Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


House GOP Voter ID Legislation Has Strong Support Statewide

Bookmark and Share

Even though the Voter Integrity Act of 2009 (HF 57) introduced earlier this week by Minnesota Representative Tom Emmer (R-Delano) has been characterized by some in the media as a "politically divisive idea" ("Requiring Voter IDs Is Back on the Agenda," Pioneer Press, 1/26/09), public opinion conducted on the issue of requiring voter IDs reveals overwhelming support for the measure in the Gopher State.

On October 22, 2008 the Rasmussen polling firm asked 500 likely voters in Minnesota whether or not voters should be required "to show photo identification such as a drivers license before being allowed to vote." Nearly three-quarters of Minnesotans (73 percent) were in favor of such a proposal, with a scant 20 percent in opposition. In a Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters taken in August 2006, the split was 83 percent in favor and 13 percent opposed.

With supporters outnumbering opponents in the electorate by more than a 3:1 ratio, the issue of photo IDs may be politically divisive at the Capitol among party elites, but not on the farms outside Kenyon or in the streets of Stillwater. Emmer claims the legislation is not a partisan issue, and the Rasmussen poll lends credence to this view.

Legislation of this kind is extraordinarily popular among residents throughout the Upper Midwest. An October 23, 2008 Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters found support at 80 percent and opposition at 13 percent in Iowa, and at 73 percent and 23 percent respectively in Wisconsin.

Similar legislation has passed in seven other states, with Indiana's voter ID law recently being upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision.

Interestingly, Minnesotans feel strongly about the need for voter IDs despite being quite confident in the voting system overall. In October 2008, the Rasmussen poll also found 66 percent of Minnesotans to be "very confident" that "ballots are properly counted in most elections and the right person is declared the winner." Only 8 percent were "not very" or "not at all" confident, and 26 percent were "somewhat confident."

Some House DFLers maintain election fraud is not a problem in the state and requiring voter IDs is an unfair barrier that will suppress urban area and minority voting.

Whether or not there are political motives behind Emmer's legislation, it can certainly be maintained that his bill echos the views of a supermajority of Gopher State residents.

Previous post: Pawlenty Invokes Obama and Displays Fancy Footwork On Tax Policy in Budget Presentation
Next post: How Long Will It Take to Regain the 65,000+ Jobs Lost in Minnesota in 2008?

3 Comments


  • The problem with "Voter ID" legislation, is it usually gets shot down in Court.

    If and when legislation is drafted that can survive a Constitutional challenge, I'm all for it.

    Unfortunately, past performance suggests Rep. Emmer's is just more of the same.

  • This bill is based on the Indiana law that has already been heard and upheld in the US Supreme Court. It won't be shot down in court.

  • I live near Stillwater and I disagree with the poll. So the poll's question is maybe too simple. If you asked "should Minnesota implement a photo ID for voting even though there has never been a case of fraud?" I know you would get a different result. I know this push polling is not fair normally, but the question as posed is almost implying there is a "issue" and you would not ask this question unless fraud was being committed.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Which States Own the Best Track Record in Backing Eventual GOP Presidential Nominees?

    Nine states (each with primaries) have an unblemished record in voting for the eventual Republican nominee since 1976 - and not all host contests on the back end of the calendar.

    Political Crumbs

    Evolving?

    When Scott Walker "punted" back in February after being asked if he was comfortable with the idea of evolution he added, "That's a question a politician shouldn't be involved in one way or the other." However, it may very well be a question that is asked at one of the upcoming GOP debates this year. In South Carolina during the first GOP debate in 2012, FOX News' Juan Williams asked Tim Pawlenty, "Do you equate the teaching of creationism with the teaching of evolution as the basis for what should be taught for our nation's schools?" Pawlenty replied, "There should be room in the curriculum for study of intelligent design" but that it was up to the local school districts if it should be in a science class or comparative theory class. At the fourth Republican debate held in California, Jon Huntsman addressed the GOP becoming "anti-science" thusly: "Listen, when you make comments that fly in the face of what 98 out of 100 climate scientists have said, when you call into question the science of evolution, all I'm saying is that, in order for the Republican Party to win, we can't run from science. We can't run from mainstream conservative philosophy."


    73 Months and Counting

    January's preliminary Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers show Minnesota's unemployment rate of 3.7 percent was once again lower than Wisconsin's 5.0 percent. That marks the 73rd consecutive month in which Minnesota has boasted a lower jobless rate than its neighbor to the east dating back to January 2009 including each of the last 67 months by at least one point. The Gopher State has now edged Wisconsin in the employment border battle for 204 of the last 216 months dating back to February 1997. Wisconsin only managed a lower unemployment rate than Minnesota for the 12 months of 2008 during this 18-year span.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting