Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b>Online Exclusive:</b> Privacy Issues Arise in House Voter ID Proposal
When the U.S. House passed HR 4844 last week, the bill was touted as a way to ensure that illegal aliens did not vote in federal elections. However, opponents of the bill cited privacy concerns as one of the reasons that they fought the legislation.
The amendments to the Help America Vote Act of 2002 would require 'each individual who desires to vote in an election for Federal office to provide the appropriate election official with a government-issued photo identification.' Votes submitted by mail would have to be accompanied by a photocopy of the identification form ' and that's the problem, according to some legislators.
'The problem with HR 4844 is not its requirement of proof of citizenship when registering to vote, but its continual requirement to present such proof every time a citizen votes,' said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), who voted against the bill. 'That means each time Oregonians mail in their ballots for a federal election, they would also be required to include a copy of a document proving their U.S. citizenship. I have serious concerns about the inconvenience and cost this would add to the voting process, as well as privacy concerns about access to this sensitive information, which are not addressed by this bill.'
Oregon has been one of the most aggressive users of mail-in voting procedures, and DeFazio said that the state has not had any problems with illegal aliens voting. 'According to the Oregon Secretary of State, since 1991, over 10 million votes have been cast in Oregon,' he said. 'Of those 10 million votes, only 10 people have met the criteria that would warrant an investigation into their citizenship. Of those 10, two have been prosecuted.'
The bill, which passed 228-196, is now in the Senate.
When the U.S. House passed HR 4844 last week, the bill was touted as a way to ensure that illegal aliens did not vote in federal elections. However, opponents of the bill cited privacy concerns as one of the reasons that they fought the legislation.
The amendments to the Help America Vote Act of 2002 would require 'each individual who desires to vote in an election for Federal office to provide the appropriate election official with a government-issued photo identification.' Votes submitted by mail would have to be accompanied by a photocopy of the identification form ' and that's the problem, according to some legislators.
'The problem with HR 4844 is not its requirement of proof of citizenship when registering to vote, but its continual requirement to present such proof every time a citizen votes,' said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), who voted against the bill. 'That means each time Oregonians mail in their ballots for a federal election, they would also be required to include a copy of a document proving their U.S. citizenship. I have serious concerns about the inconvenience and cost this would add to the voting process, as well as privacy concerns about access to this sensitive information, which are not addressed by this bill.'
Oregon has been one of the most aggressive users of mail-in voting procedures, and DeFazio said that the state has not had any problems with illegal aliens voting. 'According to the Oregon Secretary of State, since 1991, over 10 million votes have been cast in Oregon,' he said. 'Of those 10 million votes, only 10 people have met the criteria that would warrant an investigation into their citizenship. Of those 10, two have been prosecuted.'
The bill, which passed 228-196, is now in the Senate.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Warehouse Liability: Know Before You Stow!
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.