Indiana voter ID laws upheld

[southsider2k5]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080428/ap_on_...scotus_voter_id

 

Supreme Court upholds photo ID law for voters in Indiana

 

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer 27 minutes ago

 

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Its backers said it was needed to deter fraud.

 

It was the most important voting rights case since the Bush v. Gore dispute that sealed the 2000 election for George W. Bush.

 

The law "is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting 'the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'" Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy.

 

Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also agreed with the outcome, but wrote separately.

 

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented.

 

More than 20 states require some form of identification at the polls. Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan, but struck down Missouri's. Monday's decision comes a week before Indiana's presidential primary.

 

The case concerned a state law, passed in 2005, that was backed by Republicans as a way to deter voter fraud. Democrats and civil rights groups opposed the law as unconstitutional and called it a thinly veiled effort to discourage elderly, poor and minority voters — those most likely to lack proper ID and who tend to vote for Democrats.

 

There is little history in Indiana of either in-person voter fraud — of the sort the law was designed to thwart — or voters being inconvenienced by the law's requirements.

 

"We cannot conclude that the statute imposes 'excessively burdensome requirements' on any class of voters," Stevens said.

 

Stevens' opinion suggests that the outcome could be different in a state where voters could provide evidence that their rights had been impaired.

 

But in dissent, Souter said Indiana's voter ID law "threatens to impose nontrivial burdens on the voting rights of tens of thousands of the state's citizens."

 

Scalia, favoring a broader ruling in defense of voter ID laws, said, "The universally applicable requirements of Indiana's voter-identification law are eminently reasonable. The burden of acquiring, possessing and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe, because it does not 'even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.'"

[jasonxctf]

i'm torn on this issue...

 

on one hand we need to make sure that people who say they are someone, really are that person. voted fraud is a big issue.

 

on the other hand, if a state issued ID costs money, say $20 like a DL it becomes a poll tax. If you live in the City and don't drive, what do you need an ID for? Thus if you need to pay $20 for an ID and stand in line at the DMV for 2 hours so you can go vote, you're not going to.

 

The other question comes down to nursing homes. If my 91 year old Grandmother gets bused over to the polling place to vote how can she? I guarantee you that 50% of those living in nursing homes, no longer have valid, state-issued ID's.

[Texsox]

There is a balance in here somewhere. As noted there are valid reasons why someone would not have a valid picture ID and creating barriers to voting is something that has to be carefully considered. I find it interesting, with low voter turnouts and apathy by many American in voting, the illegals (and we know this is targeted towards illegals) are flocking to the polls. It would appear that the majority of Americans (who do not vote) are concerned that others may vote. Dammit, a true American speaks English and does not vote.

What this is really about is the voters that will be effected tend to vote for one party over another. If the votes were balanced, politicians would not care and largely ignore the topic. We have a nice degree of grandstanding that will play well with some voters.

 

And, just to be clear, I do not believe people living here illegally should be allowed to vote.

[jasonxctf]

im sure states would not enjoy this, however why not eliminate the costs associated with obtaining an ID or DL?

 

Also, allow people to get this ID and multiple locations and thus everyone does not flood one particular location and cause long lines.

 

Post Office, DMV, Library, City Hall, etc.

 

Also, to accomidate the elderly, accept an expired ID. Shoot if the ID I have in my pocket was good enough for me to vote in 1998, why not allow me to vote in 2008?

[Balta1701]

voted fraud is a big issue.

In all honesty...no it's not. It would be if people were actually committing it. Virtually all of the evidence out there, including the peer-reviewed and published stuff, tends to find that it barely ever happens. People simply don't show up with intent to defraud the system. Over the 3 year period from 2002-2005, there were a grand total of 38 cases of voter fraud even pushed by the government, despite a big emphasis on it coming from the DOJ. And 1/3 of those failed to result in a conviction.

 

While these laws may be constitutional, and I think they are, they do vastly more to disenfranchise people than they do to stop voter fraud.

 

[jasonxctf]

in all fairness, just because the govt doesn't chase it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

its like saying that the Naperville police department only handed out (and thus caught) 75 speeding tickets last week, so only 75 people were speeding.

[Texsox]

When I was an election judge in Lake County during the early 1980s, the training taught us that it was better to allow people to vote whenever possible. Most of the time the only issues were people at the wrong polling place.

[Texsox]

in all fairness, just because the govt doesn't chase it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

its like saying that the Naperville police department only handed out (and thus caught) 75 speeding tickets last week, so only 75 people were speeding.

 

In most election far less than half of eligible voters actually head to the polls, seriously, how bad could it be? I see far more stories about electioneering, mail in ballots, etc, then a person showing up and voting for someone else.

[jasonxctf]

is there a state or national database that checks for voter duplication?

 

say I am registered to vote in Schaumburg and then vote to Hoffman Estates and re-register (not transfer) my new address.

 

Is there any check/balance in place that goes back to make sure that I don't vote in both locations?

[Texsox]

is there a state or national database that checks for voter duplication?

 

say I am registered to vote in Schaumburg and then vote to Hoffman Estates and re-register (not transfer) my new address.

