(MintPress)—With voter I.D. laws implemented in 30 states, activist groups are working on the ground to place proper free government identification in the hands of those who would otherwise be turned away at the poll in November— a move opponents of the voter identification movement claim is a way to fight back against perceived discrimination of underprivileged and minority populations.
According to a recent study released by the Brennan Center of Justice, there’s a need for such grassroots efforts, led by Fair Elections Legal Network and Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
The Brennan Center for Justice claims 11 million Americans do not have proper identification to vote under proposed voter I.D. legislation, according to a telephone survey conducted in coordination with Opinion Research Corporation. The survey asked 987 random citizens whether they could provide documents proving citizenship or identification if they were given one-day notice. According to statistics scaled to fit the nation’s population, 7 percent of Americans cannot easily access identification.
Supporters of the bills claim residents have had more than one day to obtain valid I.D.s — in Tennessee, which will face its first Voter I.D. election in November, residents have had the opportunity to obtain a free I.D. through the Department of Homeland Security on the first Saturday of each month for one year.
On the ground running
A group of nonprofit organizations has created a platform to help voters obtain the necessary identification. Identifying hurdles, such as lack of transportation to DMV offices where free I.D.s are being issued, the organizations are setting the stage for overcoming obstacles and ensuring everyone has the opportunity to vote. They’re also addressing ways to provide funds for those who need to obtain a birth certificate and are conducting voter outreach programs to identify those in need of assistance.
The group — which consists of Demos, Common Cause, Fair Elections Legal Network and Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law — is tackling what they see as discrimination against those who lack identification and the means to obtain it.
“As we deal with the reality that there will be vote suppression in the 2010 elections, groups must work together to fight back by helping at-risk voters overcome these barriers to the ballot,” Senior Demo Democracy Fellow said in a press release.
Considering each state is different in terms of acceptable identifications, the organizations are calling on locals, especially those who work with targeted populations, to help on a state-by-state basis.
“It is vitally important that community leaders, particularly those who work with communities of color, young people, seniors, and people with disabilities take an active role in helping voters acquire the requisite photo I.D.,” Elections Protection Coordinator Chris Melody Fields said in the press release.
The heart of the battle
The polarized issue of voter I.D. laws stem from two very distinct arguments, both of which seemingly attempt to protect the vitality of U.S. democracy.
Those who oppose the measure claim the move is an attempt to drown out the votes of minorities and underprivileged citizens, who are more likely to not have access to identification. College students, who tend to vote more democratic as a whole, could also find themselves in a tough spot for voter verification. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) claims such laws are a step back to the days before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which stripped discriminatory practices imposed on African Americans.
“When the Voting Rights Act was passed 46 years ago, poll taxes and literacy tests were among the tactics used to prevent African-Americans and other racial and language minorities from voting,” the ACLU website reads.
However, those in favor of the measure say it protects the democratic process while combating voter fraud. Jumping over constitutional opposition to voter I.D. legislation, Protectmyvote.org, a Minnesota-based group in support of a proposed voter I.D. law, equates the measure to showing identification to obtain a handgun, a right awarded through the second amendment. It saws those who do not have identification can obtain a free form suitable for elections.
States tackle issue, court decisions mixed
While the first Voter I.D. law was introduced in 2003 in Alabama, the nation-wide movement gained quite a bit of traction in 2011. Speculators say this was due to model legislation created in 2009 and distributed by American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).
Since 2011, 34 states introduced legislation requiring voter I.D.s, 12 of which required such identification to prove citizenship. In the upcoming November election, 30 states will enforce identification laws of varying degrees, according to the National Conference of State legislatures (NCSL).
South Carolina and Texas have current voter I.D. laws, but have been denied clearance by the U.S. Justice Department to further enhance laws without prior approval by the department, which will determine if such legislation holds up to constitutional measures.
The Justice Department cites Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, in regard to Texas and South Carolina, which allows the federal government to “freeze election practices or procedures in certain states until the new procedures have been subjected to review, either after an administrative review by the United States Attorney General, or after a lawsuit before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.” Both states have appealed the Justice Department’s ruling.
In Wisconsin, the law was retracted when a judge ruled it unconstitutional — an appeal is expected. Mississippi voters approved the law last year, but it has yet to clear hurdles to verify its constitutionality. While Minnesota may not be enacting the law, voters will decide during the election if such a practice should become law.
Wisconsin is not the only state to see a court battle over the law’s constitutionality. While Missouri residents are required to present a photo I.D. to vote, a court in 2006 reversed the original law, expanding the state’s list of acceptable identification for voting. In 2012, a U.S. District court upheld the law in Arizona, where it had been challenged on the grounds of discrimination against the Latino population.
In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a district court decision when it deemed a voter I.D. law in Indiana constitutional. Indiana’s law, passed in 2005, requires voters to show a state- or federally-issued I.D.