How will you vote on voter ID, and why?

Republicans George W. Bush, Norm Coleman and Tom Emmer each lost the popular vote by a squeaker.

The Republican organization American Legislative Exchange Council then came up with a plan to convince people that voter fraud exists. Facts are available proving it does not, and that voter ID will suppress the Democratic vote.

The Republican plan is to stop losing elections by a squeaker.

The real fraud here is the Republican proposal for Voter ID.

I will be voting NO on both constitutional amendments for the Minnesota ballot next week because they are bad bills that are very wrong-headed. These bill sprimarily distract us from remembering just how lousy and ineffective our elected officials were last session, and emotionally manipulate voters with stupid legislation which could not get through both the House and Senate on their own merit.

Voting is a constiutional right. Are Photo ID’s ?

Barriers which prevent anyone from voting, especially considering how long it can take this state to deliver a photo ID, are wrong. Will our DMV pictures be printed in the fat books on the election judges tables? Who pays? Will municipalities have to buy or lease tablets or laptops and tap into a State Photo ID database for every election? Who pays? Where is my data privacy protection? Who pays? Well duh – local property taxes of course!

Seniors in nursing homes with no birth certificate or drivers license should still be able to vote, or are we writing off Great-Grandma? College students (consider school starts in September) and those who have moved recently should not have to go through extra grief at the ballot box. What if the addresses don’t match? Back to utilitiy bills? Will overseas and Soldiers mail-in ballots be considered Provisional? I have no problem with better voter verifcation and security at the polls, but tacking this half-baked legislation on the Consitution is just wrong.

I strongly resent the politicians who ‘balanced’ our state budget on the backs of cities and municipalites through claw-backs, shut down the state goverment and told state employees to file for unemployment WHILE THEY PAID THEMSELVES, and stole cash from the public schools through defferred payments into trying to make us think they are acting in our best interests.

I don’t trust tweaky legislation through the Constitution.

My vote is NO !!! for 3 reasons:

1) I am an Election Judge. It will create more work & headache for us & the elections staff that work all year long to put on our elections. The Provisional Ballots really concern me – how much cost? how much voter confusion? how many currently eligible voters won’t be able to or can’t vote? and HOW MANY WON’T BE COUNTED?

2) it sets up a dual, unfair system for college students. U of M, MnSCU & Community college students go to government supported schools. Their college ID’s are ‘government issued’ according to the provisions of the Amendment. BUT, students at private colleges (Macalester, St. John’s, etc) have private issued ID’s. Those won’t be recognized as a valid ID according to the Amendment.

3) Cost. This is a blank check. We the taxpayers, particularly homeowners will have to pay. My propety taxes are already unaffordable. The unknown cost of this, in every year we do elections, is adding insult to injury.

This Amendment is SO ‘unMinnesotan’ !

Definitely voting NO! If it’s not broke – why fix it? There is literally no voter fraud in MN. It’s a lie brought on by the Republicans to get more votes – and spend our tax dollars.

No !!! It’s not needed, it’s too expensive and it will disenfranchise too many people.

I just did an independent private survey of 298 teachers within 7 suburban school districts in MN.

Results: 87 % say they have changed their view on presidential choice and have switched to now being against their own union endorsements on all issues. Two reasons were prominent: 1. The Benghazi scandal where the facts show help was requested but the President looked the other way for his agenda and refused and then 4 Americans died. More recent facts about the President’s refusal to release requested tapes and testimony added more fuel to the growing anti-Obama trend in MN.

2. The stifled economy where more women are jobless, more on food stamps, higher food prices, doubled cost for fuel for cars and home utilities have escalated beyond typical inflation, affecting mothers with children. Voter ID will pass and Obama will not be re-elected in MN if the survey results carry over to the rest of the state.

It’s not clear to me that voter fraud poses a significant problem. It is clear to me that voter id will prevent some people from voting. So I will vote no on an amendment that as far as anybody knows for sure only causes a problem.

Somebody asked why the flip side isn’t compelling: How do we know there is *not* voter fraud? We don’t, but if we follow that line of thinking we could disenfranchise voters for any reason we like and then demand somebody to disprove it. As a silly example you might ask, “How do you know aliens from another planet aren’t masquerading as lawful US citizens and hijacking the election?” and then try to pass an amendment that requires all voters to prove they are really human beings. Or perhaps more believably, that they haven’t been convicted of a felony. Or that they haven’t already voted in another state.

In general, if we are going to do something that prevents lawful voters from voting, then I think we should at least be sure we are doing it for a good reason.

Absent from the photo ID debate are important technical details. It’s clear most Minnesotans have limited understanding of the checks and balances outlined in current state law. The loudly voiced belief that our registration system allows any person to vote in any precinct without restrictions is misguided. Laws are already in place to protect your vote.

Each registered voter has only one record in our statewide system. Each voter record is regularly subjected to electronic verifications against databases maintained by the MN Dept of Public Safety, the MN Dept of Health, the Social Security Administration, MN Courts, MN Corrections, and the United States Postal Service. These databases cross-check for death, citizenship and felony status, age, and residence.

New voters and voters who have changed their name or address must update their record by re-registering. In a large election year as many as 500,000 Minnesotans use the Election Day Registration process. These persons are known as “new-registrants” even though a majority are simply updating current voter records. Under our current law, every new registrant must already present photo ID and proof of residence, and attest to eligibility by signing the Voter Registration Application. Providing false testimony carries a sentence of five years in prison, or a fine up to $10,000.

Persons who have already voted in a specific precinct do not show a photo ID. These “pre-registered” voters attest to their eligibility by signing their name. Advocates of photo ID believe that voter impersonation is an undetected problem and that we have “no way of knowing” if this ever occurred. The evidence is quite to the contrary. Not only is voter impersonation not detec ted – it is not alleged. Voter impersonation is a felony. What incentive is there to risk a felony conviction for attempting to cast a single vote in a room where everyone present is a neighbor of the person you are impersonating?

After every election all voter records are updated with history, and the statewide system is checked for persons voting in more than one precinct. All voter records, including Election Day Registrants, are again matched against the aforementioned government databases. If irregularities are detected, election officials must investigate and refer potential violations to the County Attorney who is required by law to investigate. The fact that convictions rarely occur is not because election officials are not looking for wrong-doers. Convictions are rare because Minnesota’s current laws work to prevent fraud.

This amendment adds nothing to the system that doesn’t already exist. It burdens our state both socially and financially. I challenge the electorate to set fear aside and consider the delicate balance between access to the ballot box and integrity of our elections from a more educated perspective and then vote NO on this divisive, expensive and wholly unnecessary amendment.

Has anyone considered what would happen to voters who had their voter ID stolen (as in the case of stolen wallets) or misplaced? My wife had her wallet stolen the day before the 2010 election and if the id law would have been in pace she would have been prevented from voting.

NO, it’s much too cost prohibitive and, the number of fraudulent votes are so few they don’t affect the election.

Shawn Tweten – [Has anyone considered what would happen to voters who had their voter ID stolen (as in the case of stolen wallets) or misplaced? My wife had her wallet stolen the day before the 2010 election and if the id law would have been in pace she would have been prevented from voting.] *** So much misinformation…you can still vote, you just vote using a provisional ballot which becomes a normal ballot once you prove who you are (such as getting a new ID or showing up with a birth certificate/SS card). As far as the idea that voting is a right, that’s fine but so is hunting (for food for my family), getting married and purchasing a gun (to protect my family)…all of these “rights” require that I show a valid government issued ID. I will be voting YES! BTW, I will also be voting NO on the marriage amendment.

Republicans pushing this bill are under the delusion that it is impossible that more people would vote democrat than the increasingly racist, sexist, and apocalyptic republican party.

It’s just another level of their delusions.

I’m voting NO to both. The Constitution was written to protect our freedoms, not restrict them to if’s and’s or but’s.

I am voting no. Voter i.d. in itself is not such a horrible idea, but this law is convoluted and very expensive. It doesn’t do nearly enough to prevent the fraud so many pretend to worry about, but it makes it a lot more complicated for people to vote. And no, not just “lazy liberals,” but also senior citizens and active military. They need to send this back and redo it in a way that is workable and cost effective. As it is now, it’s ridiculous and I’m not sure how anyone reading it would give it a yes.