 

Is there any check/balance in place that goes back to make sure that I don't vote in both locations?

 

I believe it is a state by state process. So you could, in theory, vote in Zion and in Kenosha.

 

How many elections are decided by a small enough margin that fraud could tip the balance?

[jasonxctf]

there are 13 million people here in Illinois. Assuming 0.25% of the population double votes or commits voter fraud, that runs up to 32,500 votes.

[EvilMonkey]

If you live in the City and don't drive, what do you need an ID for?

Cash a check, get a job, get into a bar, buy beer, take out a loan, obtain a lease, open a bank account, if you are detained by the police, ....

 

 

Most of the voter ID laws contain provisions to waive the ID fees for people who cannot pay.

[Texsox]

there are 13 million people here in Illinois. Assuming 0.25% of the population double votes or commits voter fraud, that runs up to 32,500 votes.

 

and if .00025% it would be closer to 35.

 

Even using your number, how many statewide elections were decided by fewer then 32,500 votes?

 

And don't you think it's convenient that these measures are introduced just when anti-immigrant fervor is at its highest?

[Texsox]

Cash a check, get a job, get into a bar, buy beer, take out a loan, obtain a lease, open a bank account, if you are detained by the police, ....

 

 

Most of the voter ID laws contain provisions to waive the ID fees for people who cannot pay.

 

Cash a check? Direct Deposit and debit cards

Birth Certificate and Social Security Card

Bar? Beer? When was the last time you were carded? No Problem

Loan? Credit report, social security card. I've taken loans out over the internet.

Lease? My current one did not require it.

Bank Account, not certain.

Detained by police? Not illegal (yet) to not carry any ID.

[kapkomet]

Let's just go ahead and all get chip implants and go on the road to hell. At least we'd all only get one vote. (Sarcasm).

 

(BTW, I would NEVER get that, I'll die first. Not joking. But the technology exists now).

[southsider2k5]

Cash a check, get a job, get into a bar, buy beer, take out a loan, obtain a lease, open a bank account, if you are detained by the police, ....

 

 

Most of the voter ID laws contain provisions to waive the ID fees for people who cannot pay.

 

If they do this, there is pretty much no "poll tax" arguement. At that point, I have no problem with it, and actually applaud it. I see no problems with taking steps to insure the integrity of our electoral system.

[jasonxctf]

Cash a check, get a job, get into a bar, buy beer, take out a loan, obtain a lease, open a bank account, if you are detained by the police, ....

 

 

Most of the voter ID laws contain provisions to waive the ID fees for people who cannot pay.

 

 

Seriously, who pays with checks anymore.

 

To offset bank accounts for those without them (either illegal or bad credits) most banks are now offering a payroll card solution for employers. Thus the employers don't write out checks (or pay cash) to employees. They autodeposit funds into a debit card type solution.

 

As for beer, how many 18 year olds do you know who drink beer without a valid ID.

[jasonxctf]

If they do this, there is pretty much no "poll tax" arguement. At that point, I have no problem with it, and actually applaud it. I see no problems with taking steps to insure the integrity of our electoral system.

 

 

and that's important. now how do you overcome those who can not physically go in and re-apply for an ID card once theirs has expired. think nursing homes, etc.

[Texsox]

Every once in a while there are solutions that are out of scale with the problem, or which create more problems then they solve. But that never stops our elected officials from enacting them if they think it will either earn them votes or cause the other party to lose votes.

[EvilMonkey]

and that's important. now how do you overcome those who can not physically go in and re-apply for an ID card once theirs has expired. think nursing homes, etc.

If they can't physically go get an id, how can they physically vote?

[EvilMonkey]

Seriously, who pays with checks anymore.

 

To offset bank accounts for those without them (either illegal or bad credits) most banks are now offering a payroll card solution for employers. Thus the employers don't write out checks (or pay cash) to employees. They autodeposit funds into a debit card type solution.

 

As for beer, how many 18 year olds do you know who drink beer without a valid ID.

Alot of people get paychecks still. Go to any inner city currency exchange and you'll see. Those people also don't usually have bank accounts to auto-deposit to, or debit cards to draw from.

[Texsox]

If they can't physically go get an id, how can they physically vote?

How will they handle absentee ballots?

[Texsox]

Alot of people get paychecks still. Go to any inner city currency exchange and you'll see. Those people also don't usually have bank accounts to auto-deposit to, or debit cards to draw from.

 

You are correct, we are talking about such a small percentage of people, it seems stupid they are even creating a law. Imagine now if your picture doesn't match because you gre/shaved a beard, gained/loss weight, changed hair color, and some hyper election judge decides you can't vote.

[Texsox]

And what is an acceptable number of legitimate voters being denied the opportunity to vote? It is often said, we would rather ten guilty persons going unpunished then one innocent person being falsely convicted.

[EvilMonkey]

.... we are talking about such a small percentage of people, it seems stupid they are even creating a law.

Sounds alot like the making hybrid cars noisier problem,eh?There is such a small percentage of people who would be affected by the law, it seems stupid that they are even creating one.