Back in April, Rep. Steve Simon (DFL-St. Louis Park) warned that the Poll Tax Amendment may be susceptible to a legal challenge, since the proposed language is misleading. Here’s what I wrote at the time:

Simon’s argument was simple: The amendment as worded does not offer a full summary of the changes that would be made to Minnesota law, and therefore is illegal.

Most importantly, it’s the GOP’s intention that the Poll Tax Amendment will usher in the use of provisional ballots in Minnesota. Thousands of Minnesotans — possibly including some with valid IDs — would be required to use provisional ballots, which may never be counted. Yet the proposed amendment doesn’t say a word about provisional ballots.

Today, a group of concerned Minnesotans announced a lawsuit based on similar reasoning:

Is the wording on a proposed Minnesota constitutional amendment requiring a photo ID to vote misleading? A court may decide that issue since The American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota, along with League of Women Voters Minnesota, Jewish Community Action and Common Cause Minnesota are filing a lawsuit. Today the groups announced the lawsuit.

The Supreme Court should absolutely strike down the amendment, or at the very least specify new language to be put on the November ballot. Voters considering the amendment must be informed that the amendment will end same-day registration, restrict absentee balloting, and require the use of provisional ballots in Minnesota, many of which will never be counted. Amending our constitution should never be done lightly. Voters need to have all the facts. If they don’t, this amendment has no place on the ballot.

Have you read the bill that put the Poll Tax Amendment on November’s ballot? The final version sets a strict standard for identifying potential absentee voters. In fact, it’s so strict that I wonder how absentee balloting would possibly work. Here are a couple of relevant excerpts (the full text is here):

(b) All voters voting in person must present valid government-issued photographic identification before receiving a ballot….

(c) All voters, including those not voting in person, must be subject to substantially equivalent identity and eligibility verification prior to a ballot being cast or counted. [Emphasis added]

Voters not voting in person “must be subject to substantially equivalent identity and eligibility verification.” I can’t help but wonder — how in the world will that work for absentee voters? And even if it can be made to work somehow for most absentee voters, how will it work for soldiers serving oversees? At least some of them are going to lose their right to vote.

It seems to me that only way to provide “substantially equivalent identity and eligibility verification” to presenting a photo ID in person is to appear in person yourself. But voters who are voting absentee often do so because they can’t appear in person, like our military oversees. How will these voters be able to exercise their constitutional rights?

Ending absentee ballots is just one of many far-reaching consequences the Poll Tax Amendment will have on our elections. It will strip thousands of their right to vote, end same-day registration, and end absentee balloting. On top of that, it will cost millions to implement. We can’t afford this radical change that would deprive thousands of their right to vote.

The Voter ID amendment, which I’ve been referring to as the Poll Tax Amendment, has two related goals:

1. End same-day voter registration, making it harder for new voters to exercise their right to vote.
2. Make voting expensive and difficult, stripping the poor of their right to vote.

The second item above is commonly referred to as a poll tax — an illegal charge for voting aimed at taking away certain citizens’ constitutional right to vote.

I know the common retort: The IDs would be free. But the cost of the IDs themselves is just the start. Gathering the documentation required for the IDs can be expensive, time-consuming, and difficult — in some cases, even impossible, as the documentation may no longer exist.

In an Op-Ed in MinnPost, Jay and Iris Kiedrowski gave a great example of the hidden costs of obtaining an ID for Jay’s mother:

Read More

Former Republican Governor Arne Carlson doesn’t like the MNGOP Poll Tax Amendment one bit, and he had some harsh words about the amendment. In fact, he even called it a poll tax aimed at voter suppression.

Clearly, the MNGOP isn’t fooling anyone. Even members of their own party understand that the amendment is all about stopping people from voting. Carlson also warned that once this can of worms is opened, there’s nothing to stop the parties from regularly trying to suppress each others’ voters. That would indeed be a stain on our system of free and fair elections.

You can see some excerpts of Carlson’s comments below, courtesy of The UpTake:

On Friday, I wrote that Voter ID is “an opening for bureaucratic mistakes to strip you of your constitutional rights.” I want to give you an example of the sort of mistake I’m talking about.

Years ago, when my sister-in-law was applying to college, she was told she couldn’t receive student aid because of her immigration status. That was news to her — she was born in St. Paul. Because of a data-entry error, though, that’s not what her record showed. To compound the problem, the computer system insisted that it needed her Green Card to clear things up — which, as a citizen from birth, she of course did not have.

When you’re dealing with the data of millions or even hundreds of millions of people, these sorts of mistakes are inevitable. My sister-in-law got things sorted out, and no harm was done, but it took a few weeks. But what if she hadn’t been applying for student aid, but trying to vote?

People in my sister-in-law’s place — innocent victims of simple data-entry errors — could easily be wrongfully stripped of their constitutional rights to vote. Citizenship status recorded improperly? Have a typo in your home address? Your ballot will be discarded, and you may never even find out.

If the Poll Tax Amendment passes, thousands of people may be wrongfully denied their constitutional rights because of minor clerical errors. Does the MNGOP have any sort of solution for this? Of course not — they don’t even have any enabling legislation written. This is a grotesque attack on our most fundamental rights as citizens.

Here in Minnesota, we’ve been fortunate to have a great election system, so we’ve never really had to deal with the nightmare of provisional ballots. But if the Poll Tax Amendment passes in November, we’ll all need to start learning about provisional ballots, and I guarantee you won’t like what you learn.

