Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

A blow for voting security

The Rocky

Published May 3, 2008 at 11:10 p.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

In post- 9/11 America, government-issued photo IDs are required for such mundane acts as boarding an airplane or entering a federal building.

For many Americans, voting is more important than those actions, and security surrounding it should be no less stringent. However, many states treat voting with less seriousness than, say, opening a bank account. Colorado, for instance, allows a registered voter to present nothing more than a utility bill or a paycheck stub before casting a ballot.

So we hope last week's 6-3 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding Indiana's voter ID law will lend more weight and urgency to boosting security at polling places.

It's too late for the General Assembly to tighten ID requirements for the 2008 cycle. But there's no reason the 2009 legislature can't enact a law similar to Indiana's requiring voters to show a government-issued photo ID, either a driver's license or passport or DMV-issued non-driver's document.

Meanwhile, of course, lawmakers should not erode security standards now in place, which unfortunately some are inclined to do.

The high court's main opinion, signed by three justices, said - rightly - the state's interest in protecting the integrity of its elections was more compelling than the interest of a small number of voters who may experience a special burden in obtaining an ID.

A concurring opinion by the other three justices supporting Indiana said it was proper for the court to defer to the judgment of the state legislature but added an important caveat - "unless it imposes a severe and unjustified overall burden on the right to vote, or is intended to disadvantage a particular class."

Groups challenging Indiana's 2005 law spun horrific tales suggesting that forcing voters to provide an ID could disenfranchise elderly and low-income residents, but they couldn't cite examples where votes weren't counted when residents arrived at the polls without documentation.

In fact, that state bent over backward accommodating those who might be inconvenienced by the law. Indiana lets any voter who lacks an ID cast a provisional ballot that will be counted if the voter provides proof of identity to the state within 10 days of the election. It will also provide a photo ID for free to any resident who doesn't have a driver's license.

Colorado Secretary of State Mike Coffman, for one, has asked this state's lawmakers to require voters to present a photo ID and proof of citizenship at the polls. Unfortunately, the legislature has not agreed.

Earlier this session, a bill that would largely align Colorado law with the Indiana statute died in committee. House Bill 1039 would have eliminated from the list of acceptable identification most IDs that lack photos and aren't issued by the government. Think utility bills and bank statements.

Meanwhile, other lawmakers have pushed bills that would set up an online voter registration system allowing anyone - not necessarily registered voters - to change voter information over a state-run Web site. Talk about a potential step backward.

Colorado first required voters to provide some form of identification at the polls in 2004. Thoughtful reforms along the lines Indiana approved would both survive a constitutional challenge and reinforce the notion that every vote should count - but that only those who are eligible have the right to exercise the franchise.

Comments

  • May 4, 2008

    6:22 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Mike_In_Hartsel writes:

    So what if having to register in person is an inconvenience and some people don't want picture IDs. Voter security is more important. There is no valid argument against having one except to allow ineligible persons to vote.

  • May 4, 2008

    7:25 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    TW writes:

    House Bill 1039 failed because it meant the illegal alien protected class wouldn't be able to vote. As far as the legislature passing a law similar to the Indiana law, don't count on it as long as Bill ("Agricultural Trespass") Ritter and his like-minded legislators are calling the shots.

    This is supposed to be a government of the people, for the people, and by the people. The majority of the people want something done about the illegal alien invasion. Why won't Bush, Ritter, Hickenlooper, and the others enforce the laws that already exist on the books?

  • May 4, 2008

    8:09 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    davis_x_machina writes:

    Earl- when you graduate from elementary school- presuming you get that far- why don't you come back and comment then? Otherwise go down to your local schoolyard and practice up on your infantile insults repukelican wingnut that you are.
    You'd think that somewhere among the various rescumlican administrations, tricky dicky from Yorba Lindas comes to mind, or maybe St, Ronnie the Forgetfuls, or maybe bush the lip readers they'd have set the Department of Justice loose to investigate the veritable tsunami of voter fraud that plagues this country, and we'd have courtrooms full of the indicted, and jails full of the guilty. As it is there have been exactly no convictions for electoral fraud of the sort this law is predicated upon.Perhaps if tricky hadn't been so busy staying a step ahead of impeachment and St. Ronnie trading drugs for cash and weapons for hostages with our enemies, and propping up every tinhorn right wing dictator in central America, and bush 41 dispatching troops into the meat grinder that was Somalia for the next president to deal with, they could have gotten around to this little chore.Seems to me that if the state wishes to require this as a condition of enfranchisement they'll create the means by which everyone who desires their official papers plizz has the means to acquire them

  • May 4, 2008

    8:59 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Oh_Wise_One writes:

    Frow69 "voter fraud as occurred in Florida in 2000"? You mean the ballots in Democrat districts that some voters couldn't or didn't punch correctly? Otherwise known as 'hanging chads'. So your definition of fraud covers incompetence. Okee. Did you include the military ballots or the selective districts that AlGore wanted to count and exclude the statewide? How about when the Press declared the Florida race over before the polls were closed in the primarily Republican Panhandle.
    You Dems will be living in the glory year of 2000 for a long time after the landslide this November. Dreaming of the past when AlGore almost 'Stole' the election.
    Pathetic.

