On the recordFebruary 27, 2002
I am glad we can begin this debate because there is much to be said, but let me go to the heart of the matter. This amendment simply guts the compromise, the key antifraud provision that was carefully negotiated over 6 months as a part of the bipartisan compromise. We asked for some protection against the widespread practice of loading up voter rolls with phony names and then voting those names. It is something that every voter can comply with. It has been negotiated to make sure it did not have any unfavorable impact on people we are trying to get to the polls. After 6 months of negotiations, I feel like we are playing rope-a-dope. The Senator from Oregon gets up and says, why, this is a photo ID requirement. Everybody knows a photo ID requirement is discriminatory. Then the Senator from New York gets up and says these antifraud provisions really do not prevent fraud absolutely either way. I said we devised a compromise that recognized the concerns that their side had about making sure we did not impose any unreasonable restrictions on voters who might not have a driver's license, for example. That is why we said voters can use a bank statement, a government check, utility bill, anything that has your name and address on it, the first time you register. No, it is not as strong as I would like, but that was part of the compromise.
Source
govinfo.gov




