resulted in new maps being drawn, but those provisions even though lace, judges had concluded there was intentional discrimination, and demonstrable indication of the difference between section 2 and section 5. conclude by saying lawyers in the room should understand that in addition to being the effect iive piece of civil rights legislation ever enacted, the voting rights act in section 5 had one of the earliest and most effective alternative resolution mechanisms ever put into federal law, seeuse that's how we should preclearance. it is an efficient and timely ffective way of resolving disputes around electoral changes. timeliness is important to once changes from those being implemented and having an when on occur, because someone's right to vote is enied and an election happens, you can't unring that william judge or again if a

later judges decide that what happened is discriminatory. ou have to have a timely mechanism to resolve those disputes. involved was submission of the change and the data to support the potential effects of department of he justice. the department of justice in a vast majority of cases would it would e change and be implemented. that is a much more cost effective and efficient means of resolving these disputes than section 2 under the totality of circumstances test. >> we have a room full of and students from saint rio catholic high school. we'd like to welcome them in the room, absolutely. [applause] as well as illinois state reeves tative pamela

harris of chicago who's also in the room. so thank you. andrea, let me ask you and your perspective as -- until very recently ceo of league.n what impact has the voting ights had and is it still important? so of course the voting rights act had significant impact. heard statistics earlier on the increase in the number of vote iing i want to remind people that this argument around rights and the importance of state's rights, how that argument was levered rights laws asil

well important to remember the federal government in overcoming that and recognizing there are some in particular, constitutional protections that have to come from the federal to balance against states rights. the other thing that troubles me just a little bit and it was the that hanz made. the voting rights act worked. frican-americans are now being elected to office. it's kind of that argument around look, we have an president.erican that's great. we're good now. [laughter] and i think that idea that, okay, it's all good we don't need those protections anymore is that fault understanding. because we had those protections and preclearance, to the immediate response

shelby which was states immediately going -- some of the like texas and north arolina, immediately pursuing restrictive voter i.d. laws ould indicate to you that the protections of the preclearance review were critically important. the other thing you need to remember is that about the prece estrictions that the voting rights act, local voting is a very activity and the restriction of voting is a very local activity. activity. congresswoman waters touched on it, but the idea is, you pass the law, you say, great, we will have voting rights. at a local level there is a lot of opportunity to restrict voting rights. that is why we put in preclearance to say, forget it, you can't change it because we cannot get to every single one of the

thousands of jurisdictions where you could be discriminating. we're not going to allow you to change it. it is that protection that we are missing because -- as tom pointed out, we all know them as lawyers, particularly the gators, litigation takes a long time. while that litigation is happening, elections are occurring where rights are being limited. >> kiaddress? what i and bringing think is a quote of justice said, if you have an umbrella in the rain and it's keeping you dry, it's not the time to close the umbrella. [laughter] >> the point is if you're going to say a certain number of

states have to be under federal supervision, then you have to provide evidence of current systematic, widespread discrimination was justified -- that has not been shown. let's talk about voter id. it is a myth that this all occurred after the shelby county decision. i will remind people that the georgia voter id law was passed in 2005. indiana's was passed after that. georgia's law has been in place since the 2008 election. indiana's has been in place since 2008. they have had election after election. the data on georgia, a large african-american population, 30% shows that after the voter id law went in place, the turnout of black voters and hispanic voters went up dramatically. it went up at a higher rate than the turnout of white voters. same thing happened in the 2010 election. in 2008, when indiana's voter id law was in place for the first time, in place because their case went to the supreme court. it was upheld by the court. it

was not a 5-4 decision. it was 6-3. justice stevens was a liberal. barack obama won indiana with her photo id law in place. first democrat to win the state since the 1964 election. folks have also complained about cutbacks in early voting. first of all, a large number of states do not have early voting. new york does not have it. on friday, he probably know, it was the last day of the trial in north carolina, over the fact that they had changed their early voting days from 17 to 10, although they had the same number of hours. the justice department had trouble because they had put experts on -- more than a year ago when they tried to get a terrific estuary restraining order to keep that change from being in place for the 2014 midterm elections for the

