We are pleased to announce that photo ID didn’t budge over the last 6 weeks. HJR 9 was DOA once it hit the House calendar where it sat through the close of the 2009 session. After thousands of calls poured into legislative offices and voters made their voices heard at media events and hearings, the state legislature got the message.
Clearly your calls, emails and visits made a difference! Missouri’s commonsense voter ID laws prevail again. We hope this will be last time that we have to worry about this degenerative reform.
After arriving at an impasse on education and economic development it would seem that the state legislature has forgotten all about photo ID. Although there have been rumors and threats of bringing HJR 9 to the House floor there hasn’t seemed to be an opportune time to get to it.
Could this mean the end of the photo ID fight for 2009? We hope so and we hope it dies to never roam the capitol halls again.
Denise Lieberman, senior attorney and voter protection advocate for the Advancement Project pointed out all the fallacies and misnomers surrounding HJR 9 in a guest column printed in the Columbia Missourian this morning.
GUEST COLUMN: Requiring voter ID will do more harm than good
By Denise Lieberman
May 6, 2009 | 9:46 a.m. CDT
I was glad to see the Missourian give attention to the photo ID voting proposal now awaiting vote in the Missouri legislature. Boone County voters would be among those most affected by the HJR 9 measure, and the voting rights of many Mizzou students and Boone County residents hangs in the balance. But a recent op-ed on the topic in the Missourian (“Voter ID necessary for fair elections,” Karl Miller, May 5, 2009) misses the mark.
The proposal is the latest effort by Missouri lawmakers to require voters to produce a specific kind of photo ID at the polls before they can cast a ballot. This needless measure would change our constitution to require voters to provide this ID. This is more restrictive than most of us realize. In contrast to what Mr. Miller suggests in his editorial, the measure wouldn’t allow you to use your college ID, a driver’s license from another state, your voter identification card, or the other forms of ID that are currently allowed at the polls. The fact is that if you don’t have the specific kind of ID outlined in the law, you wouldn’t be allowed cast a regular ballot even if you’re a fully eligible, registered voter. Are you a college student here with an out-of-state ID? A person with a disability who doesn’t drive? Your state of birth can’t find your original birth certificate? Your driver’s license expired? Your records destroyed in Hurricane Katrina? Too bad, even if you are a duly registered voter in Missouri, you would not be entitled to cast a regular ballot. In fact, analysis conducted by the Secretary of State concludes the law could disenfranchise up to 230,000 registered Missouri voters who don’t have the kind of photo ID required – including 6,055 voters in Boone County. Although getting a photo ID is free, it can be costly, difficult and sometimes even impossible to obtain the documents necessary to secure the ID. That’s why the Missouri Supreme Court in 2006 said such a law was unconstitutional, finding that it posed a "a heavy and substantial burden on Missourians' free exercise of the right of suffrage." Now lawmakers want to circumvent our court by asking voters to change our very constitution.
To get the ID, you must first present documents such as a birth certificate to prove your identity, citizenship and place of residence. In some instances, you must present a social security card, proof of residence, court documents or marriage and divorce records if names have changed. Studies show that 11 million people nationwide — and 230,000 here in Missouri — lack or can’t get the required ID.
What’s worse, this law is unnecessary. Despite the claims levied in Mr. Miller’s editorial, research has found time and again that there has never been an instance of voter impersonation fraud in Missouri. What’s more — Missouri law already requires voters to show ID at the polls to prove they are who they say they are on election day. And despite the claims in Mr. Miller’s editorial, photo ID is not an inevitable national trend. Our own state Supreme Court concluded that it violates our fundamental right to vote.
If you’ve ever voted in Missouri, you know that it rarely runs without hitches. And while elections ran more smoothly in 2008 than in the past, many jurisdictions still were overwhelmed and unprepared to meet the large voter turnout. In fact, with thousands of St. Louis County voters standing in line up to seven hours to cast a ballot, news outlets characterized the experience as the “longest wait in America.”
Yet, rather than pursuing reforms like effective early voting in Missouri — as they have in 32 other states — to reduce administrative burdens and make it easier for voters to cast their ballots on Election Day, Missouri lawmakers instead have focused on this overly restrictive photo ID proposal that doesn’t make sense and isn’t justified.
