Joshua Douglas, a professor of election law and voting rights at the University of Kentucky College of Law, posted two detailed and informative Twitter threads about the proposed Voter ID bill in KYGA20 (Senate Bill 2). We contacted him to ask if we could share the threads, and he said yes, as long as they were properly attributed.
So, here are the threads. Rather than link each of the tweets into the story, we have pulled the text out to make it easier to read.
Thread #1
The Kentucky legislature just released SB2, the proposed new voter ID bill. You can find it here: SB 2
I have thoughts (THREAD) 1/
Currently Kentucky does not require a *photo* ID to vote. The list of permissible IDs to show at the polls is fairly broad, including a credit card. Voters need not show any ID if the poll worker already knows the voter and can attest to the person’s identity. 2/
.@Adams4SecState campaigned on a stricter photo ID law as his main priority. And to the victor go the spoils: though I oppose photo ID laws for voting, it’s coming to Kentucky. 3/
One of the reasons I agreed to serve on @KYSecState’s Transition Team was because I hoped to persuade the new Secretary to keep the photo ID law “mild” such that it has very little chance to disenfranchise valid voters. 4/
But let’s be clear: there is NO need for a photo ID law in Kentucky elections. Photo ID laws prevent only one kind of voter fraud: in-person impersonation. There is ZERO evidence of that kind of fraud in Kentucky (or any U.S.) elections. (WaPo story) /5
In addition, studies show that photo ID laws don’t even make voters feel more secure in their elections. Voters in states with strict photo ID laws essentially feel the same about their elections than voters in states without these laws. (Stanford Law Review story) /6
Ok, so let’s dive into the proposed new Kentucky law. It’s not good news.
First, the law *requires* all voters to show a photo ID to vote. The ID must be issued by the U.S. or the state. The only exception is for voters in a “licensed care facility” who vote at that facility 7/
The IDs permissible for voting must have (1) the person’s name, (2) a photograph, and (3) an expiration date that is at least after the most recent election. U.S. military IDs do not need an expiration date. 8/
The law also allows student IDs to count – but the student IDs MUST have an expiration date listed on them. I don’t know about all universities in Kentucky, but neither the @universityofky or @uofl ID cards have expiration dates! (I called both to double check.) 9/
Essentially, the law “allows” student IDs to count but it does not actually let students use their university IDs because the IDs themselves don’t comply, as they don’t have expiration dates. 10/
The ID rules apply to all voters–including absentee ballots–and a voter who submits and absentee ballot without proof of identification will be sent a “provisional absentee ballot” to complete. Lots of hoops to jump through. 11/
Now, what if you don’t have an ID to vote? Several other states with strict photo ID laws have a “reasonable impediment” provision that allows voters with a reasonable impediment to obtaining an ID to still cast a ballot. But the KY version is no good. 12/
First, voters without an ID will have to cast a provisional ballot. That means filling out a separate envelope before casting a separate ballot. 13/
Then — and this is the worst part — the ballot still WILL NOT COUNT unless the voter visits the county clerk’s office by the Friday after Election Day. The voters would have to fill out an affidavit there explaining the reason for not having the ID. 14/
This is unlike the similar reasonable impediment provisions in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas, where the voter can fill out the affidavit (under penalty of perjury) at the polling place. 15/
So, although it is good that there is some relief for voters without a photo ID, this is not really a fail-safe measure: it requires voters to jump through various hoops. 16/
Increasing the number of provisional ballots in Kentucky will also lead to additional post-election disputes as candidates in close races see the provisionals as another way to fight the result. That’s bad for everyone. 17/
In sum, the proposed ID bill has significant flaws: (1) student IDs don’t actually work; (2) voters without an ID shouldn’t have to cast a provisional ballot; (3) voters definitely shouldn’t have to travel to the county clerk’s office to have their ballot count. 18/
I recognize that this is just a draft bill and that negotiations will proceed over the next few weeks. Let me also say that @KYSecState has been very responsive in our private discussions about the matter. He seems open minded to my concerns. 19/
Although photo ID laws do not prevent any kind of voter fraud that actually occurs, as I said, Sec. Adams campaigned on implementing photo ID, so that’s his prerogative.
But I really hope this bill will be amended to address these significant concerns. 20/
I am open to a milder form of a photo ID law that addresses these problems–not because I think photo ID laws are good but because I recognize it is coming to KY. And again let me reiterate that Sec. Adams seems willing to work with both sides to make this happen. 21/
Final point: any photo ID law should not take effect until 2021. There’s just no way for the state to implement a law like this and ensure everyone has the proper IDs for 2020, especially in a presidential election year with a huge election involving @senatemajldr as well. 22/
This proposed bill is a starting point. But it can’t be the end point. The bill has too many flaws. Let’s hope the legislature will work together to craft a bill that, even if we can’t all wholeheartedly support, we can at least live with. /end
Additional tweets in response to questions
For those who say “you need a photo ID to board a plane, so of course you should need it for voting,” check out the TSA guidelines that show the workarounds. (Plus, how many people without an ID, who often are poor, are flying on a plane?)
* * *
@smtay_99 There are a range of documents the state could require to accomplish that goal: bills, other mail, etc.
I agree it’s a good idea to check that a person is an eligible voter in that precinct, but you don’t need a *photo* ID to do that.
Thread #2
(THREAD) There’s so much misinformation out there about voter ID in Kentucky.
“I already have to show an ID to vote.”
Yes, you have to show *something* but not a *photo* ID. (I show my credit card.) The proposed law would change that, requiring an unexpired photo ID. 1/
“You need a photo ID to buy sudafed or board a plane.”
No, you don’t. Every instance when we think we *must* show a photo ID, there’s always a workaround.
And none of those things are fundamental rights to our democracy. 2/
“A photo ID law would improve the security of our elections.”
No, it won’t. Photo ID laws prevent only one kind of voter fraud: in-person impersonation. And that simply does not occur. It would be a dumb way to throw an election. 3/
“A photo ID law would make people have more confidence in our elections.”
No, it wouldn’t. A study showed that people feel essentially the same about the security of their elections whether their state has a photo ID requirement or not. 4/
“Everyone has a photo ID.”
That’s simply not true.
One study found that about 17,000 voters (and probably more) didn’t vote in Wisconsin due to the photo ID law. 5/
“Photo ID laws have a disproportionate impact on racial minorities & women.”
Correct! Although numbers are still relatively small, minorities are more likely not to have a photo ID. Women are more likely to change their names upon marriage or divorce. 6/
“Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin because of the voter ID law.”
That’s unprovable and probably false. Voter ID laws have an impact, but it’s hard to say the exact level of that impact. 7/
But whether photo ID laws actually have changed election outcomes shouldn’t matter. We shouldn’t impose burdens on voters for no good reason.
In my world, we rely on facts, not hyperbole or speculation. Let’s focus on the facts in the debate over voter ID. 8/
Those facts show that strict photo ID laws for voting, like the proposal in Kentucky, provide zero benefits and can harm valid voters.
We need to amend the proposal to ensure it does not have a disenfranchising effect.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk. /end
–30–
Joshua Douglas is professor of professor of election law and voting rights at the University of Kentucky College of Law. His new book, Vote for US: How to Take Back Our Elections and Change the Future of Voting, is available on Amazon. His website is https://joshuaadouglas.com/ (note the double A in the middle).