primary general election, they had experts in place who said, if this early floating -- early voting is in place, the turnout of voters that are black will go down because -- the expert said -- i find unbelievable that somebody from the justice department would say this because they said quote that black voters were less sophisticated voters" it is less likely to imagine these voters can figure out how to avail themselves of other forms of registering and voting. i find that to be the most patronizing and frankly bigoted attitude. what actually happened? the justice department didn't get it. the cutback in early voting times was in effect for the may primary and north carolina and the general election. in the may primary black turnout went up 30% over the 2010 primary, when that change was not there. the white turnout went up 14%. in the general election, the

black share of the vote went from 38.5% in 2010 to 41.1% in the election. in a general election, remember the midterm congressional elections last year, turnout was down all across the country. it went down all across from the primary -- prior midterm. one of the only states where turnout went up was north carolina, where the suppose was predicted. all data from the states, the turnout data as opposed to predictions by experts show i.d. does not keep people from voting. changes in early voting don't keep you from voting. in fact, the university from wisconsin several professors just put out a study and the conclusion was counterintuitive,

that it hurts turnout. they concluded it made decrease turnout by 3-4%. the reason being the campaign spent the majority on get out the voters. if they have to spread the money out over a two-week, three-week, four-week period, it is not as intense and effective in people who normally would not vote on election day keep saying, i can i can vote the next day and apparently can hurt turnout by a percentage. it is not me saying this, this is a study at the university of wisconsin and a number of other studies. >> mark, let me respond, apparently, the voter i.d. to rictions are measures increase turnout. [laughter]

>> you had your chance. that's what i heard you say. say that.ot >> just one second. just one second. opponents have said -- speaking over one another] >> you are employing here and elsewhere. >> since the supreme court action in 2013, stricter voting aws have been passed in alabama, arizona, georgia, mississippi, texas and virginia. some states er, have been challenged on that and and overturned those state laws. for example, new york times michael says the headline of your story: texas voter id law en after court order. in exactly took place texas? >> that was a prolonged fight voter id law in texas like many others that required voters id in duce a specific

order to cast a walot. this has been up and down in the and in the most recent decision of the u.s. court of decided that this law had a discriminatory impact and here needed to be greater opportunities for people who had these ids to g obtain them. and so there have been meetings the plaintiff's voting rights acts and the state, and an agreement which effectively undid that photo id allows anybody who does not have an id, who has to iculty in getting it, still vote by signing an affidavit at their polling place aying that they couldn't reasonably obtain one of these documents. that was a big change. fourth orth carolina's circuit court struck down part of the state's id law there. in a court argument, one of the case questioned

the intent of the voting laws. here's a couple of minutes of that. >> all of this rhetoric, we've a evidence that there was surge in african-american prior.ation 10 years nd the laws changed, and they claimed that you were adversely affecting them, which would be to protect your own political interests. means in this case could be party got publican control of both the house and governorship the and the opportunity came to change those pretty liberal provisions ration a with shelby, and half of them same shelby decided, looks terms of to me, in purposeful discrimination.

>> your honor, i can persuade a nefarious as not thing. certainly, judge slater found that it wasn't. and there's a couple of premises in your questions that -- or our question i have to challenge. there's a correlation between same-day registration and 17 ays of early voting and out of precinct voting and preregistration and an increase in the black participation rate registration rate from the 2008 and 2012 election. this was -- i've never been in a trial where there were more they came from m.i.t. and harvard and every university in the country, and fellows have done what's called a cross-state analysis where they give election n whether qualitative the increase in turnout registration.

none of them -- and they've all at the plenary injunction stage in that event ad done a cross-state analysis to try to opine on whether these practices had caused an increase turnout of registration, and they were all put on notice that found by the ence judge that there was states like as h carolina, such virginia, where the black turnout and registration rates up at equivalent rates and virginia did not have same-day registration and out of precinct voting and 17 days of early voting. o it was our contention at the preliminary injunction stage that they had failed to prove any sort of causal link between these repeal practices and the increase in participation by african-americans. >> you can listen to the entire argument at c-span.org. michael wynes of the new york north what occurred in carolina since that court ruled?

