Here is a COMPROMISE I SUPPORT... Make state ID cards free. That is right. I should not have to pay for an ID to vote. That is a poll tax. And a very tough one for the elderly, the poor and college students. Those people should not have to pay upwards of 20 dollars for a state ID and almost 15 each time they move. So, GOP and DFL compromise. Make all state id cards free. GOP gets to stop the one or two (out of millions) of invalid votes that get cast and DFL saves the financially underprivileged from a regressive tax.

Talk about over the top hyperbole! Rosenblum's focus on a 24 year old "non-profit worker/homeless shelter intern" really gives us a great viewpoint into the views and opinions of most Minnesotans. NOT! Just when I thought it couldn't get anymore over the top we get this quote from our young crusader, "...voting is something women, especially, have died for." What? Come on Gail...if you're going to try to convince us that IDs are a real hardship please provide some credible examples to make your case.

The columnist turned me off early in her article when she proclaimed that the voter ID amendment is wholly unnecessary. That's just what she thinks. She used examples of people who all have ID's, which does not support the crux of the story. From her article, I would suggest that anybody who doesn't have a valid ID doesn't give a hoot about elections. Not only is this video not on my oscar list, the article is not on my Pulitzer Prize list.

Just watched the video - nice tug at the heart but not really loaded with facts or anything that should change the argument - there is NOTHING wrong with asking for ID - that by law you should have anyway - to determine who leads this country

Excellent column and so very true. Minnesota already has all kinds of identification requirements to register to vote. There is no need for this additional requirement. It is unnecessary, costly, and will not even address the issues it claims to. We have an excellent system right now.

Howard43 -- yes women (and men) have died fighting for the right to vote. As recently as the 1960s and back 90 years ago when women were imprisoned and force-fed all for demanding the right to vote. Do not diminish how hard many, many people have fought for the right to vote. Minnesota does not have a voter fraud problem as has been repeated proven. The only problem is that some felons have voted while on probation. Neither a voter ID or a drivers license identifies felons, much less whether or not they have voting rights. This is nothing more than thinly-veiled discrimination.

The people in the video aren't actors? Then why are they reciting the same lines. In principle I like the idea of Voter ID, but I am willing to listen to compelling argements against it. What would you need to do if you were living in your car? What if you were attending college outside of your home precinct? Unfortunately that video did not have any insight into those situations. Gayle--I love your columns, but you need to dig deeper here and give us some real insight into specific situations if you are going to change anyone's mind.

ginny6 - your statement "Minnesota already has all kinds of identification requirements to register to vote. There is no need for this additional requirement." is entirely untrue. I can walk into any polling location and have someone vouch that I live here and I can vote. Website explaining vouching: http://www.mnparticipationproject.org/voter-registration/voter-registration-guides/vouching Also, the fee for a Minnesota State ID (non-driver license) is only $11 for those 65 and older.

I love supporters of voter ID. They tell you that there is all this fraud. Well, prove it. They can't. At least not any that will be prevented by having to show your ID at the polls. They say this doesn't affect anybody and demand opponents show who it will affect. Whey opponents do that, they claim these people don't stand for "the views and opinions of most Minnesotans." As long as you can show one person who would have their voting rights taken away by this, it shouldn't be allowed. Not without proving there is some widespread fraud going on that needs to be prevented.

@mrmisinformed - the voter is vouched for by an already registered voter who lives in the same precinct. They both sign an oath under penalty of felony. Are you implying that people are vouch for those who are ineligible? Ineligible in what way? Parents vouching for their 18 year olds, neighbors vouching for neighbors, a roommate whose name is not on the utility bill vouched for by someone whose is. You are fabricating a problem where there is none.