E-DEMOCRACY | PHOTO i.d. help requested… how would i get a state-issued photo id?


From: Cheryl Luger
Date: Sep 04 22:02 UTC

i’m not sure i am reading these requirements accurately…. but i think i am in a ‘catch 22’ or maybe a bureaucratic purgatory.

i began checking into how i can vote if the photo id amendment passes.

can someone show me how to get a state issued photo id under the circumstances/limitations below….someone from the amendment’s sponsors, someone from Sec. ritchie’s office …. a kind legal adviser (yes, i know the cliche about free legal advice).

to obtain a minn photo i need a valid license or a birth certificate. unlike my brother, i was born in minnesota so that is one less hurdlle. to get the mn. birth certificate i need to pay a county fee (below co. has link to the state statute provision)with possible additional research charges and notarization costs.

i also need a secondary id for the state…. the only one i would qualify for is a social security card (paper).

along with my birth certificate, i held on to ssn card for years until a home accident destroyed it a couple of years ago. to replace it i need to submit an state id to the feds…they won’t accept either a birth certificate or a medicare card (they do accept medicaid card or a private insurerance card).

none of my id’s are valid with social security in spite of having been a taxpayer for over 50 years.





if you had a name change (divorce, marriage, remarriage), you need more docs to prove who you are. seniors may not have saved those docs. others may have lost then over the years.

guess i’m skunked.

heck of a situation for a republican raised- kid in the almost good old days. someone who has paid taxes for +50 years and voted consistently since age 21.

assuming i could gather all of the docs , is the state going to reimburse me(and others) for costs above the id itself including the cost of verifying documents and notarization, cabfares/payments to drivers and other expenses required to obtain primary and secondary docs? i promise i wouldn’t bill the court for the new hair style in the photo id.

past court rulings have mostly supported the id laws if the state picks up the cost of th id, but other costs have not been addressed. if the state is require to provide for these expenses in addition to the ‘free id’, the costs could mount up.

the 24th amendment not only prohibits ‘poll taxes’ / fees (but that does bring up a question of a tax masquerading as a fee) prohibits impediments in exercising the right to vote. for example while project mobility is ‘reasonable’ (but still charges), trips need to be booked (i think 3 days in advance)….and who know how long the applicant will be waiting in the government lines. does the long lead time constitute an impediment when obtaining documents to get the photo id.?

best wishes,
cheryl luger
nokomis east /minnehaha mpls

ps….minimizing people objection to photo id based on the ‘you need an id to cash a check’ illogic,
….check cashing is NOT a right. if someone doesn’t want to take my check
…. i shop elsewhere. in over 60 years, that’s only happened twice. for other circumstances, i have legal stuff in place…but that isnt a photo id.

i used to have an employee pix id which worked in the past. i have an expired passport which still works (assuming others are polite and don’t ask why my hair is now white)… an old student id. has also been accepted. none of these would currenty be valid as secondary id’s for state issued id. or a primary id for the feds.

i was born with a visual disability and have never driven (for-profit driver ed. instructor suggested that i didn’t sign up for a second set of lessons….both drivers and insurers out there should be thankful i don’t drive).

flying is not a right either…so i haven’t any problem with requiring an id for that purpose…. since i don’t fly i don’t need the id. BUT I DO VOTE …. AS A RIGHT.

help with this ‘small’ problem, anyone ?

From: John Medeiros
Date: Sep 04 22:59 UTC

Cheryl, I think one if the biggest problems here is that it has yet to be determined what will qualify as a valid ID. What you are looking at is the current process to get a license/ID but that doesn’t necessarily mean this is what will be accepted for a voter ID.

From: Ron Leurquin
Date: Sep 04 23:32 UTC

Face it Cheryl
Your one of the targets of this voter suppresion
Your likley to vote DFL and not GOP, so the GOP has to do what it can to keep you and your kind from the pols.
Hopefully your story on here gets read by enoug undecided and they see the repercusions of the photoID requirements and chose to vote NO.
I dont have to decide, I’ve been on the Vote NO side of the issue since I first heard about it.

Ron Leurquin

From: DRQuam
Date: 00:27 UTC

Children get SS cards without a state ID, they just need the birth certificate.

If you have a passport, you do not need a birth certificate. It is legally the same for ID and citisenship needs.

Military IDs are accepted as an ID in all states. It is federal law, and has not and will not be an issue.

The US Supreme Court ruled, decision written by Justice Stevens, that photo ID requirements are not an undue burden. It also determined that it did not surpress voters. The actual data showed that minority voting increased at a greater percent than the average population.

Duane Quam Jr. Byron

From: Ken Bearman
Date: 01:19 UTC

That decision was out of Indiana, if I remember correctly. If this amendment passes and the subsequent facts in Minnesota are different, then it’s an open question again.

