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

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    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