Secretary of State Mark Ritchie said Thursday he is waging a campaign to push turnout of eligible voters above 80 percent, a threshold Minnesota hasn’t surpassed since 83 percent went to the polls in 1956. That would mean more than 3 million ballots are cast.
In 2004, the last presidential election year, a tick above 77 percent of eligible voters took part — some 2.8 million votes overall.
Ritchie, a Democrat, said it’s clear to him that “a wave is already in motion” to pad Minnesota’s turnout figures, which are routinely tops in the nation.
His “80 in ‘08” campaign is aimed at driving up participation by first-time voters, people with disabilities and seniors. Components include recently passed legislation to ease voting by soldiers deployed overseas, the use of high school civics classes to preach the virtues of voting and the coordination of transportation to help older or disabled voters get to their polling place.
While Kiffmeyer set her sights on disenfranchising Native American voters in the state, Ritchie is actually setting up programs to get more people to vote. Let this be a lesson to anyone who thinks that elections don’t make a difference.
It’s pretty amazing how you can’t even write a check at the grocery store, buy cigarettes or do any number of other day to day activities without a valid photo id. Yet, the DFL has fiercely resisted requiring photo id to vote. I can’t think of too many more activities in a person’s life where proving you’re who you say you are is more important than voting in an election.
I do most of my day to day activities without the need to show a form of ID that would be accepted under these rules.
If ID’s were free this wouldn’t be an issue but the financial barrier of ID’s will depress turnout of already underrepresented populations of eligible and registered voters, especially seniors.
I believe the ID process would be discriminatory to registered and eligible voters. For example, I would hate to turn away a previously registered and eligible voter at my precinct who lives in the same building as the polling location, a senior high rise, simply because they couldn’t find a or afford a current picture ID on election day.
Require a photo ID, then.
Validating the vote is important to everyone.
But make them FREE & convenient to get.
Have a voter sign up which has authorized registars visiting retirement centers around the state.
Ooopps. No, that would never fly on the political right.
They prefer to disenfranchise voters: a right granted to citizens.
It might be enfranchising poor people, old people who no longer drive, minorities could not be marginalized.
There are other ways to validate residency.
Some of those I heard were turned away in past elections by over-zealous election workers.
And as far as Kiffmyer was concerned, I am pretty sure I recall she was involved in refusing tribal IDs at the 11th hour. A form of ID which have been recognized as a valid form for some time.
How is that not divisive & underhanded a tactic?
Mockingbird,
Nobody on the right would care if the state spent money to provide valid, state issued IDs for the indigent. In fact, considering the indigent are vulnerable in the first place, it’s probably a really good idea to make sure we know who they are so they can receive help and not be further victimized.
If you think a tribal id is valid anywhere beyond the reservation, you’re wrong. Other than the fact that Democrats have a history of tampering with elections (ala Mayor Daley in Chicago), why are people opposed to making sure voters are who they say they are, live where they say they live and vote once?
Small amendment to previous post - which I can’t seem to edit…
I guess I can’t absolutely ascertain Kiffmeyer’s motives in her perceived attempt to disenfranchise Native Americans. She was grandmotherly woman who found herself in public office.
It certainly was divisive to take the vote from Native Americans. deja Vu, all over again. But was it DELIBERATELY underhanded?
It may not have been willful, so much as the wrong person in that office & not enough competence. Beyond her grasp. That was unfortunate.
Most especially to the people whose vote was disallowed!
Whatever happened to the “edit” button here?
I guess I am good without it - so that each statement stands on its own merit…
The one thing I didn’t do in my previous posts was to praise the concerted “get out the vote” effort which is under way.
Native Americans preceded white folks on this continent. They have an ownership that may exceed most other ethnicities.
I am glad to see the Indian Nations getting their due.
Mockingbird,
Why is it divisive to say that Native American reservations should play by the same rules as any other precinct in the state? Tribal ID is not a U.S. or state government issued form of ID. You can’t get on an airplane with your tribal ID. This isn’t about disinfranchising anyone who wants to vote. The issue is about making sure our elections are fair and honest. Joan Growe famously said that we go by the honor system when it comes to voting in this state. I can’t think of a more ridiculous and naive way to hold elections.
Chris, I agree 100%,
There is nothing about the Republican party that is divisive.
We Republicans welcome anyone who agrees with us.
Great Job!
DIVISIVE — — > look it up.
This issue is about keeping elections accurate and honest. Anything that can comprimise an election would comprimise our democracy. Is it an essential piece of our nation. Here is a partial list of what could comprimise an election:
1. People voting more than once
2. People voting falsely where they should not vote
3. Votes not being counted
4. Votes being counted inaccurately
5. People who want to vote but can’t
6. Ballots which are unclear, leading to errors
Just a partial list. The SoS should work to mitigate any of these things from occuring, and I believe some form of voter ID is perfectly justified.
You could argue that low voter turnout also comprises a democracy, but there are so many shades of gray. How much do you need to encourage someone to exercise a right that is theirs? Is it lack of awareness or just plain apathy? Which segments of people do you target, and does targeting segments in itself further comprimise an election?
Here is what it all comes down to, rhetoric, logic, or publicy policy aside. Native Americans and those negatively affected by voter photo ID requirements vote heavily Democrat. Democrats want them to keep voting, Republicans want to hinder that. I see the logic both sides provide, we do need to ensure that US citizens are voting and in their correct precinct but at the same time, proving this should be a burden so large that it prevents people from voting.
I think this is an issue both sides can compromise on and come to an agreement that ensures everyone who is eligible gets to vote while at the same time, not simply allowing people to vouch for you that you live in the precinct.
dantheman, I agree 100%
“1. People voting more than once.”
Yes, this is issue #1. Why don’t these moonbats understand?
perhaps, DantheMan, you could tell us all how many people were caught voting more than once in the 2004, or 2006 elections.
A link to that information would help feed my vapors. Lordy, lordy, I’m feeling faint already.
For some reason I couldn’t find any incidences of people voting more than once in 2006 or 2004.
I am confident that this is issue #1. Please help me DantheMan.
Great Job!
TFRGW -
Nice pivot. I point out what I believe to be 6 of a partial list of things that could hurt a democracy. You choose 1 and ask for the proof. Do you disagree that if any of these 6 were being violated, it would be an issue? And what are you afraid of by asking people to have the same proof that they are who they are as they do when they check out a book from the library?
I agree that we need to ID people when they vote. I agree that all native americans need to be able to have their votes counted fairly. I believe that hanging chads are bad.
Andrew was right — there is plenty of comprimise to be had on this issue. I think the right and left alike agree that accurate elections are sacred.
DantheMan, I agree 100%,
Everyone knows that a voter ID program would help insure that the votes are being counted accurately.
Republicans are not afraid of asking people for the same proof that they are who they are as they do when they check out a book from the library.
It is common knowledge that doing so completely solves all the problems, of course, not just your point #1.
Anyone who disagrees just wants these liberal people to vote more than once for DemocRats who hate our way of life and our freedoms.
Thanks for pointing that out to these moonbats who just don’t get it.
Great Job!!
Neither irony or sarcasm is argument.
- Samuel Butler
DantheMan, I agree 100%
“and now we have what … uh…some are reading as a suggestion that somebody knock off Osama …uh..um..Obama [after being prompted by the FNC anchor]….well both if we could [laughing]”
~Liz Trotta, FOX news May 25, 2008
Is that irony or sarcasm?
Great Job!
I don’t know what that was (the reference quote you cited) but if it is true it and Ms. Trotta have no place on an established news network.
i obviously meant shouldnt be hindered, not should…. oh typos, especially critically important ones that change meanings of sentences…
I think this is an issue both sides can compromise on and come to an agreement that ensures everyone who is eligible gets to vote while at the same time, not simply allowing people to vouch for you that you live in the precinct.
There is no compromise. We can either vote freely or not.
1. People voting more than once
2. People voting falsely where they should not vote
3. Votes not being counted
4. Votes being counted inaccurately
5. People who want to vote but can’t
6. Ballots which are unclear, leading to errors
DTM’s list has two items on it that voter ID will not solve in the least. The rest of the items are in the hands of election officials. Voter ID is simply not a problem. It’s another distraction the GOP throws out there to divide and scare us. Now, items 3 through 6 are problems and the elections of ‘00 and ‘04 prove how well the systematic voter suppression efforts of the GOP work.
The Voter ID discussion is fascinating in this regard: I live in a town of less than 3000 people, and let me tell you, the election judges know everyone, and I mean, everyone. If you are new to town, and try to vote, they know it. If you moved from an apartment to a house and need to re-register, they tell you. If you have not voted in a while and then do so, they thank you for showing up to the polls.
In talking to other election judges from small communities, they sense that this concern has more salience in urban/suburban areas, where that familiarity between people in the community is not as strong. So for many of us out here, the Voter ID issue is really a non-issue.
@ DTM-
Aside from your refusal to document your straw man (double voting) Minnesota does not use punch cards.