Posted on 05/31/2012 5:37:56 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
The American Civil Liberties Union has asked the Minnesota Supreme Court to keep off the Nov. 6 ballot a proposed constitutional amendment that would require voters to show a photo ID.
The ACLU petition, filed Wednesday, May 30, argues that the ballot question is misleading and fails to inform voters of changes in election law that could undermine their right to vote.
"The question is misleading and false," said Charles Samuelson, ACLU Minnesota's executive director.
The question asks voters whether the state constitution should be amended to "require all voters to present valid photo identification to vote."
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
One can not function in America's society without one!
Not much longer in my mind.
FMCDH(BITS)
They did make one technical error, not in the amendment, but in the enabling legislation.
“...enabling legislation requires a “government-issued” ID.”
The amendment can be passed as is, but the enabling legislation needs some way to permit the government to authorize some limited kinds of privately issued photo ID.
That is, there are strict identification laws, forms of ID that someone must present to get a driver’s license. If an approved private organization conforms to these demands, or greater than these demands, their photo ID should be “approvable”.
For example, a licensed bonding agency requires lots of proof of ID, and fingerprints, before it will bond a person. Thus they only have a negligible number of frauds nationwide.
Minnesota is a state where police carry small fingerprint readers, used even for traffic stops, to establish identity. No reason in the world that voting centers can’t borrow one of these units. Far more reliable than photo ID.
Again, these are all enabling act ideas, not the main referendum proposal. If these organizations want to challenge it, they can challenge the enabling acts. To challenge the referendum just means they support vote fraud.
Even Best Buy requires ID to return something with receipt! Not sure what else the would want if you didn’t have a receipt. I always ask “wait.. I need ID to do (fill in the blank) but I can vote with out one?” when asked for id. Gets them to think.. for a second or two anyways.
it has to be a us government entity id.
otherwise seiu cards, consular matricula, or any other form of dubious ID has to be accepted.
seriously the whole ID cost issue is utterly a red herring. The democrats fear absentee voter fraud prevention next.
They didn’t really need the fraud in the Franken case. They out lawyered Norm and beat him in the recount.
not to say the fraud didn’t help. it certainly did. But they could have pulled it off as long as a recount was triggered.
Even that may not be good enough. A student ID from a state university would be a "government issued photo ID". However, it would omit one important item: the student's place of residence. The student could then vote at the campus polling place using student ID, his off-campus residence poll using his passport, and back at his parent's home using his driver's license.
While there is lots of potential haggling in the enabling acts, this one is tricky. That is why a fingerprint alternative may be a good one, for people for whom a photo ID is problematic. And it would be the job of the legislature to tailor it to minimize or eliminate abuse.
A fingerprint reader might also be the way to go when issuing non-military absentee ballots, to insure only one goes to each legal voter. It could even have a little window in it with peel up adhesive tape, so they could peel up the window, touch the adhesive with their fingertip, and lower the window. So the absentee ballot would be “fingerprint signed.”
Lots of possibilities here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.