Young Voters Condemn Restrictive Photo ID Laws

In a number of state legislatures, photo-ID bills are making headway. These laws rarely, if ever, prevent voter fraud (mostly because it is pretty much non-existent), but they do prevent a lot of eligible people from voting (even good, christian people like nuns).

I haven't followed these bills closely, but fortunately youth orgs like the Student Association for Voter Empowerment (SAVE) have. This issue deserves more attention. Here's a statement they put out on the issue earlier today:

Young Voters Condemn Restrictive Photo ID Laws

Contact: Matthew Segal, SAVE Executive Director, 847-502-5012, matthew.segal [at] savevoting.org
Contact: Representative Joe Dorman, Oklahoma District 65, 580-476-3745, joe.dorman [at] okhouse.gov

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 12, 2009

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Student Association for Voter Empowerment (SAVE) opposes the recent progress of photo identification laws in numerous state legislatures. Recent actions in Oklahoma (SB 4) and Texas (SB 362) legislatures indicate a continued push for restrictive photo ID requirements that inhibit eligible voters from casting a ballot.

Although the implications of mandating a photo ID might seem benign given their ubiquitous use in airports, government agencies, and banks, there are tens of thousands of non-driving, non-traveling and non-banking Americans—both young and old—who do not possess such documentation. Both the Oklahoma and Texas bills mandate that a voter present a photo ID at the polls prior to casting a ballot. Acceptable identification must be issued by the state or federal government and include a photo, full name, and current address.

In the case of Texas, the law does not recognize all college or university photo IDs as acceptable forms of identification. Unless students are to change or update their driver’s licenses, many young voters will be forced to vote provisionally, lowering voter efficacy and making the political participation more bureaucratic, time-consuming, and cumbersome.

At least in the case of Oklahoma, college and university IDs will be considered valid. Representative Joe Dorman (D-65), who insisted on their inclusion, said, “I worry a poll worker might not allow the driver's license of an out-of-state student enrolled and registered to vote in their college community. I commend Rep. Sue Tibbs (R-23), who introduced the bill, for recognizing the importance of allowing these voters at both public and private institutions the opportunity to use this ID should the bill become law.”

Specific instances from the November election, most notably in Indiana, demonstrate the negative impact of photo identification requirements on electoral participation. College students were unable to satisfy ID requirements at the polls because their photo ID was from a different part of the state or another state entirely. Photo ID laws can prevent out-of-state college students from casting a ballot in the district where they attend school. In addition, most allowable substitutions for a photo ID are not easily obtainable because colleges and universities generally pay utility and other bills for their students.

“I am deeply disturbed by the prospect that legislators do not recognize that photo ID laws detract from the integrity of elections,” said Matthew Segal, the Executive Director of SAVE. “I know from hundreds of conversations, congressional testimony, and evidence on the ground that photo ID laws have deterred students from voting where they attend school, which is their home nine months of the year. In light of terrific youth participation in the November election, I am skeptical of our ability to maintain high turnout as states move forward with this disproportionately discriminatory law.”