To add insult to injury — perhaps in an effort to appease the nearly 6,000 Missouri voters who have already called Jefferson City to oppose the measure — the bill’s sponsors tacked on a litany of amendments that don’t help voters. To make matters even worse, the proposal overrides pages of laws protecting disabled and military voters, including Mr. Miller himself! Voters should know that the rights of 10,000 overseas military voters and 15,000 disabled voters are at risk because the measure eliminates the state’s permanent absentee service and eliminates the ability for county clerks and boards to get over 10,000 Missourians in uniform ballots via email and fax. The fact is, no Missourian should lose his or her right to vote because a government bureaucracy is unable to provide her with a copy of her birth certificate. I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Miller that we should dispense with the partisan politics in Jefferson City — but in my book, disenfranchising voters isn’t partisan politicking – this is about protecting our citizens’ most fundamental of rights.
Have lawmakers given thought to the many “real life” Missourians who would not be able to vote because they were unable to obtain the needed documents required by the photo ID law? Voters who would be disenfranchised include Boone County’s Kathleen Weinschenk, who has cerebral palsy and because of her disability is unable to make a consistent signature or mark — her signature would not match the signature on her voter registration record required by the Missouri law. Maudie Mae Hughes and Lillie Lewis of St. Louis are elderly women born in Mississippi who can’t get a Missouri photo ID required by the law because they cannot get a copy of their birth certificates from the State of Mississippi, which says it has no record of their births. Because they cannot get a copy of their birth certificates, they wouldn’t be able to obtain the necessary Missouri ID required under the law. Amanda Mullaney was born in Kentucky to unwed parents and her name does not match the name on her birth certificate. The late Judge Charles Blackmar, one of the judges sitting on the Missouri Supreme Court for the 2006 photo ID challenge, learned that he would not be able to cast a regular ballot because, at 84 years old, he no longer drove a car and had allowed his driver’s license to expire.
Missouri lawmakers can do better. With just two weeks remaining in the legislative session in the midst of a massive budget crisis, don’t they have more important matters to address than taking up a proposal costing nearly $6 million in taxpayer dollars to change our constitution to disenfranchise thousands of voters — especially the most disadvantaged among us? We cannot allow these tactics to relegate eligible Missouri voters to second-class citizenship. The rights of all citizens should be protected, not just those with state IDs.
Denise Lieberman is the Missouri senior attorney and voter protection advocate for Advancement Project who headed Election Day monitoring operations in St. Louis in 2004, 2006 and 2008. She serves as a spokesperson for Missourians for Fair Elections, a non-partisan coalition opposing HJR 9, www.mofairelections.org. She teaches political science at Washington University in St. Louis.
In an op-ed piece in today’s Columbia Missourian, Boone Co. resident J. Karl Miller overlooked several key caveats and problems encountered in HJR 9. Our response to his statements and misguided logic are as follows:
First, Mr. Miller claims that requiring government issued photo IDs to vote is an inevitable national trend and that Missouri will HAVE to reform its current common sense voter ID law. Currently, there are no indications that the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) or the Department of Justice (DOJ), two federal agencies charged with overseeing election administration and with enforcement of federal election requirements, are pushing for restrictive government-issued IDs to vote. Rather, elections have historically been run at the local level and there is no reason that we see should change the system to make it a top down, state driven system.
Second, Mr. Miller remarks that student IDs and out of state driver’s licenses should be acceptable as forms of photo ID. We totally agree with Mr. Miller but UNFORTUNTATELY these forms of ID would NOT be acceptable if HJR 9 passed. Rather, non-expired driver’s licenses, non-driver’s licenses, military IDs and passports would be voters’ ONLY options.
Third, Mr. Miller’s logic that 230,000 voters not having driver’s licenses shouldn’t matter in the grand scheme of things is flawed. Elections are won and lost in Missouri by increasingly tight margins. The presidential race in Missouri was won by less than 3,000 votes statewide! Two state legislative races were tight enough in 2008 that the victory margins were under 100 votes and recounts were called. Trying to say that 230,000 voters is only 6% of the voting population and doesn’t matter because 30% of Missourians didn’t go to the polls in Missouri is flawed and won’t hold up in the courts.
Fourth, Mr. Miller is a retired Marine AND disabled voter. He and all other active duty and retired military voters should be made aware that HJR 9 chisels away at their voting rights. HJR 9 eliminates the state’s permanent absentee service AND eliminates the ability for county clerks and boards to get over 10,000 Missourians in uniform ballots via email and fax. For Missourians who are fighting for democracy in the Middle East and beyond it would be a cruel move to make their vote inaccessible.
Finally, the act of voting is not a privilege, it is a RIGHT. Creating barriers to voting for voters regardless of their political leanings because they aren’t fortunate enough to have a certified copy of their birth certificate or because they don’t drive is WRONG and according to our current state constitution, it is ILLEGAL. This is not about partisanship, it is about democracy.
Affected voters and Boone County Clerk Wendy Noren held an awareness event with Secretary of State Robin Carnahan this afternoon to discuss an updated list of registered voters who don't have driver's licenses. The event was held as HJR 9 sits on the House Perfection Calendar and legislators have predicted that it will be sent out of the House this week.
Overall, there are nearly 230,000 Missouri registered voters who currently do not have government-issued identification. Breaking it down by county, we see a startling trend of which voters will be most impacted:
HJR 9 is expensive to the voter. Voters without Missouri issued driver’s licenses will have to spend hours navigating bureaucracy to find certified copies of their birth certificate and court papers if their name has changed. In some cases voters will be stuck in a catch-22 where they can’t get a certified copy of their birth certificate without a valid driver’s license. Meanwhile other voters born outside Missouri or who have experienced natural disasters like floods and fires will be helpless because their documents were long destroyed.
HJR 9 is unnecessary and impacts nearly a quarter million Missouri voters who will be discouraged from even going to the polls because of the extra hoops they’ll have to jump through. The legislature should pay heed to the county by county numbers generated by the Secretary of State and drop HJR 9 from the House calendar today.
With 3 weeks to go, the state legislature adjourned Thursday afternoon at 2 p.m. without taking up HJR 9. The House and Senate have yet to reconcile a budget that Governor Jay Nixon could agree to AND they have $2.3 Billion in stimulus funds to place before May 8th. A reasonable person would think that their simply isn’t enough time or political will to hurt 240,000 registered Missouri voters through unnecessary and expensive election reform, but some legislators aren’t letting photo ID die quietly.
Rep. Shane Schoeller (R-139) told David Catanese yesterday in response to his story about photo ID that the bill would be brought to the House floor nearly next week. Don’t these guys have enough to keep them busy with 15 days left in session? Isn’t dealing with the economic crisis, balancing the budget, helping Missourians secure more jobs and insuring quality healthcare a long enough list of REAL problems? We encourage you to call your legislators TODAY to remind them to SOLVE real problems rather than CREATE problems for Missouri voters!
Tonight, David Catanese, political reporter for KY3 NBC news in Springfield ran a story entitled “Early Voting, Voter ID Proposal May be Too Big to Pass.” The story featured Southwest Missouri League of Women Voters President Lois Detrick who spoke about the League’s opposition to putting 240,000 registered voters at risk and Webster County Clerk Stanley Whitehurst spoke about the poorly thought out implementation and unintended costs of HJR 9. The story follows:
Early voting, voter ID proposal may be too big to pass
SPRINGFIELD -- If you want to vote early in Missouri, you'd need to bring a photo I.D.
And that's probably why both legislative ideas won't survive the waning days of the 2009 session.
A joint House resolution would allow Missourians to vote a week early in statewide races --- but require a photo I.D. to do so. It's an attempted compromise between Republicans and Democrats. But there's so much in the bill, the odds are it will fail.
Willard Rep. Shane Schoeller said the House will take up House Joint Resolution 9 next week and it will probably pass. The stumbling block will come in the Senate, where a filibuster is threatened.
And even if it does clear both chambers, it would then go to the voters to decide in 2010.
KY3 News, Springfield
Photo finished? Time's running out for House resolution supporti
ng photo voter ID
By Jo Mannies and Dale Singer, Beacon staff
Posted 11:02 a.m. Tues., April 21 - The state Capitol snapped to attention Monday when Missouri House Majority Leader Steve Tilley sent out a "tweet'' on his Twitter online account that laid out his predictions about any legislation's chances.
