I once felt the same way but then I realized that I don't need my current address on my ID to do any of those things. What about our soldiers who vote by mail? What about those who may be in AZ during elections? Even worse, they also want to eliminate the possibility of vouching for a new tenant, a son who may return home temporarily after losing a job or home, etc. Anyone who was in a transient situation would be unable to vote. I am an election judge. Every voter reads a statement saying that if they are not eligible to vote they are subject to a large fine and up to 5 years in prison. In reality ... how many people want to cast a vote THAT badly?

The majority of us have drivers licenses with current addresses on them and so the majority of us say, "What's the problem?" And, for the majority of us there IS no problem. But voting is not simply for the majority ... it is also for those who may have lost their homes or jobs and may be homeless or moving frequently, it is for those who may be serving overseas, it is for people who may have had their ID stolen and find that it will take a while to get it replaced. Yes, the majority of people do now support photo ID but if they thought a bit about they just might reconsider their viewpoint .... just as I did!

To Carole below:
In whatever things you do, there are always 'RED HERRINGS'. All these problems you have mentioned are taken care of. The people who have lost their ID's simply can STILL vote--Use the Provisional Ballot and then go to your county/city office to verify you are who you say you are.
One additional note: On June 22, Mark Richie is to appear in US Fed. court to show cause as to why he [as SOS] is in violation of the Mn Constitution in not providing 'clean' voter registration sheets/books.

How is this voter ID going to be paid for? It actually adds MORE spending and MORE government to be put in place.

Is there a proven voting fraud problem in MN?
Nope.
Is there any known widespread problem with same-day voter registration?
Nope.
Is there a growing immigrant community in MN?
Yup.
So why all the fuss about changing our voting laws to make them much more restrictive?
You guessed it: the GOP is worried about changing demographics, and they will do anything to improve their chances in upcoming elections. This is the TRUE voting fraud happening across the U.S.

Is there a proven voter fraud problem in Minnesota? Define "proven." If by that you mean charges that were proven in a court of law, resulting in convictions, then YUP.

Minnesota currently leads the entire nation in voter fraud convictions. More from a single election than any other state in the last 50 years (177 and counting).

See what else is going on: http://www.electionintegritywatch.com/news-stories/

Is there any known widespread problem with sameday registration? Define "problem." If by problem, you mean organized efforts to expolit our vouching law, or thousands of election day registrants providing names and/or addresses that don't exist, then, YUP.

http://youtu.be/QmBlonSeaoQ

http://wewantvoterid.com/documents/2012_PVC_Report_Final.pdf

1) Not everyone will pay for an ID. There will be free IDs for those who don't want to buy a license. States can't charge people for voter IDs because that would constitute a de facto poll tax. As the story notes, the county worries it could wind up being responsible for this. There won't necessarily be added revenue either because license money is already going somewhere.

2) The four to six hours of additional training are only for the head judge, and it's not all focused on what to look for on an ID. As the costs and Smith's comments suggest, the provisional balloting looks to be the most challenging part of the equation. It's also worth noting that the online Minnesota Responsible Serving Course for bartenders is estimated to take 3-4 hours to complete. So the election judge training times don't seem that out of whack to me.

3) Hennepin County election officials quantified some of their cost expectations. Those estimates are position neutral. Is $550,000 a big number in the scope of Hennepin County's budget and the budgets of the few dozen cities within its boundaries? Are the benefits worth the costs? These are political questions that voters like you will decide. I simply put this information out there for people to judge for themselves. I'm not sure how that makes it "obviously written by a lib."

I'm uploading the full spreadsheet of cost estimates so you can check their math and assumptions. Feel free to share what you think about those.

Don't go there -- NO ONE was looking for fraudulent votes during the recount. Such a quest would be impossible, as there is no way to track a ballot back to the voter once it has been processed.
Every time a concerted effort is made to reveal the lack of integrity in the Minnesota election system, ample evidence is found on a scale much broader than that necessary to affect the outcome of elections.

