Winnipeg Free Press - ONLINE EDITION
U.S. voting law tested today in court
Compared with what some Americans have to tolerate on Election Day, registering to vote is relatively painless. That’s partly thanks to the National Voter Registration Act, a 1993 law at the root of a case the Supreme Court will hear today. The state of Arizona argues that it should be allowed to subvert the law’s obvious purpose. The court shouldn’t let it.
In 1993, Congress looked at the "complicated maze" of often confusing and sometimes discriminatory state election rules, and it found that "unfair registration laws and procedures can have a direct and damaging effect on voter participation in elections for federal office." So lawmakers established national standards. Americans could register to vote when getting driver’s licences, which gave the act its unofficial name: the "motor voter" law. Congress also required every state to accept a simple, common, mail-in registration form drafted by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. The record indicates that Congress meant these to be among the "procedures that will increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote in elections for federal office."
In 2004, Arizona voters approved a state law requiring evidence of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote. As a result, state elections officials no longer accepted standard federal registration forms unless accompanied by copies of passports, birth certificates or other proof of citizenship. Native American and Hispanic groups complained, and now the dispute is before the high court.
Arizona argues that federal law doesn’t bar the state from adding to the registration requirements listed on the federal form. It points out that Congress acknowledged maintaining the integrity of federal elections as another legitimate and important goal. Yet any reasonable reading of lawmakers’ intent requires the conclusion that they did not want to replace one confusing array of specific state requirements with another confusing array of specific state requirements. In fact, Congress rejected a provision that would have expressly permitted states to ask for evidence of citizenship during registration. On the legal merits, the justices shouldn’t have trouble siding against Arizona.
But what of the policy principle? Non-citizens shouldn’t be allowed to vote. But neither should citizens be discouraged from the exercise of their most essential right — even citizens who don’t have identification deemed suitable by Arizona. States should be instituting reforms to expand access to the franchise, not narrow it. Universal voter registration, in which the states take responsibility to register all who are eligible, would be a good start.
Fact Check
Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories? Please use the form below and let us know.
More Analysis
- Back to Top
- Return to Analysis
More Analysis
(1 of 28 articles for this week)
The number of words MPs speak in House counts
05/23/2013 1:00 AM 0As a measure of gauging the volume or quality of work of Canada's members of Parliament, a series of calculations ...
Poll
Most Popular Analysis
- How to humble wing nuts
- When Harper spoke, it was wise to listen
- What is Struthers afraid of?
- BlackBerry: off the mat, hitting back
- The number of words MPs speak in House counts
- Elijah's essence was most easily found in the wilderness
- Japan's PM risks bankruptcy
- Canadian to expose alien collaboration with U.S.
- Can't lose when ends justify means
- Smart people SLEEP LATE
- The Angelina Jolie effect
- BlackBerry: off the mat, hitting back
- What is Struthers afraid of?
- 'Most hated man' in Senate
- Physician networks a way forward for health care
- Cash for coitus scheme gets axed in Oz
- Can't lose when ends justify means
- Never take candy from a stranger
- Low turnout makes farce of B.C. election
- A decade after Mad Cow — the legacy of a crisis
- Don, it's not about nakedness
- Speeding fine only half of it
- Ashton might try to get the facts straight
- Ageism is rampant in Canada
- Canadian to expose alien collaboration with U.S.
- Smart people SLEEP LATE
- 'Done deal' offends Whiteshell cottagers
- Manitoba could follow B.C. on surrogacy issue
- City council can't decide which bus to ride
- The Angelina Jolie effect
- Bill 18 is perfect example of bad law
- How to humble wing nuts
- Housing homeless tackled
- A small but welcome crack in supply management
- Bill 18 is perfect example of bad law
- THIS IS NO WAY TO MAKE A POINT!!!
- What is Struthers afraid of?
- Harper embraces multilateralism on Arctic issues
- How to humble wing nuts
- Mental health system lacking funds, awareness
- 'Genetic engineered' might save planet
- Housing homeless tackled
- A small but welcome crack in supply management
- Ruining lives for cash flow
- 'Done deal' offends Whiteshell cottagers
- Kim Sigurdson It's time for government fish monger to cut bait
- Speeding fine only half of it
- How CBC and others torque ratings
- Where is Canada's strategy to help Ukraine?
- Climate options -- grim, grimmer, grimmest
- Mother Nature springs into action
- Industry, First Nations partnerships exploding
- Ageism is rampant in Canada
- Female chiefs needed
Ads by Google











You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is register and/or login and you can join the conversation and give your feedback.
Have Your Say
New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.
The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.