state + local

tho implementese bills seem like they come from unknowns so they, unlike bachmann can claim they did something, well this will cost to implement.

While the voter ID proposal does not eliminate same day registration, I have a better idea. What if by default, when one gets your drivers license or other state issued ID you were automatically a registered voter? There would be no need to have a separate voter registration process. There would just have to be one additional question on the application. That would be, are you a US citizen? Seems so simple.

According to the estimates, they claim that the cost of provisional ballots would be $2500 per provisional ballot cast and $200 per ID given out! People need to use some common sense when they read these ridiculous reports.

Not quite as simple as you assume DLBabartz. Not everyone eligible to vote gets a drivers license, and not everyone who gets a license is eligible to vote (e.g, under 18, felony conviction, not in the state 20 days before election). License applications would need all the same questions a voter registration card has, and we'd still need a separate process for when people turn 18 or have lived in-state long enough.

During Ms. Kiffmeyer's tenure, how many cases of voter fraud were pursued? Exactly.Kiffmeyer is now committing fraud against the citizens of Minnesota.

Voters will see this question on the ballot on Tuesday: "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to require all voters to present valid photo identification to vote and to require the state to provide free identification to eligible voters, effective July 1, 2013?"

And if written to expose its true intent the wording would be more like this: "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to add roadblocks intended to discourage and suppress voting by those folks who don't much look or think like you 'n' me (and you know who we mean)?"

I call on ALL Minnesotans to ask for and receive a new voter ID EVERY two years to ensure that the system is fraud free. Damn the cost, if that is what it takes. Let us raise taxes enough to cover the cost for everyone. If this passes that is what I will be doing. I'm sure the party of fiscal responsibility won't have any problem with that.

Since passports, tribal ID and military ID don't all contain current street addresses, how would allowing them to be used prevent fraud? This is simple folks. If you want more government intrusion and higher taxes, vote yes. If you think your government is big enough, and your property tax bill is high enough, vote no. The integrity of the state's elections won't change dramatically either way.

Are we going to include a definition of the word "photo" in this amendment to our Constitution? Digital images can be manipulated very easly these days. If we put "photo" into the Constitution, does that mean that any digital image will do? How do we know that the ID is real? I think only analog imagery should be allowed to make these ID's valid. Break out the old 35mm!!! Will we still need to verify our address? Sign the voter roll? State that we are who we are? A passport is good for a large number of years. What if the picture on it, and the looks of the person holding it, are disparate? Who's going to be the judge? Will this open the door to voters being denied because of a radical haircut, or dye job, mustache, or beard? How is this going to help voters get their ballot counted? Why are we wasting tax dollars and time on an "issue" that has no basis in reality, except for the fact the Norm Coleman is a sore loser and Republicans still can't believe that the turkey lost to Senator Al Franken.

The amendment is too vague with implementation to be modified by the legislature later. I have changed my vote to NO!