Before you sign your neighbor's name, the judge will have asked you to read the statement at the top of the page (provided in large print at the last election) telling you that you will be subject to a large fine and up to 5 years in prison. And, when your neighbor shows up to vote, you would be found out. You also risk the fact that the judge may know your neighbor and realize that you are an imposter. A large portion of those who are eligible do not even register to vote and about 40% of registered voters do not even bother to vote. Who are these folks who want to vote so badly that they will risk 5 years in prison for the opportunity? Let's use our common sense and ask ... what would be the point? Also, related to Dave's comment, if new people register to vote, the number who vote in that election will then be higher than the number who had originally been registered and will look as if the rate is over 100% ... not true.

to Carole,--I read where you have made many comments on this topics. Having been an election judge in both Metro counties & trained by 2 different groups, this threat of Prison is meanless. The cost to prosecute this type of crime is greater than the good---sending someone to jail for murder let alone stealing. By the way, Dave's comment is true. In states which have Voter ID laws, the voter turn out is much greater. You have been buffaloed by the Media. Quit reading the Star tribune. They do not tell the truth

"And, when your neighbor shows up to vote, you would be found out."

How? Please, oh please explain to me how you'd catch someone who signed in using a false name after the fact.

They'll know somebody voted using a false identity. How will they know who?

And just what value would there be to the photo ID to those service men and women? Wouldn't it make it impossible for them to vote if they needed to prove their identity by comparing the voter's face to their photo ID? Will we be denying the right to vote to service men and women just as we will be doing to those snowbirds in AZ or FL?

The very fact that Al Franken is a Minnesota Senator cries out for voter ID. Even without the voter fraud issue, being able to vote is a PRIVILEGE as well as a right where I come from and our soldiers have payed a dear price to keep it. Given the ease in which ID can be obtained, if you haven't the will to find a way to get an ID (assuming you are a citizen) you don't deserve the privilege!

Another RED HERRING by Carole, I would suggest that you must have called the Gore office in 2000 and asked why the service men's votes were not counted. THINK

I worked as a volunteer observer on that recount and it was such an open process that Minnesota won praise throughout the country for the transparency of our system. We DO need to clarify the voting status of felons who are no longer in prison so that it does not cause confusion. In some states, if you are in prison ... you do not vote. If you are legitimately out of prison, your rights are restored. In MN, you may be out and on probation but not being seen by a probation officer and mistakenly believe that your rights have been restored when they were not. Let's make that clearer.

Carole, OR Miss Red Herring
Let me guess--you voted for Al Franken. You take the Star Tribune, Your friends are all liberal, You are an activist with the DFL

Source: American Civil Librties Union? LOL Nuff said....

I think you are confused. Over 160 have been CONVICTED for voter fraud from the 2008 election alone. That number is only a fraction of the total number of ineligible voters. Most were not charged simply beause they couldn't prove the person knew they were ineligible. The standard for conviction is very, very high. Under MN Stat. 201.014, "Any individual who votes who *knowingly* is not eligible to vote is guilty of a felony." This requires proving not only that a person did it, but also that they knew it was wrong.

The case you refer to was one instance in a very very narrowly defined set of criteria for the ACLU's publicity stunt reward offer - one that backfired on them. See here for a bit of reality on voter fraud and election integrity issues:
http://www.protectmyvote.com/?page_id=255 If you look at the report on convictions (which is outdated - there have been many more since then), you will find the names of 113 individuals who were CONVICTED for voter fraud in 2008. You can look them up in the court system if you have doubts.

Hope this helps!

Voter Fraud does happen... Not often, but here's an interesting case:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57371606/ind-election-chief-found-guilty-of-voter-fraud/

Who cares if they write "lizard liberal"? If they want to waste their vote its their RIGHT! You guys are all for RIGHTS right?

Ron, the point that Jane was making was about the recount and why the counts kept changing. The problem with those ballots were that they were not marked clearly. NOT that they were cast improperly.

In a close election there would still be the same issues with voter intent, with or without ID.

Also I think Lizards are non-partisan...

The ballots themselves provide no evidence of voter fraud. There is nothing on a ballot that indicates who cast it, how many they cast, or if they were eligible to cast a ballot. Recounting ballots just proves the accuracy of the optical scan machines. Evidence of voter fraud is found in other ways, like undeliverable official election mail (6,000 unexplainable returned postal verification cards sent to election day registrants from 2008), comparing databases of known ineligible voters (ie convicted felons) to the voter history database (over 1,000 ineligble felons voted in 2008), comparing the voter history file to the Social Security death index (thousands of dead people on the voter rolls in violation of the federal Help America Vote Act or HAVA), etc. Then, there's vouching fraud: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmBlonSeaoQ&list=UUrNQJNuHJodSlhzLIiwjr9A&index=3&feature=plcp

People like you whose first thought is to break the law apparently aren't smart enough to figure out thats its easier to get a valid ID than a fake one. If you are a felon or an illegal your vote is only a small part of the pain you cause our society and will have to be dealt with in other ways.

