We remain unconvinced that requiring voters to show a photo identification at the polling place is necessary or desirable.
Gov. Jay Nixon, who also apparently is unconvinced, on Thursday vetoed a photo ID requirement championed by Republican majorities in the Legislature and approved during the regular session.
The governor's obstacle may be toppled when lawmakers return for September's veto session. GOP leaders already have called for an override and will prevail if lawmakers reaffirm their previous votes.
An override, however, is not the final hurdle.
Missouri voters also will be asked to decide a proposed constitutional amendment requiring a photo ID for voters.
Supporters are seeking the constitutional amendment to avoid a repeat of a Supreme Court ruling that found a previous incarnation of the photo ID law to be unconstitutional.
A photo ID requirement certainly is inconsistent with existing language in the Missouri Constitution, which says registered voters who "offer to vote are entitled to vote at all elections."
We also believe the requirement is unnecessary. Supporters contend a photo ID is necessary to prevent voter fraud, but offer little evidence to indicate voter fraud is a problem.
Supporters argue a problem can't be identified unless and until voter ID is implemented.
Nonsense.
Elections are among the most scrutinized activities in the state and are overseen by a statewide elected official, more than 100 county clerks representing both parties, the candidates and the voters.
Election fraud, even error, is unlikely to go unnoticed.
We believe the opportunity for fraud or error is a greater possibility with the provisional voting option included in the photo ID requirement. The option would allow a voter without a photo to cast a provisional ballot, which would be counted only if verified. The option creates potential for abuse or for provisional ballots to be overlooked or not counted in a timely fashion.
Finally, we believe supporters, primarily Republicans, have not effectively rebutted criticism that their primary motive is essentially to disenfranchise voters who tend to favor Democratic candidates.
We repeatedly have said that candidates should prevail by convincing voters they have better ideas, not by diluting voters they fail to convince.
Finally, the costs to Missouri taxpayers are insupportable. Estimates of up to $2 million this year and more than $11 million to implement voter ID in 2018 cannot be justified, particularly in the aftermath of the announced $115.5 million in budget withhholdings for state services.
Those services, approved by lawmakers, are designed to lift Missourians, not discourage them from participating in government.
We encourage Missourians to urge their legislators to sustain the governor's veto. If an override succeeds, however, we urge voters to defeat this unnecessary, costly and politically motivated proposal.