Working Hard For Working People

Wisconsin’s New Voter ID Law Starts With February 21st Primary



 

In 2011, a new law was enacted that makes significant changes to voting and related residency requirements. The law requires almost all voters to provide proof of identification in order to cast a ballot in any election, even if the voter is already registered. The new law also changes the residency requirements so that a person must reside within their voting district for 28 days prior to the election (rather than 10 days under the old law). The changes are in effect beginning with the February 2012 primary election and apply to all primary and general elections after that date.  Below is a summary of some of the major changes.

1.    Proof of Residency

Proof of residency is required for:

• First-time voters in Wisconsin who register by mail
• Voters who register within 20 days of the election
• Voters who register at the polls on Election Day

The purpose of the proof of residency document is to establish the voter’s current address.  The voter’s sworn statement on the registration form certifies that the voter has resided at that address for at least 28 consecutive days preceding the election.

The address on a voter’s photo ID does not need to match the address on the poll list. However, a voter is still required to prove his or her residency within the voting district with appropriate documentation, such as a utility bill or bank statement that includes the voter's current and complete name, current and complete residential address and the name of the municipality.  Voters are no longer able to "vouch" for one another.2.    Proof of Identification

 

A ballot—in person or an absentee—will not be issued to a voter until the voter proves his or her identity.  Acceptable forms of identification are as follows:

• Wisconsin DoT-issued driver license
• Wisconsin DoT-issued identification card
• U.S. uniformed service identification card
• U.S. passport

These forms of identification must be unexpired, or if expired, have expired after the date of the most recent general election. For the February 2012 primary, the identification must not have expired prior to November 2011. Additional forms of identification that a voter may use are:

• A certificate of naturalization that was issued not earlier than two years before the date of an election at which it is presented
• An unexpired driving receipt issued by Wisconsin DoT.
• An unexpired identification card receipt issued by Wisconsin DoT.
• An identification card issued by a federally recognized Indian tribe in Wisconsin
• An unexpired identification card issued by a Wisconsin-accredited university or college that meets all of the following criteria:
  • Shows date of issuance,
  • Contains student signature,
  • Expires no more than two years after its issuance, AND
  • is accompanied by documentation from the university or college proving that the student is currently enrolled.

A student ID card is insufficient to establish proof of residency.  Out of state drivers licenses may not be used as proof of identification.

A voter may get a free Wisconsin DOT issued identification card under state law. The DOT will provide free ID cards to individuals who are at least 18 (or will be) as of the date of the next election and who specifically request a free ID for voting. Note that it may take a voter several weeks to obtain a free ID card if a voter does not already have a certified copy of his or her birth certificate. Instructions on how to obtain a free state ID may be found here.  If a voter does not request the free ID card for the purpose of voting, he or she may be charged the $28 fee ordinarily assessed to applicants for such an ID.

There are some exceptions to the proof of identification requirement related to military and/or overseas voters, certain voters who are hospitalized or reside in nursing homes or similar residential facilities, and crime victims who have a confidential voter listing.

3.    Signature Requirement

Voters are now required to sign the poll list. A person who refuses to sign the poll list will not be issued a ballot and, therefore, will not be able to vote.

4.    Absentee Voting Changes

The new law also reduces the period in which absentee voting may occur and requires that voters requesting an absentee ballot present or enclose proper proof of identification with their request for absentee ballot, unless the request is electronically made, in which case proof of identification must be enclosed with returned ballot. Once a mail-in absentee voter has provided photo ID, they are not required to provide photo ID again with subsequent absentee ballot requests, unless they need to register again due to a name change or change in address. The requirement that an absentee voter sign the voter roll is waived, instead, absentee voters only need to sign the Absentee Certificate Envelope.

Changes to “automatic” absentee voting. If a voter failed or fails to return any absentee ballot mailed or transmitted to him or her pursuant to an automatic absentee voting request, the clerk must discontinue sending that voter absentee ballots until the voter notifies the clerk that he or she wishes to continue receiving absentee ballots for subsequent elections.

5.    Failure or Refusal to “Prove” Identity

Elections officials may deny a person the right to vote if the voter does not present proof of ID, if the name on the ID does not conform to the name on the poll list or separate list, or if the photo on the ID does not “reasonably resemble” the voter. While the person may be permitted to cast a provisional ballot, the voter must correct the deficiencies related to the proof of identification no later than 4 p.m. on the Friday immediately following the election.

Note that this could be a problem for people who are recently married or divorced or otherwise changed their name but have not updated at least one of the necessary forms of identification.

Additional information is available at http://gab.wi.gov/taxonomy/term/135

 

 

 

 

DOT Issues Final Rules on Use of Certain Drugs by Commercial Drivers

On January 27th, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) amended the physical qualifications for drivers and the instructions for the medical examination report to clarify that drivers who use Schedule I drugs are not qualified to drive commercial motor vehicles under any circumstance. The rule harmonizes FMCSA's provisions regarding pre- employment and return-to-duty test refusals with corresponding Department of Transportation provisions.

Department of Labor Proposes Wage Protections for In-Home Care Workers

The U.S. Department of Labor recently announced plans to update minimum wage and overtime regulations covering certain in-home health care workers. Since 1975, casual babysitters and companions for the aged and infirm have been exempt from coverage under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and live-in domestic workers have been exempt from its overtime protections. "[T]he in-home care industry has undergone a dramatic transformation..." and "the earnings of in-home care employees remain among the lowest in the service industry, impeding efforts to improve both jobs and care." For this reason, the DOL has issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to clarify and limit the scope of the companionship exemption. Comments to the proposed rules are due by February 27, 2012.

Board Holds That Mandatory Arbitration Agreements Restrict Protected Rights

The National Labor Relations Board recently determined that an employer violates the National Labor Relations Act when it requires employees to sign an agreement that precludes them from filing joint, class, or collective claims addressing their wages, hours or other working conditions. In D.R. Horton,357 NLRB No. 184 (January 3, 2012), the Board determined that such agreements unlawfully restrict employees' Section 7 rights to engage in concerted action.  The Board reached its holding despite recent court cases enforcing employment-related arbitration agreements are judicially enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act.

NLRB General Counsel Proposes a Change to Existing Deferral Policies

Under a proposal by NLRB General Counsel, Lafe Solomon, the Board would no longer defer certain charges to lengthy grievance and arbitration processes. Under the current Board deferral policy union charges of employer violations of 8(a)(1) and (3) which involve discharges or discrimination based on Union activity are deferred to the parties’ grievance and arbitration provision in their collective bargaining agreement. The reasoning behind the existing deferral policy is that the dispute will be resolved faster through arbitration than under a Board investigation. However, this is not always the case. Often employer delay tactics cause these disputes to take over a year to be resolved. Solomon is attempting to address this very problem. Solomon is proposing that the Board no longer defer where it is anticipated that the underlying disputes will not be resolved in under a year. He is also proposing that the Board end its deferral policy for an existing charge where the dispute remains unresolved after a year. This proposal, when implemented, will provide for a more efficient Board and greater protection for Union members from employer retaliation.

New Board Members Sworn In

Following their recess appointments by President Obama, the three new members of the National Labor Relations Board were sworn in this week.  Sharon Block, Terence F. Flynn and Richard F. Griffin join Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce and Member Brian Hayes on the Board.  This is the first time there have been a full compliment of Board members since August 2010.

 

President Appoints Three to National Labor Relations Board

President Obama announced yesterday his intent to make recess appointments to the Board.  The three individuals are Sharon Block, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Congressional Affairs at the U.S. Department of Labor, Terence F. Flynn, currently Chief Counsel to NLRB Board Member Brian Hayes, and Richard Griffin, General Counsel for International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE).  Biographies of all three individuals are available on the Board's website.

Absent these recess appointments, the Board would lack the ability to enforce the National Labor Relations Act in a meaningful way.  In his statement, the President said  "The American people deserve to have qualified public servants fighting for them every day - whether it is to enforce new consumer protections or uphold the rights of working Americans. We can't wait to act to strengthen the economy and restore security for our middle class and those trying to get in it, and that's why I am proud to appoint these fine individuals to get to work for the American people." 

Boeing Settles Politicized Board Charges With The Machinists

   

    The Washington Post is reporting that Boeing and the Machinists have agreed to settle the unfair labor practice charges arising out of the Company’s proposed shift of production to South Carolina as part of a larger agreement on a contract. The reported terms of the deal allow Boeing to continue moving the planned production to South Carolina. In return, the Union will receive a deal which will provide guarantees to keep another line of production in Washington and more favorable terms of compensation for its members. The deal has not yet been ratified by the membership.

    The NLRB’s enforcement of the long standing precedent in this case has been highly politicized. As a result, the withdrawal of charges could ease the intense scrutiny the agency has been under for months.  

 

Ohio Votes to Protect Public Sector Collective Bargaining Rights

In a decisive victory for workers and organized labor Ohio Senate Bill 5 was overwhelmingly defeated Tuesday night in a statewide referendum. The bill which was similar to Wisconsin’s Act 10 in restricting and eliminating the right of public sector workers to collectively bargain was highly unpopular in the state. The vote sends a clear message to Republican lawmakers across the country and in Wisconsin that the push to destroy collective bargaining rights in the public sector was an overreach. The strong margin of victory undeniably energizes and creates momentum for opponents of Governor Scott Walker and Act 10 on the eve of recall efforts that will begin in less than a week.

Supervisory "Speculation" About Layoffs Constitutes Unfair Labor Practice

In Trump Marina Associates v. NLRB (October 14, 2011), the D.C. Circuit upheld the Board's decision that the employer committed unfair labor practices in a hotly contested election that the Union lost by a narrow margin. Among the actions that the Board held to constitute a ULP was a supervisory comment that the employer would not negotiate with the union and supervisory 'speculation' about layoffs or other matters as the result of unionization that were not based on objective fact.

Interrogation of Union Supporters Violates Act

In Acme Bus Corporation, (August 26, 2011), the National Labor Relations Board reviewed a number of unfair labor practices committed by a bus company during a union organizing campaign.  The Board found that the employer violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by interrogating employees about union activities, orally promulgating and maintaining a rule prohibiting employees from discussing the Union at work, orally promulgating, maintaining, and disparately enforcing an overly broad solicitation/distribution rule, creating the impression that employees’ protected activities were under surveillance, and subjecting employees to closer scrutiny in retaliation for their support of the Union.