Anyone Want a $1000 - Simply Prove Voter Fraud in Minn

What manipulation? People are required to register to vote aren't they? Don't they probably have to identify themselves when they do that?
I would like for you to tell us what problem you could possibly have with expecting a person casting a vote to verify they are actually the person they are claiming to be.

 

Last year the Governor of Minnesota (Mark Dayton, D) vetoed a bill that would have required voters to obtain a photo ID in order to vote. The following link is his state of the State address to his State where he explains his reasoning:
http://mn.gov/governor/multimedia/pdf/Ch-69-SF509.pdf
A few selected quotes from the speech:

 

After navigating the maze that government sites are, I found a relevant document as to the estimated cost of enacting the photo ID legislation:

http://www.mmb.state.mn.us/doc/budget/impact-note/2012/sf-1577.pdf

For fiscal year 2013 the cost is estimated to be $23,346,620.
For fiscal year 2014 the cost is estimated to be $5,883,842.
For fiscal year 2015 the cost is estimated to be $4,038,274.

It should be noted that the above calculations were completed for one of two similar bills proposed in 2011 and not specific to the current proposed legislation but are used to provide a general estimate of expected costs for the current bill if it becomes law.

 

Hmmmmm... thanks for posting that. That ain't bad for ensuring that voter integrity is strengthened...

 

Voter integrity? Wouldn't getting the highest number of votes be the best way to insure the will of the majority?

 

That is what Chicago used to try. I don't mind if they set aside precincts for the grave yards, but they had better not be included in the general totals.

 

Maintaining integrity and not requiring a voter to properly identify themselves seem mutually exclusive.

 

Are you trying to start an Electoral College argument?

 

Now I intend to take a closer look at disenfranchisement claims... since I've shown that, despite righties here claiming otherwise, there is a cost to the program for the government.

Detailing costs to the consumers at this time is pointless though, as the IDs are essentially free, and any argument I make about associated costs like birth certificates (to prove citizenship) will simply be ignored by the righties as ungrounded.

But there are some associated costs for some people regardless of the righties saying there isn't and an investigation into disenfranchisement should reveal more information on both issues.

To be clear though, if the disenfranchisement claims are reasonable and can clearly show estimates of those affected, any claims by righties wanting 'election integrity' ...by insisting on a photo ID law that may not prevent the fraud the law is supposed to stop, while also causing a large group of people to be unable to vote... are unwarranted.

To answer the inevitable question of how I can say the law "may not" stop the voter fraud most often cited as cause for this law... the law isn't going to prevent felons from creating fake IDs and using them to vote.

 

I went to the eye doctor yesterday & was asked for a photo ID...I went to Staples yesterday & was asked for a photo ID.

 

What do you have against veterans?

Paul Carroll, an 86-year-old World War II veteran who has lived in the same Ohio town for four decades, was denied a chance to vote in the state’s primary contests today after a poll worker denied his form of identification, a recently-acquired photo ID from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The poll worker rejected the ID because it did not contain an address, as required by Ohio law.
Carroll told the Cleveland Plain Dealer that he got the ID from the VA after his driver’s license expired because he doesn’t drive anymore:

“My beef is that I had to pay a driver to take me up there because I don’t walk so well and have to use this cane and now I can’t even vote,” said Paul Carroll, 86, who has lived in Aurora nearly 40 years, running his own business, Carroll Tire, until 1975.
“I had to stop driving, but I got the photo ID from the Veterans Affairs instead, just a month or so ago. You would think that would count for something. I went to war for this country, but now I can’t vote in this country.”​

A local Veterans Affairs employee told the Plain Dealer that the decision not to include the address was likely made at the federal level, and because VA IDs are accepted at any location, “the actual address of a veteran isn’t as critical to us.” Carroll was offered a provisional ballot, but the type was too small for him to read and “I was kind of perturbed by then,” he said.
Republicans across the country have pushed voter ID laws to address a voter fraud “problem” that rarely, if ever, exists. Multiple laws have been challenged in court over claims that they disenfranchise voters, particularly minorities and the elderly. Carroll’s story isn’t altogether unique — Tennessee voter authorities denied a 96-year-old woman a voter ID last year because she didn’t have an original copy of her marriage license.

 

This article on voter suppression contains a lot of info that righties may want to ignore... but I'm not gonna lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression

 

A look into gerrymandering is also informative:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

 

My feeling is that if you want to make every eligible voter have some sort of government approved ID before they can vote, you had damn well better provide it free of charge and make absolutely sure that every single voter has one before any election is held. Otherwise you might as well just admit that your real intention is to suppress the votes. Anyone have a problem with that? Hum?