Georgia: Requiring photo IDs infringes on voters

• Originally published in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on February 21, 2005

• Copyright 2005 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

By NEIL BRADLEY

At a time when America has staked much of its international reputation on the ability to spread democracy and free elections across the globe, it is particularly troubling to see elected officials here at home propose measures that could deprive thousands of Georgians of their ability to vote. Even worse, the legislation disproportionately targets poor, elderly and minority voters.

Senate Bill 84, which was introduced last month, does exactly that by requiring poll workers to turn away any voter without a photo identification, with absolutely no exceptions. Unless you are a government employee or student here in Georgia, your only photo ID is probably a driver's license. But if you're poor, elderly or African-American, you're much less likely to have one.

Nearly 18 percent of African-American households in Georgia do not have access to an automobile, compared to 4.4 percent of white households. Beyond that, who is more likely to carry photo identification to the polls? Your 21-year-old who uses her driver's license to buy cigarettes, or your 79-year-old parent who you finally persuaded to give up driving last year?

Many Georgians may be under the impression that photo identification is already required to vote, but that isn't so. Under current law, voters may present a variety of documents to identify themselves, including a birth certificate, Social Security card, firearms permit, current utility bill, bank statement or government check. Most important, if voters have already proved their identity when they first registered to vote, but don't bring an identification with them on election day, they can still vote by signing a form under oath affirming their identity.

Senate Bill 84 is a solution in search of a problem. There is no evidence that voter fraud, which the bill is supposedly trying to remedy, actually exists. In reality, it is extremely risky and difficult to impersonate a registered voter.

A would-be fraudulent voter would need to have information about the real voter, and resemble him or her in terms of gender, race and approximate age. He would need to be sure that the real voter had not already cast a ballot, or voted early or by absentee, and he would need to make certain that none of the poll workers or poll watchers knew him or the person he was impersonating. Even if he were to succeed in voting, he would still risk prosecution and severe penalties under both state and federal law.

The proposed bill is also completely unnecessary. Georgia already has multiple ways to verify a person's identity. With the new statewide computerized voter registration list in place, election workers have instant access to information about each voter. If there is any doubt about a person's identity, the voter can be asked their date of birth, their middle or maiden name and other questions, such as their previous address or whether they voted in the Republican or Democratic primary.

SB 84 even requires poll workers to violate federal law. Turning away a voter who didn't have a specific document when election officials could otherwise establish that person's identity would violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects minority voters against discriminatory actions by election officials.

If the sponsors of SB 84 are truly interested in improving the health of Georgia's democracy, they need to follow the spirit of the Hippocratic Oath: "First do no harm."
 
* Neil Bradley is an attorney and the associate director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project in Atlanta.