>> michael: that was a ruling, first of all, voter id carolina's law and other changes had a iscriminatory impact but that they were actually intended to disenfranchise certain blocks of a very and that's unusual and very strong ruling. the state board of elections has handed down some rules for local elections boards they should restructure their voting in order to comply court decision and that has not always gone in one of the first meetings on a local level in north carolina, in theing board actually view of many critics tried to ake an end run around appeals court, doing things like on sunday voting, which is broadly groups, blacks y who go to churches.

polls.all it soul to the you go to church on sunday and a bus picks you up so you can xercise your constitutional right to vote and by cutting back on sunday voting is just of that that limits the opportunities of minorities to vote, or so the critics would say. but in that case in gilford and in others, there has been a outcry by citizens. some of these meetings on voting packed andabsolutely in the case of gilford, new voting limits were withdrawn. >> michael wines of the new york times. for joining us. here's more about recent changes to voter id laws. ahead to november elections from "washington journal". clark joins us to impose more voter identification

rules at the ballot box. clark, how many states are trying to impose more stringent rules this cycle? voters see this? guest: sure. in fact, there are 15 states until voters when they go to the this november will be facing new restrictions for the first time in a presidential election. part of a ates are larger trend that's been ongoing since about 2010. where we see voters in about 21 states, almost half the country facing new restrictions over the past five to six years. same kindthey all the of voter identification rules or are there some more stringent voters could ere see them in november? guest: sure. a range of the types of restrictions that we are seeing. ome of them are voter id laws as you've identified and among truly the ones that are concerning are what are often

referred to as strict voter id under those types of laws, voters can show only one of a very small number of government-issued photo identification documents in order to vote. and if voters don't have any one of those documents, then they're pretty much out of luck. hey oftentimes can't cast a ballot that counts. we have seen states such as over the wisconsin put few years attempt to those strict photo id laws in voter n addition to identification restrictions, we've seen cut backs to early and we've rtunities seen elimination of the opportunity to register to vote vote all in one trip which is the same-day registration and as making things such it more difficult for those with prior criminal convictions to vote eir right to restored. so it really runs the gamut. host: so the folks who are some of roll back these restrictions, some of

these strict voter id laws have victories in recent, quote, rulings. can you walk us through for may not have seen these stories in recent weeks? right. sure, you're so in the past couple of weeks, we've really seen courts rightng in to protect the to vote in advance of this november's election. i've already tes mentioned is texas. texas passed its strict photo id law back in 2011. it was blocked by one court and very longnt through a litigation process to end up where we are today. which is that two weeks ago, the fifth circuit court of appeals, appellate federal court, said that texas's law discriminates on the basis of race. it has a disproportionate impact on voters who are latino in rican and texas, and so texas will not be able to enforce its law as this november. in fact, voters will need to

have an opportunity to cast a types of h other identification that aren't one number of mited government photo ids we've talked about. in addition to texas we've seen ome push-back against restrictions in the courts in wisconsin where we've actually seen two court cases over the couple of weeks. one that's somewhat similar to in effect in sion that voters without photo identification will have to be given another opportunity to a ballot this november and nto the future, and we have also seen some courts speak out in wisconsin against estrictions on early voting opportunities there. wisconsin passed a law making it municipalities to offer early voting for their citizens. in addition to those two states, a big victory against restrictions in north carolina where about a week and-a-half ago there was another ederal appellate court that issued an opinion saying that

north carolina's omnibus law which estriction was passed a few years ago, had restrictions, r that federal court said that hat law was passed with the intent to discriminate against minority voters in north also na so that law has been wiped off the books. although north carolina has said they are going to take that up supreme court so we'll have to stay tuned to sao what happens there. those, we've seen a court in north dakota say that that state cannot enforce its photo id law and there in also a litigation victory kans kansas. in kansas, there has been a to push for ort documentary proof of citizenship requirements, which many voters id not show when they registered to vote so they are being taken off the rolls. a court recently said in part voters have to be given the opportunity to vote.

so there have been a lot of over decisions to follow the past couple of weeks that really push back on these restrictions. host: and for those who are more helpful mapers, the with the legislation that can impact voter access is taking place. the light blue states where here were recent litigation victories and dark blue states where challenges to restrictive place.aws are taking for those want who want to join in on questions and comments, at the ifer clark brennan center, democrats, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. clark, remind us what the brennan center is. guest: sure. brennan center is a nonprofit nonpartisan law and institute. we are housed at nyu school of founded to ere defend the two pillars on which

is built, democracy and justice. o in addition to work in voting, we do some work in other areas as well, such as justice reform and responses to liberty and national security issues. involved have you been in this various litigation, these various litigation efforts talking were just about? guest: yes. for some attorneys clients in the texas case that i talked about. he other cases, we are not -- we have not actively participated in those litigations. amicus briefs at some stages of litigation but i serve as one of the plaintiff's in the texas case that i talked about. host: with that said, let's get to calls. birmingham, alabama. a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. with jennifer clark. there are a few things when you buy you have to

present photo id, alcohol, opening a bank account and applying for food apply for medicare, medicare, social security, a house, nt, to rent rent a car, get on an airplane, purchase a gun, on.t a pet and on and so what is wrong when we vote -- which is a very present thing -- to voter -- i mean photo id? see the problem. host: thanks for the question. jennifer clark. sure.: so you're right. voting is an incredibly thing, and people should have to be able to prove they hey are who they say are. i think that everybody agrees electoral integrity is of the utmost importance. so i think everyone is on the page with that.

the problem with the types of the i was talking about, strict photo identification laws the in the strict and photo identification part. there are a large number of don't have o simply those ids, and a lot of them do someard airplanes or of the other things you mentioned. they're not homeowners. they haven't owned a home. they're able to use other types of photo identification that is not accepted under these laws. for example, in texas, you can't use a driver's license from to cast a ballot. you can't use a driver's license hat is expired more than 60 days. those things were true under the that aversion of the law court has recently said texas cannot use for this november's election. until the decision was issued, those are types of id that many people use for a lot things you talked about. you know, in the litigation we ran into, a lot of people, people, who older

did have photo identification, but it had expired five or six because they don't drive anymore, so they had no need to renew their driver's their , but they kept expired driver's license so they could show it when they needed to. that was not an id they could use to vote in texas and who came and spoke at the trial, they weren't alone. fact, there were multiple experts who did statistical voters in texas and found that over 600,000 registered voters in texas one of the ids that you could use to vote under the law. so that's a sizable portion of electorate who's simply being blocked out just because they don't have the id. you are who you say you are can be done in other disenfranchisen't people. host: john is in west palm beach florida, an independent. with jennifer clark. caller: i have a comment and then i'll have a question. brennan center is far less

quasi socialistic organization that has always been for the allowing tives of illegal immigrants to vote. i worked for the government. illegal ago, i saw immigrants, and i know this for a fact -- i can't tell you how, worked, they were getting voter registration cards and they were in the country illegally. now, the whole objective of this is to allow anyone to vote, or a r they're a citizen noncitizen. and if it's a noncitizen, that disenfranchises my vote. when people talk about disenfranchising, i don't care 600,000 that are probably half illegal. and the woman gave you, i don't know, 20 things that you have to for a license. these 600,000, really, it doesn't affect any of them? my question. host: let's let jennifer. got a hold on, i've question. host: i'll come back to your question but i want to give her

a chance to respond. caller: sure. of course, the brennan center and i don't think anybody else who works in elections thinks folks who aren't eligible citizens should be voting. that's really the basis of is tions in this country making sure that it's eligible citizens who vote. what i inly that is believe and what the brennan center believes. the base line election, integrity is the most important and if folks are not eligible to vote, then they shouldn't be casting a vote. there are plenty of ways that sure of that ake and make sure that people are are, such as hey allowing them to provide other forms of identification that are a very small limited number that a good percentage of americans simply don't have. john, back to your question. caller: illegals have been getting driver's licenses throughout the united states for of years now. and just because you have the law doesn't mean you're

a citizen. here in florida, all you have to o is check off a box that you're a u.s. citizen. there are no voter police that and verify this information. and i know this for a fact used to work.re i back in the '90s, 20 years ago, llegal immigrants were getting voter ids. host: jennifer clark, go ahead. you did point out a disconnect between some of the strict photo id laws, what say they're doing and what they're actually doing. there are many states where citizenso are not u.s. can get driver's licenses and it's not because they're doing something wrong. there are people who are here on a green card and get driver's licenses and there are plenty of olks who aren't u.s. citizens who, you're right, get driver's licenses and are licensed to drive. instrinsic nothing about showing a piece of photo identification such as a driver's license that proves fact, a u.s. in citizen. what does prove that you're a when you en is that register to vote, you have to

swear that you are a u.s. and the penalty for that is quite severe. nd, in fact, there are some prosecutions of people who have ended up registered and oftentimes, you know, you get election officials talking about what they've seen and they say make a es people just mistake. they think because they got anded a voter registration pamphlet perhaps with their application for a driver's license, they think they're register to vote and end up on the roll. so there is detection of those cases and if that is something you saw in your time in government, then many of those dete-- have been detected and oftentimes it's a misunderstanding. the concern is protecting the integrity of the vote. so how often does voter fraud election cycle? guest: sure. that. are statistics on it's important to think about what we're talking about when we say voter fraud. used as an ets umbrella term. so to break it down a little bit

ore, for example, the type of voter fraud that gets stopped by law is g like texas's called in-person impersonation fraud so i go to the polls and spb somebody else. somebody ding to be else. those types of fraud are very rare. we have a few studies on it. published in the washington post where there was an extensive look and they found 31 instances, credible instances of this type of in-person impersonation fraud between 2000 and 2014. about, you out of know, a billion ballots cast during that time, there were 31 instances. so that is infinitest mally number. in the texas case i was talking about a little bit, when texas id law, the photo legislature had evidence before it that between 2000 and 2010 two instances of this

kind of in-person impersonation that's out of millions of ballots cast in texas during that time. so that type of fraud is incredibly rare. when it does happen, people get caught, and there's a reason it's that's out of millionsrare, which is because s not a very good way to have an vote,me on the election to you know, as another person. it doesn't really have that much f an effect, and the penalties are very, very severe. ens of thousands in fines and potential jail time. maryland, a in republican. good morning. caller: good morning. c-span.k you for a couple of things. first lady is very articulate. add to my understanding of things you need id for, obamacare. so i just find it very difficult to believe that in this day and age there are people who don't have voter id. know, i'm just very

disappointed that i feel like my vote is being discounted because of a lot of the nonsense that's going on. thank you very much. jennifer clark, any response? guest: sure, so certainly, you there is nothing wrong, again, with having people prove say they are.hey and i think a useful distinction etween what texas had on the books before this court decision came out, which allowed you to pieces of photo id that, again, a good number of versussimply didn't have what they'll put in place for this november's election after the court decision came down that law was racially discriminatory. under the new proposal, you can pay check that has your name and address on it. you can use another government and ent that has your name address on it. you can use something called a certificate, ation which is something that texas actually males to people when

they register to vote. them at the address that they put on their voter registration, so if they have at that ans they live address and got it. so those are a much broader range of documents. people have those documents, and allowing them to show them at the polls means that their will count and, you know, the caller expressed kind of a dismay at the feeling that your vote doesn't count, and that was for these thing people who didn't have one of required. texas ids we heard them testify on the stand at trial about how they attempted over and over again to use the documents that they did have to get one of the cceptable ids, and they simply failed, either because they didn't have the money that they they had ran e into trouble with transportation, or perhaps they had a mistake in one of their documents. so if their name was spelled one way here and another way there, to reconcile ble them and it put them in this

loop where it couldn't get one of the very small number of ids, and that made them feel like their voices didn't count. sure is all about making that every eligible citizen can cast a vote that counts. viewers waiting to talk to you. we'll try to move through as in the last 20 minute or so in this section of "washington journal." paul is a democrat, good morning. comment.yes, a quick people have died and given their we all can vote we i think that's something need to hold as a precious jewel and treasure and yes, people proper ave identification to be able to vote and government should not try to suppress people from voting, because our are all that we have, and we should exercise that vote and that pass states stop people ws to

