With Maine’s strong, accessible system of voting, why mess with success? And, given all our urgent budgetary needs, why ask Maine’s taxpayers to pay for all the U.S. Supreme Court requires for a system of photo identification for voters?
Maine’s legislators voted twice on voting last session. The Legislature passed and Gov. Paul LePage signed a bill to end Maine’s nearly 40-year tradition of Election Day registration. Through a people’s veto, Maine people spoke loud and clear, turning aside evidence-free claims of fraud and restoring the practice by a resounding 60-40 landslide.
In the same session, the House passed LD 199, which would require photo identification to vote. After the Senate voted “no,” it was put aside and is scheduled for the Veterans and Legal Affairs Committee next week.
Problems with ending Election Day registration were easy to see. People who recently moved within Maine or worked many hours or came to Maine for military service, studies or a new job or changed their names would have faced new barriers to casting their votes.
Photo identification also has problems and, unlike ending Election Day registration, would be very costly.
And by costly, I mean real dollars. At the same time, a photo ID requirement would have a differential effect on some citizens, making it harder for them to vote. In fact, the finances and the impact are linked.
A study by the respected Brennan Center finds that nationally, “11 percent of American citizens do not possess a government-issued photo ID; that is over 21 million citizens.” If that percentage sounds high for Maine, it isn’t. The Fiscal Note for Maine’s LD 199 assumes that “10 percent of registered voters do not currently have either a driver’s license or identification card, that would equal 97,000 people.”
In other words, nearly 100,000 Maine people could have their access to the vote limited should a photo identification bill be adopted. And the requirement will bring new costs because, while the U.S. Supreme Court found photo identification constitutional, the court required states to provide these free to people needing them to vote who cannot afford them. That’s because the 24th Amendment prohibits poll taxes.
As the Brennan Center points out, “providing free IDs will be a recurring cost … and states will have to bear the costs of re-issuing new IDs for these voters whenever their names or addresses change.”
Requiring voters to show a driver’s license or its substitute for nondrivers would be very expensive, since states with this requirement have been required to add new workers and locations to issue these government IDs. (In Wisconsin, politics came into play with plans to shut down locations in Democratic areas and open new ones in Republican-leaning ones.)
Since the implementation of the federal REAL ID, you can’t get a state ID without producing other documents, such as a passport or a birth certificate. Women, who often change their names when marrying or divorcing, are less likely to have those with their current names. Taxpayers would have to pay for these documents for Mainers who don’t have and can’t afford them.
Imagine an elderly person who has moved out of her decades-long home since last voting. She hasn’t had a driver’s license since her eyesight began failing five years ago. Without a passport, she’d have to get a copy of her birth certificate — something not always possible for people born before modern record-keeping — and have someone take her to get a photo ID. These multiple steps would have to be done before voting and likely would be hard to arrange.
Now, Maine’s proposed law doesn’t actually spell out what identification would be required. But with ID requirements, the devil is in the details, leaving room for political mischief. You can see that in Texas, where a concealed gun permit is OK for voting but a college identification card is not.
Maine’s LD 199 leaves it to the secretary of state’s discretion to create the “technical rule” that would determine the identification needed to vote. The bill’s lack of specifics create uncertainty, even mystery.
Mainers shouldn’t discover what reality unfolds from that mystery nor bear the costs of a new law affecting voters.
Amy Fried is a professor of political science at the University of Maine. You can follow her on Twitter at twitter.com/ASFried and on her blog, pollways.com.
If you want an ID, we are ALL numbered. Why create another agency not that it is necessary anyway.
Any ID is fine to me.
excellent video and a great real life situation of how easy it is for dead people to vote. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-uVhhIlPk0
If you need an ID to drink or drive, then there’s no excuse for not having an ID to vote. People need to take personal responsibility or be disqualified from voting.
With 100,000 registered Maine voters not having government photo ids — and these are the figures from Maine state government — there would be quite a lot of people whose ids taxpayers would have to fund.
Drinking and buying alcohol are choices. Voting is a right and poll taxes are unconstitutional. Thus the U.S. Supreme Court says ids would have to be free to those who say they need them to vote and can’t afford them.
And while all of us who are able-bodied and able to drive have government photo ids, if you’re old and in a nursing home, you don’t have it. Should a veteran of World War II who is in a nursing home lose his right to vote because he doesn’t have a current photo id? What about a recently married or divorced woman whose id doesn’t have her legal name on it?
At the same time, actual fraud cases of voter impersonation are absurdly low.
I could just imagine what the Secretary of State would do if this law passed and we bused people to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles to all demand instant-issue voter IDs on Election Day so they can vote. Because if this law passes and doesn’t get hit with a people’s veto, that’s what I’ll be doing. Complete with tailgate party.
I’m in!
