Black Lives Matter.
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

NC Council of Churches

Strength in Unity, Peace through Justice

  • Voices
  • About
    • Overview
    • Staff
    • Members
    • Covenant Partners
    • Issue Statements
    • Governing Board
  • Programs
    • Ecumenical Immigration Alliance
      • Ideas for Action
      • Sign Our Statement
      • The NC Sanctuary Coalition
      • Immigration Bible Study
      • Contact
    • NC Interfaith Power & Light
      • NCIPL Overview
      • Faith in Action NCIPL
      • NCIPL Articles
      • NCIPL Resources
      • Upcoming Events for NCIPL
      • Contact NCIPL
    • Partners in Health & Wholeness
      • PHW Staff
      • Mini-Grants
      • PHW Collaborative Pledge
      • The Overdose Crisis: The Faith Community Responds
      • PHW Articles
      • FAQs
  • Priorities
    • Racial Justice
    • The Overdose Crisis: The Faith Community Responds
    • Gun Violence Prevention
    • Public Education
    • NC Sanctuary Coalition
    • Farmworkers
    • Legislative Advocacy
    • Christian Unity
    • Peace
    • NC No Torture
  • COVID-19 Resources
  • Events
  • Resources
    • Publications & Reports
    • Raleigh Report
    • Lectionary
    • Sermons
  • Donate
  • Council Store
  • Show Search

Search NC Council of Churches

Hide Search

Voter ID on Trial

Steve Ford, Volunteer Program Associate · January 29, 2016 · 1 Comment

Click here to sign up to receive the Raleigh Report in your inbox

The ongoing legal challenge to North Carolina’s voter ID rule, now playing out before a federal judge in Winston-Salem, could end up reminding us that it’s not the job of the courts to decide whether a law is needed or wise. It’s their job to decide whether a law violates someone’s constitutional rights. Yet the two functions can overlap.

Take an example from a different field – the debate over gun regulation. The 2nd Amendment declares that the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.”

It’s hard to imagine any judge, even an ardent gun-rights supporter, concluding that gun possession couldn’t be regulated in any fashion whatsoever because of that constitutional language. Individual rights are balanced against the overall need to uphold public safety.

In what some would describe as a similar balancing act, North Carolina’s Republican-led General Assembly decided in 2013 that beginning this year, a voter would have to show a government-issued identification document with a photo. For most people the ID will be a driver’s license. But not everyone has a license or other acceptable document. Some might not be able to get one without extraordinary effort.

For those people, does the requirement amount to an unfair, discriminatory and hence unconstitutional infringement of their right to vote? Or is a possible infringement necessary to serve a larger public purpose?

The legal jousting over these questions occurs in an intensely political context. If Republican legislators manage to get a judicial seal of approval on a law that has the effect of holding down the number of votes cast by Democrats, they’ll file it under “Mission Accomplished.” And since the photo ID rule is part of a broader set of election law changes clearly meant to boost Republican chances, the rule’s partisan motives are hidden in plain sight.

‘Fraud’ as a fig leaf

As the trial before U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder got under way on Jan. 25, the plaintiffs – including the state chapter of the NAACP – leaned on evidence showing that the group of voters lacking the designated photo IDs contains a disproportionate number of African-Americans. For example, they may be elderly people who don’t drive and who can’t locate a proper birth certificate because of muddled record-keeping during the era of Jim Crow.

The law’s defenders will have a hard time refuting the basic numbers. But they can be expected to repeat familiar arguments: 1) Most everyone should be able to obtain a valid ID with little trouble; 2) The law now allows someone to cast a provisional ballot and have it counted even if the person doesn’t have a valid ID; 3) Even if a few voters are inconvenienced and perhaps deterred from voting, the photo ID rule is a reasonable measure intended to protect the integrity of elections by cutting down on the possibility of fraud.

As it happens, the fraud-prevention rationale falls somewhere between disingenuous and bogus. The law’s critics convincingly assert that instances of in-person voter fraud – the kind that a photo ID requirement might be expected to curtail – are exceedingly rare, based on the paltry number of cases that have been prosecuted.

That’s not to say that any instances of such cheating should be tolerated. Safeguards to make sure that voters are who they say they are and that they vote only once must be observed. But the current system, which puts cheaters on the hook for felony charges, seems on the whole to be working just fine.