from voting are doing a to their constituents in these states. host: what do you consider a law? what's too much, in your opinion? caller: i can tell you one restoration ort of of criminal's rights to votes, after they have served their prison. they should have the opportunity and have the right to be put back into society and the right to vote whoever they choose, whether democrat, republican or independent. i just don't think they should be cast out anymore. they should be brought into the fold. host: jennifer clark, time for a quick response. guest: sure. he caller has identified florida as a state particularly difficult for people with prior right ions to get the

restored. it's true. it's one of only three states in where you are facing potential lifetime disenfranchisement. the right to vote is incredibly important. it's a right and it's also a responsibility, and we're seeing that states are doing a lot of to gs to increase turnout try to make it more likely that people will invest in their democracy. it's really a shame to see those efforts undercut and to states rtunately some doing, you know, quite the opposite, which is making it much more difficult for certain population, the which as we've seen in the court decisions that have come out over the past couple of weeks, disproportionately tend to be minority voters to make it people to vote. host: pennsylvania next. adam is an independent. good morning. caller: hi, in the texas case in particular, the seven forms of dentification that are required, what are they, and are there mechanisms in place for and get thosehead

identifications? i know in pennsylvania if you nondriver, you can get a non-driver id and i'm sure in a lot of se other states, including county ids i've seen. a little hard re to hear there but jennifer clark, did you get the question, forms of id? guest: i did. under the texas law that was recently, you know, at least written on the books were struck own by the court the other week. the types of photo identification that were allowed nder that law were a texas driver's license, a texas non-driver's license, state what id, which i think is the caller was talking about where you go to your department of motor vehicles and if you state id.e, you get a you still have to pay for that id. a u.s. passport was accepted and about three other identification with a photo on it. texas did create something election

identification certificate, which was a card that had a identification on it that as to be used for voting purposes only and that was supposed to be the cost-free who native for any people didn't have one of these ids. however, you needed a birth certificate and documentation and what we saw time and again did not have the original certified copy of their birth certificate anymore. people who rimarily were older and had moved around a lot and had lost that document born outsides been of a hospital setting and didn't begin at document to with. o although there was a free voter id that was provided, getting it wasn't free and that problem for g the people and texas really didn't make a lot of effort to get id people's hands. we have seen in other states there has been more of an effort. called er specifically out the idea of using county ids

and that there are some things level.at a local we have seen in new york city, for example, there has been a city rk city id where the made a big push to get ids in people's hands. of under the texas law, none those ids would count because they didn't allow any ocal -- didn't allow any government-issued documents except for the ones i've already mentioned. f you had a county idea that had your picture on it, if you were a government employee and had ad an employee id that your picture on it, you couldn't use those. > robert is a republican from alabama next. you're on with jennifer clark of brennan center. caller: first, i'd like to say that the brennan center is not nonpartisan. it has never ever supported a conservative cause. second, 40% of california's issued last nse year were to illegals. now, if you can get a driver's and you're an illegal,

born in a foreign country, to speak ility english, no birth certificate, someone cult is it for who was born here and has a birth certificate? other point is in alabama, you have to have a photo id. if you don't have one, the state will come to your house and issue one for you. you must provide proof of citizenship in order to register first place.e clark, go ahead. so the first comment, you know, the brennan nonpartisan. we don't support conservative causes, liberal causes or any attached to a particular party. in my time there, i have worked ith republican legislators and democratic legislators and i have worked with legislators who are independent or of other parties so this really is

not about partisanship in any way. go to the at we all polls if we're eligible citizens nd we vote for whoever it is that we support, that's just fundamental. it crosses party lines. and every elected official hofs voters, should feel passionately about making sure should ible citizens vote and i can't believe that that feeling is actually a partisan feeling one way or the other. it's really about the fundamental right to vote. ask you -- caller: can i ask you, have you worked with mark alias before? guest: i have not. know he is bringing some lawsuits, but i don't know him him. ven't worked with host: the washington post front page story about his work alling him a go-to lawyer for democrats in recount fights and redistricting battles and now and somewhat ent controversial place among the coalition of groups that are

