Dispute over military voting heats up Minn.'s photo ID campaign

  • Article by: JIM RAGSDALE , Star Tribune
  • Updated: October 25, 2012 - 6:25 AM

Opponents say in a TV ad that the amendment would make military IDs invalid, a point being contested by proponents.

  • 38
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
smeeagain2Oct. 24, 1210:29 PM

Backers of photo ID calling their opponent's ad a lie are rich! The entire basis of the campaign in favor of voter ID is based on lies! The claim that fraud even exists in tangible amounts is a lie. And the amendment will do NOTHING to stop the one type of "fraud", that is voting felons, from occurring. Vote NO. Vote NO TWICE!

ebfauvelOct. 24, 1210:38 PM

"We're not going to let them go on the air with a false advertisement designed to influence the vote"

Really? Proponents of the marriage amendment have been telling lies in their TV ads; where's your outrage over that?

jugglerOct. 24, 1210:39 PM

Typical Liberal Lies - Its been Liberals in this and past elections that have gone out of their way to prevent the Military vote. Ask the local precincts that in most cases are run by Liberals why Military absentee ballots have not been sent out on time for our overseas Military members to vote?

martiankingOct. 24, 1211:01 PM

The one main point in this article is the fact that it is not a finished piece of legislation. Leaving it up to the incoming legislature to finish it, trust us we know better, should be enough to stop most people.

mjcmspOct. 24, 1211:05 PM

"Its been Liberals in this and past elections that have gone out of their way to prevent the Military vote." --- Why would Democrats do that? Obama has received $680,000 from military donors in September. Romney received less than $400,000. Seems most members of the military are supporting Obama - just like they did back in 2008.

danderson60Oct. 24, 1211:33 PM

Since this amendment with no supporting documentation...the details to be worked out "later", then anti id amendment people are correct unless the pro id amendment people provide the documentation...oh wait they can't because it hasn't been decided on yet.

jkohagenOct. 24, 1211:44 PM

martianking- your comment about 'trust us we know better', doesn't that apply to every law and every politician? and isn't that why we have recurring elections so that changes can be made

olly_xOct. 25, 1212:15 AM

jkohagen - One small point: How will we vote them out if we've given them the power to take away our right to vote?

mcjoe1Oct. 25, 1212:43 AM

Who even knows what this amendment is really going to bring about. The best I can tell the photo ID requirement is the smallest piece of how this amendment plans to change our election process. I say vote NO and make the legislators work together on a solution that solves voting fraud without any risk of disenfranchising Minnesotans. The best solution I've heard thus far was the Electronic Poll book idea, but the GOP quickly pushed forward with this amendment before the public could learn how the Electronic Poll books actually stop fraudulent votes, can give prosecuters photo evidence of a potential fraudlent voter, all while not disenfranchising any of our fellow Minnesotans.

mcjoe1Oct. 25, 1212:56 AM

I thought the whole purpose was to show a drivers license with current address information to ensure people are voting in the proper precinct. As if anyone ever gets a new drivers license after they change their address. This amendment seems to have an ugly side effect of increasing fradulent voting by pushing people to vote according to the address on their drivers license instead of where they actually live.


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters