Voter+ID+Laws

=Voter ID Laws =

Our Questions: 1. What are the purposes of voter ID laws?toc  2. What are the current voter ID laws?  3. Are there different voter ID laws in each state?  4. What are the positives of voter ID laws?  5. What are the negatives of voter ID laws?  6. Are there grievances with the current state of voter ID laws?  7. How do voter ID laws impact elections (presidential, congressional, state, etc.) 8. Have there been propositions/attempts to change voter ID laws?

=**Overview: What are they? **=

__-purpose: __
The purpose of voter ID laws is to protect from fraudulent voters, which are voters who illegally cast a vote on another's behalf. i.e. voter impersonation. Voter fraud is a crime and can result in jail time, but more importantly, it can compromise the authenticity of the democratic system. Those who are for voter ID laws will say that voter ID laws keep elections fair and honest. However, opponents of voter ID laws believe that they disenfranchise minorities and the elderly.

__-history: __
Voter ID laws were created in 1950. South Carolina was the first state to request voters to show their non-photo identification at the poll; the ID simply required a name.

Hawaii then later joined in on the voter ID requirement in 1970, followed by the Lone State State in '71. By 1980, Alaska and Florida would join to make five states that required a form of voter identification at the poll.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">The real strong push for voter ID laws did not come about until the aftermath of the 2000 election, when GW Bush won Florida by a small margin of 537 votes. In 2002, the Help America Vote Act was signed into law, which required first time voters in federal elections to show ID.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">From there, many states have implemented some sort of voter ID laws. The strong push for voter ID laws saw its only defeat in 2012, when Minnesota rejected a voter ID proposal.

__<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">-what are the types of voter ID laws within the state __
<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">There are currently 32 states that enforce some form of voter identification when it comes to voting. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">17 states require voters to present photo identification and 15 require some other form of identification. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Depending on the state, some voters may be able to cast a vote without a photo ID; however, in others, they may be required to cast a provisional ballot, which is a way to record a vote for a person who's voter eligibility is in question. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Typically, valid forms of identification can differ based on the state; however, some common forms would be a driver's license, a state issued ID, or a military ID card. An example of each can be seen below: <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">From Left to Right - Ohio Driver's License, Ohio State Issued ID, Military ID Card <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Note: This kid is certainly not eligible to vote. Image is only for reference

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">According to Ballotpedia.com, Ohio's policy on photo IDs are as followed: <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">"On Election Day at the polling place, every voter must announce his or her full name and current address. Additionally, voters must provide identification. A photo ID is not required."

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">You will find that for the most part, voter ID laws are partisan. More conservative states support Voter ID Laws, while more liberal states will oppose them, trying to do away with them.

__<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">-implications on elections __
<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">According to a July 2015 article published by The Washington Post titled //Voter ID laws' impact on election turnout unclear...,// states that "many analysts point to a Government Accountability Office study that found turnout dropped by roughly 2 percent in Kansas and Tennessee from the 2008 to the 2012 contests, compared with states that didn’t change their voter ID laws" (Howell Jr.). However, the question as to whether this is concrete proof is still up in the air. Dale Ho, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project believes “there have been political scientists who’ve tried to study the effect of these laws — the truth is it’s very, very difficult to measure the effect of a single law on an election.”

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Republicans believe that voter ID laws keep elections more authentic.Yet, Democrats believe that voter ID laws are a way to attack minorities. In addition, they blame voter ID laws for low election turnout.

__-grievances with voter ID Laws:__
This short video (1 min 47 seconds) spells out the issues that many people have with voter ID Laws.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKhfuLjhADE

1. They're partisan 2. Are they truly effective? 3. They're discriminatory

Here is another, little longer video (3 mins) that dives into the nitty-gritty details of the people that voter ID laws inhibit from voting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuiS6Cqe2JU

=__<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Argument for Constitutionality __= <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Cuts down Voter Fraud: <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">According to Forbes, as of September of 2014, 66 cases of voter fraud have been prosecuted in Texas alone since 2004. Voter Fraud is considered to be along lines of crimes like shoplifting in terms of how many times it’s being reported. There have been an approximated 6,600 cases of voter fraud in Texas from 2004 to 2014. Melowese Richardson was sentenced to five years in jail in Ohio for committing voter fraud in 2012. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">ID cards strengthen the power of the legal vote. The more illegal votes and voter fraud that happens, the power the legal votes are “diluted.” Voter fraud violates promise of “one person, one vote.” <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Would require all voters to have ID, proving their identity before voting.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Complies with federal statutes. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) both accept and view Voter ID laws as “one effective method of establishing a voter’s qualification to vote and that the integrity of election’s is enhanced though improved technology.” - Justice John Stevens, Crawford v. Marion County Election BoardMajority Opinion

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Voter ID Laws <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008): <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">The court ruled that to produce any burden on voting process, the state justify by producing “relevant and legitimate state concerns,” and the state had valid interests in modernizing election procedures, while deterring voter fraud and safeguarding voter confidence. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Stevens: “the inconvenience of making a trip to the DMV, gathering the required documents, and posing for a photograph surely does not qualify as a substantial burden on the right to vote.”

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">We use ID's everyday. People need ID's to travel on airplanes, collect a prescription, buy a phone, and even use a credit card. Why should voting be any different?

