The Independent View: AZ and the Citizenship Proof to Vote

In 2004 Arizona passed Proposition 200 the "Evidence-of-Citizenship" that required state voter registration form to include one of the following:

1. State driver license number if license issued after October 1, 1996.
2. Photocopy of birth certificate.
3. Photocopy of pertinent pages of passport.
4. Naturalization Certificate number.
5. Other documents from Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.
6. Bureau of Indian Affairs card number.

The federal registration form requires registrants only to say they're citizens, but it doesn't require they submit proof. The federal form has existed for twenty years.

Arizona and Kansas filed a lawsuit in an attempt to force the federal Election Assistance Commission to change its voter registration forms to compel proof of citizenship in a separate section for state requirements.

The vast majority of Arizonans register by using a state form.

On October 7, Arizona Attorney General Thomas C. Horne and Secretary of State Ken Bennett, both Republicans, announced that voters who registered to vote with the federal voter registration form are not entitled to vote in state or local elections. Furthermore, they are not entitled to sign ballot measure petitions, nor candidate petitions unless the candidates are running for Congress or President.

"Because Arizona law requires a registration applicant to provide evidence of citizenship, registrants who have not provided sufficient evidence of citizenship should not be permitted to vote in state and local elections," Horne wrote in an opinion that was intended to give guidance on how to conduct the 2014 elections.

The only federal offices on Arizona ballots next year will be U.S. House seats. If Monday's change isn't overturned through legal action, residents who haven't submitted proof of citizenship won't be able vote for such offices as governor, secretary of state, attorney general, and candidates for the state Legislature.

On their ballots, "they would just be getting the offices that they're eligible to cast their ballots for," Bennett spokesman Matt Roberts said. However, Roberts acknowledged that a legal challenge is likely.

Dan Pochoda, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, called the move "ludicrous." "At a minimum, it's a tremendous waste of resources at a time when people already are having to wait too long to vote in this state and it will deter voting for no good reason other than a vindictive attitude," Pochoda said. "There certainly appears to be possible serious concerns about legality."

The Arizona Democratic Party condemned the move as testing "the boundaries of absurdity." "This will also create another confusing layer of bureaucracy to our voting system and potentially cost Arizona taxpayers millions of dollars," DJ Quinlan, the party's executive director, said.

Under this change, elections officials will have to establish two separate lists of registered voters so poll workers can determine the correct ballot the voter receives.

If the number of voters who used the federal form is so small, all they would have to do is refile with a state form and proof to remove the need for two separate lists.