Minnesota: Voter ID headed to House floor after committee approval | TwinCities.com

A constitutional amendment to require voters to show photo identification at the polls is heading to the Minnesota House floor. The House Rules Committee passed the proposed amendment Monday, March 19, on a 13-9 party-line vote with all Republicans voting for it. If the House and Senate pass the amendment, voters would decide in the November general election whether to add it to the state constitution. Governors cannot veto amendments proposed by a majority of the Legislature, so Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton would be powerless to stop the GOP initiative. He vetoed a Republican photo ID bill last year.

Missouri: Judge considers challenge to voter ID measure | AP

Critics on Friday challenged the ballot summary for a proposed amendment to the Missouri Constitution that would clear the way to require voters to show photo identification at the polls. The Republican-led Legislature passed the constitutional amendment last year and targeted it for this year’s ballot. The measure would permit separate legislation that requires a photo ID and establishes an early voting period. Opponents contend the ballot summary developed by the Legislature is misleading and unfair. “This is the worst one I’ve ever seen, by far the worst one I have ever seen. It fails under any standard,” attorney Heidi Doerhoff Vollet said. “It’s just false and it’s wrong, and it needs to be corrected.”

Minnesota: Court fight inevitable for Minnesota voter ID | StarTribune.com

Even if the Legislature approves the measure as a constitutional amendment, opponents vow to try and keep it off November ballot. The turmoil and contention surrounding voting rights and election integrity does not cease when a state adopts the type of photo ID requirement Minnesota is moving toward. It just moves into the courtrooms. Two Wisconsin district court judges blocked the state’s strict, new ID requirement this month, after just a single election. One judge said a government that limits the right to vote “imperils its legitimacy.” The state is appealing. In Texas and South Carolina, concerns dating back to the Civil Rights era have caused the federal government to block ID laws, fearing minority voters will be disenfranchised. Those states are appealing. Even Indiana and Georgia, two states with the longest history of using strict photo ID requirements, had to battle multiple legal challenges, culminating in a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the Indiana law as being in “the interest in deterring and detecting voter fraud.”

Minnesota: Court fight inevitable for Minnesota voter ID | StarTribune.com

Even if the Legislature approves the measure as a constitutional amendment, opponents vow to try and keep it off November ballot. The turmoil and contention surrounding voting rights and election integrity does not cease when a state adopts the type of photo ID requirement Minnesota is moving toward. It just moves into the courtrooms. Two Wisconsin district court judges blocked the state’s strict, new ID requirement this month, after just a single election. One judge said a government that limits the right to vote “imperils its legitimacy.” The state is appealing. In Texas and South Carolina, concerns dating back to the Civil Rights era have caused the federal government to block ID laws, fearing minority voters will be disenfranchised. Those states are appealing. Even Indiana and Georgia, two states with the longest history of using strict photo ID requirements, had to battle multiple legal challenges, culminating in a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the Indiana law as being in “the interest in deterring and detecting voter fraud.”

Minnesota: Voter ID constitutional amendment advancing | MinnPost

Voter ID proposals in the Minnesota House and Senate appear to be only one step away from reaching the floor in both chambers. With little discussion Tuesday evening, the House Ways and Means Committee passed Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer’s version on an 18-12 party-line vote. The former secretary of state was one author of last session’s Voter ID bill that Gov. Mark Dayton vetoed. This year, she’s proposing a constitutional amendment, which would require voters to show a photo ID at the poll. The measure, which has been waylaid in Ways and Means since last year, breezed through its first committee hearing of this session last week.

Minnesota: Minnesota voter ID plan raises many practical questions | MinnPost

Despite the assurances of Voter ID supporters, the secretary of state’s office remains worried about the many unintended consequences that could result from the proposed constitutional amendment. Minnesota’s chief election officials are concerned about two key points in the amendment legislation’s updated language: The legal provisions establishing guidelines for absentee and mail-in voting and the impact on Election Day registration. The provisions are unclear enough to effectively end the practices or require expensive workarounds, election officials say.

Minnesota: Voter ID legislation in Minnesota seen widely elsewhere | BrainerdDispatch.com

A proposed constitutional amendment to require a photo ID for Minnesota voters is part of a surge of similar legislation nationwide, much of it springing from a conservative organization that’s well-known to politicians but operates largely out of public view. Six states enacted a strict photo ID requirement last year, and this year lawmakers in 31 other states are considering it. Minnesota’s Republican-controlled Legislature actually passed such a requirement last year but Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton vetoed it — prompting its backers to seek an amendment on the November ballot that Dayton cannot block. The dispute over voter ID is Exchange deeply partisan. While Republicans cast it as a common-sense requirement that foils voter fraud, many Democrats say it would make voting more difficult for the poor, minorities, the elderly and disabled — constituencies that often favor them.

Minnesota: Voter ID sponsor promises answers to come next year | StarTribune.com

As the photo ID constitutional amendment made an emotional passage through another committee Thursday, its Senate sponsor had a simple answer to queries about what will happen to absentee voters, mail-in voters, students voting away from home and provisional voters. Wait till next year, said Sen. Scott Newman, R-Hutchinson. Before the Senate Finance Committee approved his bill, Hutchinson recited his mantra: If voters approve the photo ID constitutional amendment in November, it will be up to the 2013 Legislature to decide how to implement the requirement that all voters at polling places “present an approved form of government-issued photo identification.”

Minnesota: Voter ID issue advances in Minnesota Senate | TwinCities.com

A bill that would ask Minnesotans whether to amend the state constitution to require voters to present a photo ID at the polls cleared its first hurdle at the Capitol on Wednesday. All eight Republicans on the Local Government and Elections Committee voted for the bill; all six Democrats voted against it. The bill heads next to the State Government Innovation and Veterans Committee. Eight other states have such legislation. Proponents say it’s a way to safeguard the integrity of the electoral system and reduce fraud, but critics argue it’s unneeded and will make it harder for the elderly, college students, the disabled and others to vote.

Minnesota: Voter ID measure passes first state Minnesota Senate committee | mndaily.com – The Minnesota Daily

A state Senate committee passed legislation Wednesday that would allow voters to decide the voter ID debate. If added to the November ballot and approved by voters, the state constitutional amendment would require voters to show photo identification at the polls. The amendment passed the Local Government and Elections Committee along party lines 8-6 — Republican supporters claimed it would prevent voter fraud, while opponents said it would make it harder for some people to vote. It will move to the Senate State Government Innovation and Veterans Committee.

Minnesota: Two fears drive fight on photo ID | StarTribune.com

A high-stakes political struggle over requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls is erupting in Minnesota, conjuring up emotional precedents from the notorious Jim Crow poll taxes to the old Chicago admonition to “vote early and often.” The determined Republican drive to pass a photo ID constitutional amendment as a needed deterrent to fraud — and the equally strong DFL effort to oppose it as a partisan ploy to suppress votes — has turned the ordinary driver’s license into a symbol of our national divide. “It’s like we’re back in slavery, only it’s all of us this time,” said Antoinette Oloko, an African-American woman at one of several protests against photo ID and news conferences at the Capitol in recent days. “We’ve had cases of ineligible voters, convicted felons, voting when they shouldn’t be,” said Dan McGrath of the pro-ID group Minnesota Majority, who has collected pictures of voters’ given “addresses” that turn out to be empty lots.

Florida: Congressional Redistricting Map Moves Toward Court | At the Races

The Republican-controlled Florida Senate passed a redistricting map today, sending Congressional lines that cement a strong Republican majority in the delegation to Gov. Rick Scott’s desk. Democrats immediately announced they had filed a lawsuit alleging that the map violates a 2010 popularly enacted state constitutional amendment that prohibits crafting Congressional lines with “the intent to favor or disfavor a political party or an incumbent.” Democrats blasted the state GOP, which also controls the state House.

Minnesota: Legislators contentious over Voter ID | Minnesota Public Radio

Several groups are ramping up opposition to a constitutional amendment that would require Minnesotans to present a photo identification to vote. GOP legislative leaders say they want to put the issue to voters this fall. It’s an issue gaining momentum across the country. There are 15 states that require people show a photo ID to vote and another 26 states with legislation to create voter ID laws or strengthen them. Mississippi passed voter ID via constitutional amendment last year, but that state’s law requires approval by the U.S. Department of Justice before it can take effect. The Justice Department last month rejected a new South Carolina law that requires people to show government-issued photographic identification when they vote in person. Groups representing minorities, seniors, disabled people and others hope to convince Minnesota lawmakers to stop it here.

Minnesota: Opponents of Voter ID amendment pack Senate hearing | Minnesota Public Radio

A proposed constitutional amendment to require Minnesotans to show photo identification in order to vote is facing a rough road at the State Capitol. Amendment opponents packed a Senate hearing on the measure Wednesday and dozens took turns to criticize the bill, providing most of the five hours of testimony. Republicans on the Committee on Local Government and Elections appear supportive of the bill, and they have the votes to advance it. The panel recessed without taking action or saying when the debate would resume.

