Voter ID Ruling Clears Path For Texas Action
Requiring voters to produce photo identification drew solid Supreme Court support Monday in a ruling that should provide a green light for the Texas Legislature to adopt such legislation in its 2009 session.
By a 6-3 ruling, the Court Indiana's strict photo ID requirement for voters, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots.
"The universally applicable requirements of Indiana's voter identification law are eminently reasonable," said Justice Antonin Scalia. "The burden of acquiring, possessing and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe, because it does not 'even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting'."
A group of 11 Democrat senators blocked efforts of the Texas Legislature to adopt a voter photo ID requirement in the 2007 session. The Democrats fighting against the bill claimed that such requirements would disenfranchise "thousands of Texans."
That claim would be hard to substantiate considering how easy it is to obtain such documents and how widely they already are required. People are routinely asked almost on a daily basis for a photo identification to rent DVDs, cash a check and for any number of other purposes.
Ensuring that only qualified American citizens vote in the nation's elections ought to be of high importance to everyone.
Justice John Paul Stevens in the Supreme Court's majority opinion made that point, saying the law "is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting 'the integrity and reliability of the election process'." He was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Scalia also agreed with the outcome, but wrote separately.
More than 20 states require some form of identification at the polls. Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan, but struck down one in Missouri. The Monday decision came a week before Indiana's presidential primary.
The case concerned a state law, passed in 2005, that was backed by Republicans as a way to deter voter fraud. Democrats and civil rights groups opposed the law as unconstitutional and called it a thinly veiled effort do discourage elderly, poor and minority voters.
"We cannot conclude that the statute imposes 'excessive burdensome requirements' on any class of voters," Stevens said.
State Rep. Leo Berman of Tyler, a Republican who chairs the House Elections Committee, has indicated he will champion a voter ID bill in the 2009 Texas legislative session. He cited a study by Jeffrey Milyo of the University that found turnout in Indiana increased with the photo identification law in effect, even in Democratic counties.
The Heritage Foundation also has concluded that "Voter identification laws largely do not have the claimed negative impact on voter turnout based on state-to-state comparisons."
There also is a dispute on the size of the voter fraud problem. Democrats generally discount the impact of illegal votes but Berman contends, "The election crisis in Texas is very real."
A report in December of 2006 from the Texas Conservative Coalition's Research Institute showed that non-citizens are voting in Texas fraudulently. "The most paramount of our democratic rights, the right to vote, is guarded indifferently," the group said.
It is time for the Texas Legislature to act to reduce the potential for illegal voting in the state by adopting an effective voter ID requirement. The Supreme Court agrees it can be done without placing an "unusual burden" on any qualified voters.