So you don't have an answer other than ease of getting an ID?

Um - if your concern is Fraud - then we should stay focused on fraud because if the answer is "get an id" then there must not be a fraud issue and you just want id's for some reason that has nothing to do with fraud...

If you are concerned about fraud than I ask again - is every person at the Voting locations going to be trained to be experts at spotting forged ID's?

If voting fraud is bad enough to incur these costs then we should probably actually try to ensure that fraud doesn't take place shouldn't we?

If not, then let's get serious and what are we trying to solve here?

Dan, can you and Dan start using your middle initials along with your names? (unless they are the same!)
It's really confusing reading articles where both are quoted. Just a thought.

Right, Dan. Here's another example where progressives vastly inflate the "estimated" costs of a conservative proposal, while they minimize or dismiss altogether the solid and verifiable numbers that support the proposal in the first place.

As it happens our middle initials are the same. So are our job titles. Not my fault.

Middle initials too! That is too funny. How about childhood nicknames?

You two aren't in the same voting precinct are you? THAT would cause some confusion.

In response to a previous comment on how someone would be caught at the poll if he attempted to vote in the place of a neighbor: The judge is instructed to keep "the book" facing away from the prospective voter and to ask the person to verify both the address and birthdate. Secondly, most of the judges live right in the precinct and at least one is likely to know the neighbor who is the legitimate voter. Third, if the legitimate voter has already cast their ballot, the imposter would be discovered immediately. But lets get real and acknowledge that voter fraud based on one person misrepresenting themselves as someone else very, VERY rarely happens and, yet, that is the only type of fraud that would be stopped by photo ID. Also, related to a different comment, there is a difference between committing fraud vs. being an ineligible voter. That latter is not fraud because it is viewed as unintentional rather than intentional. That was the case with most instances of felons who voted. Because most had photo IDs, the best way to stop this is to simplify the system and let former felons who have completed their time in prison to vote after release as is done in many states.

"The judge is instructed to keep "the book" facing away from the prospective voter and to ask the person to verify both the address and birthdate. Secondly, most of the judges live right in the precinct and at least one is likely to know the neighbor who is the legitimate voter. Third, if the legitimate voter has already cast their ballot, the imposter would be discovered immediately."

I think not. First of all, fraud isn't likely to be committed by a neighbor, but by someone from outside your precinct. The book facing away is useless. The voter rolls are available from the SOS, listing names, addresses, year of birth and precincts of every voter. It also shows how often a person votes - do they vote in primaries? non-presidential?

If you give a name that's already been signed, just say, "well, there must be two of us" and complete an Election Day registration. Not really "busted."

So, again, how are you going to catch someone who voted using a false name, after the fact?

Say I walk into your precinct, give the name Don Johnson and have a random voter vouch for me and I vote. Later, a post card gets mailed to the false address I provided. It comes back undeliverable and "Don Johnson" is flagged for challenge in the *next* election. Election officials suspect Don Johnson is not a real, eligible voter, but my ballot has already been accepted and counted. You have no idea who actually cast the ballot. How are you going to prosecute Dan McGrath.

If ID verification is so expensive, did the governor reimburse Pharmacies who must now treat customers like felons when we need cold medication? Just wondering...

In order to register to vote, you are required to show an ID with a current address and that can be a drivers License, learners permit, MN ID card, or tribal ID, etc. If the ID does not have the current address a utility bill with the name and current address can accompany a drivers license, passport, etc. If the registrant has none of these, they can also provide the last four digits of their social security number or can also have a registered voter in that same precinct vouch for their identity and residence. The registrant also signs a statement that acknowledges that giving false information "is a felony punishable by not more than 5 years in prisonment or a fine of not more than $10,000." A previously registered voter, however, is not required to show ID although the also sign the same statement. They are allowed to vote even if their purse and ID had been stolen the day before the election. As a judge, however, I appreciate those people who do show us their drivers license because it does speed up the process and helps us to understand the correct spelling and to find the name. No registered voter should be denied the right to vote if they do not happen to have that ID with them for whatever reason.

Folks, Carole Rydberg has nothing to do but comment on this topic. This is now her 61th comment!!

