To the editor:
Voter ID sounds like a common sense idea because, after all, we need an ID to buy a 6-pack of beer. But wait. Unlike a beer ID, a Voter ID will require an address within our voting precinct. And we don't need a picture ID with the address near the liquor store where we buy that 6-pack.
It's not that Photo IDs are so hard to get, but they must be "governmment issued" with the address within our voting precinct. Many of us have drivers' licenses with outdated addresses (sometimes for years) and still use them as IDs without a problem. Not so as a Voter ID. This dilemma will particularly affect students, the elderly, and apartment dwellers.
For example, many students have drivers' licenses with their "home" addresses, but are living in voting precincts far from home; hence, no ID, no vote. Many elderly who have stopped driving have outdated drivers' licenses, and therefore are unlikely to have a "valid" photo ID allowing them to vote. They'll need to travel to a government office where drivers' licenses are issued, sometimes miles or towns away to apply for a Voter ID. They will wait in a line, get a picture taken, show a birth certificate and marriage license if their name has changed, and wait weeks for a new Voter ID to arrive. Sounds simple doesn't it? Do you, a US citizen, really want to be treated as an alien in your own country?
Finally, who pays for this? You will pay for documents required to obtain a "free" ID such as a birth certificate, which costs $26 in Minnesota and the transportation to get to the office. Finally, it could cost the state $50 million to implement Voter ID, which will increase taxes. Do we want the government to be able to take our ability to vote away just because we moved or stopped driving? Vote No on the Voter ID.