Fair MN Elections?

[Makalakumu]

I am participating in some physics research at BSU this summer and I recieved the following letter via e-mail...

Dear Student,

Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, a Republican with an extremely partisan track record, is in charge of our election process this November. During the past legislative session, Kiffmeyer pushed for dangerous measures that would have made it harder for Minnesotans to vote and easier for them to be turned away at the voting booth. A
bipartisan group of legislators prevented her from enacting these changes, but now she is trying to bypass the legislature and enact
these rules herself. It is up to all of us to stop her, or face the consequences of Minnesota potentially becoming another Florida.

The only way to stop Kiffmeyer from distorting our election process is to take action today. Please FAX a letter to the Judge overseeing this issue by 4:30 p.m. this Thursday and request a public hearing. Below, please find a sample letter you can work from - the fax number is 612-349-2665. The letter must be faxed, or it will not be accepted. These decisions should not be made behind closed doors without public
comment -- just 100 days away from an election. Large-scale changes like Kiffmeyer is talking about should be put before the people as they affect every citizen's right to vote.

Sincerely,

Mike Erlandson
Minnesota DFL Chair

So what do ya'll think?

upnorthkyosa

 

[Feisty Mouse]

That is, of course, incredibly worrying. What are the changes that she wants to institute? Does she have any reasons for changing the voting process?

Hmmmm....

 

[Makalakumu]

Here are some resources to aid in research.

The first is a website that documents the actual changes to MN law.

http://www.sos.state.mn.us/election/Rulemaking.html

The second is an article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune

http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/4876701.html

I have a question...is this happening in other states?

 

[TigerWoman]

upnorthkyosa,
where is that handy form again? Is that next Thursday cause its too late for this one. I had to say it to make sure. TW

 

[Makalakumu]

So far, while I wait for my computer to run my latest data sets, my research has accumulated the follow as a possible answer for question 1 that I posed.

My source for this information is this...I have taken the liberty to summerize statements because this source is lengthy.

http://www.sos.state.mn.us/election/RuleAnalysisPartbyPart.pdf

Changes in MN election law.

1. All voters must use a voter registration application.
2. Larger size registration cards
3. Requirement of forms used in tax booklet.
4. New forms must be approved by the secratary of state an an advisory board.
5. Requires that all forms meet MN statutes.
6. Language changes, voter registration now becomes Voter registration application.
7. New definition of "accepted" or "processed". All voter data will be cross referenced with state databases.
8. Upon change of address or name, information will be verified.
9. Voters may not be eligible to vote mere by filling out an application. Data must be verified.
10. Alternate addresses on applications are allowed only when the US postal service will not deliver to that address.
11. First time voters and voter registrants will be notified if their application is incomplete.
12. Independent data only will be used to register voters - such as drivers lisences.
13. Auditor will compile list of unverified voters by election day.
14. Registration must be completed before election day so mail notification can be sent.
15. Certain individuals do not have to provide identification at the polls.
16. Individuals placed under guardianship may not have the right to vote.
17. Re-registration now takes into account prior voter history.
18. Voter Registrations may take electronic format.
19. Voter complaints will not be registered if they follow voting procedure.
20. On election day applicants must provide identification of some independent form...this does not limit to driver's license only.
21. Verification of information for election day registrars will take the same form as pre-election verification.
22. If information is verified as incorrect, the voter will be challenged.
23. Sale of a paper copy of public information is not required. Electronic data bases can now be transferred.
24. Secretary of State and Country Auditors may modify, but not delete voter information.
25. Secrertary of State has full authority over voter registration system.
26. All catagories must match state database for a voter to verify information, name, DOB and voter registration number.
27. All attemps will be made to give voters a registration number.
28. Auditor must contact voters with missing information. If information is not given, the application cannot be processed.
29. Updated information must be completed on a voter registration form and verified before voting privledges are granted.
30. Absentee ballots will be marked with US postal seals.
31. Envelopes of absentee ballots will be marked with strip to aid in identification.
32. A person must be unable to vote, not simply unable register in order to use an absentee ballot.
33. Application for absentee ballot changed.
34. Absentee voter information must be verified through the same process as voter registration applications.
35. Changes in directions regarding how to change spoiled absentee ballots.

Anyone see any issues with these rule changes? How does this correspond to the Star Tribune article?

upnorthkyosa

 

[Makalakumu]

It seems as if the main DFL criticism of Secretary Kiffmeyer is that...
1. She is ultra-conservative.
2. The new regulations have made it harder for poor, minorities, and elderly to vote.

I can't address the first, because I think its a bit phoney. Who isn't "partisan" in todays politics. The following is a list of the new regulations that I feel fit their second criticism.

"New definition of "accepted" or "processed". All voter data will be cross referenced with state databases."
How long will this take? Are the databases accurate? Will wait time discourage potential voters?

"Alternate addresses on applications are allowed only when the US postal service will not deliver to that address"

If you have no permanent address but are only living with others, does this discount you from voting? Many "homeless" people "couch surf" and this could negate their right to vote.

"Independent data only will be used to register voters - such as drivers lisences"

What else counts as "independent data?" What if you have lived in this state long enough to vote, but are unable to provide anything on the "accepted" list?

"Voter Registrations may take electronic format"

Is there enough time to implement a system like this so that it is fair and accessible for all users?

"Voter complaints will not be registered if they follow voting procedure"

Very interesting. What if the voting procedure was misleading or confusing? How do they determine that one followed or did not follow voting procedure? This seems like an attempt to avoid hanging chads...

"If information is verified as incorrect, the voter will be challenged"

I'm curious to see what form the challenge procedure takes. I know that the state has poor information regarding people in low SEC levels. A lot of people could be turned away or walk away in frustration because of inefficiancy.

"Sale of a paper copy of public information is not required. Electronic data bases can now be transferred"

I can forsee this leading to more junk mail, but this doesn't really support my point. Its interesting nonetheless though.

"Secretary of State and Country Auditors may modify, but not delete voter information."

This is kind of disturbing. Why would the secretary of state want to modify someones information? The obvious answer is to correct mistakes, but if Secretary Kiffmeyer is as partisan as the dems say, then I can see why they wouldn't trust this power, especially considering that now all information has to be verified. Admittedly, this is a weak point and it relies alot on suspicion.

"All catagories must match state database for a voter to verify information, name, DOB and voter registration number."

Are we able to verify that the state will get all of this information correct? They sure do make a lot of mistakes regarding this...and now the quality of their databases will determine people's rights to vote.

"Auditor must contact voters with missing information. If information is not given, the application cannot be processed."

"Updated information must be completed on a voter registration form and verified before voting privledges are granted."

How about people who cannot read or write properly. They may not be able to fill out certain sections of the application. Are these people denied the right to vote?

I think that the DFL has some raised some pretty good questions regarding this issue. Perhaps holding off on these changes for more information or public comment would be best in order to ensure that MN elections are fair to EVERYONE.

upnorthkyosa

 

[Makalakumu]

http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/slaws/2004/c293.html

This lengthy document shows that ALL of the changes that Secratary Kiffmeyer proposed are contained with HAVA (Help Americans Vote Act). This is a federal act and she has little choice, apparently. Also, apparently, the legislature has little choice in the matter, if it is a federal law. My only question regarding the above source is only to inquire whether or not the legislature actually passed this law since they were unable to pass much this session.

Perhaps the DFL party should give Secratery Kiffmeyer a break and focus their scrutiny on HAVA. The rationale behind the law is well reasoned, in my opinion. For instance, in Chicago the dead have somehow started voting again. HAVA, with its terms requiring information verification, certainly would put a halt to that situation.

The actual terms the law requires may not be the best way to accomplish the laws rationale though. In fact, evidence exists in South Dakota, where this law has already been implemented, that voters have been turned away or discouraged by the law.

I first heard about this on NPR. They reported that HAVA was implemented and that there were some difficulties. I did a little further research.

http://verifiedvoting.org/article.asp?id=2364

This is an example of how these laws have led to voter intimidation of minorities.

http://edusolution.com/myclassroom/classnotes/reconstruction/jimcrowtoday.htm

This is particularly disturbing because more Native Americans are voting South Dakota then ever before. If you look at the polls, most of the people in this demographic are voting democratic.

http://indianz.com/News/2004/002806.asp

Perhaps if some of the same things happen in MN, the partisan nature of our secratary of state will prompt her to behave much like the South Dakota Secretary of State.

http://www.tomdaschle.com/getinvolved/index.php?id=146&parentid=142

I think we need to rethink this law and we need to examine how it will affect voters. People need to be trained well to monitor elections so they know all of the ways that people can use to verify their information. This law is going to require some efficiancy on the part of the government and we all know how difficult that is to accomplish.

upnorthkyosa

 

[Feisty Mouse]

upnorth -

Very thought-provoking topic. I'm still going through the potential problems that have been listed, but I wanted to thank you for the thread.