[Mb-civic] Reviving Jim Crow? - David J. Becker - Washington Post

[William Swiggard]

Reviving Jim Crow?

By David J. Becker
Monday, August 22, 2005; Page A17

Any day now the Justice Department will render judgment on one of the 
single most discriminatory pieces of voting legislation of recent years: 
a Georgia state law requiring voters to present one of only six forms of 
photo identification before they can exercise their right to vote. 
Before enforcing this statute, Georgia must get Justice Department 
approval by proving that the law will not put minority voters in a worse 
position than they were in before the requirement was instituted.

The facts surrounding Georgia's voter identification requirement cannot 
be disputed. Virtually every black legislator opposes the legislation, 
and most black lawmakers staged a walkout to protest its passage. Every 
major civil rights and minority advocacy group, including the NAACP, and 
many legal scholars, oppose the restriction; several have submitted 
comments to the Justice Department for consideration.

Additionally, it is surprisingly difficult to obtain a photo ID in 
Georgia. Though the state has 159 counties, there are only 56 places in 
which residents can obtain a driver's license, and not one is within the 
city limits of Atlanta or within the six counties that have the highest 
percentage of blacks.

There is also considerable evidence that photo ID requirements have a 
disproportionately negative impact on blacks and other minorities. The 
Justice Department found as recently as a decade ago that blacks in 
Louisiana were four to five times less likely than whites to have photo IDs.

Studies in other states indicate similar disparities. Consequently, the 
Michigan attorney general deemed a less restrictive voter identification 
bill unconstitutional, and the Federal Election Commission reported that 
photo identification requirements impose an undue and potentially 
discriminatory burden on citizens exercising their right to vote. 
Indeed, the Justice Department rejected a less restrictive Louisiana law 
in 1994 and 1995.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/21/AR2005082100972.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20050822/dc54089d/attachment.htm