Arkansas Legislature passes voter-ID requirement
By The Associated Press
This article was originally published March 19, 2013 at 7:10 a.m. Updated March 19, 2013 at 2:47 p.m.
- Comments (30)
- aAFont Size
The Arkansas Senate has passed a bill that would require voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot.
The Senate on Tuesday rejected a committee recommendation that the bill requires a two-thirds majority —24 votes — then voted 22-12 vote for the legislation and sent it to Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe. Beebe has questioned the need for such a requirement, but has not said whether he'll veto the bill.
The Republican-led Senate approved an earlier version of the bill, but had to approve an amendment attached by the GOP-controlled House.
Arkansas poll workers must ask for identification under current law, but voters don't have to show it to cast a ballot. The bill would require Arkansas to provide free photo IDs to voters who don't have one.
Comments on: Arkansas Legislature passes voter-ID requirement
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.
You must login to make comments.
Reason says... March 19, 2013 at 4:37 p.m.
VOTER SUPPRESSION
( permalink | suggest removal )
RBBrittain says... March 19, 2013 at 7:47 p.m.
Reason, I generally agree with you; but I can't help but wonder if the whole 2/3 diversion didn't hurt the cause of those of us who opposed it. I read the bill; it does NOT amend the voter registration law (Amendment 51) AT ALL, so the 2/3 rule does NOT apply.
.
That said, since voter ID is imposed as an independent requirement, I'm not sure it would survive a state-court challenge (like it or not, it probably would survive a Federal court challenge in the present environment). The Amendment 85 rewrite of Arkansas Constitution, Article 3, Sections 1 & 2 allow only FIVE conditions for voting rights: (1) U.S. citizen, (2) resident of Arkansas, (3) 18 or over, (4) registered to vote, and (5) legislative restrictions on convicted felons (i.e., must complete ALL elements of his/her sentence including probation); Section 2 expressly prohibits ANY law restricting that right other than the convicted-felon law. (The old section disqualifying an "idiot or insane person" was repealed by, and in fact was the main inspiration for, Amendment 85.) I'm not an attorney, but I don't see voter ID clearing those high STATE constitutional hurdles without a voter-approved constitutional amendment.
( permalink | suggest removal )
StrayGoose says... March 19, 2013 at 8:22 p.m.
Anyone against voter ID supports voter fraud, plain and simple.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... March 19, 2013 at 9:15 p.m.
The kind of voter fraud involving impersonation of another person at the polls happens about once in fifteen million votes. Anyone supporting wasting all this time and effort on voter ID instead of supporting stopping the fraud that actually occurs all the time is for voter fraud, plain and simple.
( permalink | suggest removal )
djigoo says... March 19, 2013 at 9:22 p.m.
We simply CAN'T have the "wrong" people voting now, can we? So just stay home unless you're white and wealthy. It's what Jesus would want.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Packman says... March 19, 2013 at 9:56 p.m.
The only vote suppressed will be that of people too lazy/stupid/illegal to attain an ID. This is a common sense law that not only protects the integrity of the system but the personal interest of law-abiding citizens as well.
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... March 19, 2013 at 10:04 p.m.
How does it protect the integrity of the system when it fails to do anything about the kinds of voter fraud that are so much more prevalent?
( permalink | suggest removal )
BillSmith says... March 20, 2013 at 12:10 a.m.
jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs
( permalink | suggest removal )
GrimReaper says... March 20, 2013 at 12:43 a.m.
googoo,
It's such a pity that your brain is so minute relative to the size of your mouth.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Reason says... March 20, 2013 at 6:10 a.m.
RBBrittain: Photo ID does NOTHING but disenfranchise many voters and it my opinion, it is unconstitutional and a violation of the Voters Rights Act of 1965.
.
Amendment 51 to the Arkansas Constitution plainly states what is required of a voter in order to be illegible to vote and be placed in the "permanent registration". To add requirements is amending the State Constitution. Section 19 of the Amendment allows for the Assembly to amend Sections 5 through 15, so long as such amendments are germane to the Amendment and consistent with its policy and purposes.
Voter ID (SB 2) falls under Section 1 which determines who is legally qualified to vote.
Voter ID means you may not be qualified. Not qualified means being removed from the "permanent register". Which means it would take a 2/3 in both Chambers to become law. (IMO)
.
Also, Voter ID (SB 2) allows the Secretary of State Mark Martin to finish writing the law at a later date. What other documents or proof of eligibility might he come up in order to obtain a "free card"? What is his implementation plan? Nobody knows!
.
Photo ID disenfranchises people that do not drive: The elderly, disabled, women, minorities and the poor. Election MUST be free, fair and accessible!
( permalink | suggest removal )
morebeer says... March 20, 2013 at 8:10 a.m.
Um, it's voter suppression, even GOP operatives say so when they're under oath.
( permalink | suggest removal )
jjordan says... March 20, 2013 at 8:21 a.m.
I'm sure they'll get around to figuring out how to bring some more jobs to Arkansas after we finish grinding some axes. It's scary where Arkansas is headed...
( permalink | suggest removal )
lazybar says... March 20, 2013 at 10:02 a.m.
yes thats right it is voter suppression,it is suppressing the votes of those who should not be voting.
( permalink | suggest removal )
NoUserName says... March 20, 2013 at 11:21 a.m.
Got any proof to back that up? I mean, I don't understand how supposedly intelligent people can be told/shown that there is NO evidence of in person voter fraud and yet those same people still claim this is somehow for the integrity of elections. I just really don't get it.
( permalink | suggest removal )
drs01 says... March 20, 2013 at 11:55 a.m.
I wouldn't cash a 50 cent check from anyone without seeing a picture ID; I wouldn't expect to have any establishment do the same for me without showing a picture ID. We all use them every day...so what's the big deal? Frankly, we have 20 million illegals here today, depending on whose stats you read. I'd bet that MANY OF THEM are voting because they can. This is a "send a message" law.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... March 20, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.
too lazy or stupid to get an ID?
too lazy or stupid to be allowed to vote.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... March 20, 2013 at noon
oh, yeah
Too much is always better than not enough.
( permalink | suggest removal )
NoUserName says... March 20, 2013 at 12:06 p.m.
Somebody actually thinks scores of illegals are voting? Wow. Really. Wow. And Po, since you're going to vote for Halter because Pop and, well, whoever else it was vouches for him, that ranks pretty high on my stupid voter list.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... March 20, 2013 at 1:18 p.m.
Maybe so, NoName, but I gotta ID. bwahhaahha
( permalink | suggest removal )
inquire says... March 20, 2013 at 2:51 p.m.
Illegals try their best to stay under the radar and not draw unnecessary attention to themselves, except for the really criminal ones. The former aren't going to risk a run in with the law over a stupid stunt. The latter aren't exactly the kind of people who keep up with issues and vote.
The tea party legislature looks suspicious when they waste all this time on a cure for a type of voter fraud that occurs about once in fifteen million votes, while apparently being totally unconcerned about the types of voter fraud that occur frequently.
If they want a picture ID to vote, fine, the county clerk should issue one when you register to vote. Otherwise, whatever the county clerk gave you is supposed to allow you to vote.
I've never been without a picture ID, but that isn't the point. There is something very odd and suspect about Republican obsession with fraud that is extremely rare, combined with a lack of concern about fraud that is common.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... March 20, 2013 at 3:04 p.m.
A Republican's idea of fraud may very well be a Democrat's idea of a ticket to victory.
Of course, the opposite is true as well.
I can never envision unanimity on the subject.
I can see both sides. Clearly illustrated by extreme example;
I can understand a tax paying property owner despising the homeless having a say on how things are done.
I can understand the homeless demanding to hold their francise, regardless.
This is why we have courts.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Packman says... March 20, 2013 at 4:14 p.m.
This debate highlights the essence of the difference between modern day conservatives and liberals. Conservatives believe that rights come with responsibilities. To a conservative who believes in self-reliance and personal accountability, these shrill screams of "voter suppression" are nothing more than liberal excuse-making and a way to reward irresponsible behavior. Liberals believe peole should not be held accountable for their actions and Big Government will always provide. The calls of "voter suppression" are an assault to common sense and a losing charge for liberals. Let's just hope they (liberals) keep this particular bit of insanity flowing.
