General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: HRC would have been a great president...but she's never going to run again. [View all]pnwmom
(110,261 posts)why are you using the word "you" to refer to Democrats?
The law wasn't a "foregone conclusion." In fact, it had been overturned by a judge, and then upheld by an appeals court shortly before the election.
The fight still goes on. But I fully agree that Democrats should already be working to make sure everyone has an acceptable ID.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/appeals-court-oks-wisconsin-s-strict-voter-id-law-n638501
The courts decision likely means that, barring intervention by the U.S. Supreme Court, the strict ID measure will be in place in a key presidential swing state, where it could make voting much harder, especially for racial minorities and students.
In July, a district court ruled that Wisconsin must soften its law by allowing voters who were unable to get ID to sign an affidavit attesting to their identity. Earlier this month, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit blocked that ruling from going into effect for the November election. On Friday afternoon, the full appeals court unanimously upheld the panels decision, after an appeal from voting rights groups.
The appeals court noted that in a separate challenge to the voter ID law, a court had required Wisconsin to make IDs as easy as possible to obtain, including by giving out temporary IDs at DMV offices. As a result, the appeals court found, the affidavit option is unnecessary to ensure that voters arent disenfranchised.
But voting rights advocates werent convinced that the state will really make IDs easy to get. On Twitter, Dale Ho of the ACLU called the states pledge to give out temporary IDs to all who need them dubious. Ho noted that the lower court had found that the states efforts on that score had for five years been marked by utter failure.