Polling-place rigamarole

Defendants in the lawsuit also find themselves making the awkward argument that things could have been worse. As originally passed and signed by Republican Gov. Pat McCrory, as part of the sweeping election law overhaul mentioned above, the photo ID rule was regarded as the nation’s strictest in terms of the limited kinds of ID deemed acceptable and the lack of recourse for someone who couldn’t produce one.

About a month before a challenge to the larger law was to be heard, legislators last June reworked the ID requirement to make it more lenient.

People who claim they’ve been unable to get a photo ID because of a “reasonable impediment” – missing documents, no transportation, work schedule conflicts and so forth – will be allowed to present other information to show their identity. They’ll be able to cast a provisional ballot, to be counted so long as that ID information checks out. So, for example, someone who provides a matching date of birth and last four digits of a Social Security number, or a utility bill with his or her name and address, can vote after all.

This surely raises the question: Why go to the trouble of requiring a photo ID in the first place? Even in its watered-down form, the rule makes the voting process more complicated. For instance, each photo will have to be checked to make sure it matches the person presenting it. The standards for making those determinations are fuzzy at best.

Hurry up and wait

Amidst a hotly contested election, as the presidential contest in November is certain to be, any delay in moving voters through the polls can result in some people deciding they don’t have enough time to wait in line, or perhaps even being turned away. Where have crowded polls often been a problem, even without an ID rule to slow things down? Hint: Not in the Republican-leaning suburbs.

Judge Schroeder, in declining to issue an injunction that would have put photo ID on hold for the March 15 primaries, took a skeptical view of the challengers’ legal case. And it may be that the law in its current guise stops short of trampling anyone’s constitutional rights. (Federal judges farther up the line have signaled the opposite in regard to other election law changes such as the end to same-day voter registration and out-of-precinct voting.)

But no matter the outcome of the current trial, the photo ID rule is bad policy from the standpoint of anyone except partisan zealots who know perfectly well where any impact is likely to fall.

The law fits neatly into an overall Republican strategy, evident in North Carolina and elsewhere. The strategy is to shrink the Democratic-leaning electorate and to try to convince the courts that this is a matter of necessity in the interest of keeping elections honest and “orderly.” Not coincidentally, the strategy fits hand in glove with Republican redistricting schemes intended to marginalize Democratic-leaning voters, African-Americans in particular.

Voting rights advocates, including the NAACP and the group Democracy North Carolina, are pushing to inform voters about the rules now in effect – specifically, not to be discouraged from going to the polls because of ID concerns. These are efforts that deserve support from all civic-minded folks of good will, and the Council of Churches hopes to see church-goers pitching in.

The Council takes an interest in voting rights not in furtherance of a partisan agenda, although it has opposed many of the Republican-controlled legislature’s policy initiatives as being contrary to the well-being of the state’s disadvantaged residents and to its long-range fitness as a place to live, learn and work.

The Council’s perspective is simply this: More voters are better, as a way to help ensure that elections convey the choices of a broad cross-section of citizens. It’s a special concern when our more vulnerable neighbors, who struggle to have their voices heard anyway, have it made harder for them to vote.

Elections must be conducted fairly and honestly. That should go without saying. But the photo ID rule will do precious little to improve our state’s elections on either of those counts.

The law as it stands amounts to a desperate attempt to retain a vestige of an earlier version that was headed down the tubes in federal court. Especially if Schroeder finds that certain groups of voters – minorities, the elderly, the young, those living in remote rural settings – still are likely to be disproportionately affected, he’d be well justified in banging the gong and ushering this cynical, complicated and needless law off the stage.

Filed Under: Blog, Homepage Featured, Raleigh Report Tagged With: Elections, Good Government, N.C. General Assembly

Steve Ford, Volunteer Program Associate

About Steve Ford, Volunteer Program Associate

Much goes on in North Carolina's state capital that's important to the Council of Churches. I'm glad to have a chance to help follow the action, transitioning from my career with The News & Observer of Raleigh, where I retired in 2012 as editorial page editor. I'm originally from Virginia but have lived in Cary so long I remember the Kildaire Farm barn.

Read more of my commentary here.

Reader Interactions

More Like This

Election Machinery in High Gear
Churches’ Watchwords: Every Vote Counts!
Raleigh Report – March 25, 2019

Comments

  1. AvatarRobert Kennei says

    February 1, 2016 at 3:04 pm

    Mr. Ford again brings clarity and fairness to an issue of obvious importance. I have never missed a public vote in 80 years, and I hold it as an almost sacred right. I have personally tested the photo ID requirement as if I didn’t have one, and it would be a pain in the neck for me to obtain one. I have friends who who would probably not complete the process.
    My anger at the NC Legislature and Governor is palpable. Surely North Carolinians are better than this !!!!