Tilley tweeted that a bill must pass the House this week -- and be on its way to the Senate -- "to have a realistic chance of passage'' before this legislative session ends May 15.
That edict could affect several controversial measures.
Among them: House Joint Resolution 9 (HJR 9) , the latest effort by Republicans to require all Missouri voters to show a government-issued photo ID at the polls before they can cast a ballot.
Almost three years ago, the Missouri Supreme Court thwarted a legislative move to impose the government-issued photo ID requirement in the 2006 election. The court tossed out the mandate just weeks before Election Day.
The court said the new law violated Missouri's constitution by imposing "a heavy and substantial burden on Missourians' free exercise of the right of suffrage."
This legislative session, some Republican backers -- including Tilley -- are hoping to circumvent the court and another powerful opponent, Gov. Jay Nixon, by going directly to Missouri voters in 2010 with a proposed constitutional amendment mandating the government-issued photo IDs.
If passed by voters in 2010, the proposed government-issued photo ID requirement would then be in place for the next presidential election in 2012.
The governor doesn't get a chance to sign or veto "joint resolutions'' that propose a constitutional amendment and pass both chambers. Such measures go directly on the ballot.
Backers are banking on a floor vote this week on HJR 9, after the measure won approval last week from the House Rules Committee
Although concerned about the time crunch, Tilley observed recently that a photo ID mandate is "a pretty big issue'' for legislators like himself who support the requirement.
But in the state Senate, potential opponents like Sen. Joan Bray, D-University City, and Sen. Jeff Smith, D-St. Louis, say they will attempt to block HJR 9 -- with a filibuster, if necessary -- if the final version is, as Bray put it, "a piece of junk."
Supporters of the requirement believe that most Missouri voters -- especially those in rural areas -- share their belief that the lack of a government-issued photo ID invites fraud at the polls.
Democrats generally dispute the fraud allegations and say the GOP's real aim is to disenfranchise low-income, disabled and minority voters who are least likely to have government-issued photo IDs, and more likely to favor Democrats.
To sweeten the taste for dissenters, the proposal's sponsors have added a provision authorizing no-fault early voting, which Missouri does not have -- and which many Democrats (and a few Republicans) have long sought.
State Sen. Delbert Scott, R-Lowry City, was among the leaders of the failed 2006 effort to mandate government-issued photo identification at the polls.
He said Monday that he's had some misgivings about seeking a constitutional amendment and about tacking on the early-voting provisions.
"Having said that, if it's the only way to do it and it's a tradeoff for early vote -- I don't know if it's a good idea or not," Scott added. "I am very supportive of the photo ID and certainly am not opposed to the early voting within a certain price tag."
But the two-pronged effort by Missouri's photo-ID supporters appears to have created a new obstacle to their chances of getting the measure through this session -- the Missouri County Clerks Association.
For much of the state, especially rural Missouri, county clerks run the elections.
Missouri's county clerks are split over the photo ID requirement, said association president Stan Whitehurst, the Webster County circuit clerk. But when it comes to HJR 9's early voting mandate, most of the association members are against it.
"As it's currently framed, we don't think the legislation is the right approach,'' Whitehurst said.
By coincidence, the association's membership is gathered in Jefferson City this week for a conference. While in town, Whitehurst added, "We plan to be visiting with our legislators'' to register the concerns about the proposal.
Many association members object to HJR 9's specific language regarding office hours and administrative procedures for early voting, he explained. But what really got the group worked up is the measure's lack of state money to help cover the added election costs that county clerks believe will accompany early voting.
Legislators "don't feel the (financial) pain," Whitehurst said. "If they had some skin in the game, they'd be concerned about the costs of these specific proposals."
The association's concerns could well harm HJR 9's chances, by providing unexpected assistance to various groups who have long been opponents of any Missouri law requiring government-issued photo IDs at the polls.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, more than 30 states already allow early voting. Only seven require photo identification.
BATTLE LINES OVER PHOTO IDS AT THE POLLS
The arguments over requiring government-issued photo IDs at the polls have changed little in three years.