You MUST be kidding! Are you saying that community organizers are so successful at encouraging someone to vote that an ineligible voter will risk 5 years in prison for the privilege of casting one vote? Even if they ran around all day and tried to vote a dozen times, it is unlikely to influence an outcome. Also, in response to the issue of why the vote counts kept changing during the recount that was mentioned by Charles: When either side challenged a ballot during the recount process, it was set aside and not included in the totals. Then after lawyers and observers from both sides examined that ballot and determined if it should be counted and, if so, for whom, it was then added to the count. That is why the totals kept changing.

@Carole Rydberg (below): You cannot honestly believe that persons intent on affecting the outcome of an election are dissuaded by a prospective penalty for violation of an oath. All they need to do is look at the penalties imposed by the courts in past cases, and they realize that, even in the unlikely circumstance of being caught and convicted, they will receive nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
In true progressive fashion, you minimize the impact on an election of an organized effort to illegally affect the outcome of an election. All it would have taken in the 2010 election is a swing of TWO VOTES PER PRECINCT, and we would have an honest person occupying the Governor's Office. In the 2008 election, a swing of ONE VOTE in fewer than 10 % of Minnesota precincts to keep a clown from "representing" Minnesotans in the U.S. Senate. Don't try to minimize the impact of an organized effort to illegally affect the outcome of Minnesota elections.

To 'Red' Rydberg, I have been a testifior before the State Senate, State House, I am involved in Mn Voters's alliance -who has sued Mark Richie, I have been involved with Mn Majority, Election Judge, read many articles nationwide, voluteered with 'TRUE THE VOTE'. All I can say is that you are dead wrong. Your passion [& maybe the Stribe] has overcome wisdom. 75% of people want it. Your mistatements coming from the liberal origanizations will not change any minds. GIVE IT UP

When you cash a check or get on a plane, etc. they ask for ID but do they insist that it shows your current address? THAT is the problem for any senior who happens to be moving about between home, care center, etc. The fraud that was identified was primarily due to confusion about when voting rights are returned to felons who are no longer imprisoned and they had photo ID's so spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on photo ID each time a person moves would do nothing to prevent the most likely (although rare) fraud. It is nice that so many people value voting so highly that they believe that people would risk five years in prison for that privilege. Sadly the half of eligible voters who do not even bother to vote don't seem to value it very highly at all. Sad, isn't it?

Non existent as long as your horse wins. In Franken's case only part of the horse crossed the finish and it wasn't the head. You are right about the house burning.; If you would have used the wall extinguisher you wouldn't have needed the fire department !! Fix the basics and you don't have the problem...(goes right over your head doesn't it?)

Honest?... really? ... liberals? LOL. Just bring it in November!! We'll see whose base is shrinking...

Shrinking base? Care to bet your food stamps on that really ignorant comment?

If ANYONE is "DISENFRANCHISED" (liberal speak for VICTIM SYNDROME) it is and has been the voter who has played by the rules and performs his civic duty without bawling and whinning. Every time an activist stuffs the ballot box or illegals vote it cancels out the vote of legitimate citizens who are actually invested in the rule of law. Yesterday I had to show a photo ID to have dinner. Common sense is truly LOST on the liberal mindset. VOTE YES ON BOTH AMENDMENTS.

Seriously, be honest with yourself. Do you really think there is a group of people that are sitting at home, with no ID, really wishing to get out and vote but suddenly feel trapped or “disenfranchised”? These same people are obviously not out working, buying things, volunteering... Just to volunteer today you need a background check and a photo id. Seriously, people. Who is exactly being disenfranchised? You are lying to yourself.

Oh, they fully grasp what the voter ID laws are all about. They never seemed to care about these voter ID laws until the "black guy" got elected, when they saw that the "white" vote is becoming less influential, that suddenly those brown skinned people's votes can have a real impact, that their "way of life" is under assault - oh they know full well why voter ID laws are being pushed.

They talk about "voter disenfranchisement" as if they can point to vast conspiracies going on - then they say "Even 1 Vote" - well can they guarantee that every vote cast by a voter in every election at every voting spot is 100% accurately counted - that there is not a SINGLE ballot EVER that is recorded for the wrong candidate?

No they cannot. We have seen just in the Republican Primaries the number of ballots received by each candidate change when they recount so they can't even ensure the sanctity of the ballot box in their own primaries.

