Almost one out of every 10 voters who cast ballots in Missouri’s two largest jurisdictions during recent elections lacked the identification now required at polls in the state, an expert testified Monday at a trial over the voter ID requirement.
Kenneth Mayer, a political scientist from the University of Wisconsin, estimated that about 175,000 votes cast in St. Louis County – or 8.4% of the total – between 2018 and 2022 were cast by people who did not have a Missouri-issued driver’s license, nondriver identification or a federally issued ID with their birth date. The numbers were a little higher in Jackson County, he said, and nearly double that in Boone County, home of the University of Missouri’s flagship campus.
Before the November 2022 election, acceptable identification at the polls included a voter registration card, a student identification card, a bank statement or utility bill or even an out-of-state drivers license if it had not expired.
Now anyone without the required state- or federally issued identification is given a provisional ballot. For it to be counted, the voter must return to the polling station and show the correct identification or count on the local election authority matching their signature to the one on file.
Overall turnout for 2022 was about 20% lower than the presidential election of 2020, Mayer testified, but the number of provisional ballots cast was four times higher than two years earlier.
Many people worried whether their identification would count likely didn’t vote, Mayer said.
“Voters frequently misunderstand the kind of ID that is required,” he said. “Half the people who don’t vote and say they didn’t vote because they lack ID actually had the proper ID.”
This Lawsuit
Mayer is an expert witness for the Missouri NAACP and the League of Women Voters, who are challenging the voter ID law as unconstitutional. He testified on the second day of a trial before Cole County Circuit Judge Jon Beetem.
The NAACP and the league argue the law imposes unconstitutional burdens on the right to vote without actually achieving the state goal of reducing fraud in elections. The current law is the third since 2006 seeking to require a photo ID to vote. The previous two versions have been struck down by the courts.
At a news conference during a mid-day break on Monday, Nimrod Chapel, president of the Missouri NAACP, blamed Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft for pushing the new law as a political measure to suppress turnout.
Passing a photo ID law to vote has been a Republican priority since 2006. Most Democrats have been opposed to the idea.
“Jay Ashcroft,(Missouri Secretary of State who is in charge of elections), with this ridiculous measure, has worked hard to ensure that African-Americans and other voters throughout the state would be disenfranchised, understanding that the burden would be borne harder and most upon us,” Chapel said.
In court, the state is defending the law as a simple solution to make elections secure.
It is a “common-sense law designed to uphold that sacred right,” Assistant Attorney General Peter Donohue said during opening arguments on Friday.
Old Voter ID Law Challenges
Enacting a voter ID law has been a goal for Missouri Republicans since 2006. The first law, enacted that year, was struck down by the Missouri Supreme Court in a decision that found it violated the state constitution’s equal protection clause and the right of qualified, registered citizens to vote.
The law, the court wrote, was not “narrowly tailored” to prevent voter fraud.
The latest attempt began with the passage of a constitutional amendment in 2016 that allowed lawmakers to add a voter ID requirement. The intent was to address the issues the court found in its 2006 decision.
But a law enacted in 2018 to implement the requirement was struck down because, the Supreme Court ruled, it required voters “to sign a contradictory, misleading affidavit” that they did not have required identification to cast a ballot using non-photo identification.
The new law does not require the affidavit but it also eliminates the use of any non-photo identification, Lieberman said. As a result, she said, the plaintiffs will show that the use of provisional ballots has gone up substantially and that few of those ballots are actually counted.
Arguments From Both Sides
The lawsuit focuses on the burdens faced by three individuals obtaining state-issued identification. The problems include finding transportation to a state license office, misspellings on important documents or lack of those documents entirely due to age.
The main purpose of a voter ID law, proponents contend, is to prevent fraud at the polls. Such laws, the state argues in its legal filings, “protect the fundamental right to vote by deterring difficult-to-detect forms of voter fraud.”
Missouri will issue an identification card for a voter who needs one at no cost and help obtaining the documents, Donohue argued Friday. The burdens are minimal and the benefit is substantial, he said.
“Protecting the integrity of elections is absolutely a compelling governmental interest,” Donohue said.
That argument was challenged during expert testimony Monday morning. Over the past 20 years, there have been no instances where someone tried to vote at the polls using someone else’s name.
The only documented instance of someone in Missouri using someone else’s ballot dated from 2007, when a St. Louis County man was convicted of using the ballot mailed to his deceased mother to vote absentee and then voting in person under his own name.
The only type of voter fraud that a voter ID law prevents is in-person fraud at the polls, which is almost non-existent, attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote.
“Because the voter ID restrictions offer no discernable protection against voter fraud while imposing significant burdens upon voters—disenfranchising many in the process—there is no rational basis for them,” plaintiffs’ attorneys wrote, “they cannot be upheld under even the most deferential standard, let alone the strict scrutiny that properly applies.”
