If you ask what Amendment 6 on the Missouri ballot would mean, you'll get different answers from different people. 41 Action News got all three candidates for Missouri Secretary of State to weigh in, so voters could decide.
At face value, the measure would require voters to verify their citizenship, identity and residence at the polls. Critics argue though, it's much more complicated.
Jay Ashcroft, republican candidate for secretary of state said, "I think it's a simple, common sense way to make sure every eligible voter has the right opportunity to vote but only once per election." Adding that legal residents could file a provisional ballot even without ID and for those who couldn't afford an ID, "The law cannot go into effect unless the legislature provides the money to give out those IDs for free."
Democratic candidate Robin Smith argues, "Ashcroft wants to waste millions of your tax dollars by issuing IDs to people who have already legally proven that they're qualified voters." In our interview, Smith cited a 10-year Loyola University study that found 31 cases of voter impersonation out of 1 billion votes cast.
Read the guest blog here: (note: this is a Washington Post story written by the study's author)
"What that study from Loyola says is that it's very difficult to know if it's occurring," Ashcroft said.
Smith takes issue with altering the Missouri constitution, adding, "In Wisconsin, North Carolina, our neighboring state of Kansas as well as Texas, where the federal and state courts clearly say that voter photo ID is a violation of your constitutional rights." The Missouri Supreme Court ruled against photo voter ID in 2006.
Libertarian candidate Chris Morrill sent us this statement:
"The Secretary of State cannot unilaterally change voter ID laws. Such laws would need to be changed by the General Assembly and the governor, or by constitutional amendment. As Secretary of State, I would follow whatever laws were laid out in those fashions, whether I agreed with them or not.Having said that, I do not believe additional photo ID rules are needed in Missouri. Contrary to popular belief, a Missouri voter must provide some documentation before voting. It just doesn't have to be in the form of a photo ID. I believe in making all rights easy to exercise, and voting is such a right. Any law or amendment that could potentially disenfranchise even one voter must be looked upon with some level of skepticism.Election fraud in Missouri generally does not occur in the form of voter impersonation. I would focus my investigative efforts where they are needed: inside the polling places and with absentee ballots."
Austin Chambers, campaign manager for Eric Greitens, also sent us a statement:
"Like most Missourians, Eric recognizes that Voter ID is a common-sense idea to protect our elections. While Eric has been steadfast in his support for Voter ID, his opponent, career-politician Chris Koster, has opposed the measure. But not only does Koster currently oppose Voter ID it is about the fourth different position on Voter ID that Koster has taken. It's a perfect example of a conservative outsider like Eric Greitens being clearly for smart, common-sense proposals vs a crooked career politician like Chris Koster who takes multiple positions on issues because he doesn't stand for anything but himself."
Chris Koster, the democratic candidate for governor shared this:
"My concern is the issue of disenfranchisement. ... We need voter integrity at the polls and we've had a situation here recently in St. Louis that is causing everyone concern. We have the situation of the presidential race in Florida in 2000. I don't mind responsible legislation that is intended to ensure that the person who is voting is in fact the individual who they claim to be. But the issue is one of disenfranchisement. This is a fundamental right much more deeply rooted, perhaps the most fundamental right in American society, more deeply rooted even than driving a car, or flying in a plane (or) cashing a check - other places we have ID requirements. And so some type of a law that makes certain that while we are maintaining the integrity of the voting but not disenfranchising anyone is critically important, and so the compromise legislation that was put together by Democrats and Republicans last session I think, at least on its face, is not an act in and of itself of disenfranchisement. But if I ever got the slightest sense that Republicans or anyone was either changing the law in a way that would disenfranchise those with disabilities, senior citizens or minorities, or were advertising across the state in a manner that was intended to scare them away from the polls, then I would go into court and try to stop it."
---
Dia Wall can be reached at dia.wall@kshb.com.
