Victories in Kansas and Missouri for Freedom at the Polls

There were two good pieces of news for an engaged electorate in the last few days.

On Friday, Missouri efforts to pass a constitutional amendment that would require voters to bring proof of citizenship to the polls failed to make it to a final vote. Activists opposing the measure estimated that it would have stopped more than 200,000 citizens from voting.

Today, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius vetoed a bill that that would have required photo identification to vote. As she rightly said, the bill was allegedly designed to solve a problem that doesnt' exist."

There are serious challenges facing states as they try to count votes accurately, design easily comprehensible ballots, and create a workable bureacracy to make the most profoundly important democratic act as simple as possible--in a constantly moving and very diverse population. It is critical for states to keep good records, and invest in good administration procedures.

However, the efforts to require identification at the polls are cynical, undemocratic shams. The last thing we need, at this point, is for voters to feel scared, humiliated, or uncertain about whether they belong at the polls.

One difficulty with these laws is that on first blush, they sound fine--what's wrong with requiring proof of citizenship?--and that the people most likely to pass them (and judge them in the courts) are also the people least likely to be daunted by trying to find a birth certificate or Social Security card. Another is that they combine with ex-felon voting restrictions to create a culture in which being a voter starts to seem like something surrounded by a web of hurdles, something daunting instead of something automatic. A third is that bureacratic hurdles costs time and money, both of which are in short supply among poor populations.

As Sebelius says, no problem is being solved with these efforts. There are no devious political entrepreneurs doing serial poll-impersonations in order to change elections. I'm proud of Sebelius and the Missouri legislature for pushing back against the disenfranchisement wave, and proud of the great work by dozens of activists in both states to make thousands of phone calls to legislators.

Comments (32)

1. >>>What's America coming to?

   Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/19/2008 <<<

   HAPP,

   Let's focus on getting "most" Americans to the polls first before discouraging others!

   With turn-out still below 50%, focusing on "impediments" to voting seems wrong-headed. Why can't 80-90% of eligible Americans vote like they do in other advanced (and even some not so advanced) countries?

   Improve turn-out first, then we can talk about imaginary campaigns to hijack democracy in America!

   Posted by Metteyya at 05/19/2008 @ 3:52pm

2. Here is a novel idea to increase voter turn-out...how about a $300 tax deduction for every American who votes?

   Posted by Metteyya at 05/19/2008 @ 3:56pm

3. Mettya,

   I bet most American would do it for a $3.00 deduction (or credit as the case may be)

   Posted by leftofcenter at 05/19/2008 @ 4:08pm

4. besides .. isn't this all kind of redundant as one must show ID to register to vote? Hence a voter reg should suffice as ID, or any ID in lieu of the voter reg card .. as there is a list of registered voters on site anyway.

   Posted by leftofcenter at 05/19/2008 @ 4:14pm

5. Always curious....WHEN we get universal health care run by the Fed...

   will you need to show an ID at SOME point in the process of going to your local Federal Hospital or doctor?

   If so...isn't that a "imposition" on the poor and elderly?

   If not...how do you plan on stopping fraud, waste, and abuse?!?!??

   Posted by Mask at 05/19/2008 @ 4:51pm

6. Posted by marybretbrad at 05/19/2008

   MBB, you know, you're getting to be REAL predictable.

   First it's a "Dems are bad...here's an example or two".

   Then somebody posts how some Republicans did the same thing, even worse.

   Then you post "Oh, sure. I'm not saying both sides don't do it" and act all bipartisan...

   until the next post on how "Dems are bad...here's an example or two" and the process starts all over again.

   Posted by Mask at 05/19/2008 @ 7:52pm

7. Fraud gives them more political power. It's as simple as that.

   Posted by marybretbrad at 05/19/2008 | ignore this person

   .

   Darin, you are partisan to the point of self-delusion.

   It's as simple as that.

   Posted by Lillian at 05/19/2008 @ 8:05pm

8. This is really scary, but I do think lvliberty1 has a point here. To quote HAPPY3: 'what's America coming to?'

   Look, there's no point in having rules about who gets to vote and who doesn't, without the means to enforce those rules. I'm not saying that having to bring your ID to the polls isn't silly - it most certainly is - but given the somewhat retarded nature of America's democratic infrastructure it may be just about the only way to ensure that those who show up to vote are actually American citizens. Otherwise, what's to stop me from registering to vote in the United States and showing up at an American polling station next November? My English is fluent, my American accent flawless. I'd stand a decent chance, I think, if taken at face value.

