[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8909-8910]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  REQUIRING A VOTER'S PHOTO ID WILL DENY MANY AMERICAN CITIZENS FROM 
                          THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, it was on May 7, the day of the Indiana 
primary election just last Tuesday, I

[[Page 8910]]

believe that was May 5, excuse me, May 5, that 12 nuns came to the 
voting booth to cast a ballot in the election. These nuns, women of the 
cloth, women who have dedicated their lives to prayer and service, only 
wanted to vote but were barred from doing so by Indiana's photographic 
identification law. This law, which is the most stringent in the United 
States, the most stringent of any State, requires that before you can 
cast a ballot, you must present a government-issued photographic 
identification card. This 98-year-old nun, American citizen, devoted to 
her country and her faith, was denied along with 11 of her colleagues.
  I'm disappointed to tell you, Madam Speaker, that this problem didn't 
have to happen. Only a few days before this Indiana photographic ID law 
was put in place, the United States Supreme Court reviewed this law and 
found that it was reasonable for Indiana to force citizens to provide 
such identification.
  Now, Madam Speaker, you might say, well, isn't this designed to just 
stop voter fraud? The answer is ``no,'' Madam Speaker. In the United 
States Supreme Court decision, the Justice that wrote the majority 
opinion admitted and acknowledged that there was no evidence of voter 
impersonation. And in fact, Madam Speaker, this bill was a bill to 
solve a problem that simply did not exist at all. This bill was 
confronting a mythical voter fraud that worked only to stop 12 nuns and 
many others from voting.
  The bill that required the photographic ID clearly would 
disenfranchise people who were low-income and didn't have a 
photographic ID. It clearly would, and did, disenfranchise older 
Americans who may not have an ID or maybe were born at home and can't 
even find a birth certificate, which is what they would need to get 
such a photographic ID. It would clearly bar college students, who 
maybe haven't gotten a driver's license yet, from voting.
  In effect, this bill prohibited people from voting who need a change 
in America. It stopped seniors who are against the donut hole of the 
prescription drug, Prescription Medicare Part D that is hurting our 
seniors. It's barring their way to the ballot box. It's barring our 
students' way to the ballot box as they struggle to confront galloping 
tuition increases and mounting debt. It's barring the rights of our 
citizens who cry for greater civil and human rights in our country. And 
it's basically standing in the way of voters who need a fairer, more 
equal, more just society.
  The fact is, Madam Speaker, I wish those people who pushed this law 
forward would have simply admitted that they don't want to debate the 
ideas, they just want to stop voters from getting to the ballot box. 
They don't want to debate whether or not it makes sense to help rich 
people get even richer, to help big corporations get even bigger. They 
don't want to debate that. They just want to stop the people who would 
be opposed to their ideas from them ever being able to cast a ballot.
  Madam Speaker, I want to commend the New York Times which, on May 13, 
submitted this editorial: The Myth of Voter Fraud. And what this 
editorial shows is it is not just Indiana but many other States which 
are requiring this absolutely unneeded, unneeded photographic ID 
requirement. States like Missouri, Kansas, Florida, South Carolina, and 
now others are considering these bills. They must and should be 
stopped. They're not intended to stop fraud. In fact, if there's any 
fraud going on, Madam Speaker, it is that people in the category that I 
mentioned, the senior citizens, communities of color, low-income 
people, students, those people are being defrauded because actively in 
almost every election, we've seen schemes and devises reminiscent of 
Jim Crow to bar them from the ballot box.
  And so, Madam Speaker, I ask you and all of the Members of this House 
to consider a bill that will preempt the Supreme Court's decision in 
the decision that upheld the Indiana voter law. It's what we need. It 
would improve the quality of democracy in our country.
  And as I close, Madam Speaker, I just want to say our country is a 
great one not because of bombs and guns and a huge economy, it's a 
great country because this country has been advancing liberty ever 
since its inception.
  In the beginning of this country, Madam Speaker, you and I know that 
only white men of property were able to vote. Just being a white male 
would not get you the vote. But then we saw the Jacksonian Revolution, 
and people without property could vote; and then we saw the Civil War 
come, and then black men could vote; and then we saw the 19th 
amendment, and then women could vote. And then we saw the barring of 
the 24th amendment which said that no more poll taxes could stand in 
the way of people voting. And then we saw the amendment that allowed 
people 18 years old to vote. Every generation we've seen increases in 
the right to vote except for this one. It's a sad day, Madam Speaker.
  I yield back, and I call on this Congress to keep the doors to the 
voting booth open for all Americans.

                          ____________________