aka swirlspice

Recent Tweets @swirlspice
Posts I Like
Posts tagged "Voter ID"


“It’s common sense,” declare billboards encouraging Minnesotans to support voter ID in the upcoming election. Presumably supporters of the marriage amendment also regard it as “common sense” to define marriage as being “solely between one man and one woman.”

From a political standpoint, I can understand why supporters of voter ID are using the “common sense” line. It resonates with many Minnesotans’ impression of themselves as being responsible, down-to-earth citizens. With its explicit appeal to the common denominator, though, the “common sense” logic is alarmingly similar to the kind of logic that might have been employed to defend previous American injustices.

“Of course women aren’t suitable for voting or holding public office. Their realm is the home! It’s just common sense.”

“Naturally one must be able to read and write if one is to be informed enough to vote. That’s simply common sense!”

“There’s nothing wrong with separate but equal schooling—it’s equal, right? Of course it’s best to keep people of different races separate when it comes to education; that’s plain common sense.”

You know who was uncommon? Harriet Tubman. Susan B. Anthony. Martin Luther King. Harvey Milk.

There are some proudly uncommon names in Minnesota history too.

It was uncommon for Roy Wilkins to lead the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People through the hardest days of the Civil Rights Movement.

It was uncommon for Eugene McCarthy to stand up to President Johnson and declare the Vietnam War an atrocity that needed to end.

It was uncommon for Hubert Humphrey to take the podium at the 1948 Democratic National Convention and make a passionate speech insuring that his party would take a stand in favor of civil rights.

“To those who say,” Humphrey declared, “that we are rushing this issue of civil rights, I say to them we are 172 years late! To those who say, this civil rights program is an infringement on states’ rights, I say this: the time has arrived in America for the Democratic Party to get out of the shadow of states’ rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights!”

If it was late then, it’s far later now. If it’s now “common sense” to turn back the clock and disenfranchise a group of disproportionately poor, minority voters in the name of solving a fictional problem, if it’s now “common sense” to amend our state constitution to reinforce a discriminatory law that’s already in effect, then the time has come for Minnesotans to remember the lessons of our proudly progressive legacy and to be uncommon once again.

- Jay Gabler

The case against the voter ID amendment is remarkably easy to make. Setting aside the legitimate fear that this measure would disenfranchise thousands of Minnesotans, especially the elderly, we’re unconvinced that voter fraud is major concern in Minnesota — and even if it were, the measure that’s being put before voters would do little to fix the problem. More than 100 felons have been convicted of voting illegally in the 2008 election, but a photo ID law wouldn’t have stopped them from voting, because voting status doesn’t appear on a driver’s license.

Furthermore, the devil is in the details — especially when voters are being asked to vote on a proposal that has no details. The photo ID proposal has no implementation language, so we’re being asked to simply trust that our legislators will figure out a fair and affordable way of making sure that no voters are disenfranchised by the photo ID amendment. Frankly, what we’ve seen from St. Paul on this issue gives us little confidence in our legislators.

If our election system needs fixing, then the Legislature should fix it. That’s its job. We suggest the creation of a bipartisan election reform committee to write a complete bill, with a fiscal note on its costs, leaving nothing to hide. Protect the voting rights of the elderly and disabled, as well as our troops serving overseas, and utilize the best technology available, including pollbooks and facial recognition software to prevent fraud. Make sure that rural townships and sparsely populated counties don’t go broke trying to meeting unfunded mandates. If “vouching” is a problem, then nullify that provision in the current election law.

Such legislation might require a year or two to perfect, but what’s the rush? We’re not on the verge of seeing Minnesota’s democracy undermined by people who are willing to risk fines and imprisonment in order to cast an illegal vote.

Our View: Legislature’s job is to pass laws, not pass the buck to voters - Post Bulletin

The Rochester Post-Bulletin NAILS the entire argument against the Voter ID constitutional amendment.


Here are what is misleading:

  1. The ballot language says all voters would be required to present valid IDs to be able to vote, but not all voters would be required. For example, absentee voters would not be required to present valid IDs.
  2. The ballot language says that the state would provide free IDs to all eligible voters when the law would only provide IDs to people who don’t already have government issued IDs.
  3. The ballot language only talks about Photo ID being required when the bill would actually institute provisional balloting.

Here is what the ballot language omits:

  1. Fails to disclose that it would institute provisional balloting. The next legislature would have to set it up.
  2. Fails to disclose that only government-issued IDs are valid.
  3. Fails to disclose that it would end same-day registration.

keep reading

A constitutional requirement that ‘all voters must be subjected to substantially equivalent identity and eligibility verification’ places barriers to voting on our seniors who no longer drive, our soldiers who vote overseas, and our students who attend colleges and universities away from home. It will make voting much harder for thousands of other eligible voters, who will find it difficult or impossible to attain government-issued photo identifications in order to prove their identities. Verifying eligibility will negatively affect any voter who has utilized same day registration (over 500,000 in a presidential year), absentee voters (195,000), Military and overseas voters (11,500), and our mail balloting voters (45,000). Virtually no class of voter is left unscathed by these extreme alterations in our citizens’ access to their elections.
Photo ID would bring America back to the days of poll taxes that prevented African Americans from voting for decades.
Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), one of many black leaders protesting proposed voter ID laws, which they say are unnecessary and will disproportionately affect African-American voters. (via tcdailyplanet)

(via tcdailyplanet)


Sen. Al Franken blasts voter-ID advocate Hans von Spakovsky at a Senate hearing Thursday, accusing him of using misleading and flawed study methodology.