challenging a wave of state laws that were rewritten in recent years, bviously, exactly what we're talking about. efforts specifically on behalf of democrats have made 2016 joining the ides efforts of civil rights groups and several states, he has on his own bringing additional claims in states especially important to. and ry clinton:'s campaign the future of democratic candidates. i guess the question is: does a work in this area concern group like yourself who is nonpartisan and has been trying nonpartisanhis in a way? you know, i think these fights should be kept nonpartisan to the extent possible. very important. but the idea that there are more holes that people need to step litigation is h not shocking, because what we 2013, the t in supreme court in a decision called shelby county struck down a part of the voting rights act of really gutted the part

the voting rights act with peace. it made it much easier for a history of discrimination at the ballot box one we laws such as the saw in texas, north carolina, virginia and elsewhere. harder for people to vote. so now that we don't have the full protections of the voting and this is, in fact, the first election in 50 years we out those protections, have seen an uptick in the number of states that are and so restrictive laws, of course, as we see those laws number, it certainly makes sense more lawyers are coming to the table because there are more people who are because they have lost the right to vote. so it's really -- it's not that arerising that other people stepping in to fill the void. what really should happen is congress should restore the voting rights act to its power and pass the voting rights amendment act which the brennan center and others have

working on with bipartisan support for the past few years. head to oregon where victoria is waiting the line for democrats. go ahead. caller: good morning. i just tuned in a little bit ago so i don't know if you mentioned we've been voting by mail for years out here for all of our and the , the local national. and now we have the motor voter know, people have to provide a lot of they go to n when the department of motor vehicles register there, and it's not necessarily a egistration if they choose not to affiliate with anyone. and so as far as i know, all you is a stamp. for et a great bonus stamp every election so you can read up on the issues, whether it's national or good bio graphies, and it's so easy for rural especially in the

areas and why doesn't every state do something like that and make it easy for people? host: jennifer clark. mentioned a so you new initiative in oregon which voter law. new motor it's actually a form of automatic voter registration in citizens who interact with government agencies get registered to vote they say they don't want to. currently, the default in many to es is that the voter has take the initiatives to get registered to vote and a lot of people end up falling through cracks because many states have very long voter deadlines and people simply miss the opportunity to get registered to vote. you mention why isn't everybody making it easier for people and that is a great example of a make it lly trying to easier for people to get registered and to participate. in the first few months of implementation of this automatic voter registration program,

has seen not only the registration roles jump up where citizens ore eligible are getting put on the roles, but they have also seen turnouts jump up among many of those people automatically registered. hat's a great example of a state making it easier rather than more difficult for people to get involved in the process. a few more calls. pleasanton, california. grace on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, and thank taking my call. the reason i called, i worked and i saw , sciu, what happened during election years. our representatives out registration forms and having illegals fill them ut and they would fill out the voter information so that these people that didn't know how to peak or write english would vote for the right people. how do you stop that?

host: jennifer clark. so certainly, you know, people who are not eligible to vote should not be vote.ering to a and, you know, if there is that, thatrpetrating is something that should be reported, certainly. toon't think any of us wants stand for that kind of fraud i would petrated, so encourage people who, you know, actually truly see something like that happening to reach out to elected officials and let going on.what is however, as part of -- that is problem.espread the studies that have been done looking at instances of voter fraud es of often include instances of folks citizens t eligible who end up on the rolls. a lot of times, that is a mistake. they are because allowed to get a driver's license that that means that they're allowed to vote and so

end up on the rolls because there's a confusion there and get off the ey rolls and do not attempt to vote. that's something that does, in sometimes and those -- their often mistake is brought to their attention and taken off the a ls but that is also not widespread problem. there is a study out of arizona they looked at instances from 2000 to 2012 of voter fraud used that term very largely. part of that was looking at mpersonation fraud, the kind i talked about before. but another part was looking at ineligible people ending up on roll, people not eligible citizens ending up on the roll it happened d that and they found out of a billion that time, over that number was below 1,000. it does happen but it's a very problem in comparison to the number of votes cast