   I have never registered to vote. I never had to. My birth was registered, and I've been in the system ever since. I was automatically registered to vote after I turned 18. Some weeks prior to every election, the city of Amsterdam sends me a card which I have to bring with me to the polling station. I trade it in for a ballot sheet and that's that. That's the way it's done in The Netherlands and in every other Western European country. It's so simple, really. Why can't the United States, which always prides itself on being the greatest democracy in the world, develop some kind of system for automatic voter registration, and take it from there?

   Posted by Amsterdam69 at 05/19/2008 @ 8:46pm

9. Mask, I assume when there is universal health care there will be a "card" to ID those with universal versus those who are covered at work. A non-issue...

   Posted by leftofcenter at 05/19/2008 @ 9:08pm

10. Posted by leftofcenter at 05/19/2008

    Okay, so why couldn't we ask for THAT ID at voting time...and it not be "vote suppression"?

    Again, if the IDs are free (yes, a caveat that I will throw out my argument if it isn't supplied for free)....what's the problem?

    But I'll tell you this is LOUSY politics and plays right into the hands of the Right (as noted by our right-wing posters) into the idea of LEFT-wing voter fraud and "dead guys voting in Chicago".

    Especially since the Left is so fond of "free stuff" anyway and they're not saying "No, we'll support the voter ID as long as the IDs are free and easy to access" instead of "No IDs ever!!!!" (a la Joan Crawford) that they're saying now.

    Posted by Mask at 05/19/2008 @ 9:55pm

11. That's the way it's done in The Netherlands and in every other Western European country.

    by hamsterdam69

    ditto.

    show up with card.

    pick up pencil.

    mark x.

    stick in box.

    pretty complicated, huh?

    Monday, May 19, 2008 10:18:09 PM

    Posted by frosty zoom at 05/19/2008 @ 10:11pm

12. Exactly, on the idea that if you are gonna require identification, then it must be free. There should be no problem with that if people who want such a rule are truly concerned with making sure people voting are citizens. Of course, that will require identification to get the identification, so I am sure we can count on the Republican party to try and set strict limits on that, maybe an RNC membership card.

    As to the idea mentioned above that the Washington State election was rigged by Democrats, where is the proof? I live out here, and Gregoire is foul (as is Rossi, her opponent last election and this one, I think), but nary a shred of evidence has been shown that the election was rigged. Conspiracy, hidden, no doubt.

    Posted by onthehelm at 05/19/2008 @ 10:22pm

13. Maybe George Soros could be convinced to fund a project to identify every eligible voter and assist them in getting a voter ID that all states could agree on. Nobody should be disenfranchised because their life is not the tidy Ozzie and Harriet vision that so many Republicans see when they look in the mirror. Believe it or not, there are Americans who don't have birth certificates or some of the ID's that Ozzie and Harriet have neatly filed away! I think a project to provide free voter ID's to all Americans would be a great exercise in spreading democracy here at home. No doubt there would be Republicans who would object to it, as this " voter fraud " bogeyman has had the blessing of Bush's Justice Department, which has gone from prosecuting civil rights violations to suppressing civil rights.

    Posted by waters at 05/19/2008 @ 10:26pm

14. Posted by frosty zoom at 05/19/2008

    Wait....you lost me.

    What was I supposed to do with the pencil?

    There's a BOX?!! Nobody said anything about a BOX!!!!

    I CAN'T DO IT!!! I just can't! (sobbing)

    Posted by Benchrest at 05/19/2008 @ 11:11pm

15. Benchrest

    yep. you gotta fold the paper, too.

    and then humans (YES, HUMANS) count them.

    newfangled.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 05/19/2008 @ 11:25pm

16. Posted by frosty zoom at 05/19/2008

    ...fold...the...paper...

    fold the paper?!

    Oh, now that's just CRAZY talk!

    Now you listen to me MISTER!!

    You can spout off about them pencils and BOXES and such, but you want me to do what to the WHAT?

    There comes a point where you gotta DRAW THE LINE, and as soon as I figure out how, I'M GONNA DO IT!!! So...THERE!!

    Posted by Benchrest at 05/19/2008 @ 11:52pm

17. Benchrest

    live hard, die bold!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 05/19/2008 @ 11:53pm

18. I just think it's hilarious that people worry about voter ID's when anyone intelligent knows that if you want to truely cook the books on votes you have to have someone on the insides. We then equip our oh so easy to to hack diebold systems with a paper trail luckily. And our in many ways easier to hack touch screen systems with no paper trail and no one complains. You can teach any lay person to hack one of those systems with 5 minutes alone in a voting booth yet no one complains.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/20/2008 @ 12:39am

19. Posted by marybretbrad at 05/20/2008

    Okay, MBB...long discussion, but still misses the obvious point...

    if we accept your "false negatives"....then why not accept the "false negatives" of homosexuals marrying?

