUGLICAN (that is, Independents and/or Democrats), and the Rethuglican block on the Supreme Court cares much, much more about the survival of their PARTY and their IDEOLOGY than they do about anything else in our country, and definitely more than anything like the Constitution. by Charlie L (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 747 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 21, 2007 at 10:13:12 AM  (0+)
|
|
Seize the Polls
Parody by Mark E. Smith and Rady Ananda, Nov. 2007 (Pirate Radio Song by David Rovics)http://www.diymedia.net/audio/mp3drovics.htm (with much apology to David Rovics) by Rady Ananda (182 articles, 374 quicklinks, 49 diaries, 1718 comments [201 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:13:26 AM (0+)
|
|
If voting could change things ...
...they'd make it illegal. After the 2000 sham of an election one would have thought that a massive effort would be made to have a uniform, verifiable (paper receipt) election process. Not only did that not happen, more obstacles were put into place instead. Not even simple things like moving the election day to Saturday, and eliminating the antiquated Electoral College were taken. I wish I had some hope left for this country but whatever hope I had was pounded into the ground a long time ago. So forgive me if I don't get to excited expecting to see a SC that is even worse than the one that put these treasonous bastards in office in the first place coming to the rescue this time. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 21, 2007 at 11:50:16 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Here's a proposal
Consider the possibility of a Free and Fair Elections Amendment to the Constitution. It's a proposal to open the debate at a new level and consider providing Constitutinal grounds for these decisions. At a minimum, the court would have to squirm harder to get around it. Try the language at www.freeandfairelections.org. by Anthony Signorelli (5 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Wednesday, Nov 21, 2007 at 2:31:33 PM (0+)
|
|
Powered by unfounded allegations of voter fraud
About 46,000 people, are illegally registered to vote in New York City and in Florida - - New York Daily News Completely unfounded.. sort of reminds me of the movie Casablanca " I am Shocked, SHOCKED to learn that GAMBLING is going on here!" "your winnings, Sir" "Oh, Thank you very much!" You talk about voter suppression? People can't obtain an ID card? in their $120 nikes? PLEASE! If you want to discuss voter Disenfranchisement, maybe we should discuss the fact that the two "PARTIES" do everything they can to keep real choice from being offered on the ballots! They tell us who we are "ALLOWED" to vote for... Suppression? OF WHAT? a rigged election where the two candidates are EXACTLY THE SAME? Bush vs Gore... Bush enacted the EXACT SAME POLICIES Gore campaigned to enact in the first 100 days! WAKE UP, man! We are being tossed BS issues to keep us all too occupied to think about what is REALLY happening... Corporate America RUNS the Dems and the Repubs, and we, the people, get the shaft. Ciao, CZ by steve scheetz (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 831 comments [52 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 21, 2007 at 12:08:49 PM (0+)
|
|
Just another reason to
join a boycott on voting for federal offices in 2008; not only are the major candidates not worth voting for, but the whole election/voting system is a disgrace; first a boycott and then deep political reforms to fix our democracy by Joel S. Hirschhorn (141 articles, 50 quicklinks, 65 diaries, 546 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 21, 2007 at 12:14:30 PM (0+)
|
|
LEFT UNSAID
In all the arguments opposing this "voter ID" the most-important one was not stated. That is Article I, Section 8, paragraph 18, that states all law must be "necessary and proper" to carry into fruition the powers the Constitution places with government. Since there is no evidence of "voter fraud" (maybe beyond some mistakes) the law is not necessary. And, if the law disenfranchised otherwise legal voters, it isn't proper. It should be easy to declare it unconstitutional. But, with this right-wing court, constitutionality has nothing to do with anything. by tabonsell (33 articles, 0 quicklinks, 39 diaries, 318 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Nov 21, 2007 at 5:51:07 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