Based on state statistics, Secretary of State Robin Carnahan's office believes that up to 240,000 of Missouri's registered voters lack a driver's license -- the chief form of government-issued photo ID that would be allowed under HJR 9. Others put that figure in the range of 160,000 people.
(Those figures were compiled by comparing the number of Missourians with drivers licenses with those on voter rolls. Critics say duplicate voter registrations inaccurately fatten the comparison, and also back up their case that better identification is needed to guard against people voting more than once.)
HJR 9 also would allow a U.S. passport, a military-issued ID or a state-issued photo identification card for non-drivers as an acceptable government-issued ID.
Carnahan's official report of the November 2008 election, which came out last month, declared that there was no evidence of any voter fraud -- but plenty of incidences where legitimately registered people got turned away. In some cases, she wrote, they were improperly told they needed photo IDs.
Carnahan's predecessor, Republican Matt Blunt, asserted in his report after the 2000 election that as many of 1,233 people were illegally allowed to obtain court orders to vote after they couldn't provide evidence that they were registered. Later, the U.S. Justice Department asserted in a lawsuit that an undetermined number of legitimate voters in the city of St. Louis were inappropriately barred from voting in November 2000 because of faulty voter rolls.
In any case, St. Louis lawyer Denise Lieberman, who is the Missouri voter protection coordinator for a nationwide group known as the Advancement Project, says the real issue centers on the real people who are now legitimate voters but could lose their rights if Missouri institutes a constitutional amendment requiring government-issued photo IDs.
"We're not talking about people who would be otherwise ineligible to vote," she said. "We are talking about disenfranchising eligible voters, people who have a right to cast a ballot and have a say in their government, who have been arbitrarily removed from the political process solely because they could not get a copy of an original birth certificate, say, or a student in Missouri with a driver's license from another state or a person with a disability whose signature changes every time."
By a 6-1 vote, the Missouri Supreme Court embraced similar arguments. For example, the court noted that people seeking a driver's license or non-driver photo ID must produce a birth certificate, which can cost $15 to acquire. Such a payment violates the constitutional right to free elections, the court said.
One person who knows firsthand of the frustrations that the photo ID provision can bring is Kathleen Weinschenk of Columbia, Mo., who was instrumental in bringing the suit that overturned the 2006 photo ID law.
Weinschenk, who uses a wheelchair because of cerebral palsy, is unable to write her name and must make a mark while signing documents. Because of her disability, the mark is not the same from one time to the next, so it is difficult to use it as identification.
She said tying the photo ID issue to provisions for early voting undercuts the right she has worked so hard to secure.
"If you have early voting, but not everyone can vote, it still doesn't help anything," she said. "If you have only a selected few people who can vote, you're not a democracy, are you?"
Meanwhile, state Sen. Scott said that requiring government-issued photo identification would provide Missourians with a "great deal of comfort" about the legitimacy of the state's election process.
If Republican legislative leaders are committed, there is time to get the measure through both chambers by May 15, he said.
However, Scott also took note of the potential obstacles facing HJR 9 as well: "I don't know whether it's got legs or not."
Freelance writer Jason Rosenbaum contributed information for this report.
Contact Beacon political reporter Jo Mannies or Beacon staff writer Dale Singer.
The MO House of Representatives engaged in a colorful debate on HB 361 centering around the federal Real ID act which requires each state to move toward federalized driver’s licenses and databases. The very same legislators who have time and again voted in favor of requiring photo IDs to vote opposed Real ID because of the bureaucratic headache and cost of acquiring it.
Following this logic, one would believe that the same state representatives who oppose real ID would also oppose photo ID requirements to vote because both require jumping through bureaucratic hoops, paying fees for supporting documentation and long waits for such documents. Even the bill’s champion, Jim Guest, and Rep. Ryan Silvey confused one another as they discussed the process of acquiring a bona fied, government-issued photo ID. Click here to listen to their circular floor discussion.
Ultimately, the House voted to oppose Real ID because of the burden that would be imposed on Missourians to get federal certified ID to enter federal buildings and travel by airplane. The House of Representatives voted against such requirements in an 83-69 vote. Let’s hope that the same legislators will respond in the same way to unnecessary and burdensome photo ID requirements.
