Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.


Voting amendment foes say 65 newspapers urge readers to vote no

In its final ad, Our Vote Our Future cites editorials from around the state.

In its final ad of the campaign season, Our Vote Our Future, the group leading opposition to the voting amendment, says 65 newspaper editorials from around Minnesota have urged a no vote on the proposal.

Included in the ad:

  • The Red Wing Republican-Eagle says, “Lawmakers did a lousy job.”
  • The Valley News says Amendment 2 would “take away the right to vote for tens of thousands of eligible voters.”
  •  The International Falls Journal says, “It puts the cart before the horse.”

The group has aired six previous ads against the proposed constitutional amendment, which would change voting procedures in the state.

The actual change, if the measure is passed, would add these paragraphs to the state constitution, according to the Secretary of State’s Office:

Article continues after advertisement

(b) All voters voting in person must present valid government-issued photographic identification before receiving a ballot. The state must issue photographic identification at no charge to an eligible voter who does not have a form of identification meeting the requirements of this section. A voter unable to present government-issued photographic identification must be permitted to submit a provisional ballot. A provisional ballot must only be counted if the voter certifies the provisional ballot in the manner provided by law.

(c) All voters, including those not voting in person, must be subject to substantially equivalent identity and eligibility verification prior to a ballot being cast or counted.

Voters will see only this wording on Tuesday’s ballot:

“Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to require all voters to present valid photo identification to vote and to require the state to provide free identification to eligible voters, effective July 1, 2013?”