Don’t forget to stop by Husson and the U of Maine to pickup the students as I am sure the R’s will not accept the universities ID’s. Wow let me know when this is to take place as I am sure some of those students know how to party.
Include all of the other colleges and univeristies too.
There is really no big problem with getting a photo id for thise 100,000. If there are shut-in Democrats of Republicans who don’t have an id, you can be sure the parties will make sure they get one. The legislation needs to provide a way for it to happen without excessive public cost. For example, the partiues could buy the equipment to make an id, set up a day at nursing homes or private homes with some town official and get it done. Neither party is going to risk a reliable vote being lost because of lack of an id. Other organizations such as League of Women Voters, Rotary, Kiwanis, and lots of organizations will pitch it. Problems like this can be solved without major government expense and they will be.
I used to work at polls years ago when the rules were different regarding same day registration and absentee. There was a lot of cheating. A lot. We used to hold back challenges until it became clear they would or would not have an effect on the outcome. One time I challenged 150 or so votes on behalf of my party but when the votes were in, our candidate lost by 300 so there was no point in pursing it. The pressure put on the person making the challenge was intense from the other side and I can see why many people were intimidated. But those supporting same day registration in the refernedum made a big point about how few challenges were made but that was really not honest and they won the right too cheat which seems very important to a number of people.
So you admit to cheating by holding back challenges in an effort to give your party a better chance. So your cheating in more virtuous than the alleged cheating of others?
No cheating. But to challenge voters in that case, would have involved a lot of people who voted absentee that should not have under the law then in effect. Since my challenge would not make any difference in the election results, why report them? They didn’t know they were breaking the law because the person voting them, misled them. Some did make an effort to crack down on people who were collecting absentees inappropriately but that just provided impetus to change the law rather than enforce it. So that is what happened
I’ve
seen a case where absentee ballots from college students were thrown away
because that person didn’t feel they had the “right “to vote on that
issue and would be for it anyway. This is not a second hand observation, but
fact and incidentally, that person just happened to be an R. And lost a job
over it also. This is the types of “challenge ” that is worse than
one or two voting frauds, This is punishing tens of thousands in Maine and
millions nationally to prevent the very little fraud that actually exists. It’s
very transparent as to the reason. Republicans really don’t want “those
people’ to vote because they tend to vote democratic.
Don’t forget the students at Husson, U of M and Beals, boy as a taxpayer I will be really happy to spend our money for this. The R’s sure have some great ideas all to stop an non-existance problem.
And I’ll bet that “your party” was Republican. The political leanings of any voter are none of your business. If you’re convinced that it will be so easy for EVERONE to get a photo ID, I’m sure that you’ll be at the forefront of assiting them (transportation, etc.) to do so, right? Oh yes, no questions asked, right?
Absurdly low, to the point of being Z-E-R-O (except for the guy who HAD a government ID, but was an illegal immigrant).
Of course you realize that the individuals pictured in the video which was done by Criminal James O’Keefe are currently under investigation by the N. H. Attorney General for voter fraud and identity theft. If your real name is John Smith and you live at 1 Main St. and ask for a ballot in the name of Joe Jones from 1 Maple St. you are committing voter fraud. Apparently all the names they used were not dead people, but in a few cases the names of living people. People need to obey the law. And other people should not use criminals as sources.
The problem with your argument is driving or drinking or anything else that you might show an ID for is not a right granted to us, but Voting is.
I may be wrong, but isn’t showing ID required when buying a gun (found to be a constitutional right a few years ago)?
I don’t believe you need to show anything at a gun show if the person selling is not a gun dealer.
Also you can buy one from any individual without ID’s.
True, but when you’re dealing with government-licensed sellers, the government demands an ID. And I have to think with all the hoo-hah about ‘the gun show loophole’ that the government isn’t all that happy about private sales where you don’t have to show an ID, either.
Gald to see you’re thinking on both sides of your brain. Some people do not drink, nor do they drive. Requiring a government id for everyday living is nothing more than one more step towards a totaliltarian society. Glad to see that you’re able to think outside the box (NOT!).
I am glad someone brought this up. I have my id, lets go vote Comrade.
In fact, many people (for example, people in nursing homes) neither drink nor drive. Do you want to deny the vote to them?
You need to reread the column.
I just don’t get it. I show ID for so many things. I don’t think that I system that doesn’t provide controls and safeties can be considered a success.
Did you prove to your wife it was you with an ID when you kissed her goodbye this morning?
Maine.gov: Residents: Getting Married in Maine http://www.maine.gov/portal/family/marriage.html – Similarto Maine.gov: Residents: Getting Married in Maine Marriage licenses are issued at the town or city level. … If both of you are residents of the state of Maine, you should both apply at the town office where at least one of you is a resident. … Photo ID such as a driver’s license may be required. …
Did you prove to your wife it was you with an ID when you kissed her goodbye this morning?
