State legislators are jumping on the voter identification
bandwagon so quickly that these voter "integrity" initiatives
have become a modern tool of voter suppression, much like poll taxes,
white-only primaries, and grandfather clauses of the past. Whether
deliberately or unknowingly, state legislatures are casually proposing
measures that will have a devastating impact on poor, African-American
and other minority voters.
For months, Wisconsin has been pushing to join the
ranks of states like Indiana, Florida and Georgia by mandating that
voters provide a government-issued photo identification ("photo
ID") to register or vote. Earlier versions of the proposed
law were heard on the floor of the Wisconsin legislature on three
separate occasions, and were rightfully vetoed by Governor Jim Doyle.
The most recent attempt to override the Governor's veto failed by
just one vote.
Now in an unprecedented move, the legislature proposes
to amend the state constitution to include a voter photo ID requirement
("Wisconsin Amendment"). Although, Wisconsin currently
accepts 13 forms of identification at the polls (including allowing
another voter to vouch for you), the constitutional amendment proposed
in May, would prevent potential voters from registering or voting
without a government issued photo ID. As drafted, the law is silent
on whether individuals without photo ID would be allowed to cast
provisional ballots as mandated by federal law, or whether, like
South Dakota's photo ID measure, a voter could sign an affidavit
swearing to their identity as a fail-safe means of voting.
Eighteen states require voters to show some form of
identification to vote, but most offer options to voters in addition
to government-issued photo ID, such as an utility bill, bank statement,
paycheck or Social Security card. Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana,
Louisiana, South Carolina and South Dakota require voters to show
a photo ID in order to vote. Georgia's law, the most restrictive
measure thus far, requires voters to show one of six forms of government
issued photo identification. Although the U.S. Department of Justice
pre-cleared Georgia's measure, several civil rights organizations
challenged the law in federal court and won a preliminary injunction
to prevent the identification requirement from going into effect
prior to November 2005 elections. The court found that plaintiffs
have a likelihood of showing that the measure is a constitutionally
impermissible poll tax.
Wisconsin's citizens should not take the exclusionary
photo ID measure lightly. Restrictive identification provisions
discourage voting, disproportionately disfranchise poor, elderly,
and minority voters, and compound the existing social inequities
confronted by those communities. As a result of past racial discrimination
in education, housing and employment, the socioeconomic status of
the state's Black citizens is markedly lower than the socioeconomic
status of its white citizens. The effects of past discrimination
hinder the current ability of African Americans to participate effectively
in the state's political process. These individuals are less likely
to have a car, therefore a driver's license, not to mention affording
the fees for the necessary "feeder documents" required
to get a license, such as a birth certificate or a passport. For
them, the hurdles to overcome the means of participating in our
democracy are simply too high.
In this, the 40th anniversary year of the Voting Rights
Act, it is disappointing that a state with a long tradition of expanding
access to the franchise would abandon it in favor of a voter identification
requirement with such stark consequences for many of its citizens.
Wisconsin's State Legislature would do better to protect the vote
and encourage voter participation rather than leaping blindly toward
a potentially crippling and potentially unconstitutional voter suppression
measure.
Alaina Beverly is assistant counsel at the NAACP
Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. She can be contacted at
[email protected]. |