A guide to voter ID in Wisconsin
Wisconsinites can breathe a sigh of relief at the polls, at least this year. The contentious voter identification law, otherwise known asAct 23, will not be fully implemented in the 2012 presidential election.
The Wisconsin Government Accountability Board states on its website that, in March, two separate lawsuits challenged Act 23 based on the claim of restricting access to the polls. Both cases resulted in judges placing injunctions on the law based on constitutional concerns. The Wisconsin Department of Justice then appealed both decisions, where the cases now sit waiting to be heard at the Appellate level. In late September, the Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected for the second time a request from the WDOJ to hear the challenges to the voter ID law and make a ruling before the November 6 election date.
What does this mean for voters? Well, it means they no longer will be required to show a photo ID at the polls in order to vote, or submit a photocopy of their ID card with an absentee ballot. Yet, there are still several changes to voting laws because of Act 23 that are still in place. They include:
• Voters must provide their former address when registering to vote.
• A witness is no longer allowed to corroborate your identity when voting.
• Proof of residence is required when registering at the polls, the Clerk’s office, or first-time voters by mail.
• Voter registration is now closed the Saturday, Sunday, and Monday prior to the election date; Voters may still register at the polls. Absentee voting is also closed those same days.
• Students may use their student ID cards for proof of residence, along with either a fee receipt or certified list of students in student housing.
• Straight ticket voting, otherwise known as party-line voting, is no longer allowed, except for those permanently overseas or on active duty in the military.
• Residents must reside at their voting address for at least 28 days prior to the election.
Voter identification laws have been sweeping the nation since the 2010 mid-term elections. Those elections were a sweeping victory for Republicans, as they added several governors, and gained majorities in several statehouses and the U.S. House of Representatives. Not coincidentally, voter identification laws have sprung up across the country in these red states. Many point a finger the finger of blame at outside groups, like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), that have provided “model” legislation to sitting politicians.
Despite their efforts, several of the controversial laws have been challenged in court. In some cases, judges have struck down all or parts of the laws. In other cases, the laws are held in tact and ruled constitutional. At the heart of the debate is the issue of restricting voter access for specific groups of people.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, people of lower economic status, minorities, and the elderly tend to lack the proper identification to show at the polls. Opponents of the laws claim that the requirement of photo identification is onerous to those groups, and thus, is unconstitutional. Proponents claim that the laws are fair for everyone, and that citizens need photo identification for a myriad of other everyday tasks, so the requirement for photo identification at the polls is a simple way to combat voter fraud.
When examining both sides of the argument, there are several points to dissect. The most obvious would be whether or not voter fraud actually exists en masse, as well as whether these laws solve the alleged problem at hand. According to News21, since 2000 there have been 2068 reported cases of voter fraud. Of these cases, only 10 were in-person voter fraud, or, in other words, the kind of voter fraud Voter ID laws are supposed to combat. The report did, however, find that there were over 490 cases of fraud in absentee voting and 400 cases of registration fraud, which some of the current Voter ID laws cover. It is important to note that only 53% of these cases resulted in any sort of conviction. The other 47% resulted in acquittals, or dropped charges in some form.
Regardless, the 900 voter fraud cases represent one case of fraud for every 3 million valid votes. To put it lightly, voter fraud is not a real problem in elections. Now, to take the case of Pennsylvania, the Voter ID laws would seem to be put in place for one purpose: voter disenfranchisement. In Pennsylvania, there are about 750,000 citizens without proper photo identification. The task of getting that many people ID cards is beyond daunting, it is almost impossible. More than 2000 people would have to obtain an ID every single day of the year for an entire year before they would all have one.
Based on the fact that voter fraud is virtually non-existent, and the fact that there are millions of eligible voters across the nation who would be turned away on election day without these ID’s, the only logical conclusion can be these laws are designed to curb votes that tend to go to Democrats. The facts simply do not tell any other story.