by James Parks
In a decision today that could disenfranchise millions of average Americans, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld, on a 6–3 vote, Indiana’s voter identification law, the most restrictive law of its kind in the country.
In his dissent, Justice David Souter echoed what critics of the law have said all along:
Indiana’s voter ID law threatens to impose nontrivial burdens on the voting rights of tens of thousands of the state’s citizens, and a significant percentage of those individuals are likely to be deterred from voting.
After the 2000 election, Republicans in many states have pushed for voter ID laws, claiming voter fraud is rampant. But studies have shown the problem does not exist.
The Indiana law requires anyone voting in person to present a current government photo ID. If you don’t have one, you can vote provisionally at the polls, but you must present the required ID at an appropriate government office within 10 days or your vote will not be counted. People who don’t have IDs can get them free from the state, but they must have other documents, such as a certified birth certificate and other secondary proof.
Click here to read the Supreme Court decision.
The law’s real effect, say its opponents, is to take away the right to vote from people of color and elderly, disabled and young citizens. Recent reports show, for example, that more than 40,000 Hoosier voters lack legal voter identification right now.
Ken Falk, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana and lead counsel on the case, points out there is no evidence that Indiana’s voter ID law is justified by any actual problem of voting fraud, which already is prohibited by various criminal statutes in the state. No cases of in-person voting fraud have been prosecuted in the state in recent history, he says.
AFL-CIO President John Sweeney says the decision, known as Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, puts the Supreme Court’s “seal of approval on what is in essence a poll tax.”
It’s the wrong decision for our country, and the wrong decision for America’s working men and women.
For many Americans, the cost of processing the paperwork for a government ID is so daunting they may not vote. The logistics of tracking down documents, traveling to offices and even just knowing where to begin can be extremely daunting for the elderly, the disabled, the poor and voters in rural communities.
For the crucial 2008 elections, the AFL-CIO will train hundreds of volunteers to advocate, educate and guard voters’ right to vote as part of its Voting Rights program. Click here to learn more about the program and here to volunteer to help protect voters’ rights on Election Day.
Congressional leaders say the Indiana decision will add unnecessary roadblocks, preventing many from exercising their right to vote. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) called the decision “disappointing.”
The Court’s decision today places obstacles to the fundamental rights of American citizens—especially the poor, the elderly and individuals with disabilities—to participate in the electoral process. Requiring American citizens to pay for underlying documents needed for an identification card and travel to distant motor vehicle locations for processing hinders—and diminishes—their right to vote.
The right to vote is a foundation of our democracy. American citizens who wish to vote must be able to do so.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says Indiana’s law and those like it “are roadblocks to democracy,” but added that this is not the end of the issue.
While today’s decision denies a facial challenge to the Indiana law, it allows future challenges in which there is more evidence of the harms caused by photo-ID laws. As November approaches, Americans must remain vigilant to protect the right to vote in the face of this and other schemes to depress turnout. Voting is the most fundamental right in our democracy because it protects all other rights.
The decision also could have a negative impact on the youth vote, according to the Young Democrats of America (YDA). David Hardt, YDA president, says:
Young voters will feel the effects of these disenfranchising laws just at the time when turnout among young people is on the rise. Make no mistake. These laws are a voter-suppression tool, with young voters—who have been voting overwhelmingly for Democrats in recent elections—in the crosshairs.
Earlier this year, a panel of experts said the Indiana law would be a bad model for the country. Deborah Goldberg, director of the Democracy Program for the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, says making the Indiana law the model could have a serious impact on voting rights in the country and open the gates to allow legislators to use the “unproven allegations of fraud” to justify widespread suppression of voting rights.
Tova Wang, a fellow at the Century Foundation, who co-authored research and filed a federally mandated report on the question, told National Public Radio (NPR):
We found that although there is fraud in the system, it doesn’t take place at the polling place.
Royal Masset, a consultant who by his own estimate has been involved in some 5,000 Republican campaigns in Texas, told NPR:
My experience is that in-person voter fraud is nonexistent. It doesn’t happen, and if you really analyze it, it makes no sense because who’s going to take the risk of going to jail on something so blatant that maybe changes one vote?
Voter fraud does exist, say the experts, but in more systematic ways, through ballot box stuffing, voter machine manipulation, registration list manipulation and absentee balloting.