To the editor:
In a recent letter, a resident raised concerns that they have heard about the proposed Voter ID constitutional amendment including large costs and limitation of which types of ID are acceptable. The amendment is very clear about which types of ID are acceptable, it is spelled out in the amendment language where it says "valid government-issued photographic identification". It must be valid, not expired or revoked, it must be government-issued: drivers licenses, state ID, military ID, tribal ID, passport. No mention of address and for our seniors, their ID doesn't expire once they turn 65.
As for the high costs, this estimate originally came from the budget office when discussion was on going before the amendment was put forth before Minnesotans. The largest single cost in the estimate is for Electronic poll books - something being supported by opponents of Voter ID. The fact is that the amendment says nothing at all about "E-Poll books" and this is not a requirement if the amendment passes. The only required costs are giving identification to eligible voters at no cost, voter education and printing a small number of "second chance" provisional ballots.
I would encourage everyone to read the actual amendment language; it does what it says it does and it's not complicated. It would eliminate Minnesota's problem of having high numbers of unverifiable and ineligible voters casting ballots. Simply put, Voter ID would make it easy to vote, and hard to cheat. That just makes sense, and I will be voting yes.