I will be voting NO, with an exclamation point. Requiring a gov’t issued ID at the polls prevents certain citizens from voting and, therefore, is discriminatory. If you don’t believe me, volunteer sometime at the Project Homeless Connect and take a look at the line for obtaining state IDs. It is always the longest line. Some people JUST DONT HAVE IDs.

As for the argument that you need an id to cash a check, or buy beer, or any number of other things… it does not hold up. Not everyone has a bank account. Not everyone makes purchases that are restricted to non-minors.

I have already voted NO. I have been a Lead Election Judge for several years in a Mpls suburb so I actually know the process. We don’t have a problem with voter fraud or the voting process in Minnesota. If this passes it would be a problem for the elderly, minorities, the poor and college students. There is NO PROBLEM so LEAVE IT ALONE! This is a non-issue created by the Republicans to suppress voting.

Yes – to voter ID – not sure on the 2nd one. It is a Voter ID amendment people – not a “voter restriction” as Mark Richie tried and failed to rename it. I have seen cases where for whatever reason – accident or on purpose – someone in my polling place voted for someone else. Last election – the person in front of me was denied the right to vote – because when he gave his name and address – the election judge said “You already voted” – Needless to say there was heck to pay. The judge called over another judge to consult – they both looked at the man’s id, name, address, etc and determined that he was who he said he was – they showed him the log and sure enough there was an unreadable signature by his name. They could not / would not let him cast a ballot – because as the judge said – we have no way of knowing which ballot to pull out of the box – that was cast improperly. Their only option for him was to call the attorney general and county attorney and report it – he said what good will it do? they can’t prove who did it or if they intended to do it or if it was an accident.

What happened to smaller Government and less spending.This is a bridge to nowhere!!!

I spent the afternoon at my auto mechanic’s shop……

I had him remove the windshield wipers, the headlights, the backup camera, all the mirrors, and, of course, the brakes.

This car has never been in an accident, so all that mechanical crap is just a solution looking for a problem that doesn’t exist.

And, being a good Democrat, I am not going to haul around all that heavy, gas-wasting, climate changing junk just because I might need it someday.

Ahhhhhh….that’s better……..I feel so much lighter, now.

I will be voting NO on both of the hateful amendment proposals!

Regarding voter ID, voting is the right of all citizens and the claim that voter fraud is rampant in MN is just plain false! Voter fraud is just a made up argument that the GOP is pushing to limit the voting rights of lower class citizens, minorities and senior citizens.

Those people (students, the elderly, and minorities) are lucky we give them the right to vote at all.

Demanding a government issued photo-identification in exchange for that ist not a big deal. It’s not like voting a right or anything.

I don’t think they should ask for ID to buy liquor either. They should just trust people when they say they are old enough. Police should not ask for ID and proof of insurance either. I mean why would people drive if they were not supposed to be.

Voting YES! All arguments that I have seen against this have been easily proven false. Why would someone object to verifying their identity unless they are not who they claim to be? Under current practice voter fraud is too simple to get away with. Just look at the number of election day registrations that have been unable to be verified.

NO, this is more discrimination. Voter ID will not prevent felons from voting, they have ID’s. It will not prevent illegals from voting, they have ID’s. Gee, 16 year olds have their fake ID’s to buy booze. I don’t use a photo at the ATM, nor when I do business on the internet or the phone, but I do have security. So does the current MN election system – just one part of which is that postcard you receive in the mail. Perhaps someday in the very near future we’ll be able to cheaply put our fingerprint on a pad and it will recognize us, but not in MN if this passes, because our state constitution will be locked in to outdated technology. We hire people to do jobs in the state legislature. This is their domain, that’s why we pay them. It’s not something to permanently lock in place in our constitution. The people behind this amendment do not care about voter integrity, they don’t even care about our budget problems given the implementation, ongoing (provisional ballots) and court costs that will be involved in this. This is more discrimination. Think about it, who doesn’t have a MN DL? People too poor to own a car. People like my 92 year old father with Parkinson’s Disease, and students who may be attending our colleges and universities who came from outside this state. What do all these groups of people have in common? The answer is they tend not to vote the way one political party in this state wants them to. This is NOT about voter integrity. The ONLY thing it will prevent is somebody pretending to be you and trust me, nobody wants to do that. The only people who are registered to vote in MN are the people who vote regularly. If you miss two Presidential elections in a row, you’re off the roster. How do you think we manage to have the highest voter turnout in the nation. We’re constantly cleaning up the rolls. Once you’re off and have to get back on again, you’re already required to show ID. You want to talk about vouching, that’s for residency status, not ID – look it up, it’s in the statutes (211). This is just another attempt to try to incorporate discrimination into the MN Constitution. NO, it ain’t happening.

Voter fraud, meaning someone who is ineligible to cast a vote does so, does occur in Minnesota. In Hennepin County alone, more than 38 cases were brought against felons whose civil rights had not been restored who nonetheless voted in the 2008 general election. However, the amendment before the voters on this November’s ballot is not a good solution—not only will it not catch most cases of voter fraud, but the costs associated with its implementation are extremely severe and the benefits do not, by any measure, outweigh the costs.

First, what types of voter fraud are there? Well, there is the issue I mentioned above about convicted felons whose civil rights have not been restored casting votes. Requiring a government-issued photo ID will not stop this type of fraud—many felons still have drivers’ licenses or state ID cards! Then there is the issue where someone with a fake ID votes. Requiring a government-issued photo ID will not stop this type of fraud—these people, by definition, have IDs, so unless the friendly retirees at the polling places are experts in spotting fake IDs, no one would be the wiser. Finally, there is the situation where one voter impersonates another at the polls. This case is the ONLY one which the Voter ID amendment can prevent.

How rare is voter impersonation? It’s difficult to say, and to my knowledge only one case of it has been found in a recent Minnesota election, wherein a woman from Andover sent in an absentee ballot on behalf of her daughter who was off at college, and the daughter also voted at her college polling place in Mankato. In this case, the problem was detected, and the mother was prosecuted. But it’s also unclear whether requiring a photo ID would have stopped this—absentee ballots already require a notary to verify the identity of the voter, so the notary in this case did not do a very good job of that verification!

So, the amendment will stop a very small number of improper votes from being cast. The benefits of the amendment are very small. The costs, however, are substantial.

The financial costs to state and especially local governments are extreme. The state must provide a free ID to any citizen who needs one. Not only does the ID itself cost the state, but the state or local government must also pay the salaries of the DMV workers who will have more customers. They would need to pay for a process to determine whether the citizen has need of the free ID (and the salaries of the people developing and maintaining the process). They would need to pay for the software and procedures to verify IDs and to develop a provisional balloting system so that someone who believes they are eligible to vote can still cast a ballot and then come back to prove their eligibility, locate that provisional ballot, and add it in to the totals. Estimates of the cost of all this exceed $10 million in the first year alone, mostly borne by the local governments, with smaller maintenance costs every year thereafter.

The financial cost to the voters is also not negligible. Sure, voters can request a free ID, but there’s the other costs of transportation to the DMV or county office, the time off of work, and the difficulty of getting certain types of people (elderly, deployed military, the poor) to the location where they can get their ID. Would you want to stop your great aunt Mildred, who lives in a nursing home and hasn’t had a driver’s license since 1990 but still wants to do her civic duty, from voting? Would you want to prevent a Minnesota soldier in Afghanistan from casting an absentee ballot because the notary at their base can’t verify the address on the photo ID, since military IDs don’t include a home address?

There are also many potential legal hurdles to the amendment being implemented. It may violate the single-subject rule already in the Minnesota Constitution, and determining whether this is true will lead to months of litigation. There is the concern raised by Secretary of State Mark Ritchie that it will end same-day registration, and whether that turns out to be the case or not, since he will in all likelihood still be our Secretary of State after the amendment is implemented, you can bet he will attempt to get that issue litigated as well. Using the court system like this costs the state and thus the taxpayers a significant amount of money.

This amendment, if implemented, will cause thousands, probably hundreds of thousands, of otherwise eligible voters to be unable to vote on election day. It would ruin Minnesota’s standing as the state with the highest voter participation rate. Our voting system is the envy of the country. Why would we want to ruin that?

In conclusion: I consider myself to be a conservative by temperament—meaning, I believe one should hold high regard for current institutions and policies, and carefully consider where they may need improvements, rather than make drastic changes with potentially unforeseen consequences. (Obviously, this definition does not very much agree with the platform of the political party in the United States which calls itself “conservative!”) For that reason, I will be voting NO on the amendment requiring a voter ID for Minnesota, and I urge you to join with me and the thousands of other Minnesotans such as former Republican governor Arne Carlson, former Secretary of State Joan Growe, the AARP, and the League of Women Voters, in doing the same—and in advocating to your friends, family, and neighbors to do the same. Please do what you can to put a stop to this deeply unconservative amendment, whose foreseeable costs clearly outweigh their minimal benefits.

I will vote no.

I do not believe the number of cases of voter fraud (IF ANY) are worth taking such drastic measures.

For those of you who say “even one is one too many”, I wholeheartedly agree. Let’s work together to prevent “even one” invalid vote being cast, while simultaneously assuring that 100% of all eligible voters are offered unfettered access to the polls in order to exercise their right to vote.

Furthermore, let’s work together to ensure that every legal vote is accurately counted and reported.

This amendment does not do that.

I am voting no.

Amending the constitution is not the way to implement stricter voter ID laws in the state of Minnesota. There needs to be legislation, so our state can figure out all the problems and how to fix them in this new voter ID protection law. It is also going to cost a lot of money because there is no such thing as a “free” ID.

Another issue is voting students like me. We should not have to purchase a new ID when we move to a new address every year and sometimes twice in one year. A lot of students are struggling to pay their bills and eat because of the increasing costs of higher education. I certainly don’t have extra funds to buy an ID every year.

Either way, the wording of the amendment leaves so many questions. It’s just not productive. Let’s send it to the legislature and make our state government do its job.

When you write a

$50 check at Walmart you have to show your ID

.why should’ntyou have to show your ID for something as important as voting for the president of the USA.

Facts prove that voter suppression hurts Democrats, therefore the idea of this amendment should be illegal in it’s inception since it hopes to disenfranchise voters from the Democratic party only

I already voted no as I will be out of state on the 6th. One reason: it’s hard enough to vote absentee as it is, without any further impediments. My college student daughter, out of state, barely got her ballot here in time because of postal delays. We don’t need more obstacles.

Yes, you need an ID for a beer but a beer isn’t guaranteed by the Constitution. Voting is. Plus, how will we pay for this? Wouldn’t those millions be better off spent on Early Childhood Education or hunger relief programs? How will our deployed military vote? Will we fly them all back home to show an idea before we let them vote? Research has shown there is no problem to fix here. Vote no, please.

I am voting YES. I guess everyone has forgotten about the folks from Acorn and all their phony registrations. Did any of those registrations make it into the system? Are you willing to bet a senate seat or a Presidency that none of them made it in the system? I am not wanting to make that bet. We here in Minnesota have same day registration which is an open invitation for cheating. A same day registered person without an ID can have another person vouch for them. Any person with an ID can vouch for 20 people. What could possibly go wrong there?

NO!! This was two years in the making, they had plenty of time to work out all the kinks…send it back and tell them to do it right.

All of us should be contributing ideas to make a law that *protects the vote of every citizen* AND *efficiently prevents fraud*. Instead, people back themselves into their ideological corners with bullhorns and logic and civility are lost. There is a vast and comfortable middle ground here, people. I will vote no because the language of the amendment lacks necessary details that cannot be left to chance, but I stand in solidarity with both sides of this issue. Let’s send it back and make it work the way it ought to in America.

Are the ideas you Repubs haver for America soooo bad that you have to try to scare voters and attempt to steal the election??? Republicans/ the repub candidate so blantantly lie about almost every issue from the auto industry,fema, mitt’s feelings about the 47 pct, etc……and you idiots want to vote for him? plz forgive me for that….it’s the beauty of democracy! still sad that you would hater the Prez that much that you vote for an empty suit with policies proven to fail!

I will be voting NO for the voter ID amendment. There are too many people that will not be able to vote without having to get the new ID card. College students that live too far from home (I have not heard how the absentee ballot will work… will people have to go to their local courthouse to show their ID?), Nursing home residents no longer drive and will not have current IDs. Who will take them to the courthouse to get an ID and do all the paperwork required to register for it? Members of our Military are not required to update their driver’s licenses as long as they serve (I have a friend that was in the Air Force for 20 years who had the same driver’s license that she had in college on the day she retired) and since military IDs and passports are not legitimate IDs (really? I just can’t understand the why behind this…), they will have to get a new voter ID card. What about the cost to implement it? Will every precinct, even the small ones out where I live need WiFi and a ID reader to scan everyone’s ID? How will that work? Who is going to pay for all this, and the voter ID cards people will need? It just doesn’t make sense! There is not enough voter fraud to warrant this type of amendment.

The bill’s author never complained about voter fraud in her 8 years as Secretary of State. Hmmmmmmm

I’m voting NO. I have seen no evidence that there is an actual problem. The cost and process to administer this in an absentee ballot situation remain unclear. There is no question the only purpose here is voter suppression!

I am voting No because I believe the Legislature needs to do their job not put this thing on the Minn Constitution. You write the bill first then vote upon it not something that has no defined parameters such as what is a voter ID, who pays for it, how does one get one when they do not have a birth certificate, who pays for a birth certificate, and what will photo id be in 20 years or does voter id change by which party controls the legislature? It is a shameful copout.

I am voting no on voter id for several reasons, first and foremost it is a misuse and abuse of the constitution to put an amendment on it that limits and demeans people, setting up a status system of voting. Second, I am voting no because if we use the system correctly, this can be done by a law. Third, the ONLY other state in the US that has a constitutional amendment is Mississippi, and it is disgusting to think of good solid MN politics being delivered in a manner that is forcing a reduction of viable voters-our voter turn-out will drop dramatically. Next, 19 states have laws, we could easily come up with another route to do things – other than the amendment.

Fiscally, the costs will be outrageous and the beauracy over the top-so, smaller governement – is a better option for the state and those implementing voting (muni’s, townships, towns, cities, counties, etc.).

I am soundly and strongly encouraging others to VOTE NO!

Most definitely voting YES. After living in CA for 18 yrs and being aware of voter fraud/abuse. A photo ID issued by a gov’t agency is the only way to curtail voter fraud.

I am against voter restriction. I believe we should be expanding voter rights and helping everyone vote. Voter ID requirements will end same day registration, which is vital to new voters, people who have moved and probably others.

It will also make it hard, if not impossible for some of our military to vote when they are overseas. Shouldn’t we be making it easier for our troops to vote when they sacrifice so much?

If people are legitimately worried about voter fraud then we need to do it where it matters. Lets start by getting rid of the Electoral College and use popular vote laws. Lets get rid of the rigged electronic voting machines. It had been proven that the Diebold machines were the cause of massive voter fraud in 2000 and 2004. We know certain paper balls with

Wow, a lot of hate and assumptions here, I am not going to along, just state I will be voting no. I work with survivors of abuse, and they are a large population effected by this vote.

Any way you slice the numbers the amendment will disenfranchise more voters than fraud it would prevent. Voting NO.

I started my voting history with same day registration as a college student in a new town with an old ID and an electric bill. A friend brought me to my polling place to vouch for me if I had any trouble.

For people living in Bemidji the closest DMV location to apply for a Photo ID is Grand Rapids. Having a VALID photo ID can not only be a financial burden but a physical challenge.

Sure most people have a VALID photo id. The minority of people who struggle to maintain their constitutional right to vote are not MOST people, but their vote should still count.

I’ll be voting no. This thing would have caused problems for my Grandma to vote when she was in the nursing home. It would have caused problems for me this past summer when I moved back from graduate school but wasn’t settled in a home yet.

Fact is, I’m still trying to figure out why people are pushing this. After two statewide recounts in our recent past, MN solidified its reputation as having a strong, clean, accountable election system. It’s a “solution” in search of a problem.

So it begs the question, what is this really about?

I intend to vote “no”. Personally, having to show photo ID wouldn’t be a problem for me, but my husband, who cannot drive any longer, wouldn’t be able to vote without his state-issued ID card, which costs practically as much as a driver’s license. There are many folks out there that can’t fit that expense into their already strained budget. Those of us who live in the country know everyone who monitors on election days, anyway, and they know us. I understand that personal ID isn’t the answer, and why put more hardship on folks when voter fraud is not, and never has been, a problem except for those who wish to stop every Democrat that they possibly can from voting?

It’s too costly … too complicated + risky.

There’s more behind the text of the question on ballot that concerns me.

Q: Q: Would you sign any important document without seeing and understanding the “fine print?”

A: No [Way!]

Please take a look before you consider voting “yes” on this question: http://www.mediafire.com/view/?47m6hmdk9v5sgm4

Voting NO! Because restricting voting rights is a battle we fought last century and we shouldn’t be even considering it today.

Our state leads the country on voter turn out because our registration laws are based in complete common sense and respect.

Mn came out of the 2 most scrutinized razor-thin recounts as a model of election integrity. We are foolish to change our system.

It is a solution to a non=existing problmem. By the way in the Schools of Eastern Carver County we have 34 first languages in our district. so you rascist Republicans how many languages are you willing to print.

I work with elderly people and many of them no longer drive and have licenses that are expired, so no longer “valid.” It is a hardship for them to obtain a valid State ID — they need to find someone to take them, possibly walk further than is easy, and wait when it’s difficult for them to stand for long periods. Also many are low income and don’t have the means to pay for a new ID or obtaining the paperwork they need if it’s even available. I am voting NO. Also, it they spend time in a transitional care center or move to an assisted living, they may not be at the address on their ID even if it’s valid. Putting this into the Constitution before some of these issues are resolved is a mistake. I am voting NO.

I’ll be voting yes. If I can’t buy a gun without an ID and several other barriers, it’s illogical to allow unknown voters to vote.

We have conclusive proof that voter fraud is under control in this state, and we thus can all see that the amendment is unnecessary. This is why I feel the push to pass the amendment is yet another example of certain elements of our society, in this case on the state and metro-area levels, using legislation as an outlet for their extremism and fear. Anyone who claims they support this very creepy amendment for key reasons aside from their own racism, hatred of the poor and homeless, and/or anti-immigrant bigotry, is either lying or is in denial.

I do NOT believe that people are being deliberately bigoted if they think the amendment is a good idea. I DO believe that those people are shirking one of the key responsibilities all adults have: to identify what bias resides in us, acknowledge it to ourselves, and see past it, day by day. We all have bias, and we must all work to fight it in ourselves, for the sake of our society and our children.

I will vote No on this amendment because I consider it my civic and patriotic duty to do whatever I can, even if that is only casting one vote, to protect voting rights from being whittled away by extremists and fearmongers.

I am voting yes, I know of people that bragged about voting for the same candidate nine times at the last election, there is nothing to stop this from happening, registering to vote doesn’t mean anything when you can just have the person next to you say they vouch for you, right now you can drive around to different polling locations a keep voting all day if you can find someone to vouch for you, and fanaticly passionate people do it!

I will be voting NO. Voter fraud is virtually non-existent, and the type most prevalent will NOT be prevented with an ID. Too many people will potentially be disenfranchised (people like my mom, who remarried and changed her name VERY late in life, then changed it back when she was widowed…NIGHTMARE to obtain some of the documents required). The ID may be free, but obtaining the documents to GET the ID are NOT. That amounts to a poll tax. This is nothing more than a Republican effort to suppress the vote.

Yes…it is broke, so let’s fix it.

Says the Disgruntled Conservative to himself, “Because I know I’m right, and everyone I talk to agrees with me (either that, or they’re too “Minnesota nice” to contradict me to my face), I can’t imagine that a majority doesn’t vote the way I do, but since liberals and moderates keep winning elections, the only explanation must be voter fraud, which is why I know it has to exist.”