We are very proud of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch enough for taking a stand AGAINST Photo ID and the state legislature’s attempt to tack a feeble early voting reform onto it. Read our letter to the PD below which we sent in response to their Editorial entitled Partisans who mess with voters’ rights are playing with fire.
Tying voter ID to early voting is an underhanded move to suppress voters
Thursday, Apr. 16 2009
Tying voter ID to early voting is an underhanded move to suppress voters
We applaud the paper's efforts to speak out against HJR 9, the snowballing
photo identification constitutional amendment being pushed through the state
legislature this year.
As the editorial "Early voting gets a poison pill" (April 10) shrewdly pointed
out, this law is unnecessary, expensive and a clear impediment to making sure
that every eligible voter is able to vote. We were extremely disappointed that
the Elections Committee refused to hold a public hearing on the bill after 10
pages of changes were added, thereby changing its intent and impact
dramatically. It is important that concerned voters, advocates and affected
organizations share their views on such proposals before they are passed.
Tying voter deterrence legislation like photo identification to a good
government measure like early voting is illogical and underhanded. To make
matters even worse, HJR 9 is a constitutional amendment that was poorly written
and overrides pages of pre-existing absentee voting statutes that protect
disabled and military voters. If HJR 9 passed in its current form, it
potentially could disenfranchise up to 200,000 voters, and the secretary of
state estimates that 10,000 overseas military voters and 15,000 disabled voters
would be hurt as well.
We call HJR 9 for what it is: A merciless and unnecessary reform that uses an
inadequate early voting reform as a disguise to hurt the most vulnerable voters
in this state.
Denise Lieberman – St. Louis
Bob Quinn – Jefferson City
Spokespersons for the Missourians for Fair Elections Coalition
The Rules Committee met last night to consider several bills including HCS HJR 9, the photo ID law. It comes as no surprise that Photo ID moved so quickly to the top of the Rules’ Committee list as the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Stanley Cox is the Vice-Chairman of the Committee. Despite a motion made by Rep. Stephen Webber to send the photo ID bill back to the Elections Committee for further review and public input, the committee chose to vote this dangerous and snowballing bill out of the committee. Rep. Webber and Rep. Mike Talboy each spoke to the issue and pointed out that other pieces of legislation have been sent back to their committees of origin for further review and photo ID should be no different. Chairman Michael Parson even agreed that there were “issues” with the bill but he had been reassured by Rep. Cox that some of the bill’s provisions would be corrected once it goes to the House the floor.
It is unacceptable that our legislators are willing to pass this legislation out of committee KNOWING IT IS INHERENTLY FLAWED and would most certainly disenfranchise tens of thousands of disabled and overseas military voters. CALL YOUR LEGISLATORS TODAY AND LET THEM KNOW HOW DISAPPOINTED you are in their FLAWED PROCESS!
The Turner Report captured a column written over the weekend by Rep. Cynthia Davis (R-O’Fallon) in response to the many calls she has received in opposition to a photo ID requirement in Missouri. Not only was her column based in rumors, stereotypes and misgivings but it also completely missed the mark. In her assertions, Davis claimed:
First of all, the Department of Justice and Secretaries of State past and present have pointed out there are no recorded instances of in-person voter impersonation in Missouri. This is a law that Davis believes will deter illegal voters from going to polls but the intended effect is that a photo ID law will discourage eligible, registered Missouri voters.
Later in the column Davis continues exclaimed that:
We are happy that Davis is taking calls from her constituents but we fear she isn’t listening. Davis continues to deny that this proposal would make it INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT for voters to actually cast ballots. Photo ID would take the fundamental act of voting and turn it into a bureaucratic nightmare full of expensive and time consuming obstacles for voters without a valid driver’s licenses, military IDs or passports. These persons include disabled, minority and urban area voters. Just the types of voters that Rep. Davis isn’t concerned about or interested in protecting. Shame on you Cynthia for not really listening to Missouri Voters and passing HCS HJR 9 out of committee!
