Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 7 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Miss. attempts at voter ID law have failed
Published Monday, April 28, 2008
JACKSON (AP) — Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann says a Supreme Court ruling on voter ID shows the court's interest in protecting the integrity of the ballot box goes hand-in-hand with ensuring the public's confidence in the election process.
Mississippi does not require voter identification at the polls. Legislative efforts to enact a law, including an attempt this year, have failed.
The issue also is tied up in the federal courts. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is considering an appeal of a voting rights case from Mississippi, in which a federal judge ordered the state to implement voter ID in time for the 2009 election.
Voter ID has been a hotly debated topic for years in Mississippi. Supporters say requiring voters to show a driver's license or other identification would prevent election fraud. Opponents say there has been no evidence of people voting under false identities. They also say some older black voters who lived through the violence of the Jim Crow era could be intimidated by an ID requirement.
Derrick Johnson, president of the Mississippi NAACP, said Monday's decision will not affect the case pending before the 5th Circuit. The NAACP was allowed to join the appeal of the federal judge's ruling.
The NAACP and others said the Legislature — not the federal court — should decide such issues as voter ID.
"The decision simply says a state has a right to enact a law," Johnson said. "Mississippi has not decided to enact such legislation. It is the complete authority of the state Legislature."
Johnson said the decision has nothing to do with the lawsuit.
Hosemann had pushed a voter ID bill in 2008 session as part of a number election law changes.
The bill passed the Senate but died in the House. It would have required voters to show a valid photo ID, a government document with their name and address on it or a social security card. Acceptable photo ID includes driver's licenses, passports, student and employee cards. Those without ID could vote by affidavit.
On Monday, the Supreme Court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Its backers said it was needed to prevent fraud.
The law "is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting 'the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'" Justice John Paul Stevens.
"Mississippians don't need the nation's highest court to tell them voter ID protects the integrity and reliability of the electoral process, deters voter fraud and protects public confidence which encourages citizen participation," Hosemann said.
Comments
Posted by OldGrandDad (anonymous) on April 28, 2008 at 9:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You are either pro voter identification or pro voter fraud.
Posted by silly_willy_24_7 (anonymous) on April 29, 2008 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
i wonder if those who are reluctant to show id at the voting places are as equally reluctant to show id at the department of human services.
Posted by Mucasplug (anonymous) on April 30, 2008 at 7:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
yep, if u can show a i.d. for social security of food stamps u can show i.d. to vote. To say different is a lie. The N.A.A.C.P. Is for voter fraud.
Posted by LdyBreez (anonymous) on April 30, 2008 at 9:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree with everyone above. I would definatly show my ID to vote. I would know that each vote would be valid. It would make me feel better after everything that has gone on in Wilkinson County.
Seems to me like anyone who is reluctant to show ID has something to hide...
Posted by Yeahuhuh (anonymous) on April 30, 2008 at 3:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I actually know 4 people who if it were not for the kind assistance of others would not vote. They don't have kids local or a way to the polls unless someone remembers them.
And if not having a ride to the polls can prevent people from voting then not having a ride to get a government ID before hand AND not having a ride to the polls can certainly do it. Anybody that thinks about that admits it is true. And unlike the fraud charges, it is true in almost every election in almost every district.
Add to that the fact that very few cases of voter fraud have actually shown up due to people going to the polls and claiming they are someone they are not. It is different kinds of fraud that surface more often, like the accusations in Concordia about out of area people being encouraged to vote there.
I seem to remember someone prosecuted for helping others vote in Texas, a case widely laughed at as partisan shenanigans, but one that is intended for people who help the poor vote to watch their step.
You either want everyone to vote or you don't. And if you are serious about that you don't design a method to prevent fraud that you are sure will eliminate some of the poorest and oldest voters. But a lot of people think it is perfectly fair to use laws that prevent some people from voting.
Wasn't it a company that Haley Barbour helped start up nawth' that was involved in jamming Democratic Party phone lines so they could not help with transportation to the polls on election day? Nobody seems to talk much about that but it was all over the national news.
I think someone who would stop people from voting is lower than a snake's belly and a worse human being than Ossama Benladin. I think everyone who recommends policy that keeps even one person from voting should go to jail. And any ID requirements without remedies to the requirement do just that.
I also think anyone who doesn't care if a few old black poor people don't get to vote should just have the courage to say that.
Didn't Judge Roberts just say this week that people will certainly get violated by Voter ID laws, but that until they have complaints and plaintiffs he would allow the law in another state as constitutional even though it would likely restrict legitimate voting?
Compare that to our recent Louisiana election debacle in the Concordia Sheriff's race where when a candidate complained after the fact and the Louisiana Court said they had to address voter roll problems before the fraud occurred. Go figure.
No, I don't think this matter is as simple as those who push it pretend. And I think they know that quite well.
Posted by rushinghjr (anonymous) on April 30, 2008 at 10:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe Mississippi needs to get a new Secretary of Statw with some Common Sense!
Posted by rushinghjr (anonymous) on April 30, 2008 at 10:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And a new Legislature also!
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)