Photo ID: Religious Objectors
SB280 is an interesting photo identification bill, not because of its purpose (bills have been introduced in the past to require photo ID before voting) but rather because of some of the specific language in the bill.
As I've written elsewhere, I am not sure that Alabama needs a photo ID law for voting purposes. As others have noted, we have no reason to believe that there is a compelling need for such a requirement.
However, even if one agrees with the need for such a law, the bill has some strange language regarding people who have a "genuine religious objection" to being photographed. The strange thing isn't that the bill acknowledges that some people do in fact have a genuine religious exception to being photographed. What is strange is that the bill would have these individuals vote by provisional ballot without providing any procedure for actually counting the ballot.
Election law now states that anyone required to present ID and who cannot do so may cast a provisional ballot. However, for the ballot to be counted, the voter must present ID to the Board of Registrars no later than the Friday after election day. If ID is not presented to the Registrars by the deadline, the ballot will not be counted.
Under current law then, the religious objector will be permitted to vote by provisional ballot but, in the end, the ballot will not count.
The bill ought to provide some meaningful option to the religious objector (an uncounted ballot and the wasted time filling out provisional ballot paperwork are not meaningful), otherwise the language in the bill acknowledging their objection serves no useful purpose.
As I've written elsewhere, I am not sure that Alabama needs a photo ID law for voting purposes. As others have noted, we have no reason to believe that there is a compelling need for such a requirement.
However, even if one agrees with the need for such a law, the bill has some strange language regarding people who have a "genuine religious objection" to being photographed. The strange thing isn't that the bill acknowledges that some people do in fact have a genuine religious exception to being photographed. What is strange is that the bill would have these individuals vote by provisional ballot without providing any procedure for actually counting the ballot.
Election law now states that anyone required to present ID and who cannot do so may cast a provisional ballot. However, for the ballot to be counted, the voter must present ID to the Board of Registrars no later than the Friday after election day. If ID is not presented to the Registrars by the deadline, the ballot will not be counted.
Under current law then, the religious objector will be permitted to vote by provisional ballot but, in the end, the ballot will not count.
The bill ought to provide some meaningful option to the religious objector (an uncounted ballot and the wasted time filling out provisional ballot paperwork are not meaningful), otherwise the language in the bill acknowledging their objection serves no useful purpose.
posted by Ed at 12:04 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home