TPM: Everything That's Happened Since Supreme Court Ruled on Voting Rights Act [View all]
Published on ProPublica, Nov. 1, 2013, 12:24 p.m. To use ProPublica's interactive map graphic, go here
via TPM ==> http://a1.img.talkingpointsmemo.com/image/upload/c_fill,fl_keep_iptc,g_faces,h_365,w_652/yr4b6nfgg6xrqr4ilg6k.jpg
What have preclearance states done since the Supreme Court ruling?
NORTH CAROLINA: Two months after the Supreme Court decision, North Carolina passed a number of measures, including strict new photo ID requirements. The law also eliminates same-day voter registration, shortens the early voting period by seven days, and specifies that ballots cast at the wrong polling station will be thrown out. Some changes will be phased in starting in 2014, and the photo ID provision goes into effect in 2016.
TEXAS: Last year, a federal court rejected Texas' voter ID law, calling it "the most stringent in the country." The panel also rejected the state's redistricting maps, finding that they protected white incumbents while altering districts with minority incumbents. But on the very day of the Supreme Court ruling, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said the state would "immediately" enact both measures. The photo ID law requires voters to present an approved form of photo identification, where before they could present mail, utility bills or other proof of voter registration. The Justice Department had refused to approve the lawbased on the state's findings that Hispanic registered voters were far less likely to have the approved photo IDs. The new law also requires the photo ID presented on voting day to match the state's voter rolls 2014 complicating votingfor some married women and others with name changes.
FLORIDA: After the Supreme Court ruling, Florida resumed its plans to remove non-citizens from its voter rolls using the federal SAVE (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) database. The Department of Homeland Securitydatabase helps government agencies check the immigration statuses of people applying for government benefits like drivers' licenses, housing assistance, or Medicaid. But opponents of Florida's measure say that SAVE data is faultyand not meant for elections, and that using the database to verify voter rolls will disenfranchise eligible voters.
Read the whole thing. It gets worse....
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/everything-that-s-happened-since-supreme-court-ruled-on-voting-rights-act