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Anonymous comments or comments that target individuals will not be posted (please include your first and last name). All comments must be on topic and respectful. Comments will not be posted until they have been reviewed by a moderator. Comments do not reflect the positions of the NC Council of Churches.

Footer

Contact

NC Council of Churches
27 Horne St.
Raleigh, NC 27607
(919) 828-6501
info@ncchurches.org

Facebook

Partners in Health and Wholeness

Featured

Voter ID on Trial

Latest Tweets

Moving away from fossil fuels is vital to loving our neighbor! Say so during the public hearing on the @DukeEnergy IRP on March 16th. Register today: dukesenergyplan.org/… pic.twitter.com/FD9u…

About 2 days ago

The #ForThePeopleAct (#HR1) just passed in the #House! We are one step closer to: ✅ Protect the freedom to vote ✅ Ensure the integrity of our elections ✅ Hold elected officials accountable ✅ End the era of big money in our politics pic.twitter.com/Mkhb…

About 2 days ago

"One day when the glory comes It will be ours, it will be ours" - John Legend, "Glory" Read our resolution at the link >> ncchurches.org/2021/… pic.twitter.com/y9Vs…

About 2 days ago

"Our knowing that divine reality exists gives us permission to be humble, gentle, and kind." Read more from Susannah Tuttle and her reflection for the third Sunday in Lent. >> ncchurches.org/2021/… pic.twitter.com/cEzo…

About 3 days ago

Read or listen to this article from @PNS_News about a new data dashboard in North Carolina that would help local county officials better allocate vaccines to where they're needed most. Follow the link to find out more >> publicnewsservice.or…

About 4 days ago

Follow @ncchurches

Latest Tweets

Glad to be on this journey with you! Another workweek in the books and another reason to be proud 💪 twitter.com/StampSti…

About a day ago

#harmreduction is love. twitter.com/HarmRedu…

About 3 days ago

RT @WakeMed Today marks one year since our state’s first #COVID19 case. #WakeMed staff, visitors and patients observed a #momentofsilence to honor the legacy of those we've lost and reflect on the strength and compassion of every essential worker, patient and family as we begin to heal. pic.twitter.com/E92V…

About 3 days ago

Dr. Satcher questioned the structures that have upheld health disparities in our communities. By laying the foundation for this work, we can continue taking meaningful action towards promoting a society where we can all thrive. #BlackHistoryMonth @HHSGov @Surgeon_General pic.twitter.com/zrw2…

Last week

Amen! #MindfulTogether twitter.com/cornerpr…

Last week

Follow @healthandfaith

Latest Tweets

RT @CUREriver The bankruptcy filing by Brazos could destabilize the entire REC systems. The U.S. need to take action to avoid this in other places. We need to make investments in clean energy, energy efficiency, and grid modernization right now. #RuralPower ow.ly/6Erz50DMYPJ

About 2 days ago

RT @greenthechurch Be sure to read Green The Church's COO Kim Noble's op ed, "#EnvironmentalJustice in Focus this #BlackHistoryMonth", in the Texas Metro News! @Kimrenay22 #Austin #DFW #Houston #Texas #SanAntonio #EJ ow.ly/mOtw50DGQnN pic.twitter.com/IPOO…

Last week

RT @ActionAidUSA To build a truly just, equitable & sustainable world, we need to fight for a new #socialcontract. That means: ✔️ Defending democracy ✔️ Fighting for climate justice ✔️ Building equitable food systems ✔️ Supporting women’s leadership. Learn more: bit.ly/2M8xT40 pic.twitter.com/fEWv…

Last week

RT @interfaithpower IPL is proud to be a signer on this letter. The U.S. must provide bold and socially just leadership to protect our communities from the impacts of climate change, including the threats to our economy- @sbhendershot twitter.com/RealBank…

Last week

RT @interfaithpower "This is all of our country, this is our mother. It's difficult to not feel obligated to protect this land" - @DebHaalandNM with a powerful reminder of what she believes in. Her passion is exactly what we need right now; the Senate must #ConfirmHaaland! #ConfirmClimate

Last week

Follow @ncipl

Latest Tweets

Copyright © 2021 NC Council of Churches · All Rights Reserved · Website by Tomatillo Design · Hosted by WP Engine