Groups want photo id requirement at St. Paul polling places.

Posted at 4:12 PM on October 28, 2009 by Tom Scheck (2 Comments)
Filed under: Campaign 2010

The Minnesota Voters Alliance and the Citizen's for Responsible Taxation say they're launching a petition drive to change the St. Paul city charter to require voters to present photo identification in St. Paul city elections. The groups say the want to submit the necessary signatures by July 10th, 2010 to get a question on the November, 2010 ballot. The groups argue that photo identification will reduce fraud at the ballot box:

"Voter ID protects the rights of legitimate voters! If undocumented persons, convicted felons and dead people are allowed to vote, or if properly registered voters have their identities stolen by someone casting an illegal ballot, THE VOTES OF ALL LEGITIMATE VOTERS ARE DEVALUED!

The electoral system cannot inspire public confidence if no safeguards exist to deter or detect fraud or to confirm the identity of voters. Photo identification cards currently are needed to board a plane, enter federal buildings, and cash a check or even rent a rug doctor."

The Minnesota Voter's Alliance unsucessfully sued to prevent Minneapolis from using instant runoff voting in this year's election. Former Republican Secretary of State (and now state rep) Mary Kiffmeyer is on the group's board of advisers.

Meanwhile, opponents of the photo id requirement say there has never been an example of voter impersonation on the books and it will cost the state and local government millions to enact. Here's DFL Secretary of State Mark Ritchie on the issue from February:

"The only argument that's ever made is that this will prevent voter impersonation," Ritchie said. "I've looked through 150 years of Minnesota voting history and haven't found one case. But we have now determined how much the proposals will cost and it's millions for everybody. The locals, the state, everybody involved."

Comments (2)

After we have the photo ID requirement, can we bring back the poll tax, too. Ms. Kiffmeyer would not doubt support that. She spent most of her term in state office (and a fair amount of state money) tyring to prove that there was massive voter fraud in the state, and that this alleged fraud had been the cause of every Democrat who had won office for the past century. She no longer has the office, but she does still have followers.

Posted by Gary Lee | October 29, 2009 9:55 AM

I disagree with almost everything the highly partisan MVA and CRT represent. However, on this one thing I agree. Most states require a valid, state-issued ID for voting. It proves the person who is voting is who they say they are. It also proves they are in the correct polling place and have residency. These are all good things.

It is ignorant and foolish to say that requiring the voter present a valid, state-issued ID will cost millions of taxpayer dollars. It won't cost one red cent. Simply show a valid ID to the election official which will be compared to the name and street address already in the sign-in book.

To say getting an ID will be an undue financial hardship on the voter is also nonsense. Driver's licenses are already required to drive and only run $28 every 4 years. State ID cards are $18 for 4 years, $11.00 for those 65 and over. Not a hardship.

Regarding Mr. Richie's claim that there's never been a case of voter impersonation, with all due respect to someone I admire for his great work for the state, simply because it has not been prosecuted, does not mean it hasn't happened.

The only people the ID requirement disenfranchises, are those who are illegally trying to vote.

Period.

Posted by Stormer | October 29, 2009 11:00 AM

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories