Recent Posts

Voter ID constitutional amendment

by The Big E on December 1, 2010 · 6 comments

Republicans absolutely hate hate hate it that so many people vote in Minnesota.  Republicans do better when fewer people vote (like in mid-term elections).  In their efforts to suppress voter turnout, they’ve created a number of organizations to push their agenda.

I’ve obtained a copy of an email from Andy Cilek, President of the MN Voters Alliance.  They teamed up with MN Majority and created a front group, Election Integrity Watch, to try and harass voters this election but largely failed.

Cilek hopes to push a Voter ID bill through the legislature this spring as well as try and get a Voter ID amendment on the ballot for 2012.  The amendment is the better shot as it wouldn’t require Mark Dayton’s signature to get on the ballot.
Here’s the email.

Dear Friend of Freedom,

For several years The Minnesota Voters Alliance has been working toward a PHOTO ID requirement for voting.  The November election has provided a GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY to implement PHOTO ID statewide.  With a republican controlled legislature, it will be much less difficult to get this vital voter protection measure passed – regardless of who the governor is!

We are working closely with Representative and former Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, who serves on our Board, to take a multi-faceted approach:    

1.    Introduce a bill for statewide PHOTO ID as a first priority.  If Governor Pawlenty is still in office in January, he would undoubtedly sign it.   If Dayton wins and is seated sooner rather than later, we are already preparing a campaign to urge him to sign the bill, including our PHOTO ID petition in St. Paul which we have nearly 3,000 signatures.  

2.   We have already begun laying the groundwork on a constitutional amendment to introduce PHOTO ID to the voters   statewide to vote on.  82% of last Rasmussen poll support PHOTO ID requirement for voting.  The Governor DOES NOT have to sign a constitutional amendment; it goes from the legislature directly to the voters!

A PHOTO ID requirement for voting can further cut down on fraudulent voting, and counteract the ridiculous VOUCHER program where ONE INDIVIDUAL can vouch for 15 “voters.” We also need a provisional ballot process in place to allow the voters to be verified BEFORE their vote is counted.    There will be much work to do on the absentee ballot process which has turned in to a bastion for fraud.  PHOTO ID is the first step in improving the integrity of our elections, protecting the rights of legal voters and increasing public confidence in our elections.  

We have also partnered with Minnesota Majority and the North Star Tea Party Patriots and thousands of supporters statewide, to start in an effort to dissuade and deter fraudulent voters from showing up at the polls.  We believe this effort was extremely successful in the most recent general election.

We spoke up for what it right, and our voices were not silenced by criminals and frauds!

There is no organization in Minnesota doing what we do.  We need your contribution in support of our legal and research expenses which currently total over $7,500.  As a 501c4 organization  contributions are not tax deductible.

Please send a generous contribution to:   Minnesota Voters Alliance, P.O. Box 4602, St. Paul, MN 55104, or, use our secure PAYPAL account online at…

Andy Cilek
President, Minnesota Voters Alliance

NorthernMNer December 1, 2010 at 7:48 am

need to really hold their caucus together, and make sure they appear to be working with the majority.  But they can’t give them a single vote.  Let all their initiatives hit Dayton’s veto pen, and paint the majority as out of touch and radical.  It worked very well for the Congressional republicans, and it can work for the DFL if they do it right.

JeffStrate December 1, 2010 at 10:54 am

are clownish con artists who play on the paranoid and un-informed among us.  How do we reach their low-informational victims?    

ericf December 1, 2010 at 11:48 am

I have no doubt it would win if the election was held now. It seems few people who drive have any clue what it’s like to not be able to afford an ID, and to not have any need for an ID since they can’t afford a car or can’t physically drive, don’t write checks, don’t fly or travel overseas.

I also wonder if the proposal might be turned to an advantage by making the IDs free, including any documents needed to get the ID, and the ID then counts as voter registration. Especially if this new ID is the only ID acceptable for voting so everyone has to get one, not just a few people. If we can’t get that, then we need to show, not talk about as hypotheticals or statistics, but show people who have been disenfranchised by photo ID laws in other states.  

Joe Bodell December 1, 2010 at 5:06 pm

Then use every avenue available (cough comms strategy cough) to make sure people understand what a Poll Tax is and why it’s unconstitutional.

arronolson December 1, 2010 at 6:49 pm

Over the last few months of the election cycle we heard a lot about photo ID. Unfortunately for the supporters of photo ID, IT DOES NOT WORK.

It will not resolve ANY voter fraud that may or may not exist, since we have seen that the only fraud that exists is a small number of felon voters. The felons who voted before their right to vote was restored, could easily provided a valid ID on Election Day.  In other words, a few dozen fraudulent votes are cast in a state of 3+ million voters and photo ID would not change that.

Photo ID will disenfranchise MANY THOUSANDS of voters. These include unknown numbers of seniors without valid ID’s, Minnesotans who do not drive, and every single university student who cannot travel home to vote on election day. We have over 400,000 college students in Minnesota, why would it be acceptable to disenfranchise nearly all of them?

jnleareth December 1, 2010 at 7:30 pm

We can either err on the side of making sure no one illegally votes but disenfranchising legal voters in the process, or we can make sure all people who can legally vote are allowed to and deal with catching fraudulent voters.  We can come darn close to the line (and our current system appears to do so) but no system can ever perfectly meet it.

And the voucher system is actually a pretty good one.  If they ever looked at how many people filed vouchers, its an incredibly small percentage.  Its not something that shows any signs of abuse.  But the best part is that it has a paper trail.  If a person fraudulently voted via a voucher, they get charged with voter fraud.  Guess what?  So does the voucher.  Its not in anyone’s best interest to vouch for a bunch of fraudulent voters because there’s a paper trail.  

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: