Voter ID proponents point to beer, tobacco and plane tickets to bolster case
Tuesday, March 15, 2011 at 8:30 am
- 13 Comments
Is the right to vote the same as the right to buy beer, cigarettes and airline tickets? That seemed to be the argument made by proponents of a bill seeking to mandate photo identification for voters that was heard Monday afternoon in the Senate Committee on Local Government and Elections.
The two-hour hearing touched on many aspects of the debate. Minnesota Majority and the Minnesota Voters Alliance — two conservative groups — stressed that voter fraud was a serious problem in Minnesota and implied that voter fraud tipped close elections in 2008 and 2010.
Andy Cilek of the Minnesota Voter Alliance — on whose board one of the bill’s authors, Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer, sits — held up 3,000 notarized petitions from St. Paul residents supporting voter ID.
“Clearly the public has no confidence, nor should they have, in our current election [system],” he told the committee.
On the other side of the debate, people with disabilities, students and homelessness and civil liberties advocates said the bills would disenfranchise legal voters at minimum and, at worse, would violate the Minnesota Constitution.
Simone Hall, a homeless Minnesotan who is working with People Serving People, said, “When people are homeless and they still show up to vote on election day, they are saying I’m working to make my life better, to make my situation better.”
She added, “Some people are simply too poor to afford a constant address. It is a blessing that Minnesota allows eligible people to vote regardless of their housing circumstance.”
Several Republicans and leaders of conservative groups likened the right to vote to that of buying cigarettes or alcohol, using a bank account or boarding an airplane.
Ben Hellerstein, a Carlton College student who relayed a story about how he assisted a friend by vouching for them in the last election, was grilled by committee chair Ray Vandeveer on vouching.
“Maybe you can explain to me how we would know how many people were drinking underage if we never ID’d then,” Vandeveer said, noting that the same could be said about voting.
Hellerstein was a bit flabbergasted. “I’m sorry, I’m not sure I see the connection.”
In his testimony, Minnesota Majority’s Dan McGrath compared the voting process to banking. “How fast do you think your bank accounts would empty if someone could access your account on the say-so of a friend?” he said, deriding vouching.
MVA’s Cilek said voting with voter ID is the same as boarding an airplane. “I would argue this is no different than taking an airplane,” he said. “How many people would fly on an airplane if we didn’t make sure the people on that plane were who they said they were in the terminal at their destination?”
He added, “I don’t think the right to vote should be taken any less lightly than getting on an airplane.”
Committee chair Vandeveer stated to Katie Conlin of the Minnesota Catholic Conference: “You do need an ID to get cigarrettes and to cash a check.”
The Minnesota Catholic Conference, the policy arm of the Catholic Church in Minnesota, opposes voter ID.
“Voting is not privilege, it is a right,” said Conlin. “It’s really not comparable to buying cigarettes or getting on a plane or buying alcohol.”
The committee will continue its hearings on the bill on Wednesday.
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter13 Comments
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 9:27 am
This is not about Voter Fraud in the least. This is about disenfranchising a segment of the population and prevent them from voting, period. They may be Elderly, poor, College students, etc.
This is also a ploy to reduce the numbers of voters who would otherwise vote for Democratic Party candidates, as revealed in New Hampshire last week.
I am an Election Judge in Olmsted County. People who come to vote are honest people. When some register the same day, they present an ID, papers to verify residency, etc. When they sign the form, they are under oath that all information is correct as stated in the Law. I have worked 6 elections since 2006. They verify their names, addresses, and Dates of Birth. Many of them I know personally. Nor do voters receive a Receipt for a Ballot wiothout first signing the register. Everything is on the up and up. No hanky panky going on where I Election Judge.
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 10:06 am
What blows me away is the gall they have of equating voting with purchasing something. We are better and smarter than that. Are they willing to turn away all campaign funds that does not originate from the sweat and blood of Minnesotans? Are they willing to give up all campaign slogans that talk about Big Government and Big Brother? How will they get elected if they have to turn the double standard back on themselves?
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 10:36 am
As a student from Minnesota attending college out of state, I voted absentee taking great care to follow all rules. I’ve never had to mail in my driver’s license along with the ballot so voter ID would not make sense. Additionally because I am quite outspoken on gay issues, there are many in my precint that would challenge my ballot knowing that under the proposed rules, I would have to fly home to appear before the election judges and explain why my ballot should be accepted. I would NOT appreciate this abuse of my right to vote.