Please correct me if I’m mistaken.

From: DRQuam
Date: 01:27 UTC

The US Supreme court rulings are national. All the states that have added photo ID have used the ruling as a guide for their legislation. All have improved the delivery of IDs, and that has helped beyond voting.

The validity of military IDs and passports will not change, they are federal, and national. A photo ID verifies the identity, and can also verify residency, however, other documentation could be used for that.

The legislature and governor would workout the details.

Duane Quam Jr. Byron

From: David Frenkel
Date: 02:08 UTC

Federal Courts have shot down some recent voter ID laws and the Supreme Court could hear a state case to clarify its previous ruling on this issue http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/2012/0901/Bad-week-for-voter-ID-laws.-Will-Supreme-Court-weigh-in-before-election It is a bit much to expect volunteer voting judges to understand thenuancesof the various state and federal ID’s. I have tried to use my new US Passport card for ID and most people don’t know what it is. Military ID’s can be complicated and Passports are not a valid source of residency. Not to mention getting a realistic looking fake drivers license is a click away on the Internet, ask any college student how to do it. David Frenkel

From: Mike Jones
Date: 03:09 UTC

I see various forms of ID every day as a bartender at a world-class museum. Maybe I could consult…

Mike Jones
Catering Server/Bartender
Walker Art Center

From: Bill Kahn
Date: 14:57 UTC

I don’t think that you can take any one decision, Supreme Court or lower court, and assume that a given state’s voter photo ID law is going to stand; the laws and the situations in each are different, in spite of the efforts of the American Legislation Exchange Council (ALEC).

Last Thursday, a US District Court struck down the Texas Voter Photo ID law (arguably the worst) and issued a laundry list of things Texas folks could do to make it legal, presumably aware of the last Supreme Court decision (lower courts don’t like to be and seldom are reversed); since 1965, 15 mostly southern states have had to get an okay from the Justice Department or the courts to implement voting laws and the former refused to okay the Texas law, so that implementing the Texas law required a court case. The 3 judge panel included a George W. Bush appointee, a Barrack Obama appointee, and a Bill Clinton appointee who wrote the *unanimous* decision to nix the law.

Other states not affected by the voting rights laws could go ahead unless someone sued, but that has been the case and is what we have to look forward to if this amendment passes here in Minnesota. The cavalier manner in which Republicans have pushed through these supposed anti-voting fraud laws blueprinted by ALEC shows an utter disregard for the legislative process in which all folks with a stake are included in forming the laws that govern all of us; the fact that any of these laws made it is attributable to Republican control of a state more than bipartisan work in any legislature, but those that were tweaked enough to satisfy the US Justice Department and the courts to the extent than any stayed on the threshold of illegality, are still not good law.

I’m not sure to what data Mr. Quam is referring; I read something about Georgia’s elections ( http://www.ajc.com/news/news/despite-voter-id-law-minority-turnout-up-in-georgi/nR2bx/ ), but nothing connected to data for the Supreme Court ruling on the Indiana law. The data, such as it is, is not such that anyone who is not partisan one way or the other draws any conclusions from them, i.e., you can’t get to where Mr. Quam has with any degree of certainty.

Nothing has been presented that indicates any fraud anywhere and the title “solution in search of a problem” is valid everywhere regardless of whether a voter id law is found constitutional or not. The upshot is that a whole lot of money is spent on litigation and IDs and goodness knows what else to get these ridiculous laws in place across the country in a purely Republican effort.

The obvious solution for ending the ridiculous amount of money and time spent on these laws to me is to eliminate Republicans from any sort of political power. I think the GOP is a party in its death throes, but I’m pretty biased. They’ve tried everything to subvert our democratic republic with the most effective strategy being packing the U.S. Supreme Court and the decisions on political matters coming out of that body reflect a mindset skewed from any sort of reality, but they can only manage one or two branches at a time, there being only so much money available to them.

Of course, none of any of this solves Cheryl’s problem should Minnesotans decide to go this horrible direction; we can only hope that most don’t feel the need to buy into the latest flimflam on Nov. 6 with the only currency citizens have available to them, their vote.

From: Bill Kahn
Date: 15:19 UTC

I should have and thought I was saying “the only currency that *all* Minnesota citizens have available to them,” is their vote, but of course this currency and the effort to make and keep some of it worthless, is what this is all about. Vote *NO*

See thread here.

Free Speech Zone
The Free Speech Zone offers a space for contributions from readers, without editing by the TC Daily Planet. This is an open forum for articles that otherwise might not find a place for publication, including news articles, opinion columns, announcements and even a few press releases. The opinions expressed in the Free Speech Zone and Neighborhood Notes, as well as the opinions of bloggers, are their own and not necessarily the opinion of the TC Daily Planet.
E-Democracy forum posts are republished under license by Creative Commons with Attribution