  • May 4, 2008

    9:08 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    You have to have ID to open a bank account, shouldn't you vote too.

    A utility bill, very easy to set up multiples or I just bet if you brought a photocopy they'll accept that too.

  • May 4, 2008

    11:33 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    anarchist writes:

    I thought this was about showing you had enough sense to have some verifiable form of identification before being allowed to vote, I am sure in the republic of mexico I wouldn't be allowed to vote without proving I was a citizen, ditto for Canada, and most other nations I know of, so why not Colorado, including the peoples republic of boulder. It may not be P.C. to suggest that only citizens vote and have a voice in our government, but it is little effort for those truly interested in voting to register (motor voter) so why not require proof of identity, it isn't unreasonable to me, but then, I am a natural born citizen with proof of identity.

  • May 4, 2008

    8:28 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    peterpi writes:

    The Coloradoi law, according to the RMN, would have required ID AND proof of citizenship. So now, in order to vote, not only do I have to provide ID, but also a birth certificate?
    Voting fraud in most areas is very low. This is just another Republican effort to go back to the days when only white male property owners couuld vote.
    They'll make sure that no one in suburbia is unduly burdened, while challenging everyone in Five Points or Northwest Denver.
    Earl, If you want respect, stop calling people you don't like dumbocraps. You're the one who ends up smelling. Republicans think they're so clever with Feminazis (for any woman who wants to control her own fate), dumbocraps, etc.

  • May 4, 2008

    11:13 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Patron_Drinker writes:

    Gene, would that be the party that in Chicago allowed dead people to vote decades after they'd slipped from this mortal coil? or do you mean the party that bussed vagrants, felons, and illegals from polling place to polling place in Miami during the 2000 election? or the party that disabled opposition vehicles in Minneapolis?
    Oh wait, those are all the same party.... The same party that pretty much ruled the Deep South during the heyday of black voter disenfranchisement.

  • May 5, 2008

    10:02 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cwillyrun1 writes:

    davis......... nice try on your political rant. Just to put it back on you, if Clinton had done what he should've done, capturing bin Laden when he knew when and where he was, 9/11 probably doesn't happen. But hey, Willie was too busy in the oval office receiving oral from the fat girl. Jimmy Carter was so incompetent, I don't even need to expand on that. His greatest military achievement was the failed hostage rescue. Let's go back to Lyndon Johnson. He kept the US in Vietnam, and since he's from Texas and all those military contracts were with Texas corporations, don't you think he was keeping them in business? I could go on with examples of Democrats that are flawed just as well as you can with the GOP. The difference is that I don't care what party it is. They both have flaws. The biggest flaw is with Democrats visions of socialism, of tax and spend, of wealth redistribution.

    There should be ID's voters have to use, one with a picture. It's the only way to make sure those people who are allowed to vote are the ones voting.

  • May 5, 2008

    10:07 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Cwillyrun1 writes:

    WINDFALL TAX ON RETIREMENT INCOME

    Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people, you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you. That's what the Speaker of the House is saying. Read below...............

    Nancy Pelosi (a Democrat) wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income. In other words tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement. This woman is a nut case! You aren't going to believe this.

    Madam speaker Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock
    market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds! Alas, it is true - all to help the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities! This woman is frightening.
    She quotes..." We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income, (didn't Marx say something like this), in our country and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest."

    When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:
    "We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'." (Read that quote again and again and let it sink in. Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it, and who are NOT even American)

  • May 5, 2008

    11:55 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    anarchist writes:

    Cwillyrun1 wrote in part, re: Nancy Pelosi "When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:
    "We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'." (Read that quote again and again and let it sink in. Lower your retirement, give it to others who have not worked as you have for it, and who are NOT even American)" Any citizen of the U.S. that doesn't see it as a socialist Marxist attempt by her to buy those 12 million illegal votes is living in a stupor, more take from the citizenry to support the social cause du jour, that why my handle was so easy to pick, anarchist

  • May 5, 2008

    12:31 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    dilligaf writes:

    Reading sunday morning comics and Earls 3rd grade posts. What a country!!!!!!

  • May 6, 2008

    8:23 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    roger44 writes:

    If voter fraud is rampant, doesn't make much difference, No one worth voting for anyway, it will be business as usual after the election. The "earmarks" will continue, fraud in contracting and lobbyists will get their way.

  • May 8, 2008

    9:14 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    jhous1490 writes:

    www.thirtythousand.org

    Tired of politics?

    Maybe what we have been lacking is representation.

    Jefferson gave us one per thirty thousand citizens. Today it's one per 750,000 and growing.

    Take a look at this website. It's worth your time.