Since becoming a Senator, not only have I voted for it on numerous occasions, I have been an outspoken advocate of the issue on the Senate floor and in the Senate Elections Committee. Evidencing my passion, the very first bill I co-authored as a freshman Senator was a Voter ID bill.
But partisan Democrats in the Mississippi House of Representatives have always remained recalcitrant.
Despite the work of embattled House Republicans, Senate legislation on the issue has been perennially met with the same predictable results – stonewalling, obstructionism, logical fallacies and eventual defeat. For countless consecutive legislative sessions, an assassin’s experience has made the Democratic House leadership adept at killing Voter ID legislation; it remains their collective badge of honor.
So when I first discovered the House leadership had finally allowed some form of Voter ID to escape out of their tightly controlled chamber, I was cautiously optimistic. But, after a thorough analysis of House Bill 1533, my guarded optimism was replaced by pressing concern.
By the time the bill had been malformed through legislative process, it could no longer fairly be considered merely a Voter ID bill. It had instead been compromised into a misguided elections reform bill.
Containing several provisions that had absolutely nothing to do with Voter ID, the bill would have restored to certain felons the right to vote.
Moreover, it contained a provision allowing individuals to register to vote up until 3 days prior to an election. Not only have Circuit Clerks across the state proclaimed this atrocious provision to be completely unworkable in practice, its misplaced addition did absolutely nothing to secure the future integrity of Mississippi’s electoral process, which should be the sole focus of any true Voter ID legislation. To the contrary, such an approach would play havoc with workers having to print and organize poll books, while allowing additional opportunity for mischief by those seeking to improperly alter an election’s ultimate outcome.
It likewise allowed an exemption for persons over 65 years of age to not show photo identification in order to vote. Of course, a troubling question is raised by this provision: how is a poll worker to actually validate a voter’s purported age, unless the voter presents a valid photo ID verifying his claim?
Even if the obvious paradox could be overcome, this seemingly innocuous addition would expose the legislation to a Constitutional challenge under the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution, as I’m currently unaware of any compelling state justification for treating 65 year old adults differently from other qualified electors that happen to be 64 years of age or younger. Since the bill revolves around the fundamental Constitutional right of voting, arbitrary distinctions regarding age could easily render the bill ripe for judicial disregard.
The bill also contained a provision allowing for “no-excuses” early voting for 20 days prior to an election. This is an unwise approach; since without proper safeguards, early voting is an open invitation for fraud, particularly if the problematic House amendments were to operate in conjunction with one another.
And fraud isn’t the only problem. Early voting effectively lengthens and increases the cost of campaigns, thereby causing even more money to flow into the political system and granting an inherent advantage to wealthy incumbents.
Early voting may also negatively affect voter turnout in some races, with at least one study finding that states with early voting have lower voter turnout rates than states that do not. Early-voting “exit polls” are likely to exacerbate the low turnout problem.
Another complication with early voting was recently highlighted by David Lewis Schaefer, a writer for National Review. “Early voting is comparable to leaving a stage play before the final act,” he wrote. “Why should voters be encouraged to make up their minds before the official end of the campaign – unaware of new issues or revelations that may emerge in its closing weeks, or sudden developments that bear on the question of whom to elect?”
Moreover, perhaps it is fair to question whether modern society should blithely accommodate people unwilling to spend some part of Election Day going to the polls, thus abdicating personal responsibility.
Not including those who vote through legal absentee ballots or our heroes out of the country on military duty, there are others who care so little about the franchise that they won’t vote unless offered the opportunity for mail-in ballots or early voting. Being unwilling to sacrifice even a moment on election-day, they are probably no more willing to invest the time it takes to actually become informed voters. Isn’t it time the American voter took his civic responsibility more seriously than ordering take-out from a local drive though window?
Lastly, while recently disparaging several Republican Senators over the alleged demise of Voter ID, there is an essential part of the story the press conveniently failed to cover. By the first week of February, the Senate had already passed a pure Voter ID bill, Senate Bill 2548. It was transmitted to the House for consideration on February 6, 2009, and the House leadership summarily killed it – once again.
A silent execution slyly witnessed by cunning accomplices, the death of SB 2548 was quickly forgotten and never reported.
Perhaps old news is no news at all.
Post a Comment
