Why Don't Minorities Have IDs?

This is just ridiculous. Everyone needs an ID - how can you cash a check without a photo ID? Get a job without a photo ID? Why is is it so hard for miniorities to get IDs?

Justice Dept. rejects S.C. law requiring voter ID
The Obama administration entered the fierce national debate over voting rights Friday, rejecting a South Carolina law requiring photo identification at the polls after determining the statute discriminates against minority voters.

The Justice Department's decision is certain to heighten tensions over eight state voter-ID statutes passed this year, which critics say could limit turnout among minorities and others who helped elect President Obama in 2008.

Justice Department lawyers still are reviewing a Texas statute. The Obama administration also is locked in a Supreme Court fight with Texas and its Republican Legislature over a proposed remapping of the state's districts.

In its first ruling on the voter-ID laws, Justice's Civil Rights Division said South Carolina's statute is discriminatory because the state's registered minority voters are nearly 20 percent more likely than whites to lack a state-issued photo ID. The 1965 Voting Rights Act requires South Carolina and other states with a history of discrimination to receive "preclearance" on voting changes to ensure they don't hurt minorities' political power. [Why? And why not just bloody well get them IDs?]

"The absolute number of minority citizens whose exercise of the franchise could be adversely affected by the proposed requirements runs into the tens of thousands," Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez said in a letter to state officials.

South Carolina Republican Gov. Nikki Haley called the decision "outrageous" and said she plans to seek "every possible option to get this terrible, clearly political decision overturned so we can protect the integrity of our electoral process and our 10th Amendment rights."

The law, passed in May and signed by Haley, requires voters to show one of five forms of photo identification. The state now can try to persuade a federal court to approve the law or seek reconsideration from Justice.

In defending the law, South Carolina cited the need to fight voter fraud. Whether such fraud exists and how extensive it may be is the subject of a divisive national debate. Some conservatives contend tighter laws are needed to combat it.

While documented cases of the sort of fraud that voter-ID laws seek to limit — ineligible people casting ballots in person — have been few, there is evidence that absentee-ballot fraud has been used to attempt to sway an election, including a 1997 mayoral election in Miami.

As for South Carolina, Perez said the state's submission "did not include any evidence or instance" of fraud not addressed by state laws.

The federal action, the first time the government has rejected a voter-ID law since 1994, signals an escalating national legal battle over the laws. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and another group recently filed a federal lawsuit contending Wisconsin's new voter-ID measure is unconstitutional.

Laws approved in Mississippi and Alabama also require federal approval but have not been submitted to the government. States can receive approval for changes to voting laws from Justice, a federal court in the District of Columbia, or both.

It is unclear if four states not subject to the Voting Rights Act requirement — Wisconsin, Kansas, Rhode Island and Tennessee — will face federal challenges to their laws.

Enacted mostly by Republican legislatures, the voter-ID laws also restrict early voting and make it more difficult for former felons to vote. The Justice Department also is reviewing electoral changes in Florida that reduce the number of days for early voting.

But voter-ID laws have aroused the most fury on the left, with some comparing them to poll taxes once used to limit minority voting in the South. Opponents say the laws would discriminate against minorities, and others such as poor voters, because some don't have photo ID cards and lack the means to obtain them easily. [Why? How do poor folk get their welfare - don't they need photo IDs for that? Welfare fraud is probably far greater than voting fraud...]

One study estimated the changes could prevent more than 5 million people from voting. But the laws have proved popular, according to surveys. Mississippi voters last month easily approved an initiative requiring a government-issued photo ID.

The ACLU and civil-rights groups praised the South Carolina decision, with NAACP President Benjamin Jealous saying it "ensures all eligible South Carolinians will have access to the ballot box in 2012 and beyond."

Supporters of the law were equally expansive in their criticism. Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said the decision "was purely political and driven by ideology."

Noting Georgia and Indiana voter-ID laws have been found to be nondiscriminatory, "they are going against their own precedents and other court decisions," von Spakovsky added.

Georgia's law, passed in 2005, received approval from President George W. Bush's Justice Department, over the near-unanimous objections of career staff members in the department's Voting Section. The Supreme Court upheld Indiana's law in 2008 but noted the state promised to provide free photos to all who were eligible to vote.