Senator Benson Supports Voter ID Legislation

(ST. PAUL, MN) – This Wednesday, a bill to require photo identification for voting will be heard in the Transportation Finance and Policy Committee. Senator Scott Newman (R- Hutchinson) chief authored the legislation. It holds widespread support in the Senate Republican majority and requires identification for both absentee and in-person voting.

Minnesota has some of the loosest voting laws in the country.  As many are aware, registration is available at the polls and can be done with proof of residence (such as a piece of mail) or with someone to vouch for the registering individual. No proof of citizenship is currently required, causing concern in the legislature over election security.

“The opportunity to vote in a secure election is often taken for granted,” said Senator Michelle Benson (R- Ham Lake). “So many places in the world hold dishonest or badly secured elections.  Voter ID legislation is our greatest opportunity to further fortify our polls.  Individuals unable to obtain a driver’s license can easily apply for a free voting ID. Our goal is to value every citizen equally, by not allowing their votes to be washed out by manipulation at the polls.”

The legislation requires voters to produce valid, government-issued photo identification when voting in-person or by absentee ballot. In addition, the legislation establishes a new voter identification card to be provided free-of-charge to individuals who currently lack appropriate identification. Individuals unable to provide valid proof of identity or residence would be able to cast a provisional ballot, affording the voter a period of time in which they could obtain valid identification. Same-day voter registration would also remain intact.

Those opposing the Voter ID bill in last Thursday’s hearing expressed concern that it would marginalize minorities and the disabled by making it too difficult to exercise their constitutional rights. This concern has been echoed in other state’s considering similar legislation, one example being the U.S. Supreme Court case Crawford v. Marion County. The Court held that an Indiana law requiring a photo ID to vote did not violate the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, the Court specified there are “legitimate state interests” in voting laws requiring photo ID, including deterring, detecting, and preventing voter fraud, improving and modernizing election procedures, and safeguarding voter confidence in elections. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that federal law authorizes states to use a photo identification requirement to determine an individual’s eligibility to vote.