As expected, a Voter ID bill is back in the legislative hopper | Arkansas Blog

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

As expected, a Voter ID bill is back in the legislative hopper

Posted By on Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 3:16 PM

click to enlarge BLOCK THAT VOTE!: Rep. Mark Lowery is back with a GOP fave: A voter ID amendment.
  • BLOCK THAT VOTE!: Rep. Mark Lowery is back with a GOP fave: A voter ID amendment.
State Rep. Mark Lowery of Maumelle has filed a bill constitutional amendment to require a photo ID to vote in Arkansas.

It is in keeping with national Republican strategy to erect barriers to voting, barriers that tend to disproportionately impact voter groups — poor and minority, particularly — that lean Democratic.

There is no evidence of voter identification fraud in Arkansas or elsewhere that necessitates this. The legislature passed an earlier voter ID law that was struck down by the Arkansas Supreme Court in an opinion written by the late Donald Corbin. High irony that Lowery would be back with vote suppression the day after Corbin's death. The law now allows election officials to request a photo ID — and voters must give a valid address and signature to vote — but they may not be denied a vote or given only a provisional ballot simply for refusal to produce an ID. Famously, Corbin refused to produce an ID when requested in 2014. "I wrote the opinion," he said.

We need more Donnie Corbins and fewer Mark Lowerys.

Vote suppression was successful in Republican-controlled  states such as Wisconsin, North Carolina, Michigan and Ohio, places where swings for Trump were crucial in the presidential election. (For illustration, see this.)  Trump needed no help in Arkansas, but I guess in Lowery's world, you can't be too careful.

For people who don't have IDs, the ability to prove up a challenged ballot — a trip to the county clerk by the Monday following an election — is all but worthless.

I wrote erroneously originally that this was a constitutional amendment. Sen. Bryan King has talked about trying that again, too.

Why would this law pass muster and the earlier law did not? Well, the not-so-estimable Rep. Bob Ballenger thinks there's importance that three of seven justices  said the last law could be struck down simply because it didn't have the required two-thirds vote for changes in constitutional rules on voter registration. That shouldn't be a problem with the overwhelming Republican majority now. But that ignores that four members of the court held that the law was unconstitutional on its face under Article 3 of the Constitution. The same judges would undoubtedly say the same on this law, because it creates new requirements for voting, prohibited by the Constitution. But NONE, that's right NONE, of the four will be on the court next year. The three who found another reason to strike down the earlier law — Justices Karen Baker, Jo Hart and Courtney Goodson — will be there. They have proven solicitous of the feelings of the legislature in the past. And they seemed to perhaps be willing to override Article 3 by using voter-approved Amendment 51 that gives legislature leeway over voter registration procedures. The majority rejected that view. Even the threem, however, held open the question of whether the voter ID law violated the bedrock protection of Article 3, regardless of what room the legislature has to make changes in registration procedures under Amendment 51.

Will the court overturn the firm precedent of the earlier ruling just because the legislature wants it too? I fear the answer. But count on the ACLU and others to give them a fight first.

The last bill was passed over Gov. Mike Beebe's veto. He said it was an expensive solution in search of a problem. Those were the days.


Tags: , , , ,

From the ArkTimes store

Favorite

Comments (16)

Showing 1-16 of 16

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-16 of 16

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

Readers also liked…

  • Federal judge wants John Goodson to explain class action maneuvering

    A show-cause order filed Monday by federal Judge P.K. Holmes of Fort Smith indicates class action attorney John Goodson has some explaining to do about the move of a class action complaint against an insurance company from federal to state court with an instant pre-packaged settlement that has been criticized as a windfall for Goodson.
    • Dec 22, 2015
  • Arkansas Times Recommends: A Literary Edition

    Arkansas Times Recommends is a series in which Times staff members (or whoever happens to be around at the time) highlight things we've been enjoying this week.
    • Jul 1, 2016
  • Al Gore remembers Dale Bumpers

    Former Vice President Al Gore, a former U.S. Senate colleague of Dale Bumpers, sent a statement on Bumpers' death Friday:
    • Jan 3, 2016

Most Shared

  • 'Cemetery angel' Ruth Coker Burks featured in new short film

    Ruth Coker Burks, the AIDS caregiver and activist memorably profiled by David Koon as the cemetery angel in Arkansas Times in 2015, is now the subject of a short film made by actress Rose McGowan.
  • Buyer remorse

    Out here in flyover country, you can't hardly go by the feed store without running into a reporter doing one of those Wisdom of the Heartland stories.
  • Not Whitewater

    Just think: If Democrats had turned out 78,000 more votes in three states in November, people could be reveling today in the prospect of impeaching and convicting President Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, as some Republican lawmakers had promised to try to do if she won.
  • Head-shaking

    Another edition of so-much-bad-news-so-little space.

Most Viewed

Most Recent Comments

Blogroll

 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation