Charlotte and Sanford Municipal Primaries Under New Photo ID Law: Initial Results Show Smooth Implementation
The cities of Charlotte and Sanford have recently held municipal primary elections, marking the first time that voters were required to show photo identification under the 2018 constitutional amendment. The implementation of the new law has been smooth so far, with no reported cases of voters showing up without an ID in both cities.
In Charlotte, early voting commenced on August 24th, with a total of 556 people casting their votes as of Friday. Mecklenburg Elections Director Michael Dickerson confirmed that there have been no incidents of voters arriving at the polls without proper identification. Furthermore, no individual has filled out an ID exception form, which allows them to vote provisionally if they do not possess an ID.
Similarly, in Lee County where Sanford is located, the Board of Elections has not encountered anyone attempting to vote without an ID. However, it is essential to note that these are early results from a relatively small sample size. As more significant elections approach, a larger number of sporadic voters may turn up at the polls, and some may not have photo ID.
However, an examination of the photo ID law reveals that its impact should be minimal, as long as voters are aware that they can still vote without an ID. There are two ways for individuals without IDs to cast their votes. The first option is to vote provisionally and then visit the county Board of Elections with a valid photo ID. Alternatively, they can choose to fill out the ID exception form, which allows them to list a reasonable impediment for not having an ID. Valid reasons can include a lack of transportation, a lost or misplaced ID, or a voter with a disability.
While the state Board of Elections removed the pre-listed option of didn’t know photo ID was required from the form, Mecklenburg voters can still write it in the other category. The county election boards will review these provisional ballots and exception forms. Dickerson explains that for a provisional ballot cast by someone with an ID to be rejected, it requires a unanimous vote from the board, meaning both Democrats and Republicans must agree.
However, there are two potential challenges with the photo ID law. Firstly, there is a concern that individuals without IDs might believe they are not allowed to vote and decide to stay home. To address this, there may be a need for the Democratic Party, which has criticized the photo ID law, to launch an educational campaign to inform voters before the 2024 election. Similarly, the Board of Elections could play a role in disseminating information to ensure voters are aware of their rights. Interestingly, it may also be in the Republican Party’s interest to ensure their voters understand that they can vote without an ID, considering the influx of new voters Donald Trump has brought to the party.
The second issue revolves around whether poll workers encourage voters without IDs to fill out the reasonable impediment form or allow them to leave the polling place without casting a ballot. State law mandates that all polling places display a sign informing voters that they can vote without a photo ID.
The initial results from the Charlotte and Sanford municipal primaries under the new photo ID law indicate a smooth implementation process. However, it is crucial to address potential challenges such as voter misinformation and poll worker conduct to ensure that every eligible citizen can exercise their right to vote in future elections.