( permalink | suggest removal )
BillSmith says... March 20, 2013 at 5:45 p.m.
packman ..... Give me one good reason why any state would want to cut early voting days.
Surely a learned person as yourself can list a least one. That is voter suppression period.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... March 20, 2013 at 5:47 p.m.
Republicans, Democrats - George Washington hated political parties and said,
""Let me now warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally. The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism."
Like George, I am not much for parties and I think about this: Doesn't the current two party system act as a tyrant? Aren't we limited to pick from whom those parties deign to present us? Haven't the parties colluded to make candidacies other then from themselves almost impractical? Don't both parties cease rendering themselves and turn together in attacking upstart parties? Aren't the sad little "token" parties resigned to suck up to one of the two controlling parties to do any business at all? Don't you feel sorry for the Greens, Populists, Libertarians and such like who are forced to chose Democrat or Republican as an affiliation, when none of them actually care for the politics of the respective parties they have to suck up to if they want to be heard?
( permalink | suggest removal )
Walter says... March 20, 2013 at 8:06 p.m.
Will Beebe have the balls to sign it into law?
( permalink | suggest removal )
BradBailey says... March 21, 2013 at 5:33 a.m.
I suspect HB2, like many other state voter ID bills, was originally authored by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and then passed down to Arkansas Republican legislators to make the bill appear as a grassroots work. What evidence is there of prevalent voter fraud in Arkansas? I've seen none reported..
This bill is nothing more than a tool to disenfranchise the elderly and minorities and others who usually vote Democratic.
Don't look know, but the 89th is serving the Southern Baptist Convention and the corporate overlords of the Republican Party, not the people of Arkansas.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Pobucker says... March 21, 2013 at 9:31 a.m.
Brad seems to forget the 88th leg served its own overlords.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Packman says... March 21, 2013 at 9:56 a.m.
Hey Brad - "This bill is nothing more than a tool to disenfranchise the elderly and minorities and others who usually vote Democratic." Says who? And why do you believe elderly folks and minorities lack the ability and resourcefulness to obtain a valid ID? Unlike you, I believe them to be every bit as able and resourceful as anybody else. What do you have against senior and minorities?
Hey BillSmith - Money. It costs taxpayer money to keep the polls open. If a cost/benefit analysis should show those "open" days as marginally useful, save us taxpayers some money and close them. That's a good enough reason for logical thinking follks.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Jjackk says... March 21, 2013 at 10:59 a.m.
Who doesn't have an ID? I mean really?
But its not like this will stop voter fraud. The fraud comes from the handling of the voter machines. Or having Democratic and Republican representatives on the election commission to further their respective parties is a lot more detrimental to free and fair elections.
( permalink | suggest removal )
BradBailey says... March 21, 2013 at 4:56 p.m.
Packman. Who says? The ACLU:
Racial Minorities:
"As many as 25% of African Americans of voting age lack government-issued photo ID, compared to only 8% of their white counterparts.
"Poll Tax: Even if the photo IDs are offered for free, the birth certificates, passports, or other documents required to obtain a government-issued ID cost money, and many eligible voters simply cannot afford to pay for them. Without full and ongoing funding, the requirements for a photo ID would become an unconstitutional poll tax."
Senior Citizens
"Eighteen percent of Americans over the age of 65 do not have government-issued photo ID.
Ruthelle Frank, a resident of Brokaw, Wisconsin since her birth in 1927 has voted in every election since 1948; yet she has none of the accepted forms of photo ID under Wisconsin’s photo ID law. In order to get a state ID card, she needs to prove citizenship, but since she was born at home, she has never had a birth certificate. This could easily happen to elderly voters in our state."
Many people with disabilities do not have drivers licenses, for example.
"A former musician now stricken with multiple sclerosis and confined to awheelchair,whose ID has expired and for whom obtaining new state identification would be both physically and financially difficult; A woman on disability due to a severe accident, who would encounter significant physical and financial hardship obtaining new state identification;
And others:
"Grover Freeland, a Philadelphia-area retired veteran, whose veteran's ID card will not be acceptable to allow him to cast a ballot. Arkansas’ bill requires an ID with an expiration date, which a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) ID does not have."
( permalink | suggest removal )
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Read our Terms of Use policy.