Fair / 73° F
Cost of voter ID progam is too steep [UPDATED]
Published 10:07am Monday, October 1, 2012 Updated 12:09pm Monday, October 1, 2012On the surface, a constitutional amendment requiring that Minnesota residents provide a valid, government-issued photo identification in order to vote seems to make sense. Clearly, requiring a photo ID would eliminate some forms of voter fraud.
However, the need to eliminate voter fraud seems to pale in comparison to the costs of implementing it and the potential disenfranchisement of voters that may come with it.
While proponents could point to some cases of fraud in two recent statewide elections — Al Franken and Norm Coleman for senate and Mark Dayton and Tom Emmer for governor — the percentage of fraudulent votes certainly does not suggest the need for radical reform.
In addition, voter ID will most certainly create more work — and thus more taxpayer dollars — for government. For example, townships that currently do mail-in balloting may have to revert to regular balloting, potentially costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars.
And while those who do not have a photo ID may be able to get one, it is likely that many simply will not vote.
In other words, if our election system isn’t broke, then it doesn’t seem necessary to fix it.
Did we notice what happended to Pennsylvania’s photo ID voting law today? The devil is in the details and we don’t know the details.
Actually, the case can be summarized thusly:
The leftist Democrat party sued to keep their voter ID law from being enforced in the upcoming election (fearful of losing 10% of the vote which is fraud?).
A judge upheld the law and said the election could go forward under the VOter ID law’s provisions.
So, the leftist Democrats appealed the lower court’s decision to the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court. That court also upheld the voter ID law, but the liberal majority also ordered the lower court judge to examine and hear arguments posed by the anti-fairness in voting Democrats before allowing the Voter Id law to be used; a process which will be conducted AFTER the elections. Hence, the anti fairness in voting left don’t have to worry about the fraud they obviously intend to commit since their co-conspirators in the PA Supreme Court have pulled a switcheroo by upholding a statute which the US Supreme Court has upheld as constitutional, while using legal flimflam to prevent the use of the law in the upcoming election.
Thus demonstrating our need to pass our CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT in Minnesota to fend off continued legal trickery by our own anti fairness in voting Democrats. This trickery has really shown how desperate the Democrats nationwide have become to protect their fraudulent tactics to win elections.
Jerome—this will make your head explode so let me say I’m sorry before continuing. It is true that we can pass a Constitutional Amendment that requires photo ID of everyone who wishes to vote. BUT, it is also true the method and manner in which that requirement is implemented can be found to be unconstitutional IF implementation is shown to obstruct or restrict someone’s right to vote. That is what is happening in Wisconsin and Texas and now in Pennsylvania.
Did you ever notice that the “voter fraud” only conservatives can see, has never been seen in elections where the conservative wins?
It is absurd that people think this will cost to much! Defending stealing at any amount is unacceptable. When we have over 40,000 registration cards that are returned because they are undeliverable as addressed says that we have potentially 40,000 illegal votes. A generous estimate is that 4,000 or 10% are actually people that have moved, changed address after voting and before the reg card was returned. Without provisional ballots these illegal ballots are cast into the mix….to late then. Vouching started in 1974. Pushed by Joan Growe then in the State Leg and after becomming the SOS. When you do not have to prove who you are to vote, what is to stop the cheating. If we applied this logic to banking, your account would be empty in short order and someone would be having a nice vacation at your expense. You have to be either a hermit or completely living off the grid by choise not to be able to get an ID. You cannot get any government service without an ID (food stamps, etc). You cannot attend a college, university or tech school without having taken the SAT or ACT, both require you to prove who you are in order to take the test. The biggest joke of all is that the elderly do not have ID, really people? If you have taken any medications in your long life, guess what, ID required. And what about the biggest tax increase on the middle class in the history of this country—Obamma care? (Our Senator Franken-60th vote. The cost is far more than implimenting Voter ID. http://www.VoterIDforMN.com
Maybe you’re right. But when we remember the cost of taxation without representation, I wonder how smart it is to take away one person’s right to vote.
BTW–have you been reading the stories about the registration fraud in Florida this year paid for by the Republican party? Not saying photo ID would solve registration fraud. It won’t)
Voter ID, I suggest you are a prime example of someone living off the grid, moreover divorced from reality.
Your scare tactics must be a great hit at tea bag socials for the uninformed. The fact is that the Governors and attorneys general of Florida, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Ohio and Minnesota can not find more than one or two cases of voter fraud and that is in sworn testimony before various courts. Yet you conservatives like to pretend that spending billions and billions to prevent less than 10 cases of voter fraud is the price of Liberty and freedom.
The only reason conservatives are willing to have the tax payer foot the bill for this massive scam is because it is worth the price to conservatives to buy elections by reducing the number of Black, Senior, Student and Military voters.
By the way, Voter ID, the identification some people now have will not be sufficient when it comes to voting. Those details have not been worked out yet, unless you sit on some committee writing those rules and know something the rest of us don’t.
And another thing…..putting money in a bank savings account is not a constitutionally guaranteed right, but voting is. Turn off Fox noise and read a copy of the constitution.
You all forget that these people that everyone is so concerned about, need to have a photo id in order to cash their social security checks, their Welfare checks, and to get their food stamps. These are the ones that everyone is so concerned about. Of course there are the illegals that now have to prove they are here legitimately, and there are so many of you out there to assist them with false id’s. This is not a conservative vs liberal thing, this is just common sense. It doesn’t cost anymore, I am always asked for my id, to verify that I am in the right district. Why should there be exceptions????
Instead of making ill-informed comments Ms. Roen, I suggest you investigate the type of ID that will be required to vote. IT IS NOT THE SAME TYPE NEEDED TO CASH YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK, WELFARE CHECKS AND GET FOOD STAMPS.
Ill-informed voters are the bane of this nation. Where on earth do you get your news? Let me guess, does it start with Fox——
Government housing assistance goes directly to the landlord. No ID needed. Food “stamps” are now in the form of a “credit card”. No ID needed. General assistance of the type used to cover living expenses for those elderly who need assistance but lack the personal funds to pay for it have their social security checks claimed by the local government paying the nursing home bill and no ID needed. ID given to college students is not valid for voting purposes and as their address might be diferent because they are “away” at school their driver’s licenses would not be valid. Newly married men and women whose names or addresses have changed would not have valid photo ID.
Some beliefs are not as simple as the people who hold them.
“these people”
“welfare checks”
“food stamps”
“the illegals”
Well, it’s pretty easy to understand Jean’s line of thinking. Fortunately, it’s just as easy to guffaw at.
Election runaways because of voter fraud is a pretend problem. It does not exist. We may as well institute a ban against monsters under the bed.
The problem with elections is that not enough people vote. Roughly 50% during the last election, pretty bad.
It’s unfortunate there are some non-thinkers out there just act as “repeaters” for bad ideas. This initiative is a complete waste of time, resources, and it’s a thinly veiled attempt at discrimination. Nothing more.
Perhaps if this group of busy bodies, with a poorly designed website that looks like a scam job, wanted to contribute, they could participate in steps to get more people at the polls rather than fewer.
“Every voter restriction that has been challenged this year has been either enjoined, blocked or weakened. It has been an extraordinary string of victories for those opposing these laws.”
LAWRENCE NORDEN, of the Brennan Center for Justice of the New York University School of Law. From the NY Times–”Quote of the Day” 10/03/12