And where is the big push to ensure that EVERY VOTE is 100% accurately counted every time? (I hear crickets out there Republicans, come on where is your plan for that?).

These people know full well why the voter ID bills are being pushed, it has nothing to do with the "sanctity of the ballot box" and has everything to do with trying to win with a decreasing share of the overall vote in the country by the white, conservative demographic.

Way to go ROB!!! You have no real argument. You don’t agree with the majority of the messages on here so you resort to the #1 liberal tactic. You cry racism. You are a perfect liberal solider. Even though you look like a huge racist for even bringing the matter up, you stuck to the script and spewed your garbage. Well Done!!

Come on Carole, use your brain. Try reading an actual article on the subject. Those issues would be dealt with.

...common sense is truly LOST on the liberal mindset... Most of the folks you mention are or should be insulted by your assumption they are not capable of getting their vote counted because of their situation. I'll guarantee you those citizens in Afghanistan have this situation well under control! LOOSE their right to vote?
Your low opinion of Americans is typical of the liberal ideal... you don't have to make any effort to get what you need or want ... and some have to work harder than others to accomplish it ... it AIN"T FAIR but we nasty conservatives have made that the rule since life is always FAIR.

This isn't related to voter ID, but it's worth noting that service members in Afghanistan don't necessarily have "this situation well under control."

When I was in Baghdad just before the 2008 election, I met a pair of soldiers who on their own initiative worked to educate others about how to submit ballots in the event they didn't arrive on time.

Their concern was a real one. A report found that half of ballots got to overseas voters too late in that election (http://www.stripes.com/news/report-half-of-absentee-ballots-got-to-overseas-voters-too-late-1.87871). Notably, people in the military made up only a fraction of the survey group, so this is not a problem confined to the unique circumstances of Iraq and Afghanistan.

A report on the 2010 election (http://www.stripes.com/news/report-one-third-of-overseas-voters-couldn-t-cast-a-ballot-last-fall-1.134413) found the number had dropped to one-third for that election—still too high, in my opinion.

Like I said, this isn't really related to voter ID. I just thought it was a good opportunity to point out an important issue.

Again, the overseas voting issue is totally separate from voter ID. But with regards to ballots arriving late, there is clearly a problem. The soldiers did what they were supposed to—registered on time, requested an absentee ballot, etc. They had every reason to believe their ballots would arrive on time. But in at least one out of three cases, that didn't happen. Backups are important, but there's a problem when those backups become the primary method. A couple soldiers had to take it upon themselves to educate their comrades about alternatives precisely because so many others didn't know those alternatives existed. I, for one, didn't know the steps to take at the time—and, as a reporter, I had much better access to the Internet, cell service and other resources than the average soldier at a small outpost.

(For those who are curious, the Overseas Vote Foundation has created a YouTube video explaining what to do: http://youtu.be/2KPGyUZk8Mw)

So I don't think it's whining to call attention to a legitimate problem. It's just recognizing that this is one more way we could support our troops. The good news is that, unlike with voter ID, this is a logistical challenge, not a political one. The numbers are dropping, and we're seeing progress. Still, I hope we see quite a bit more progress come November.

I wrote the post above before I saw this one. Looks like we're on the same page re: overseas voting.

So - where are the Republicans on correcting the issue of ballots and our military?

Republicans have enough time and energy to expend on a non-existent issue of "voter fraud" relating to ID's (along with spending taxpayer money on it) but can't spend any time for our military voters?

The truly ironic thing about Voter ID is that most of the cases of Fraud I have seen reported would not be solved by Voter ID laws...

So again - this is all about driving down voter turnout.

Can these Republicans guarantee that every ballot is correctly counted every time?

Of course they can't - they can't even get the counts correct in their own Primaries in mulitple states - and yet that is TRUE voter disenfranchisement but not a single word o of concern from Republicans on this issue. Why not? Because it doesn't help them to drive down voters.

Republicans just can't be honest about what they are doing, which I understand, because actually acknowledging that this was never an issue until the "black guy" was elected, while it would be cheered by their Base it wouldn't go over very well with swing voters who decide general elections.

Hey Rob, you are projecting your own ugly feelings on everyone here. Obviously, you are a huge racist. You are the only person to post a comment and mention race. When everyone else on here was stating facts and opinions, you screamed racism. Why? Obviously you are racist. And as a liberal screaming racism, you are also obviously white.