Reporter crusades for photo ID cards

More editorial commentary from the Journal Sentinel's Greg Borowski, who seems to have gone from reporting on election problems to crusading for photo ID cards for voters.

Last week, he felt compelled to offer his own comment when reporting on Rep. Gwen Moore's comments at a House "hearing" ginned up by Rep. Mark Green to boost his campaign for governor. [See earlier post, No Drivers License? No Problem. No Vote. ]

Now, in a story decrying the lack of action of needed election reforms since Borowski and the Journal Sentinel investigated problems a year ago, he offers this:

A probe headed by U.S. Attorney Steve Biskupic and Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael McCann was launched in January. In May, the two said they had found clear evidence of fraud in the city, but emphasized it did not involve an organized effort.

They said more than 200 felons voted illegally in the city and there were at least 100 other cases in which someone used a fake name or false address to vote, or voted twice.

So far, 14 cases have been filed in federal court, 10 involving felons who illegally voted while still on probation or parole and four involving cases of double voting. In addition, two cases were filed in Milwaukee County Circuit Court involving false registration cards submitted in voter registration drives.

Of the felon-voting cases, four people are awaiting trial, one was acquitted, one was found guilty at trial, and three reached plea agreements. Officials have been unable to locate the 10th to pursue charges.

In the double-voting cases, one resulted in a hung jury, one was dismissed when the individual was found incompetent to stand trial, one resulted in a plea agreement and the other is awaiting trial.

By its very nature, voter fraud is difficult to detect and hard to prove in court. It is one thing to determine that a fake name was used, and another to learn who used the fake name.

"We need to rely on the records," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Rick Frohling. "There has been a lot of coverage about human errors and the integrity of the records."

While Republicans have cited the cases of fraud in the photo ID debate, many Democrats have argued that the number of cases is so small that a major change, which they say would burden the poor and elderly, should not be implemented.

At a hearing in Milwaukee last week by a U.S. House committee, critics of such a requirement cited the smallest measurement of the cases - the number convicted - to say the problem is not severe.

That approach, though, ignores how other crime is measured. Cases of burglary, for instance, are not measured by only those where a prosecution leads to a conviction.

None of the many Republicans present thought to make those bold-faced comments, so Borowski supplied them himself. That's full-service reporting.

It is true that burglaries are measured by how many crimes are committed and reported, not by how many people are convicted.

But even if you take the worst case scenario and assume that there really are 100 cases of people using false identities or addresses -- I doubt there are even that many actual fraud cases, and that many of the 100 are clerical errors -- bear in mind that 277,000 people voted in the city in the last presidential election. That's .03 of 1 per cent. If you throw in the 200 felons, it is still less than one-tenth of one per cent. (Everyone agrees that photo IDs would not stop felons from voting; other steps are being taken to correct the problem.)

We would like elections to run perfectly. But an error rate of one-tenth of one per cent cannot justify putting into effect a new requirement -- photo ID cards -- that are guaranteed to prevent some people from exercising their right to vote. Many of them, we know, will be the poor, minorities and the elderly -- those who have no driver's license now and will be less well-equipped and less likely to satisfy the photo ID requirements.

I am surprised that the Journal Sentinel, which consistently editorializes against photo IDs, continues to endorse it in its news stories.

Perhaps the belief is that if the newspaper is to win a prize for exposing the problems in the system, it is necessary to show that some changes were made because of the newspaper's investigation. (I write that as a former newspaper editor who knows that competition for awards can drive coverage.) Let's hope that's not what's going on here. But if that's not it, what is it?

Borowski's original investigation into problems with Milwaukee's voting systems and process provided a real service and highlighted areas that need correction. Photo ID cards, for which he now seems to have become an advocate, is a political issue, no matter how hard the Republicans try to dress it up as something else. Its goal is to reduce the Democratic vote, especially in Milwaukee. Borowski and his newspaper should not want any part of that.

(Borowski shared the byline with Stacy Forster of the paper's State Capitol bureau on this one. If it turns out she wrote the part I questioned, I will be surprised.)