What is a provisional ballot? It’s a fake ballot that lets you feel like you got to vote, but which may never be counted. It’s an incomplete ballot that can be thrown away if you don’t return to the polling place a second time. It’s an opening for bureaucratic mistakes to strip you of your constitutional rights. And it’s the Republicans’ primary method for reducing the number of votes in Minnesota elections.

In the 2008 election, approximately 70 percent of provisional ballots were actually counted. At first glance, that might not sound so bad. But that means 30 percent of all provisional ballots are thrown out, and those voters are being deprived of their legal right to vote.

If the Republicans have their way, provisional balloting will be all too common in Minnesota. In fact, it may not limited to voters without ID. It may be required for same-day registration as well, forcing thousands upon thousands of same-day registrants to cast fake ballots that may never get counted. In fact, ending same-day registration is an important goal of the Poll Tax Amendment.

Can we really afford to take a chance that the Poll Tax amendment will force hundreds of thousands of us to cast provisional ballots? Voting is our most fundamental right. I for one won’t accept being given a fake ballot — I demand my right to vote.

In a ceremony today, Governor Mark Dayton vetoed the Republican bill that will place their Poll Tax Amendment on the ballot. The MNGOP’s Poll Tax Amendment is an effort to implement a poll tax in Minnesota by requiring photo ID to vote; it would also end same-day voter registration. The Governor doesn’t have the power to keep the amendment off of the ballot, but his veto wasn’t entirely symbolic.

According to one insider I spoke with earlier today, the Governor’s veto will have a small impact. There are three lines of the bill that the Governor does have the right to veto:

(b) The title required under Minnesota Statutes, section 204D.15, subdivision 1, for the question submitted to the people under paragraph (a) shall be: “Photo Identification Required for Voting.” [Full text available here]

So while the Governor doesn’t have the power to keep the amendment off of the ballot, it appears he may have the power to reject the Legislature’s preferred title for the amendment on the ballot, leaving that decision up to the Secretary of State instead.*

Certainly, the Legislature’s chosen title doesn’t convey the full impact of the bill, and so deserved the Governor’s veto. If I could humbly suggest a title for the Secretary of State, it would be “Voting Rights Suspended; Same-Day Registration Repealed.”

*I’m not a lawyer, so take this analysis with a grain of salt.

After yesterday’s passage of the Poll Tax Amendment by the Republican legislature, Rep. Steve Simon (DFL-St. Louis Park) argued that the Supreme Court might strike it from the ballot. Simon’s argument was simple: The amendment as worded does not offer a full summary of the changes that would be made to Minnesota law, and therefore is illegal.

Most importantly, it’s the GOP’s intention that the Poll Tax Amendment will usher in the use of provisional ballots in Minnesota. Thousands of Minnesotans — possibly including some with valid IDs — would be required to use provisional ballots, which may never be counted. Yet the proposed amendment doesn’t say a word about provisional ballots.

I hadn’t thought about this, but Simon’s got a great point. Can it really be legal to put this issue on the ballot without even mentioning the huge changes that would be made to balloting and voter registration? You can be sure that we’ll find out; there will certainly be a lawsuit.

Watch Simon’s explanation below, courtesy of The UpTake:

Sheesh, that was fast. The House GOP held a late-night vote last night to pass their anti-voting Poll Tax Amendment, moving as fast as the rules allow. I’m not exactly clear on why they felt such a need to rush. Maybe it’s because they’re trying to wrap up and go home already.

It’s sick to see just how excited the MNGOP is to get the Poll Tax Amendment on the ballot. They can’t even wait a day! This amendment is a despicable effort to improve Republicans’ chances of winning elections by taking away our most fundamental constitutional right. It’s an attack on our freedom so disgusting and cynical it should be unthinkable. And they can’t wait to get it on the ballot.

I think I’ve said nearly everything there is to say about the GOP’s poll tax. Rather than saying it all again, here’s a small sampling of past coverage here on MNpublius:

• GOP actions prove their goal is to stop you from voting
• There is no voter fraud in Minnesota
• Not only would the amendment take away your right to vote, it would be expensive, too
• This is the sort of person who will lose her voting rights to the GOP’s poll tax

There’s one last subject that I’ll be writing about in the days and weeks to come: How the Poll Tax Amendment will make it harder for even voters with IDs to vote. Republicans aren’t just after the poor and elderly, they’re after same-day registration, too. More on that soon.

The MNGOP’s “voter ID” poll tax will take away thousands of Minnesotans’ right to vote. And they’re not trying to minimize that damage; in fact, they’re doing their best to maximize it. That was evident when the conference committee stripped away provisions that would have allowed for the use of new technologies for verifying voters’ identities.

I had a feeling this would happen when I wrote the following last week:

…the conference committee vote will be a test of the Republicans’ motives. The [provision for new technologies] makes a lot of sense if you’re really interested in making our elections work better. But I suspect the GOP will find one big problem with it: Future technologies may make things easier for the poor and elderly, and might allow too many of them to vote.

Forcing voters to get ID — and eliminating better options like electronic poll books — is all about instituting a poll tax. Republicans must want to put up barriers to voting, or they wouldn’t have rejected new technologies that can eliminate the need for a physical ID.

Requiring a physical ID requires the poor to make a trip they may not have the means to make. It requires the elderly to find documentation that may be long lost. To DFLers, these are obstacles to voting that must be eliminated. To Republicans, they’re the whole point.