Racial bias found in state voter identification map

[caption id="attachment_12243" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Voting"][/caption]

Carol Forsloff - As a preliminary to a more comprehensive report on racial bias and
elections, research by attorneys finds racial bias in asking for
identification for voting.  This provides new evidence of racial issues
at the polls.



Law professors involved in research on the topic
of racial bias and elections ask the question if it is possible in the
current political climate in the United States to administer voter
identification laws in ways that are not racially biased.

Using a sampling from a specific jurisdiction and an election where laws would
be unlikely to pose issues of racial differences and applying what the
attorneys say are state-of-the-art field methods to analysis of the
issues, they have found preliminary results  discouraging when it comes
to racial bias in the election process.

That specific jurisdiction is the City of Boston,  a placemany folks would consider to have less racial biases.

The researchers include Rachael V. Cobb, Suffulk Unniversity,
Department of Government, D. James Greiner, Harvard Law School, and
Kevin M. Quinn of the UC Berkeley School of Law.

" We find strong evidence that Hispanic voters, and reasonably strong evidence
that black voters, were asked for identification at higher rates than
white voters. The magnitudes of the differences are troubling," is the
preliminary conclusion of the research.

Researchers go on to offer this analysis concerning the administration of voter ID laws : "We
suggest that it may not be feasible to administer voter ID laws in a
race-neutral manner in the current United States."

States have varying requirements
for voter registration.  Although this state by state reference on
Ballot pedia may be in process, a fact-check of several states reveals
the point of significant difference in state laws is demonstrated.

Some states require a photo identification, whereas others do not.  This has
been part of the ongoing debate among Republicans and Democrats.

In 2008 Stateline looked at the issue, presenting both opinions on what
should be required.  The Republican National Committee wrote this in a
brief on their position: “Vote fraud is not a
victimless crime. It diminishes and marginalizes the vote of every
eligible voter who takes the time and effort to vote, and it undermines
the legitimacy of the entire election process.”

The partisan difference played out in discussion of the voter registration laws of
Indiana.  Democrats contend that in- person fraud is rare and that "the
GOP initiatives are designed to turn away elderly and minority voters
who are less likely to have valid IDS and who tend to vote for
Democrats."

In Indiana a photo identification is required for all
voters with a provision ballot clause that allows people to vote at the
polls on a provisional ballot with verification of a picture
identification to be provided later.  This provision allows people who
may not have a picture identification but do have other forms of
identification to be able to vote as the picture identification is
requested as follow up.

Massachusetts, on the other hand, follows minimum HAVA requirements.  These are explained as the following:

• HAVA requires implementation and maintenance of a single, uniform, official, centralized and interactive Statewide computerized voter registration list accessible to all election officials in the State. In Oregon, this will be referred to as OCVR, Oregon Centralized Voter Registration. The
  system shall contain registration information on every registered voter
  in the state, with a unique identifier assigned to each legally
  registered voter.

• System must use a unique identification number assigned to each legally registered voter. Requires
  that applicants provide a valid driver's license number, or last four
  digits of Social Security number. If neither, then state assigns a
  unique identifier.

This is similar to Oregon's law, whereas in Louisiana full photo identification is required.

What the preliminary research finds is that even in the more lenient states,
like Massachusetts, where race is not considered an issue, racial bias
shows up in the identification sought.

What might be found in states with more stringent laws like Louisiana?
That's one of the questions that can be posed by the present research.

The present research on this issue maintains it will continue to look at
the consequences of the racial bias in terms of both theory and legal

practice in the application of voter identification laws.