Gosh it has only worked for 200 plus years.
You want to know how the Republicans are full of garbage when they push this kind of legislation citing cleaner elections? Just look at these past Presidential primaries for their parties. None required pre-registration or photo identification to vote and NONE of them had any qualms about this. They have nefarious motivations when they propose this kind of legislation, they know exactly who it’ll impact and discourage from voting. That’s wrong and that’s unAmerican.
Precisely. They don’t even require it now in Maine. I bet if I showed up to a GOP caucus they wouldn’t be carding people on the way in.
And it is REPUBLICAN as well
As someone who works at the polls during elections, I can attest that there is no way of knowing if a person standing before you with a name and address on a piece of paper is indeed that person and once they vote and exit the polls it is virtually impossible to find them again. I can also attest to the experience every year of having someone come in to vote only to find out someone else has voted for them. Photo ID would better equip us poll workers to prevent voter impersonation. This is a basic safeguard that a person’s vote deserves.
We also see far less than 11% of voters who do not use photo IDs. The Brennan Center “study” you reference is based on a 987 respondent telephone survey made in 2007 which readily states it is not representative of the general population. Yet BC cites its survey as applicable to every state, county, township, and city in America; plus they show up to testify in every state legislature on photo IDs, but consistently fail to find a single individual who has no access to a photo ID.
The examples you use of World War II veterans, elderly who have had a driver’s license in the past, and people whose names change are all people who can readily get updated photo IDs because of their past record. People who vote will obtain the necessary ID just like they obtain the neccessary registration today.
Lastly, in today’s society those people without photo IDs are limited in their access to basic services or have to plead that the standard photo ID requirements be waived. Photo ID legislation provides IDs to those who do not otherwise have the means to obtain one. This is a good thing not a bad thing.
21 million eligible Americans don’t have IDs. They’re largely the young, old, and minorities. Your “consistently fail to find a single individual who has no access to a photo ID. “is untrue.
No dispute that there are registered voters without state-issued photo IDs, but closer looks such as that taken in South Carolina continue to show the magnitude as overstated. Photo ID laws provide an unbiased opportunity for eligible voters without photo IDs to obtain these at taxpayer expense. Having said this I don’t support suppressing a single vote, just like I don’t support stealing a single vote. My issue is with the unsubstantiated overstatements made by the Brennan Center. The Brennan Center testifies against photo ID laws on a conceptual basis, but I stand by my statement that they consistently fail to find someone who can successfully testify that they do not have access to a photo ID.
It’s the state of Maine that says that 10% of registered Maine voters don’t have government-issued voter ids, not the Brennan Center. This is the figure used in the Fiscal Note for LD 199.
Regarding the Brennan Center’s survey, it was conducted by a highly reputable survey research operation that does the field work for CNN’s surveys and for major corporations’ market research. As such, it is representative of the population from which the sample was drawn, within the explicitly stated margin of error.
Your claim that people can easily renew ids is incorrect. It is far harder to renew licenses than it was in the past. The last time I went to the DMV to renew mine, there were many unhappy people who were turned away because they didn’t have the documents required under REAL ID, a federal mandate. These requirements also add to the cost and the potential for time delays that would prevent people from voting.
Amy, Read your own article: The State of Maine ASSUMES that 10% of registered Maine voters don’t have government-issued voter ids. Fiscal Note for LD 199 very specifically states “ASSUME”….not a fact. An assumption is not a fact. Let’s deal with the real number.
The DOJ made a similar comparison for South Carolina citing 239,000 registered voters that were not listed on the state DMV as license holders; only to find that number shrink to 37,000 once voters who are deceased, have moved out of state, or have allowed their license to expire are removed. Let’s deal with the real size of the problem.
The Brennan Center overstates the significance and the content of their “study” results and sadly others simply parrot their narrative. Their study did not reflect the actual experience I saw at the polls so I have read their “studies” in detail. They do claim a highly reputable survey research operation conducted their study. My point is not with the survey operation, but with how the Brennan Center misstates the results.
It still appears that despite the significance of the hurdle, you were able to get your license renewed. My experience is that others will responsibly obtain the same result.
You’re right that the 10% figure is an assumption.
But take a look at people who “have allowed their license to expire.” Those folks do not have government-issued id right now and, under the rules adopted in many photo-id states, it is not a matter of paying to renew it and getting a new photo. REAL ID has changed the situation and made it costlier and more difficult to renew those ids. And this has real impacts on all sorts of people, including the person in a nursing home who no longer has a license.
But, as I noted, there is considerable mystery in LD 199, since it doesn’t spell out what ids would be acceptable. This is too big a decision to be left to the Secretary of State to make in a technical rule, and it’s unlike other states’ photo id policies, which spell this out in detail right in the legislation.
Additionally, the Brennan Center acknowledges George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, among other left-wing organizations, for its “generous support of our voting work.”
