When Indiana passed a voter ID law, it was ostensibly to protect the integrity of the voting process. What better way to prevent voter fraud than to require those participating in an election to produce identification?
Was there any evidence of a voter-fraud scourge in Indiana? No. Would the law make it harder for “certain kinds” of voters (i.e., the elderly, minorities, and the poor) to participate? Yes. Did this look a whole lot like Republican lawmakers trying to discourage likely Democratic voters from taking part in elections? Obviously.
But in a painfully misguided ruling, the Supreme Court approved the Indiana measure anyway. We’re now seeing the predictable result — conservatives who want voter ID laws to help keep Democrats from the polls are ratcheting up their efforts.
The battle over voting rights will expand this week as lawmakers in Missouri are expected to support a proposed constitutional amendment to enable election officials to require proof of citizenship from anyone registering to vote.
The measure would allow far more rigorous demands than the voter ID requirement recently upheld by the Supreme Court, in which voters had to prove their identity with a government-issued card.
Sponsors of the amendment — which requires the approval of voters to go into effect, possibly in an August referendum — say it is part of an effort to prevent illegal immigrants from affecting the political process. Critics say the measure could lead to the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of legal residents who would find it difficult to prove their citizenship.
Similar Republican-led efforts are under consideration in 19 states, but Missouri’s effort is the only one that might take effect before this year’s presidential election.
Robin Carnahan (D), Missouri’s secretary of state, estimates that the measure could disenfranchise up to 240,000 registered voters who would be unable to prove their citizenship. (In 2000 and 2004, the margin of victory in Missouri was less than 200,000 votes, meaning that the GOP voter ID plan could easily make a difference in deciding the winner of the state’s electoral votes.)
Digby concluded:
This is what the voter-fraud fraud has always been about: making voting such a hassle that a lot of voters will just figure it isn’t worth the trouble or don’t feel like being treated like dirt by officials who suspect them of being criminals on the basis of their ethnicity. I would imagine that there are a whole lot of older people who’ve never had to prove their citizenship in their lives and wouldn’t have a clue about how to go about doing it.
This whittling away at the franchise will be one of the greatest accomplishments of the conservative movement when all is said and done. They simply don’t believe in the democratic concept of one person one vote. Never have.
I’d just add that it’s far from clear that the Supreme Court would go for this. The court majority endorsed the Indiana measure, but it required a photo ID. If someone doesn’t have a driver’s license, they can get a state ID card for free. It’s a huge hassle, especially for elderly people who can’t get around easily or low-income workers who can’t get time off to go to a courthouse, but there were options. (In other states, utility bills, paychecks, and student or military ID cards meet identification requirements.)
Proving U.S. citizenship is tougher, creating a hurdle that’s harder to clear. Missouri voters would likely have to produce an original birth certificate, naturalization papers, or a passport in order to participate in an election, and a whole lot of eligible voters would likely be denied a ballot or decide in advance it’s not worth the trouble. Maybe five justices would sign off on this, maybe not, but it’s not obvious.
Lillie Lewis, a voter who lives in St. Louis and spoke at a news conference last week organized to oppose the amendment, said she already had a difficult time trying to get a photo ID from the state, which asked her for a birth certificate. Ms. Lewis, who was born in Mississippi and said she was 78 years old, said officials of that state sent her a letter stating that they had no record of her birth.
“That’s downright wrong,” Ms. Lewis said. “I have voted in almost all of the presidential races going back I can’t remember how long, but if they tell me I need a passport or birth certificate that’ll be the end of that.”
A 2006 federal rule intended to keep illegal immigrants from receiving Medicaid was widely criticized by state officials for shutting out tens of thousands of United States citizens who were unable to find birth certificates or other documents proving their citizenship.
Is there any evidence at all to suggest non-citizens are voting and influencing U.S. elections? Not at all; that’s not what this is about.
This is a scheme launched by far-right activists who hope to get fewer Democrats to vote. Plain and simple. Republicans have a choice — try to win elections the old fashioned way (by earning the support of voters), or try to shave a few percentage points off the likely vote totals of the other side. They seem to prefer the latter, even if it means proposing a solution to a problem that doesn’t exit.
As Josh Marshall explained a while back, “Remember, the point of voter ID laws is not to eliminate fraud; it is to eliminate Democratic voters.”
No Trackbacks To “What hath the Supreme Court wrought?“
I’m sure the Supremes will be happy to hear any and all such cases brought by any and all states to ensure the desireable election results by November.
Democracy is anti American! /s
Impeach Scalia and Thomas! Conflict of interest and gross incompetence, respectively.
McFrist.
sorry I had to do it.
damn.
Papers. Papers, please.