overall. certainly, every effort should be made clear that people aren't signing up for something they're not eligible to sign up for. more calls. helen is in maryland, a democrat. morning, helen. caller: good morning. thank you c-span for taking my call. i am listening to ms. clark speak and my mom and most of my live in alabama and they area, and there were some things that took place in alabama last year where they down most of the mda, where could not go in even to the buildings and make their votes at all. alive right now is still and doing very well. she is 91 years old. voted when she got the opportunity behind the civil right act. ut now with all these restrictions for birth ertificates and things, people

do not understand that a 91-year-old woman brought into not orld by a midwife is going to have a birth certificate. but she still is a citizen of this country. easier for ke it people to voting and the biggest violations are the ones making people not to r vote. my last opinion on this is, in the workforce in alabama where a my family works their hours are shifted on voting days in there can't get for the hours allotted to vote. some of my family members are vote.told not to so when their days are off saturdays and sundays, a lot of too. days were shut down so what is your organization -- or is your organization looking at these mphasis where these things are taking place as well? host: jennifer clark. guest: sure.

alabama oned specifically where your family is and there is a lawsuit ongoing in alabama right now to that state's nst photo id law. we're n't look like necessarily going to have a decision before this november, lawsuit is an ongoing there. because as you mentioned, alabama is one of those states recently made it harder for citizens to vote despite the fact that there are people ids that you need to vote in alabama. and you talk about your mother wonderful that she still cares so passionately right and responsibility to vote at 91 years old. hear and, erful to you know, in the trial in texas we saw a lot of people exactly like her who were born, you know, 80 plus years ago and many particularly, if they were african-american citizens, were not born in a hospital bornse plenty of them were in places where hospitals wouldn't take african-american at the time birth

so they were born at home with a midwife and they never got the ocumentation they needed, but they were born here in the united states, and those people have worked very hard to get the ids that they need and still oftentimes have come up short. sammy batesan named in texas who had to save $42 to out of state birth certificate. she lives in texas now but was had to ewhere and she mail an application for the birth certificate and then pay to get it printed and mailed her.to that cost $42. er and her husband live on a fixed income. i think he's a bus driver and they live on an income of about where they are feeding a family for that. hey saved about six months to put money aside in an attempt to get her birth certificate. they eventually did but the cost be so high ould not or pem -- people that are

eligible citizens and want to use the same right they've had years old. g 18 host: lynn is in richmond, indiana. an independent. go ahead, lynn. caller: hi, john. thank you so much and thank you a great r having such public service. i'd like to speak with ms. clark the federal prison system and the state prison system. had did some work with benny payman. he was a sheriff in jackson kentucky and i would like to let her know about something she might want to look and that's the candidate id numbers just to make sure compromised. been those candidate id numbers back to 014 were tied directly unverified illegal immigrants in the federal prison system. benny paymon, we couldn't get voter ids.

but he came up from kentucky and those tied, te id numbers were every one of them, to unverified llegal immigrants in the arizona federal prison system. something like it's that you've looked into? guest: that's not something i've or something i've heard of and, again, i would eally urge callers who have truly first-hand seen something to their to reach out local election officials because ocal election officials are very invested in the system, truly want those who are eligible to vote to be able to to make sure that secure,ctoral process is because that's their job. so i can't speak to that but i think your local election officials are a you need resource if to ask a question of somebody, or if you have a first hand

of a concern about electoral integrity. tennessee,elen is in a republican. helen, good morning. caller: good morning. to you. enjoy listening i've been watching your tv program every morning. because therethat are so many states that have so many different issues regarding id verification and regard to suggestion is that every four years when the election is up for each that the people in state would submit certain issues, certain problems, the id verification issues, are also to be put on ballot. the elections are over and all the various issues are put on the ballot, that people vote for them, because every state has the same

issue basically but different issues in depth. hat way all the people throughout the whole united once they vote on, get their retribution back from et cetera.r, everybody should be able to vote but fighting the steps take atively would just 20, 30, 40 years. because every state, again, has but they're es inherently also different. all on it once and for legislatively, in the meantime, work with your legislators. somebody. host: got your point, helen. -- jennifer rk, clark, i'll give you our last 30 seconds. guest: sure. power toet ave the qualifications for voting for each individual state so that is something under our constitution given authority over. on a t's why it's decided state to state basis. however, that