Minnesota: Minnesota GOP wants voter ID on the ballot in November | StarTribune.com

Republican legislators plan to take their case for a photo ID requirement for voters directly to the voters themselves. Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer, R-Big Lake, who oversaw Minnesota’s voting system as secretary of state from 1999 to 2007, and Sen. Scott Newman, R-Hutchinson, have introduced the photo ID concept as a proposed constitutional amendment. It would require all voters to produce an “approved form of photographic identification prior to voting.” If it passes the Republican-controlled House and Senate, the proposal would go directly onto the November ballot for voters to decide. Unlike bills and budgets, where the governor can use his veto pen, Gov. Mark Dayton has no way of blocking or changing a proposed constitutional amendment approved by the Legislature.

Editorials: Citizens United v. FEC decision proves justice is blind | Jeffrey Rosen/Politico.com

Last week, the Occupy movement came to the Supreme Court. To protest the second anniversary of the Citizens United decision, the group called Move to Amend organized demonstrations at courthouses around the country — including the steps of the high court itself. (The protests began peacefully but ended with 11 arrests.) Say what you will about the strategy of organizing political protests against controversial judicial decisions, which can be overturned only by constitutional amendment, but one thing is clear: The Supreme Court was spectacularly wrong in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission when it confidently predicted that the ruling would have no significant impact on Americans’ confidence in their political system. In this sense, the Citizens United decision has much in common with the ruling in Paula Corbin Jones v. William Jefferson Clinton, which allowed President Bill Clinton to be sued for sexual harassment while in office.

Minnesota: Voter ID constitutional amendment introduced in Minnesota Senate | Politics in Minnesota

A host of Republican Senators, including Judiciary Chairman Warren Limmer, member of leadership Ted Lillie and Environment Chairman Bill Ingebrigtsen, have introduced a bill to implement a Voter ID requirement by way of constitutional amendment. A total of 10 senators have signed on to two versions of the bill, SF 1577 and SF 1578, that would bypass Gov. Mark Dayton’s threatened veto and instead put the controversial elections reform measure before voters this fall. The bills will be formally introduced Thursday in the Senate. Voter ID laws have long been a goal of Republicans in Minnesota and around the country, as opponents say they help reduce fraud and protect election integrity. Opponents — mostly Democrats — say they add unnecessary burdens to voting and target typically Democrat-friendly constituencies such as college students, the elderly and minority populations.

Editorials: Mitt Romney’s flawed plan to ‘fix’ campaign financing | The Washington Post

Mitt Romney has a prescription for the super PAC problem: Allow political candidates to collect unlimited donations, instead of having the funds funneled to supposedly independent groups. “Let campaigns then take responsibility for their own words,” Mr. Romney said at Monday’s debate. He raises an intriguing question: Given the Supreme Court’s flawed interpretation of the First Amendment — that campaign spending equals speech; that independent expenditures on behalf of candidates, even by corporations, therefore cannot be limited — would the campaign finance system be better off with a regime of no limits plus full and timely disclosure of donations? In other words, a world where the $5 million check can go directly to the candidate? As Mr. Romney put it, “Wouldn’t it nice to have people give what they would like to to campaigns, and campaigns could run their own ads and take responsibility for them?”

Editorials: The Problem With Citizens United Is Not Corporate Personhood | Truthout

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Florida Rep. Ted Deutch introduced aconstitutional amendmentin December to overturnCitizens United, one of five decisions since 2006 by which a closely divided Supreme Court vastly increased the amount of corrupting corporate money in elections. In an opinion piece critical of the decision in Citizens United, Senator Sanders wrote:

When the Supreme Court says that for purposes of the First Amendment, corporations are people, that writing checks from the company’s bank account is constitutionally-protected speech and that attempts by the federal government and states to impose reasonable restrictions on campaign ads are unconstitutional, when that occurs, our democracy is in grave danger.

The joint Sanders-Deutch Resolution proposes an amendment to the constitution “to expressly exclude for-profit corporations from the rights given to natural persons.”

Minnesota: Amendment proposals include voter ID | St. Cloud Times

Gov. Mark Dayton rejected a Republican-backed bill last spring that would have required Minnesotans to show photo identification to vote. In his veto letter, Dayton noted that the measure would have forced local governments to spend money and that it did not have broad bipartisan support. But voter ID supporters insist the measure is needed to prevent election fraud. That’s why they’ve introduced legislation that would bypass Dayton and allow voters to make the change through a constitutional amendment. Governors cannot veto constitutional amendments.