And apparently the goal is to stop nuns from voting as well.
A bad, bad situation, and one we have to keep on top of - but an opportunity to further expose Republicans for what they are.
The Supreme Court is made up of political appointees. One does not exactly get there by being the best legal mind in the country. It’s not what you know; but, who you blow.
What is it with those that desire power so much that they would work to take such an important right away…please help me understand such people.
It is my State that the Court ruled in favor of…we need a Constitutional Convention to change a few things…among them, lifetime appointments to anything in Government.
What a pathetic bunch of losers: the repugs realize that they cannot win on a level playing field, so they make it part & parcel of their everyday strategy to cheat… even when it means destroying our rights or ignoring the same Constitution that they pretend to hold so dear.
Why do repugs hate America so much? Are they really such a bunch of weak-kneed little followers who need an authority figure like Cheney to tell them what to do & what to think?
“In this world of sin and sorrow, there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican.” -H.L. Mencken
.
Why does the SCOTUS hate my freedom to vote?
.
This is so unfair. Everyone, including undocumented aliens and foreigners, should be able to vote in USA elections. After all. they ARE all affected by what the USA does/
I don’t see what the problem is with them voting.
The GOP will try anything.This we already know. But in a way, they have too , otherwise they don’t stand a chance in Nov. Is it wrong? Absolutely. This is just the beginning.
It is time to begin the recall of several of the justices on our courts. Please begin creating citizen initiatives that will require your state to issue impeachment votes to congress to have them removed. We only need the majority required to force them from their thrones.
We are not talking about only the Bush’s idiot appointments to the supreme court. Hundreds of unqualified conspirators of the neocon movement have been installed while our congress has approved them knowing, and there is no doubt, that they were part of the criminal conspiracy that is our current government.
Imagine an idiot like Clarence Thomas doing anything but teaching as a tenured professor? He isn’t capable of any other job, and clearly has sexual problems that make him a fine republican. He just doesn’t fit our America. The recent appointments are absurd and can be directly linked to the obstruction of justice in our courts and regarding the executive branch of government.
As Americans, we have a lot of shameful duties ahead of us. There will be many trials and there can be no soft sentences or others will attempt to repeat these crimes.
Oh yeah, Missouri is practically Tijuana.
Can there be any doubt *why* Republicans push this issue? It’s to make it harder for people with less money to vote, period.
Eventually, people realised our conservative (Republican-Lite) government in Australia had gone too far and voted them out in huge numbers.
Unfortunately for America, you don’t have the truly independent electoral commission that we have. No-one questions the vote tallies (which are quite accurate) and electoral boundaries aren’t gerrymandered; being based and continually modified based on the population and are independent of interference from any of the political parties.
We’re not free of interference (mostly internally when the parties pick candidates) but it’s generally quite good. I hope one day they clear the way for genuinely free and fair elections in the US.
Failing that for now, I hope at least so many people vote for the Democrats that they can’t fix the results.
“From October 2002 to September 2005, the Justice Department indicted 40 voters for registration fraud or illegal voting, 21 of whom were noncitizens, according to department records.”
Once again, the Republicans (and their lackeys in the Supreme Court) “fix” a problem that never really existed. Disgraceful. Now it’s up to the States to put together some sort of free identification program, as one Republican suggested. Sure. That’ll happen.
Forget the Indiana Nuns; even Jesus couldn’t vote in Indiana!
Maybe soon we’ll have to sign “Loyalty Oaths”.
I Like Pie @ 7:
The old adage about judges: a judge is just a lawyer who knows a politician.
If an individual does not have a drivers license or any other form of ID on their person when they show up to vote, they are too gattdam stupid to cast a vote. Good riddance.
I assume that the Indiana voter identification law extends to vote by mail. Not.
“Also, if you qualify to vote absentee-by-mail or absentee-by-traveling board, and you chose to vote as such, you are not required to present photo ID.”
There will be many trials and there can be no soft sentences or others will attempt to repeat these crimes.
There will? Just who is going to initiate these trials and would it matter, anyway? The real (and only?) legacy of the Bush years is reflected in the local and federal courts that they have successfully (sometimes with Dem support!) packed with rightwing ideologues. Nothing will change that for decades.
the u.s supreme court is now the u.s criminal supreme court …
Why do I keep expecting the court to do this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tqeETjBeFQ
Oh great, so they’re adding bouncers to the polling places. Will they be checking your ID at the door, or what? So much for the party of smaller government.
Supreme Court Justice Scalia has been all over the place repeating “get over it” in regard to the Supreme court Judicial Coup of 2000.
Do you think the Supreme Court Judges get the lack of respect that the majority of Americans feel towards them?
I don’t think they get it. They need to spend more time on the streets
Well…seems the 15% solution is going well…bunch of fascist fucks!
drago @ 19:
Is a voter identification card enough?
Isn’t Christofascism lovely?
Funny. The Second Amendment to the U. S. Constitution is supposed to be the failsafe that protects American citizens from this level of fascist tyranny and yet not a single rightarded gun nut mother fucker has “risen up” to exercise the very rights they claim they need their firearms to protect.
Democracy is an endangered species.
I read somewhere recently that because of gerrymandering all but around 15% of votes are for all intensive purposes,out of play.What remains is now being threatened by sleazy tactics like this,and an aggressively partisan press intent upon manipulating and controlling the outcome.What a sad farce.
The Japanese Americans were allowed to leave their internment camps during WWII as long as they could provide evidence that they were loyal American citizens, too.
We gotta stop the spread of brown people somehow! Before you know it America will have a huge population of brown people! While we’re at it we should make tanning salon’s illegal too. We need to protect our lilly-white skin!
Whatever happened to a citizen not having to prove innocence. It seems to me the citizen should be allowed to regiter unless someone has evidence of wrongdoing. It’s all part of American citizens giving up rights and freedom due to a lack of interest.
Ah, but remember….
The Supreme Court Works in mysterious ways. Justice Stevens joined the majority (which was actually just a plurality). The majority opinion made clear that if disenfranchisement could be shown, unequivocally, then they will make voter id laws illegal.
In a way, this is a set up. Let the republicans pass their crazy laws, challenge them as disenfranchisement, and watch the supreme court lay down the law for good.
A ruling on the past case would have been weak, targeted, and with little staying power. The next round could bring broad reform.
-The Political Jerk
It’s all about making everyone have their papers.
I heard from the mouth of the deputy DNI in person “Gosh, I wish we could track everyone at all times.”
Papers please.
yeah i doubt the decision was misguided…more likely calculated…a long time ago…
Remember, the SCOTUS is a highly partisan group that cares ONLY for the GOP agenda. That is what cannot be done by congress or presidential edict will be done by Roberts and company.
New Jim Crow laws.
Any hope this could backfire on the fascists and actually end up disenfranchising more fascists than Democrats?
Kathleen @ 25:
Like this?
http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/abr1072l.jpg
Jan @ 38:
New Jim Crow laws.
It disenfranchised a group of nuns.
Um, is the Jesus the only one who sees the glaringly obvious factor that this post misses?
NOT ALL VOTERS ARE DEMOCRATS.
This will also effect voters who are GOP leaning. Show me some evidence that this will greatly effect (D)’s instead of (R)’s, and then you have a story. BEWARE: Just stating “well, most older people are D, and they don’t have ID’s” is crap.
Just vote fucking absentee, and be done with all of this nonsense. It’s so insanely easy, and makes all the hanging chads and disenfranchisment phony shit fly away.
“Also, if you qualify to vote absentee-by-mail or absentee-by-traveling board, and you chose to vote as such, you are not required to present photo ID.”
Jesus out.
Embittered-Max-Hussein-1 @ 10:
Because four of them are fascist pigs.Can you guess which four?
” The measure would allow far more rigorous demands than the voter ID requirement recently upheld by the Supreme Court, in which voters had to prove their identity with a government-issued card. ”
I remember when Conservatives vehemently opposed the idea of a government-issued ID card. Now they want you to present one in order to exercise voting rights Americans have had for 220 years.
Whatever happened to minimal government intrusion into the lives of citizens - the basic idea of conservatism? What do these people stand for any more, aside from hypocrisy, lies and expediency?
I’ve got a great idea! [sarcasm] Why don’t we have any governmental agency (i.e., police, fire department, election officials, etc) ask anybody, anytime, anywhere to produce proof of US citizenship. If unable to comply, the individual will be held in a subordinate station (SS) until a judge determines whether the individual should be allowed to stay or is deported. [/sarcasm] This would apply to anybody living in this country.
Freakaloin @ 35:
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Jesus Hussein Christ @ 41:
the electorate is substantially uneven with registered voters, most are democratic. The purpose is to get rid of the democratic voter. Anything to discourage voters from voting. Funny thing, any such action is also illegal? So we have a court that has given precedent that is based on something they have all ready declared illegal. Would be funny if it weren’t yet another crime.
Non-land owners didn’t get to vote for president until 1824. Blacks didn’t get to vote until 1865. Women didn’t get to vote until 1920.
drago @ 19:
No intelligence test is required to vote. That’s why you’re allowed to.
In December 2000 five-robed fascists on the Supreme Court sentenced the Founding Father’s dream of Democracy to death. George W. Bush and his fellow fascists are the executioners. Barack Obama may be able t