So here’s a system that worked and could be improved only by allowing Missourians to vote early, as voters in 32 other states can do. Naturally, Republican lawmakers in the Missouri House of Representatives have decided to mess up a good idea with a bad one. . .
That’s not all. To gain even this second-class system, Missouri voters would have to swallow an amendment to HJR 9 requiring mandatory photo identification at polling places. House Republicans cynically cobbled together the two concepts into one proposal — all without a public hearing. . .
As much as we favor early voting, we can’t swallow the poison pill that is the voter ID requirement. The House should reject the committee bill. Failing that, the Senate should reject it. . .
Citizens are way ahead of politicians when it comes to voting rights. They’ve lived through Bush v. Gore, long lines at polling place, scare tactics and dirty tricks on Election Day. They have had enough. They have every reason to resent this cynical partisanship. Partisans who mess with voters’ rights are playing with fire — and deserve to get burned. . .
Excerpts taken from the April 9th St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial entitled: Partisans who mess with voters’ rights are playing with fire. For Full Story Click Here.
Partisans who mess with voters’ rights are playing with fire
April 9, 2009
St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial Board
Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan published a detailed report last week saying that Missouri voters generally fared well at the polls last November.
That was no accident. Despite huge turnouts, troubles were few at state polling places, the result of good preparation by election officials, voting rights advocates, voters themselves and more than 24,000 volunteers — real patriots at work.
So here’s a system that worked and could be improved only by allowing Missourians to vote early, as voters in 32 other states can do. Naturally, Republican lawmakers in the Missouri House of Representatives have decided to mess up a good idea with a bad one.
On a pure party-line vote Tuesday, the House Elections Committee approved a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow early voting, but only at the cost of disenfranchising many voters and locking Missouri into one of the least progressive voting systems in the nation.
Missouri voters would benefit immensely from an early voting system. But state lawmakers have shown little interest in their constituents’ convenience. They do a lot of talking about it, but they consistently have failed to take action.
Now House Republicans are holding early voting hostage. They are proposing a constitutional amendment that provides early voting, but through the stingiest program imaginable.
Under their plan, embodied in House Joint Resolution 9, early voting would be available just for one week and for limited hours. Other states allow early voting to last at least two weeks and accommodate working people with extended hours.
HJR 9 would let counties open one early voting center. Those that wanted more than one would would receive no state support.
That’s not all. To gain even this second-class system, Missouri voters would have to swallow an amendment to HJR 9 requiring mandatory photo identification at polling places. House Republicans cynically cobbled together the two concepts into one proposal — all without a public hearing.
The photo ID requirement is a vestige of GOP political guru Karl Rove’s voter suppression efforts during President George W. Bush’s administration. A voter ID requirement passed in Missouri in 2006, but was thrown out by the Missouri Supreme Court. Subsequently, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld — wrongly, in our view — a similar law in Indiana.
Photo ID is billed as a way to stem fraud, but that’s a phony argument. There wasn’t a single complaint of voter impersonation in Missouri in the last election cycle.
The effect would be to disenfranchise some of the more than 200,000 Missourians who lack photo IDs, many of them elderly or poor — people who tend to vote Democratic.
And it would penalize voters who need special assistance. Permanently disabled voters, for example, now can be granted permanent absentee voter status. HJR 9 provides no such allowance.
Constitutions should be amended infrequently and with care. This amendment was proposed simply to circumvent a gubernatorial veto.
As much as we favor early voting, we can’t swallow the poison pill that is the voter ID requirement. The House should reject the committee bill. Failing that, the Senate should reject it.
Citizens are way ahead of politicians when it comes to voting rights. They’ve lived through Bush v. Gore, long lines at polling place, scare tactics and dirty tricks on Election Day. They have had enough. They have every reason to resent this cynical partisanship. Partisans who mess with voters’ rights are playing with fire — and deserve to get burned.
MO Elections Chief Blasts Proposed Changes - Associated Press
Election Group Pans Voter ID Passage out of Committee – KY3 Political Notebook
Proposed Change to Constitution Would Create Early Voting Period, Require Photo ID – Springfield News-Leader
Election Committee Approves Voter Photo ID - KRCG Channel 13
Photo ID Resolution Passes MO House Committee - KWMU Radio, St. Louis