=__<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Argument against Constitutionality __= <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Discriminates against minorities and the elderly. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">ID laws discriminate against minorities. In many states, ID laws were imposed by the legislature after elections with high minority turnout. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Souter and Ginsberg’s dissent to Crawford v. Marion: Voter ID Laws “threatens to impose nontrivial burdens on the voting right of tens of thousands of the State’s citizens, and a significant percentage of those individuals are likely to be deterred from voting." <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">The American Civil Liberties Union states that “Research shows, for example, that more than 21 million Americans do not have government-issued photo identification; a disproportionate number of these Americans are low-income, racial and ethnic minorities, and elderly.” <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">ACLU: “Voter ID laws have a disproportionate and unfair impact on low-income individuals, racial and ethnic minority voters, students, senior citizens, voters with disabilities and others who do not have a government-issued ID or the money to acquire one.” “As many as 25% of African American citizens of voting age do not have a government-issued photo ID, compared to only 8% of their white counterparts.”

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Violates Constitutional Rights: <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Many people argue that Voter ID laws are essentially modern forms of the poll tax, grandfather clause, and literacy tests which were tactics used by southern states to prevent minorities from voting. While Voter ID laws are not as severe, opponents believe it is a tactic used by conservatives to disenfranchise minority voters. Specifically, they believe that Voter ID closely resembles the poll tax because many states no not provide free ID's.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Voter Fraud is almost non-existent <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">ACLU: “Multiple studies have found that almost all cases of in-person impersonation voter “fraud” are the result of a voter making an honest mistake, and that even these mistakes are extremely infrequent.” <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Inability for supporters of Voter ID laws to prove that in-person voter fraud is widespread.

https://www.aclu.org/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/09/03/voter-id-would-protect-voters-rights-not-inhibit-them/

=__<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Key cases throughout the history __=
 * Case:** Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008)
 * Facts:**In 2005, the Indiana State Legislature passed a law requiring that voters present photo identification when voting in person. Plaintiffs believe that the law “is nether a necessary nor appropriate method of avoiding election fraud; and that it will arbitrarily disfranchise qualified voters.” Specifically, they believe that the law will create an unduly burden for minority and elderly voters.
 * Issue:**Does this law create an unduly burden on a citizens right to vote? Is this law in violation of the 14th Amendment?
 * Holding:** (6-3) No.
 * Majority Opinion**: (Justice Stevens):Any burden on the voting process “must be justified by relevant and legitimate state interests.” The State has valid interests in modernizing election procedures, deterring voter fraud, and safeguarding voter confidence. . Two federal statutes, HAVA and NVRA, indicate, “Congress believes that photo identification is one effective method of establishing a voter’s qualification to vote and that the integrity of election’s is enhanced though improved technology.” Also, a Voter ID law will help States effectively comply with these federal statutes. “There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the State’s interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters.” The new federal statutes have caused inflation in Indiana’s voter rolls, and it is reasonable for the state to enact this law in order to combat this issue. The State also has an interest in safeguarding voter confidence. By enacting a Voter ID law, the State is maintaining the integrity of elections and thereby encouraging other citizens to vote. While the Voter ID law does cause a burden for those without them, “the inconvenience of making a trip to the BMV, gathering the required documents, and posing for a photograph surely does not qualify as a substantial burden on the right to vote.”
 * Concurring**(Justice Scalia, with whom Justice Thomas and Justice Alito join): “The Indiana photo-identification law is a generally applicable, nondiscriminatory voting regulation, and our precedents refute the view that individual impacts are relevant to determining the severity of the burden it imposes.”
 * Dissent**** (Justice Souter, with whom Justice Ginsburg joins):“Indiana’s “Voter ID Law” threatens to impose nontrivial burdens on the voting right of tens of thousands of the State’s citizens, and a significant percentage of those individuals are likely to be deterred from voting.” The Indiana law is unconstitutional.

Most Recently, the Supreme Court refused to hear a case involving Wisconsin's strict Voter ID Laws; therefore, Crawford v. Marion is still the law of the land and Voter ID laws remain Constitutional.

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/03/23/394898151/supreme-court-declines-challenge-to-strict-wisconsin-voter-id-law

__Cases under Consideration:__
Voter ID cases have been very prevalent in Federal Circuit and Appeals courts. State Supreme Courts have also taken action regarding Voter ID. In States where the State's highest courts have ruled Voter ID unconstitutional, there have been initiatives and Amendments proposed to undo this action.

Citations: "Oppose Voter ID Legislation - Fact Sheet." //American Civil Liberties Union//. ACLU, n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2015. <https://www.aclu.org/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet>.

Rousu, Matthew. "Voter ID Would Protect Voter's Rights, Not Inhibit Them." //Forbes//. Forbes Magazine, 3 Sept. 2014. Web. 01 Dec. 2015. <http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/09/03/voter-id-would-protect-voters-rights-not-inhibit-them/>.

"Supreme Court Declines To Hear Challenge To Strict Wisconsin Voter ID Law." //NPR//. NPR, n.d. Web. 01 Dec. 2015. <http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/03/23/394898151/supreme-court-declines-challenge-to-strict-wisconsin-voter-id-law>.

White, Edward Douglass. "THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES." //American Bar Association Journal// 7.7 (1921): 341-43. 1921. Web. 1 Dec. 2015.