Getting state IDs without a birth certificate--is it working or just a Walker scam?

[dragonlady]

The Walker administration started a new process at the DMV for people who need the free state ID for voting but have no birth certificate (or other required document like proof of citizenship). This of course was because of their profound interest in getting every eligible voter the means to vote after the courts upheld the voter ID law. (Do I need the sarcasm thingy here?) If someone cannot bring a birth certificate without spending money to get it, the DMV would now communicate with the proper agency in their place of birth and verify their existence that way. (Let's not ponder whether the certificate proves that any particular adult is that newborn.) The DMV cannot guarantee that the agency (perhaps halfway around the world) will respond in time, or ever. If it doesn't, or there is no record in that place, the prospective voter can bring in a family bible, certain school records, or some other "proof" of birth (even less reliable than a birth certificate, but we're talking about bureaucracy here).

My question to DUers is this: has anyone heard of someone who went through this process and got the state ID? What problems were there? How long did it take?

The spring elections are coming up and the voter ID requirement WILL be in effect then, and until the U.S. Supreme Court takes an appeal from the 7th Circuit decision and overturns it. Whether that will happen is unknown.

[PeaceNikki]

1. I know that the ACLU is actively looking for stories of challenges

I am interested as well.

[BobbyBoring]

2. I haven't

In fact, I know of a few people that have been denied IDs for not having any proof.

This is one of those "Just think about it a tic" subjects. Are they really going to just hand out IDs on a persons word?

[dragonlady]

3. They represented to the court that they would put this process into effect

IF the alternate process worked as it was advertised, it would go a long way toward complying with the constitutional prohibition against the poll tax. It still doesn't address the hassle of getting to a DMV that may be open only a couple of days a month, but at least it would make things easier for many voters.

If there are still problems, it would be important for the plaintiffs' attorneys to have something to point to when they argue this case before the U.S. Supreme Court. A process that doesn't work as described and isn't modified to work would indicate bad faith in trying to meet the constitutional requirement.

[midnight]

4. Dragon lady is this what was settled on before the election and that would be implemented after the

November election? I continue to find this focus on voter fraud ill placed.

[dragonlady]

5. Yes, voter ID has always been a solution in search of a problem

They passed the photo ID requirement early on but it was enjoined by the courts for a long time. Then before the November election the U.S. Court of Appeals put it back into effect. Just before the hearing, the Walker administration announced this new way for voters to get an ID without having to spend money for the needed documents (which would be a poll tax). The new process was supposed to go into effect the Monday after the hearing and apparently remain available as long as ID would be required. (They could have offered this from the beginning but pulled it out when they were desperate to get the ID upheld.) The U.S. Supreme Court then stayed the ID requirement for the upcoming election because enough justices decided to follow their own precedent.

I have not seen anything yet in the media about how this system worked out in practice during the few weeks before the election and since then. Much depends on whether the agencies in other states or countries will cooperate. It's typical of the Walker gang to start something with no planning and just promise that it will work.