Hardly impartial.
You betcha!
I guess the 10% who don’t have id’s also don’t purchase
anything that requires them to show an id? Outside of possibly
an elderly or disabled person, who doesn’t have an id?
If you move just before an election you might be an exception
too. So the same ones who say this is such an inconvenience
are going to try and snow the majority into thinking that these
10% who don’t have any id are going to run right down and
vote too. When you try to make a point, why is it the elderly or
disabled or children are always used as the sob story? They aren’t
the issue, more often the exception.
Why is this any of your busniness
Read. Reread. Comprehend.
I’ve heard all the Republican nonsense citing responsibility and reasonability to show ID because of all the other instances where you must show ID. The simple fact of the matter is all those other instances aren’t granted to us but the right to vote is, end of story.
Voter ID is brought to us by the Republican Party which needs to restrict votes to have a snowballs chance in the 2012 election and they know it, so if they can’t win using the documents that guide this country …. they’ve decided to try and steal the next election.
one of biggest issues with photo id in maine will once again be college students. will maine be willing to issue state id’s to every out of state college student? The supreme court says those students are legal voters, without a maine id they will not be able to vote, but issuance of a drivers license in maine has stiffer requirements. can’t wait to hear what our resident student hater Charlie Webster thinks on this one,,,,,
I was thinking along the same lines. Charlie in charge? Heaven help us all.
The GOP in near lockstep moves Voter ID bills to protect the sanctity of our elections, they purport. Their logic continues that if even one illegal vote is cast, it undermines the entire process. Still, these laws will result in turning away potentially millions of legally eligible voters. Yet, in Iowa, this same party did not bother to reconcile the variance in vote tallies in one particular district.
The reason the GOP did not care to clarify the exact vote count is because as long as it is only republicans voting, it does not matter. Further, the goal is not actually making sure that voting is more accountible or accurate, it is to turn the poor and minorities away from the polls. If this was not the case, they would have had recount after recount to ensure the voters will was determined.
Lets also not forget that in 2000, the republican party brought Bush v Gore to the Supreme Court to prevent the accurate counting of all of the votes cast because at that moment, they were ahead. This is the real bottom line for the party. They are not trying to save our elections, they are trying to save their own asses by keeping likely opposition away.
After Bush v Gore, the republican party cannot honestly say they care about the will of the voter. Votes only count when they tell the story they want told. Beyond that, every single one is suspect.
Amy, this is a very persuasive piece and I am forced to agree with you. Even though I am a thorough Republican, I believe the party is wrong to pursue voter id–for the reasons you stated, and because I am notoriously forgetful and I would hate to have to run back home to get my id so I can vote…especially since the checklist ladies all know me.
I feel the best reason for not even considering LD199 is that there is absolutely no proven need for it.. there is no case history here in Maine that says we need this.. and I know this because we just went through the whole argument last year. Saying there is voter fraud IS the fraud. The Students all voted legally as did the medical students they later accused.
Voter ID is part of a national Agenda that has no place here.
Asking me why I shouldn’t have a photo ID to vote, is no reason to pass a law saying I have to have one.
I love how the leftists insist that requiring an ID to vote is somehow a burden, yet for a 40 year old man to buy a six pack its no burden at all. The whole point is that the dimocrats cheat and commit voter fraud. They have done it in the past, are probably plotting to do more of it right now, but the typical brain-dead hippies who post on here see it as “the man” holding them down. What a crock of ****. I hope the GOP commits MASSIVE voter fraud this election to ensure we get rid of Oblamer. Whats good for the goose… After all, thats how Obama got elected in the first place. He is nothing but a walking, squeeky-s talking fraud who is going away after this term no matter what it takes.
Wow.. you are interesting… you would promote using fraud to overthrow the will of the people so your party can win…. and pass a law that would prevent fraud.
Do you not see how utterly ignorant this position is?
It is EXTREMELY scary that there are people in this country that think the way you do. You would throw EVERYTHING this country stands for, everything YOU say YOU stand for just to win….
This right here people… this person represents why we must work hard to remove republicans from office. These are the under pinning of their movement for power. To do whatever it takes to make sure the other guy isn’t around anymore.
Sick Sick Sick…
Wow.,voter fraud got the president elected so now we need more?Then you must be against having an ID.To quote our “great govenor,”What planet are you from”?
The point is this: One party has no problem cheating, lying and manipulating so Im simply suggesting the other party adopt the same tactics. Funny how you dont object to the first group doing it and only the second. Biased a little maybe?
And by the way, I’m neither left nor right.I’m a centrist who understands what the R’s are trying to perpertrate upon the people of Maine and this country.
Perpertrate should be Oblamer’s middle name. Funny how you only see the “evils” of the GOP and give Oblamer and his party a total pass. You must work for the BDN.