    They're not even close to a majority, but a significant minority...atleast as large as infertile couples and seniors combined.

    So...why not accept them, if you're willing to "accept a few false negatives"?

    Posted by Mask at 05/20/2008 @ 09:13am

20. A number of problems with the Voter ID requirement:

    Hamsterdam, this was actually a pretty crappy democracy for a significant proportion of its population up until 40 or so years ago, and we still have issues with voter intimidation in people of color communities around the country, usually by off-duty white cops working for a Guiliani-type nominee.

    Many poor people, urban AND rural, do not have certified copies of their birth certificates, and it costs money to get them from their state of birth. Many younger folks also don't have certified birth certificates. Hell, many citizens, period, don't have a certified copy of their birth certificate, so even if it's not a financial burden for 80% of us to get one, it's just another bureaucratic hurdle placed in front of exercising one of our fundamental civil rights.

    A surprising number of people do not drive, believe it or not, and therefore do not have driver's licenses.

    Some of us, left, center and I WOULD HOPE RIGHT, still cherish some sliver of personal liberty - don't you just love it when a Commie Pinko Red Trotskyist like me throws around such concepts - and, while we may have Social Security Cards, and have registered for the Draft (thank you, Jimmy Carter!), and been registered voters for decades, we really resent having to register ourselves into what will pretty much become a national database system allowing the state and corporate America to track us and invade our privacy even more so than they do now. It especially stuns me that someone like lvliberty1, who seems somewhat acquainted with the history of Conservativism, jumps on the bandwagon for a universal state-level ID card when conservatives like him cried bloody murder over the idea of the Social Security Card and System being turned into just such a tool.

    I can see it now, in my paranoid fantasies: Your not so friendly cop or highway patrolman asks to see your Driver's License or Voter ID card and writes you a ticket or takes you into custody if you don't have it on you. All in the name of security.

    And all of this to solve a problem that has not been recently documented, unlike the actual cases of absentee ballot fraud, by Dems and Repubs alike, that occur pretty much every election cycle! Gods, I hope the GOP gets sent packing this fall, even if it is by another set of bourgeois politician lapdogs.

    Posted by cka2nd at 05/20/2008 @ 11:11am

21. "...we really resent having to register ourselves into what will pretty much become a national database system allowing the state and corporate America to track us and invade our privacy even more so than they do now."---Posted by cka2nd at 05/20/2008

    But, CKA...what if you "have to present your National Health Security card, when you go to the hospital or doctor"....

    and the Fed needs to keep a "national database" for MEDICAL RECORDS to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse of the federalized health care system?!?!???!?

    Posted by Mask at 05/20/2008 @ 11:28am

22. Posted by marybretbrad at 05/20/2008

    So you got no problem with "gay marriage"....

    you're just fighting a....judicial interpretation?!?!?!?

    Okaaaaaaaaaaaaay

    Posted by Mask at 05/20/2008 @ 1:20pm

23. Posted by marybretbrad at 05/20/2008

    No, I just find it odd that you'd get all incensed over the LEGAL PRECEDENCE, and not the issue itself.

    Kind of like saying "I am firmly pro-choice, but I have fifteen paragraphs on why Roe v. Wade is bad law."

    Posted by Mask at 05/20/2008 @ 2:26pm

24. Posted by marybretbrad at 05/20/2008

    no

    Posted by Mask at 05/20/2008 @ 7:31pm

25. I am unaware of any Republican stealing an election through fraud.

    Posted by marybretbrad at 05/20/2008 | ignore this person | warn it

    .

    Darin, a quick cut and paste from the "Voter Intimidation" thread the other day...

    .

    In fact the three most high profile election thefts were all Democrat.

    Posted by marybretbrad at 05/13/2008 | ignore this person

    .

    Actually, this kind of statement displays a SERIOUS delusion based on a complete ignorance of history. In 1876, Republican candidate Hayes, with the help of Republican President Grant, quite literally stole the election right out from under the Democratic candidate, Tilden in what was probably, up until 2000, the most infamous stolen election in history (certainly more universally acknowledged as such than the JFK election.)

    "The last time a Presidential election was stolen in broad daylight was in 1876."

    http://davekopel.org/Misc/OpEds/1876-Election.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_J._Tilden

    .

    Then of course, we have the 2000 and 2004 elections. The most blatant being Ohio 2004.

    http://www.votermarch.org/

    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20041129/corn

    .

    And please, let's not forget the 1980 election, with GW the 1st using his CIA buddies to stike a deal with the Iranians in the infamous "October Surprise". The 1980's also had several elections (many in Texas - surprise again) 'dirty tricked' by the young Karl Rove.

    http://www.geocities.com/jacksonthor/cheat3.html

    I could EASILY go on...and on....and on. But seriously, anyone who pretends that the notion of 'stealing elections' doesn't apply to Republicans, has taken 'partisanship' WELL beyond 'delusional'.

    Posted by Lillian at 05/14/2008 | ignore this person | warn it

    .

    But by all means, hang on to your delusions.

    Posted by Lillian at 05/20/2008 @ 8:42pm

26. OK to photo ID

    if

    Election Day registration OK too

    Posted by winyahn at 05/21/2008 @ 07:13am

27. BTW Obama's Iowa speech was superb. What a patriot!

    Posted by winyahn at 05/21/2008 @ 07:27am

28. Posted by marybretbrad at 05/21/2008

    Actually the "redneck speech" ("sister was a thespian in NY", etc.)....

    was a hoax created by a reporter.

    George Smather never delivered or used such a speech against Claude Pepper.

    (BTW, both were Democrats...it was a primary fight)

    Posted by Mask at 05/21/2008 @ 09:11am

29. I have to interject, though, that the only voter interferance from recent elections that I'm aware of...

    Posted by marybretbrad at 05/21/2008 | ignore this person | warn it

    .

    Sorry Darin, if that's the ONLY case of "voter interference" from recent elections that you are aware of...

    ...then you aren't even trying.

    Like I said, I could go on and on (and on and on) posting examples - but really - YOU should do it!

    Google 'voter intimidation' - I got 231,000 hits...with this one at the top...

    http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oId=16368

    Here's one the FBI investigated...

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15603344/

    The term 'voter suppression' got 376,000 hits...

    http://ohvotesuppression.blogspot.com/

    Or, you could try reading this book...

    http://www.stealingdemocracy.com/

    Posted by Lillian at 05/21/2008 @ 10:00am

30. Now Darin, let's also take a look at one of your examples...the Washington gubernatorial election. YOu claim it as an outright 'stolen'election, as if this is an incontravertable fact. Yes, I wonder if you even know the facts regarding what happened? Do you know, or are you just going by what Rush said?

    As long as you are doing some research, here...try reading...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_gubernatorial_election,_2004

    Fact is, the election WASN'T stolen. The initial recount was absolutely mandatory under the law. The second recount was requested by the Dems, again, according to the election law in Washington. As happens in EVERY recount, additonal ballots were found and counted (no votes were ever switched or eliminated) including the ballot cast by the King County Council Chairman, Larry Phillips, which was WRONGLY put into the 'don't count' pile, not because of any problem with with the ballot, but because the computer didn't have a scanned image of his signature (which was later found to be clearly written on his voter registration card.)

    The Repubs have complained bitterly...but have lost EVERY legal challenge they have ever mounted...because their is simply no evidence that the election was stolen.

    So, why do YOU count that as a stolen election Darin?

    Posted by Lillian at 05/21/2008 @ 10:55am

31. As long as you're researching Darin, take another look at the Ohio 2004 thing. I sense from you a genuine concern about 'fair' elections, but can't quite align that with your casual dismissal of Ohio 2004 as just 'fantasy'.

    Did you even know that 2 election workers in Ohio were sentenced to 18 months in prison for RIGGING the recount in Ohio?

    http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070313/NEWS24/703130 29

    Did you even know that that the mechanisms and records that are supposed to provide the checks and balances for the vote counting process have been 'inadvertently' destroyed?

    Check here for a partial list of issues...

    http://ohioelection2004.com/evidence.htm

    Or here...

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0710/S00300.htm

    Seriously Darin, whatever you beleive about 'funny business' in Chicago in the election in 1960, PALES in comparison with what happened the state of Ohio in 2004!

    Posted by Lillian at 05/21/2008 @ 12:56pm

32. Care to investigate what happened in New Mexico in 2004, a state Bush carried by some 8,000 votes?

    http://www.democracyfornewmexico.com/democracy_for_new_mexico/files/NewM exico2004ElectionDataReport-v2.pdf

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0511/S00067.htm

    Posted by Lillian at 05/21/2008 @ 1:07pm