What about others who vote absentee – military, shut-in elderly and disabled, those out of town due to work or vacation and on and on?
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 11:14 am
How many cases of voter fraud have been investigated in Minnesota in the past ten years? How many people were charged with criminal violations related to voter fraud? How many people were convicted of voter fraud related crimes? How conspiracies to commit voter fraud or related crimes were investigated and charged in Minnesota? How many people were convicted of those offenses?
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 2:20 pm
You want to look at voter fraud? Really?
OK, what systems are in place to prevent (older, more well-off) snowbirds from voting both in MN and their AZ homes? Or even to find out if they did?
HINT: Zero.
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 3:15 pm
Charles, is there any documentable proof that some snowbirds have been voting both in MN and out-of-state? If so, let us – and the Secretary of State – know. Finally, how will voter ID prevent this kind of situation?
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 3:39 pm
There is anecdotal evidence, but no hard proof. Much as with the kinds of “problems” that ID is intended to solve. I doubt ID would help cross-state voting at all.
Do I believe this happens? Yes. Would I like laws changed to stop it? Not until there was objective study to determine that it’s a real problem. I wrote the SoS office on this a couple of years ago, and it was explained that to get access to voting logs from other states is usually impossible without a court order, no resources have been assigned to investigate or quantify this issue.
My point is this. This ID proposal seeks to solve a problem which has, at best, anecdotal evidence to back it up. The legit voters who could be harmed are people in the lower economic strata. While a similar issue at the other end of the spectrum is ignored. The suggestion that this is a non-partisan issue is disingenuous, at best.
Comment posted March 15, 2011 @ 6:17 pm
I am surprised at the lack of imagination in the SoS’s office. We do have MN driver’s license and income tax records to cross-check the voter registrations and logs – and flag those snowbirds for further investigation. I am assuming that no one can have an official driver’s license or state-issued ID from more than one state.
Comment posted March 16, 2011 @ 9:21 am
Having worked for voter identification for six years, I encourage people to actually LOOK AT Voter Registration Lists from former years. The more you are aware of real facts and statistics of voting, returned postcards to the counties for non-existant addresses from same-day registrations and vouched voters, the more appalling our Minnesota voting system looks.
I have been disenfranchised by unverifiable voting. I want my social justice back. This is a non-partisan issue, as demonstrated by the St. Paul Petition to require photo ID for voting.
I hope someone will do a Ph.D. thesis on the last 30 years of voting in Minnesota. According to Joe Mansky, Ramsey County Election official, 98% of the voting Minnesotans already have a state-issued photo ID. It’s kind of a “Duh” issue.
Comment posted March 16, 2011 @ 2:45 pm
Jean, what are these “real facts and statistics” that you find so compelling? If you have evidence of voting fraud, why have you not turned it over to the authorities for prosecution?
I suspect you have none. I suspect you’re just repeating something someone told you, or that you saw on a pro-voter ID website.
Comment posted March 16, 2011 @ 3:59 pm
A petition that claimed 30,000 signatures in a city the size of Saint Paul, after months of canvassing, is hardly impressive. I’m sure there are more Republicans in town, and it’s a very Deomcratic city.
Comment posted March 16, 2011 @ 7:18 pm
You can tell the case is weak when they rely on facetious, frivolous, and fallacious arguments. And Fun Facts.
Comment posted April 24, 2011 @ 1:31 pm
Its not a needed change. As to fictitious addresses I would be willing to bet most proponents of voter ID have at least 3 “official” addresses. If you have ever orderede from Amazon you know:
Joe Voter can live at:
123 Main St.
Anywhere MN
123 Main Street
Anywhere MN
123 MAIN STREET
Anywhere MN.
123 MAIN STREET
ANYWHERE MN
We all know that this represents the same address but under proposed voter ID laws Joe Voters ballot could conceivably be caged for a post card returned for a one letter discrepancy between the state ID address and the postal address. Add in zipcode discrepancies and this will be a nightmare to enforce. (Or name changes 2/2 divorce, marriage, remarriage…)
(Mankato has 3 different zip codes. Your mail will get to you if addressed to 56001 vs 56003. St Peter has MN Aveue and OLD MN AVE. The locals know and understand this phenomenon which is probably the best argument there is for “vouching.” Your neighbor knows you and can attest to your residence within the precinct.
Frankly I think that every time you do business with any level of government that requires a form you should be automatically reregistered to vote. (Or check that there has been no address change since your last registration.)
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
