Missouri
Newsletter Volume 5 Issue 3
April 26, 2010
Jefferson City, Missouri - The Missouri House of Representatives recently passed a bill that would impose restrictive photo ID requirements on Missouri's voters and establish a relatively weak form of early voting in federal elections. The bill, and the corresponding resolution that would give constitutional authorization for the restrictive photo ID requirements in the bill, now awaits hearing in the state Senate.
Denise Lieberman, senior attorney at Advancement Project, has been active in the process from the very beginning, submitting testimony when the legislation, HB1966, and its corresponding joint resolution, HJR 64, were first heard in the House Elections Committee. Lieberman argued that while laudable in theory, the early voting provisions fail to go far enough to promote true reform and that the photo ID provisions impose unnecessarily onerous and disenfranchising barriers, particularly for traditionally disadvantaged communities of color and low-income communities. She also provided helpful talking points to legislators across the state, clarifying the bill’s key provisions. One legislator, Rep. Stacey Newman, (D-73) , used these talking points to coordinate a study session on the bill for other legislators, and help bring legislators to the floor for debate. "We could not have been as effective without [Advancement Project's] excellent support and talking points," she wrote.
This proposal marks the fourth attempt by the Missouri legislature to impose restrictive ID requirements since the Missouri Supreme Court found the state's photo ID law unconstitutional in 2006. But this year, the measure was coupled with an early voting provision that, while laudable, fails to provide meaningful reform for those who need it most. The first part of the bill authorizes a four-day advance voting period during the week prior to each federal election using absentee ballots. No reason for voting an absentee ballot would be required, as is currently required. The early vote provisions would apply to federal elections only, and thus not be available to voters in local elections. The early voting portion of the legislation was adopted by a wide bipartisan vote of 153-5.
The second part of the bill establishes strict photo identification requirements for voters. Only non-expired, photo IDs issued by the State of Missouri or the federal government would be accepted as voter identification. These include non-expired Missouri driver’s licenses, Missouri DMV-issued photo ID cards, non-expired U.S. passports, and military IDs with expiration dates. Current Missouri law allows a much broader range of non-photo IDs including a Missouri college ID; driver's license from another state; a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck or other government document that contains the voter’s name and address. None of these would serve as acceptable forms of identification under the proposal, even though these common IDs typically are sufficient to establish a person’s identity in other contexts, and even though there has never been a single reported instance of voter impersonation fraud in Missouri.
Although the bill would require the state to provide at no charge an acceptable photo ID to voters who certify that they cannot afford one, it does not require the state to cover the costs of the underlying documents necessary to procure the state ID, such as a certified copy of a birth certificate. These underlying documents can be costly, difficult and, in some cases, impossible to obtain. To get an ID, voters must first present documents such as a birth certificate to prove identity, citizenship, and place of residence. In some instances, voters must present a social security card, proof of residence, court documents or marriage and divorce records if names have changed. A study by the Secretary of State found that 230,000 eligible Missouri voters lack or can't get one of the forms of ID required under the proposal.
The current law, which requires some form of ID for all voters, is already more restrictive than corresponding laws in about half of the country’s states, which only require first-time voters who did not present ID upon registering to present ID when voting. The proposed photo ID measures would make Missouri’s ID laws among the most restrictive in the country. The House adopted the Photo ID provisions of HB1966 by a far narrower vote of 80-70.
“When Advancement Project learned the measures were placed on the floor agenda for debate and vote on the morning of April 14, we responded immediately by contacting allied legislators to make them aware that the measures were being debated and urging them to return to the House floor to express their views and cast their vote,” Lieberman said. “Many legislators were not aware that the measure was up for a vote and were confused about its provisions, so we distributed talking points so they would be readily available.”
The education was effective. "Thanks for the excellent materials that you have provided," wrote State Rep. Jeanette Mott Oxford (D-59) the afternoon of the vote. "I noticed that quite a few of the themes from the talking points were used in the morning debate."
Thanks to the skilled leadership of allied legislators, the legislation was divided into two parts, which allowed the Legislature to vote separately on the photo ID and advance voting provisions.
The bill now heads to the Missouri State Senate. Because photo ID has been found to violate the Missouri Constitution, a constitutional amendment is required to impose the requirements. Should the Senate also pass the legislation, Missouri voters would have to approve a referendum during the upcoming general election on November 2, 2010 before the provisions of HB1966 would go into effect.
Advancement Project has been on the front lines fighting Photo ID proposals in Missouri for the last four years. Although Advancement Project generally supports the implementation of early voting in Missouri, it believes HB1966 does not go far enough in that regard. Early voting would be allowed for only 4 days prior to federal elections, and only during business hours. This meager reform would not make voting easier for the working Missourians whom advance voting is intended to benefit. Nor would this limited form of early voting sufficiently reduce voting lines on Election Day; Missouri voters experienced some of the longest lines in the nation during the 2008 presidential election. Moreover, HB1966's inclusion of restrictive voter ID requirements sours the whole bill. "Elections can't be free and fair if eligible voters aren't allowed to vote," Lieberman said. "Advance voting is a good thing in it of itself but is not an acceptable compromise for enacting unnecessary and dangerous photo ID legislation that stands to disenfranchise more than 200,000 eligible Missouri voters." Therefore, Advancement Project will continue working with its allies to advocate for the non-passage or veto of this generally non-voter-friendly bill.
