Fair / 64° F
Vote no on voter registration [UPDATED]
Published 11:13am Thursday, November 1, 2012 Updated 1:16pm Thursday, November 1, 2012The Voter Restriction Amendment is harmful and misleading. It’s designed to lure Minnesotans into voting for something that:
• Creates an unfunded mandate that will cost state and local governments upwards of $50 million to implement and will increase property taxes on residents. Seeks to dismantle our successful 40 year history of Election Day registration.
• Sets up a complicated new system of provisional balloting. These are votes that probably won’t get counted. Residents don’t have time to take hours off work to go back and cast a ballot down at the county after the election is over.
And unlike other states, this amendment — as written — fails to safeguard the voting rights of our seniors in nursing homes and our troops protecting our democracy.
We may not know exactly how much this will cost our cities and counties. But one thing is clear it will raise property taxes.
Minnesota is unique. Time and again, we have the highest voter turnout in the country. Minnesota has a proud history of fair and accessible elections. We have a System that protects the right to vote for every eligible Minnesota voter. Indeed, we have the best, most effective elections system in the country – leading the nation in voter participation, the hallmark of a thriving democracy.
It is wrong for legislators who placed this on the ballot to manipulate voting laws for their own gain. State legislators who put this on the November ballot are unnecessarily restricting the voting rights of eligible Minnesota voters, making it harder for hundreds of thousands to vote.
This is wrong for Minnesota. Vote no on voter restriction on Nov. 6.
Chet Nettestad
Pelican Rapids
“MN election law is appalling. You can register to vote on election day with proper ID. Without ID, you can still register if someone will vouch for you. That is, one individual registered in the precinct, can vouch for up to 15 people who have absolutely no way to prove they are valid voters. MN does NOT have provisional ballots so all these same day registrants’ votes go into the ballot box and are counted.
Verification cards are sent to those who register on Election Day (and earlier). After the 2008 election, over 17,000 of those “verification” cards were returned to respective cities and counties: Address unknown, person unknown.”
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/09/book-voter-fraud-is-real-and-has-consequences-just-look-at-sen-al-franken/
hmmmmmmmmmm–”address unknown” should be a indicator there might be something wrong with the source of that information. Legal addresses are known to the election judges within the precinct where the voting occurs. Of course, maybe the judges didn’t check or are in an area too poor to have those records available; naturally photo ID won’t solve those issues.
I have been an election judge for a few years, Larry. If the individual is not a registered voter, neither the address nor the individual is listed.
Are you seriously considering a precinct to be too poor to have an address list? If that is the case, we need a social program to provide paper and pencils to all precincts. You should offer an amendment, Larry.
Just for the sake of argument let’s suppose this restrictive measure passes. Do you think that will be the end of it? It will never end as long as there is a remote chance that a republican will lose an election somewhere.
As long as that possibility exists the republicans will find bogyman after bogyman to stop people from voting until the only people who can vote are white men in suits who own companies or are top executives in corporations.
We have what some would say is a silly little thing; we often call it innocent until proven guilty. There are some radical left wingers so upset with gun violence they advocate house to house searches for unlicensed weapons. There are some of the radical right wing who believe the right to vote should be predicated on your ability to prove you have that right; your word or your honor is not enough. Were I to vouch for 15 others, PROVE I am doing something illegal, otherwise believe I am innocent of a crime until you can prove it. The photo ID amendment lacks proof.
Larry, you have stumbled into rational thought in your accusation.
“There are some of the radical right wing who believe the right to vote should be predicated on your ability to prove you have that right.”
Larry, do you realize that only US citizens have the right to vote in US elections? If an individual’s name is not on a registered voter list, how does a judge know if that name or address even exists?
I thought that statement might be too complicated for some to understand. We have in this country something we call “presumption of innocence.” Another way of saying it is a “standard of personal integrity”. In other words it is up to a prosecuter to prove I am guilty of a crime; not to keep me from committing a crime he/she might think I will commit. Even a drunk driver has the right to drive without being stopped until there just cause to stop him/her.
That is what we have always sworn when the singed our names at out polling places–”I have the right to vote and you (election officials) need to prove otherwise.” Some would have it the other way around and that is a truly dangerous and slippery slope which could seriously erode our liberties.
Mike, In the precinct where I vote there is a master of all the addresses within that precinct. If someone registers at the poll the address they give is checked against the master list. Granted, there is a lot of money on this side of town so maybe my experience is not statewide, but it is difficult for me to believe Google knows my address and the county assessor does not. *If you are an election judge this year check out the dusty book on the shelf at your back—the mater list must be there someplace and ignorance is no excuse for incompetence.