1) Voter Fraud vs. Election Fraud: New Poll Taxes

More Voter ID Judiciousness

http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1401

Once again, a court has found that a strict voter identification law is unconstitutional. Now, joining Georgia, a Missouri circuit court judge has found that requiring voters to present a government issued photo identification in order to vote will disenfranchise many voters and with virtually no justification.

Parties Battle Over New Voter ID Laws

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091206F.shtml

Phoenix - Little noticed by voters, a nationwide melee has broken out pitting liberal and conservative groups in a duel over new laws that could determine who wins close elections in November and beyond.

The dispute, which is being fought in disparate and often half-empty courtrooms in as many as nine states, concerns new state laws and rules backed primarily by Republicans that require people to show photo identification in order to vote and, in some cases, proof of citizenship and identification when registering to vote.

One measure prompted the League of Women Voters to halt its voter registration drives in Florida out of fear of facing criminal penalties. That law, and a similar provision in Ohio that threatened voter registration drives by other groups, was blocked in recent weeks by federal courts.

The legal battle reflects a deep partisan divide, with Republicans arguing that the new requirements are needed to prevent voting fraud and boost confidence in election results, and Democrats charging that they disenfranchise seniors, minorities, students and others who tend to vote Democratic.

Hundreds of thousands of votes are potentially at stake in some of the most contested congressional races this year and the 2008 race for the White House, making the court cases the latest battle in a broader war over election policies that has been raging since the 2000 Florida recount.

One example of the skirmishing came late last month in a federal courtroom in Phoenix, where a Navajo leader, occasionally speaking in his tribal language, testified that thousands of his people would lose their right to cast ballots under a new Arizona law that requires voters to present a photo ID or other proof of identity at the polls.

Report skeptical of fraud at polls

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20061011/1a_lede11.art.htm

At a time when many states are instituting new requirements for voter registration and identification, a preliminary report to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission has found little evidence of the type of polling-place fraud those measures seek to stop.

Little evidence found despite pending bills

http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1323

Without a lot of fanfare, two very important lawsuits were filed recently by civil rights groups in Arizona. Two years after the passage of the quite pernicious Prop 200, groups are now taking serious action to combat it.

Basically an anti-immigrant measure, Prop 200 set out a bunch of restrictions on access to services for immigrants. However, with respect to voting rights, Prop 200 set up a situation blocking the right to vote for many citizens by requiring every person registering to vote to prove citizenship.

As the Lawyer’s Committee describes it, Proposition 200 requires that that counties reject any voter registration application that does not include satisfactory proof of citizenship, such as a copy of the applicant’s birth certificate, passport, a driver’s license or non-operating identification license, but only if issued after October 1, 1996, a tribal identification card or naturalization documents. This even applies to voters who must re-register simply because they moved across county lines.

The Truth About “Voter Fraud” – Issue in Brief

http://www.brennancenter.org/programs/dem_vr_castout_4c.html

Summary

· Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare.

· Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud.

· Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct.

· Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda.

· Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action.

Strict Documentation Requirements for Voting

http://www.brennancenter.org/programs/dem_vr_castout_4a.html

Summary

· Restrictive voter identification policies – especially those that require state-issued photo ID cards – threaten to exclude millions of eligible voters.

· As many as 10% of eligible voters do not have, and will not get, the documents required by strict voter ID laws. For some groups, the percentage is much higher.

· ID requirements fall hardest on people who have traditionally faced barriers at the polls.

· ID requirements are not justified by any serious or widespread problem.

· There is no reason for states to implement burdensome ID requirements.

· States that do require proof of identity at the polls should permit an expansive range of proof.

Proof of Citizenship Requirements: Issue in Brief

http://www.brennancenter.org/programs/dem_vr_castout_4b.html

Summary

· Requirements that voters show official proof of citizenship will disenfranchise many eligible citizens.

· Official citizenship documents are expensive and time-consuming to obtain.

· Proof of citizenship requirements are an invitation to discrimination.

· Blocking eligible voters who cannot show documentation violates the Constitution and federal law.

· Proof of citizenship requirements do not address any serious or widespread problem.

· States should not implement burdensome proof of citizenship requirements.