The signs were everywhere. They told New Hampshire residents participating in Tuesday’s primary election to bring ID to the polls.
There’s only one problem: voter ID was not required for the primary election in the state of New Hampshire.
As Scott Keyes explains, the state did pass a voter ID law this year, over the veto of Democratic Gov. John Lynch. However, the law was designed to be phased in. For the primary election, voters were supposed to be asked for ID, but not required to hold it. Even in the general election, voters without ID will be able to sign an affidavit attesting to their eligibility to vote and their identity. The lack of ID as a barrier to voting doesn’t hit until next year.
Yet here’s a sign, installed outside a polling place, claiming that ID is “required.” And several others were posted like this throughout New Hampshire.
The confusion extended to inside the polling place:
Ken Ward, a Democrat from Rollinsford running for the House, said election officials told him incorrectly he couldn’t vote without an ID yesterday morning. “I had one in my pocket, but I knew I didn’t have to produce it,” said Ward, 50.
Ward said more than half the officials knew him. Eventually, they told him to sign an affidavit, even though affidavits aren’t required yet, he said. Ward assented and said he doesn’t plan to file formal complaints.
In at least two cases, voters were turned away from the polls because they lacked ID. Again, under current New Hampshire law this is illegal. And it will remain illegal for the general election, when the stakes will be higher, given that New Hampshire is one of the 9 battleground states that will decide the election.
This is another facet to the war on voting. Not only do they attempt to disenfranchise high-propensity Democratic voters. The overall effect is one of confusion. Poll workers are poorly trained to administer election laws, especially ones with intricacies like the three-stage process in New Hampshire. And this almost always ends up disenfranchising more voters, rather than less.
There are solutions to this, but they almost all involve funding that states and the federal government would rather not provide. Even the funding for properly trained poll workers goes wanting. And we get the democracy we have.





6 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
I hope those voters who were disenfranchised file a suit. This is terrible.
Another buggy feature of a govt in chaos.
By the way, the Cons (led by the “Center for the American Experiment“) are pushing the myth that the ALEC Photo ID laws really don’t cost that much. Guest poster Max Hailperin at Bluestem Prairie shreds the CAE’s arguments into tiny bits:
The Voter ID laws are beyond despicable. If you ask a supporter of these laws for statistics on the actual amount of voter fraud that takes place each election, they won’t be able to give you any. If you ask them whether it’s fair to disenfranchise their fellow citizens who are elderly, don’t drive and don’t have access to a vehicle so that they can get to a DMV, they don’t want to talk about it. The GOP realizes that it will only get harder for them to win elections as our country becomes more ethnically diverse, so they are willing to do anything–voter ID laws, manipulating the electoral college (PA), or, as Arizona and Kansas threatened to do, removing a candidate altogether from the ballot–to seize power. They aren’t interested in winning over voters based on clearly outlined policy prescriptions and political philosophies–the Tea Party folks in particular seem to want to turn our elections into something more in line with what you find in Russia, or in any number of teapot dictatorships
What’s more disgusting than the laws passed by Republican politicians is the arrogant, selfish buy-in by grassroots Republicans. Those morons like to say “liberalism is a mental disorder,” but remember that one of their biggest character traits is psychological projection.
If only Democrats had been in control of Congress between January 2007 and January 2011, they could have passed a law about federal elections, instead of only holding hearings.
In fairness, they did pass an unconstitutional law that put ACORN out of business permanently, signed by the Constitutional law lecturer who had worked with ACORN in Chicago to register voters before he ran for Illinois Senate.
But, sure, let’s put 100% of the blame on Republicans for doing exactly what they’ve been doing for years and what Democrats somehow left them a clear field to do.
That’s what good Democrats are supposed to do, right?
If each group held their own parties responsible for anything, the country might actually start to work for someone besides the rich.