Dorothy Cooper is 96 years old, and she's voted in every election but one since she was eligible to cast a ballot. When her home state of Tennessee passed a voter identification bill this year, she wanted to make sure she could vote again in 2012, so she went to a voter service center with a rent receipt, birth certificate and voter registration card. But because Cooper's maiden name was on her birth certificate, she was told she needed a marriage certificate, too, according to the Chattanooga Times Free Press. She didn't have one. She was denied a voter ID.

Thelma Mitchell, 93 years old, cleaned the Tennessee state capitol for 30 years. She also wanted to ensure she'd be able to vote next year, but she was incorrectly told that her old state ID was inadequate, according to a Chattanooga TV report. When Mitchell went to get an ID at a state drivers license center, she was told she needed her birth certificate. She has never had one. She was turned away.

Tennessee is among five states that passed laws this year requiring voters to show some form of ID at the polls. One of those states, South Carolina, had its voter ID bill rejected by the Justice Department last week. It was the first voter ID law to be refused by the federal agency in 17 years.

Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez said that tens of thousands of South Carolinians might not be able to vote under the law because they wouldn't have the right identification. Some don't have the paperwork or online access to satisfy the ID requirements. Some aren't physically able to wait in a long line at a motor vehicle office - or they make low wages and can't afford to take the time to do so. Some, unlike Thelma Mitchell and Dorothy Cooper, won't be fortunate enough to get help.

This is what happens when you try to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. That problem would be voter fraud, which is the reason Republicans frequently cite when they introduce and champion restrictive voting laws. Problem is, no one has shown that such an epidemic is real, and the sprinkling of fraud cases that do exist make up a tiny fraction of the voters who will be disenfranchised by laws such as South Carolina's.

What Republicans are trying to accomplish is clear: The voters who are most likely to be affected by the voter ID law are low-income minorities, who tend to vote Democrat. It's the same motive that's behind Republican-led legislation across the country that restricts voting, including in North Carolina, where lawmakers are considering overturning Gov. Bev Perdue's veto of a voter ID bill. Some states are doing a particularly poor job of hiding their intentions, such as Texas, which rejected student IDs issued by state universities in its new voter ID law, but did give the nod to anyone with a handgun license.

That Texas law is on hold, pending Justice Department approval, and Attorney General Eric Holder has announced that similar laws will get a close look. In a recent speech, Holder made note of how minorities once braved more direct barriers to voting, including "billy clubs and fire hoses, bullets and bombs." In fact, South Carolina's past failure to protect the voting rights of minorities resulted in it being one of nine states that need the Justice Department's approval of election laws.

These new barriers, while not as repulsive, are still a deplorable attempt by public officials to make it harder for those who might vote against them. Leaders in North and South Carolina should reconsider making that precious right more difficult to exercise.