AUW Voting Rights

Two AUW members were very involved in this project. Carol Johnson, initiator and co-author of the report, presented an overview of the safeguards in place in Minnesota to protect the integrity of our elections. Jennifer Jewell Thomas, a MUUSJA and CEI board member, Voting Rights co-chair and a contributor to the report, offered an executive summary: "Voter fraud is not a problem in Minnesota and a photo identification requirement for voters is completely unnecessary."

The report highlights the finding that, from over 1500 investigations statewide, there were only 26 convictions for voter fraud. All convictions and 77% of investigations were related to confusion over felon voting rights, which a photo ID could not prevent. The report recommends:

Do not implement a voter photo identification requirement in Minnesota.
Allow all non-incarcerated felons the right to vote. Until that is implemented, implement measures to inform felons when they can and cannot vote
Change the Minnesota statute regarding Deceptive Practices in Elections from a gross misdemeanor to a felony with the requirement to serve time, so that people who intentionally and illegally deny others the right to vote would lose their own right to vote.

This project was a good example of the power of community partnerships to increase the influence of AUW's work. The report notes Johnson's and Thomas's membership in AUW, and AUW is recognized for generously contributed to the printing of the report.

The Voting Rights team had presented a program on April 20 addressing the pros and cons of recent proposals to require state-issued Photo IDs to vote in Minnesota. Our work on this issues is a collaboration with the Minnesota Voting Rights Coalition which includes our non-partisan partners: Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota, the League of Women Voters Minnesota, and Common Cause Minnesota.

Minnesotan's are already required to provide a state-issued photo ID or designated alternative when they register to vote. The proposed efforts would require already-registered voters to show a current state-issued photo ID every time they vote. This extra requirement might be appropriate if fraud were documented as a significant issue; however, all evidence demonstrates that individual voter fraud is extremely rare. In fact, on February 5, 2010, Twins Cities Public Television Almanac, former state senator and lead recount attorney for Coleman, Fritz Knaak, said, “We were looking for fraud, but we did not see it.” More specifically, impersonation of voters (which is the only fraud a photo ID at the polls might prevent) is essentially non-existent in Minnesota, as confirmed by AUW's own surveys of Minnesota county officials and confirmed by last year's Senate recount. Fraud is also documented to be rare nationally and non-partisan research groups, particularly the Brennan Center for Justice and the League of Women Voters, have done extensive research showing that requiring a photo ID to vote would prevent 10-15% of eligible voters from voting. A strong majority of voters when polled, support the idea photo ID because it's not a barrier for them. However, many people would be adversely affected for almost no gain in electoral integrity. Women are particularly at risk of being denied the right to vote with ID requirements because of name changes (so IDs may not be current). The elderly (and elderly women, particularly, because they live longer on average) are at greater risk of not being able to vote because they may not have a current ID if they no longer drive. Similarly, the poor who don't drive may not have the need or means (money and time off from work during business hours) to get an ID and provide the supporting documents. Students and other young people who move frequently may not have a current ID. People born out of state are at risk because of the time it can take to get the required documents. And how would you feel if you lost your purse or wallet just before an election and found out that you had also lost the right to vote?

The proponents of photo ID in Minnesota have not been successful in passing this with the state legislature, so now they are trying to pass such requirements with the city councils Minneapolis, St. Paul and Duluth. Perhaps it is just a coincidence that they are targeting a measure that would disenfranchise more than 10% of the voters in the three strongest democratic cities. The proposal to require registered voters to present a state-issued photo ID at the polls is not needed and would be a substantial barrier that would prevent a significant number of eligible, registered voters from casting their legal vote. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, “More citizens of Indiana have been disenfranchised by Indiana’s voter photo ID law in the last two years than the number of reported cases of impersonation at the polls cited to the Supreme Court —from anywhere in the country — in the last two decades.”