The push of the republican years to harden the requirements to vote and to restrict the way in which the ballots are counted continues, as is the debate which rages around them.
Dozens of states already have laws on the identification of voters and limit the way in which ballots can be denounced and how long after the day of the ballot, they can be counted, if necessary. But research on the impact that this has is largely inconclusive and sometimes contradictory.
However, many studies have revealed that the laws on the identification of voters have little or no impact on electoral participation, others suggest a disproportionate negative impact on colored voters and other minority groups, according to a 2023 article by the Goldman School of Public Policy in UC Berkeley.
These are voters who historically looked at the Democratic candidates.
President Donald Trump increased the issues with an executive decree in late March requiring documents showing that evidence of citizenship be presented when registering to vote and prohibiting the ballots received after election day, even if they were seamless on this date.
A federal judge blocked on Thursday certain parts of the order, including proof of citizenship, judging that the Constitution gives the Congress and the States the power to regulate the federal elections. But the judge has at least temporarily authorized the Ministry of Justice to take measures against states which do not adopt the requirement that postal bulletins be received on election day.
American citizenship is required nationally to vote in state and federal elections, although people are generally only to attest to this status, but under penalty of perjury. The documented proof of citizenship is more than most of the laws on the identification of voters of most states.
Carl Demaio assembly, R-San Diego, has proposed legislation which would also require verification of citizenship and an identity document with photo to vote in person, while restoring the ballot of voting at 72 hours after the day of the ballot. A Democrat controlled legislative committee recently rejected one of its bills, although Demaio declared that it was planning to continue a measure for the state -of -scale voting 2026.
A federal trial of the representative Darrell Issa, R-Bonsall, aims to prevent California from counting the voting bulletins by the day of the ballot which then arrive. The League of Women Voters of California asked the Court to intervene the opposition.
Whatever its position on the trial, deposited by the judicial watch in the name of Issa, there is a refreshing veracity on this subject. The process gives “an electoral advantage for opponents of the holders of the Republican Congress”, according to the dispute.
Efforts to shape electoral laws – by Republicans and Democrats – often have a partisan objective. Democrats have pushed the changes to allow the “harvesting of voting ballots”, where people can collect ballots by mail and deliver them to polling stations or electoral officials. The Democrats greatly benefited, at least until the Republicans, who initially cried a fault after being blinded by the tactics, begin to do so.
The ISSA trial maintains that the practice of counting ballots after the elections is illegal (and “unfair”), that most of the courts weighing on similar cases across the country have rejected.
The trial mentions the elections at the Congress where the Democratic candidates exceeded their heads while the late ballots were recorded. On rarer occasions, the script returned, the late count putting the Republicans above, according to Alex Riggins of the San Diego Union-Tribune.
The voter league of women, among others, argues that the trial seeks to deprive the legitimate voters who voted on election day for partisan reasons.
But at least, the costume was not based on the myths of generalized electoral fraud or that the massive number of undocumented immigrants vote.
These rus have stimulated restrictive voting laws across the country, despite failure during the years of anyone who finds fraud that takes place beyond small and rare cases – and certainly not at the scale of the major elections decision.
It is a crime in California to falsely declare citizenship to register. Often lost in the debate, the few undocumented immigrants risk prison or deportation to do this.
Dozens of business, examination, stories and surveys – even authorized by Trump – found no evidence that his loss against Joe Biden in the 2020 elections is the result of fraud.
It ages but rehearsing, while Trump continues to claim to date. In doing so, he managed to question the veracity of the electoral process.
This does not mean that the validity of the elections is not important and that efforts to seek improvements should not be a constant priority. A silver lining with Trump’s accusations has been the elections is more examined, safer and more precise maybe than ever.
None of this has changed Trump’s melody. His executive decree claims that the United States “does not apply the basic and necessary electoral protections”.
At the hearing of the committee where his bill was rejected, Demaio said: “(W) the lowest level of public confidence and confidence in our elections that we have ever seen,” according to Los Angeles Times.
He noted that the survey has shown that the cross view of partisan lines. A Gallup survey in October showed that 84% of those questioned in favor require a photo identification to vote and 83% supported the evidence of citizenship when registering to vote for the first time. About two -thirds of the Democrats agreed, but republican support is almost 20% higher.
So who benefits from these laws and who does not?
A study on the partisan impact was published in 2023 in the acts of the National Academy of Sciences (PNA).
“We conclude that the requirements for the identification of voters motivate and mobilize the supporters of both parties, ultimately attenuating their expected effects on election results,” the researchers said in their summary.
The Berkeley newspaper said that “several studies have shown that colored voters are much more likely not to have the appropriate identity document to vote in states with strict voters.” For example, 13% of black citizens of the voting age lack authorized identity, against only 5% of white citizens of the voting age.
In addition, a study cited by Berkeley revealed that the adoption of voter identification requirements increases the time required to check in the polling stations “mainly non -white”, while it actually accelerates the registration process at “mainly white” polling stations.
The Wisconsin elections four weeks ago scraped the debate four weeks ago. J. Susan Crawford, supported by the Democrats, was easily elected to the Supreme State Court despite 25 million dollars spent against her by Trump Ally Elon Musk.
At the same time, Wisconsin voters voted massively to consecrate their law on the identification of voters, approved in 2011, in the constitution of the State.
What they said
David French (@davidafrench), columnist for the New York Times.
“Note how many injunctions against Trump are judges appointed by Trump. It is not a judicial coup. This is what it looks like when the judges do their job.”
Originally published:
California Daily Newspapers
