Bethany Barnes of Arizona-Sonora News Service reports on a bill to that would have required a notarized signature in order to receive an early ballot:
One person’s safeguard is another person’s hurdle.
The motives of a bill that would require a notarized signature to get on the Permanent Early Voting List were called into question in Thursday’s House Judiciary Committee.
HB 2350 died in committee (though the idea could still pop up in another form during the session) after a tense talk that was cut short by the committee’s chair.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Carl Seel, R-Phoenix, asserts that notarized signatures are the equivalent of the I.D. check at the polls.Rep. Lupe Contreras, D-Avondale, thinks Seel isn’t looking to reduce fraud as much as he is the Latino vote.
“I think it is a red herring, quite honestly, to throw the race card out there,” Seel said.
Contreras questioned why fraud needed to be addressed now. Seel pointed that more people are voting early. Contreras pointed out that many of those voters are Latinos.
Contreras said he would rather the bill be called what it is, to which Seel asked if Contreras thought the bill implied some “characteristic of race.”
“Yes, in every way shape or form. Yeah,” Contreras said.
It was at this point that committee chairman Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, intervened. Farnsworth told Contreras he was out of line. He then held the bill, saying it didn’t have the votes.
Member’s concerns about the bill varied.
Rep. John Allen, R-Scottsdale, took issue with the requirement that notaries work for free. Under the bill, notaries would not be allowed to charge permanent early voter hopefuls.
Rep. Ethan Orr, R-Tucson, said that requiring voters see a notary is a very high standard. There are vast areas of Tucson where it is hard to get a public notary, he said, by default the standard disenfranchises people that tend to have a lower socioeconomic status.
“I think if you’re trying to address voter fraud that’s a laudable goal,” Orr said. “But there are other ways to do it.”
This article appears in Feb 21-27, 2013.
It is absolutely mind-boggling how much time and effort the R’s are putting into keeping non-R’s from voting. This bill and the six others working their way through the “how do we get this past everyone without them noticing” process are not even solutions in search of problems, they are out-and-out attempts to disenfranchise low-income and non-white voters. Disgusting!
Rep. Lupe Contreras, D-Avondale, thinks Seel isn’t looking to reduce fraud as much as he is the Latino vote.
“I think it is a red herring, quite honestly, to throw the race card out there,” Seel said.”
Bullshit, enough racebaitingby the Democrats, anytime voing security comes up the Latino’s cry racist, enough already. And Ldonyo, the Republicans are not attempting to stop anyone from voting.
Why is it every time we try to bring honest and integrity into the ballot box it’s a racist issue? Can’t it be said that everybody is capable of dishonesty no matter what race, religion, whatever issue you want to put into play?Going to a notary free or not could be a real issue for many, I understand, but race being the motive? I don’t think so. Using race, religion, etc is simply a way of shutting down the conversation.
There is no problem with how voters currently get on the PEVL or send in their ballot, so why do we need a new law? Each year over a thousand bills are introduced in this legislature, and about 300 are made law. Republicans say they are for limited government, but their actions suggest otherwise.
If a bill originates from Carl Seel, it’s going to be bad. That man is sooooo slimey.
There have been 16 alleged cases of voter fraud in Arizona in the past 13 years. Seven have gone to court so far. Four of those people were eligible voters accused of voting twice. That leaves a whopping 3 cases of ineligible voting (I’m guessing one independent, one republican and one democrat). Seel wants hundreds of thousands of law abiding Arizonans to go through the hassle of getting a notary public’s signature in order to prevent massive fraud from 3 individuals every dozen years, or so. A clear case of someone who takes actions without regard to the consequences of those actions.
“Bullshit, enough racebaitingby the Democrats, anytime voing security comes up the Latino’s cry racist, enough already. And Ldonyo, the Republicans are not attempting to stop anyone from voting.”
Wow, Marcus, If anything can drive a buzzard away from roadkill, that’s it.
The fewer people that vote, the better for the Republicans. The GOP could not be more blatant in trying to prevent people of color from voting. And many white people for that matter too.
Incredible… it seems as a fact that the only people arrested and convicted for voter fraud in the last election (November 2012).. were Republicans trying to show the system was vulnerable to voter fraud.. and they go caught with the existing laws in force…
So is this a ploy to catch more Republicans in a voter fraud sting.. or is it a ploy to disenfranchise poor voters who don’t have ready access to Notary Publics…
Smells and sounds fishy to me… but when I was a child, I used to catch suckers… bottom dwelling scum suckers in shallow rivers.. I know.. it sounds like Arizona…but I bet I could catch a lot of bottom dwelling scum suckers at the next State Republican Caucus…in Maricopa County..in Phoenix..Ov vey.. say it isn’t so…
Why is it that Arizona Republicans are eating themselves like pirhanas anyway?