By all accounts, the '01-'02 session of the state Legislature was a disaster. Between the revelations of extortion and official misconduct, the obstruction of decent bills from the Senate by the leadership of the Assembly (and vice versa) as well as the back-room budget negotiations, it seems, in hindsight, that the Legislature was actually trying to fail.
Thankfully, the current Legislature seems to be performing relatively well. The worst thing you can say about the Legislature's behavior to date is that they have pressed their legitimate concerns over perpetual tribal gaming compacts long after the matter was settled. But beyond that-and apart from the wrangling over state employment contracts, which may stem from legitimate policy differences more than the behavior of individual lawmakers-this Legislature is doing a better job than the last one.
But, of course, this state of affairs may be due only to the fact that legislators have not had full opportunity to screw up just yet. The legislature's version of the state budget is still in the oven. The death penalty bill offered by Senate President Alan Lasee, R-De Pere, has not moved out of committee. And the Legislature has not yet had a chance to make the same mischief with campaign finance reform that was made in the last session.
Yet, in the coming days and weeks, the Senate may act on Assembly Bill 111. This bill passed out of the GOP-held Assembly last month on a largely party-line vote. It appears to have the backing of the leadership of the Senate. And it is the vilest piece of legislation that I have seen in a long, long time.
Assembly Bill 111 would change the state's voter registration law in several different ways. Currently, voters can prove their identity and residence by showing a piece of \official mail""-a utility bill, a credit card statement or something like that-to an election official or municipal clerk. This bill would change that rule and instead would require voters to show a piece of photo identification before registering and voting. And this bill would eliminate the corroboration procedure, by which another person can ""vouch"" for a potential voter's identity and residence.
Proponents will tout this bill as a way to cut down on voter fraud, but that is complete nonsense. By analyzing this bill's potential effect on certain classes of voters, the actual intent of this bill becomes clear. To put it bluntly, the Republican supporters of Assembly Bill 111 simply want to disenfranchise those who have a propensity to vote for Democrats.
For example, the elimination of corroboration and the photo identification requirement will instantaneously disenfranchise the homeless. Even though these people do not have a roof over their heads, they nevertheless have the right to exercise the same franchise that some of us-too many of us, really-take for granted. The fact that Republicans in the Legislature would seek to ensure the denial of that right to the least among us is distressing.
Assembly Bill 111 would have a similar effect on the working urban poor. In order to comply with the provisions contained in this bill, one would have to make his or her way to a Department of Transportation service center. For people who have a car and a certain amount of flexibility in their work schedules, this is not much of a problem. But many hard-working people in our cities do not have a car. Even more of them are in jobs that strictly require their attendance during regular business hours. And a good number of them are tenants. As such, their addresses may change on a yearly basis-this would make their identification cards out of date, and would leave them out of franchise-exercising luck.
At the same time, the rural poor may have difficulty with this change as well. Indeed, given the fact that DOT centers in outlying areas are open only infrequently-as little as twice a month in some areas-they might have it worse than their urban counterparts.
And if you are still looking for a reason to care, just open up your wallet or handbag. Does your license list your current address? Or does it say that you live in an apartment that you lived in two years ago, or in Green Bay, or in Minneapolis, or on the Upper West Side?
As it is, student turnout is abysmal. (Trust me. As an election inspector for the wards that vote at the Memorial Union, I speak from experience.) This bill would drive student turnout even lower-a result that would please the Republican Party to no end.
In short, this is a horrendous bill. Should the Senate approve this piece of garbage, the governor should veto it without wasting a second deliberating upon the merits of the bill-for it has no merit whatsoever.
