Greater Participation Means Better Government
Reporting on Norm Ornstein's recent book It's Even Worse Than It Looks, Lori Sturdevant was relieved to discover Ornstein still holds a Minnesota notion: "If more people voted and helped choose candidates, this state and nation would be better governed."
Ornstein notes that the Amendment is presented under the pretext of guarding against fraud. "It's a pretext to try to narrow voter participation." In a recent talk at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs, Ornstein and his coauthor Thomas Mann cautioned Minnesotans to resist the Amendment which would replace election day registration with provisional balloting, that Drs. Ornstein and Mann referred to as a terrible process which "can be manipulated by partisan election officials." They recommend increasing voter turnout and ranked choice voting as ways to move from partisan extremes. Read Lori Sturdevant's article: "Voter ID as written is just not our style."
Amendments Would Harm Minnesota's Reputation
Writing on both constitutional amendments, Dane Smith, President of Growth and Justice states, "So understand this, once and for all: We will do great damage to our brand and our reputation if we approve either one of the constitutional amendments on the ballot in November."
While one amendment would impose unnecessary barriers to voting, the other would cast in constitutional stone the second-class status of our family members and friends. This is in a state which never outlawed interracial marriage and was one of the first states to allow election day registration and oath by signature to exercise one's right to vote. "Fact is," Smith emphasizes, "there is no significant problem in our election system," and thus no need for a constitutional amendment which would make it harder or impossible for so many Minnesotans to vote.