Common Cause

Campaign Launched to Oppose National Voter ID Law

 

A CCV Special Report

 

 

Common Cause has recently urged voters to contact their Congressional representatives in opposition to H.R. 4844, a bill formally named the Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006. Proponents of the bill say it will put a stop to fraud in elections. But Common Cause and other human rights advocates say otherwise.

Supporters of the bill include the chairman of the House Committee on Administration, Vernon J. Ehlers, a Republican Congressman from the Grand Rapids, Michigan area. Ehlers cites a recent poll by NBC/ Wall Street Journal which asserts that eighty-one percent of Americans surveyed favor an ID requirement for voting. He sees what he refers to as a “large bi-partisan majority” that has concluded that such a reform is necessary, and is a “simple, common sense” proposal “necessary to safeguard against voter fraud.”

Joined by the ACLU, the AARP, the NAACP, the League of Women Voters of the U.S., the Americans for Democratic Action, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, and by various other local, state and national groups, Common Cause has argued that partisan politics should not play a role in U.S. election law. They maintain that the national ID card required under the measure will mean that eligible voters will be blocked from voting to gain partisan advantage.

The first round of discussion and proposed amendments got under way on September 19, and already the debate has sparked controversy. This is because the proposed law brings together two potentially explosive issues that have a long history of divisive and fractious impact in U.S. politics: immigration and the imposition of restrictions and limitations on the right to vote. The bill was introduced by Rep. Henry Hyde of Cook County Illinois, a ranking Republican on the House Select Committee on Intelligence and a key supporter of President Bush in the War on Terrorism. Proposed as an amendment to the 2002 Help America Vote Act, the measure picked up eleven co-sponsors, eight of whom were from the Southern states of Florida, Texas and Georgia and was amended before being passed on to the U.S. Senate.

In response to claims that the measure will be expensive to carry out and amount to a virtual poll tax for voters below the poverty line, Congressman Ehlers proposed an amendment that would provide federal funding to cover the costs incurred by state governments to provide photo IDs for indigent voters. But the measure with its amendment as enacted does nothing to actually require the states themselves to provide the funds for indigents—it merely provides authorization for federal funds to cover the costs when or if they are incurred.

Pointing to an election system already in disarray through election controversies of 2000, 2002 and 2004, Common Cause and other critics observe what they regard as a party-line vote on a measure that will place an undue burden of proof upon elderly, minority, poor, rural, and urban voters who already are the least advantaged citizens in U.S. society. They say a photo ID would add to election chaos, increasing the problem of long lines at polling places, requiring poll workers to explain onerous requirements, with voter after voter turned away. Proponents of the measure, such as Hyde and Ehlers, argue that a national ID card will actually increase voter participation by restoring public confidence diminished as a result of election fraud.

By contrast, for Rep. Peter DeFazio, an Oregon Democrat serving on the House Committee on Homeland Security, the national voter ID law is an unnecessary redundancy that will cost the taxpayers extra money and threaten the privacy of American citizens. DeFazio supported the Real ID Act of 2005, which set federal standards for the issuance of state driver’s licenses to ensure that only American citizens or legal immigrants in the U.S. could receive them.

According to DeFazio, who denies that there is a problem with voter fraud in Oregon, where only two cases out of ten million voters in the state actually required prosecution for  fraud, "The problem with HR 4844 is not its requirement of proof of citizenship when registering to vote, but its continual requirement to present such proof every time a citizen votes. That means each time Oregonians mail in their ballots for a federal election, they would also be required to include a copy of a document proving their U.S. citizenship.”

Observing that severe penalties for voter fraud already exist, with illegal immigrant voters automatically subject to deportation, DeFazio added, "If the majority were truly concerned about guaranteeing the integrity of federal elections, we would be focusing on widespread concerns about new electronic voting technology. In recent elections, voting machines have failed, votes have been lost, and hard drives have been damaged. Secure and auditable electronic voting machines that provide a paper ballot for verification should be the focus of Congress, not this hastily written bill."

 

 

Sources:

 

http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=186966

 

http://defazio.house.gov/pf_092006GVRelease.shtml

 

http://cha.house.gov/hearings/OpeningStatement.aspx?OSID=178

Carolina Civic Voice

                             Fall 2006  Vol.  6, No 3