For the past 5 years plus, Republicans have refered to erstwhile Gov. Arne Carlson as a RINO. Today, I’m setting the record straight. He isn’t a RINO. He’s a Democrat. PERIOD. This video attack on Mary Kiffmeyer, his buying into the DFL’s lies about Photo ID as voter suppression, suggest that he isn’t in touch with reality.

Here’s a transcript of the interview:

CARLSON: Be that as it may, I grew up in the Bronx of New York City. We never owned a car. Where would I get a Photo ID. This is the party of Abraham Lincoln. This is the party of Theodore Roosevelt. This is the party of Dwight Eisenhower, the party of Ronald Reagan. They welcomed people in.

When did we suddenly turn over the keys to voting to Kiffmeyer to decide who can and who cannot participate?

Gov. Carlson’s argument is flimsy It isn’t Rep. Kiffmeyer that’s deciding “who can and who cannot participate.” It’s the Minnesota Constitution that’s determining who can or can’t particate.

It’s important that the Minnesota Constitution isn’t seen as a cold document, either. It’s been ratified by the people through their elected representatives. It’s the voice of the people. Marty Seifert liked to highlight the saying inside the House floor, which read “The voice of the people is the voice of God.”

That’s essentially who Gov. Carlson is arguing against when he’s arguing against the requirements in Minnesota’s Constitution. Specifically, it’s who he’s arguing against when he’s arguing against Section VII of the Minnesota Constitution, titled Elective Franchise. Here’s the relevant portion:


Section 1. ELIGIBILITY; PLACE OF VOTING; INELIGIBLE PERSONS. Every person 18 years of age or more who has been a citizen of the United States for three months and who has resided in the precinct for 30 days next preceding an election shall be entitled to vote in that precinct. The place of voting by one otherwise qualified who has changed his residence within 30 days preceding the election shall be prescribed by law. The following persons shall not be entitled or permitted to vote at any election in this state: A person not meeting the above requirements; a person who has been convicted of treason or felony, unless restored to civil rights; a person under guardianship, or a person who is insane or not mentally competent.

Sec. 2. RESIDENCE. For the purpose of voting no person loses residence solely by reason of his absence while employed in the service of the United States; nor while engaged upon the waters of this state or of the United States; nor while a student in any institution of learning; nor while kept at any almshouse or asylum; nor while confined in any public prison. No soldier, seaman or marine in the army or navy of the United States is a resident of this state solely in consequence of being stationed within the state.

It’s fairly straightforward. Only those people who meet these constitutionally mandated requirements should be allowed to vote. In fact, letting people that don’t meet these requirements isn’t allowed.

This isn’t a matter of welcoming people into the state. That’s the phoniest argument I’ve ever heard. It’s about following the requirements established by Minnesota’s Constitution. It’s about following the laws of a sovereign government.

What Gov. Carlson is arguing for is a system without uniformity, a system where each county, city or township uses their own rules. That isn’t the rule of law.

There’s a reason why these requirements were put into Minnesota’s Constituion, not into each city’s charter. The purpose was to create uniformity so that the people of Minnesota played by the same rules, whether they lived in Duluth, Caledonia, St. Cloud, Alexandria, St. Paul or Moorhead.

Without knowing who’s voting, it’s impossible to know if the people who get ballots meet the constitutional requirements for voting. At a time when voter fraud is running rampant, it’s imperative that we know without doubt that the people getting ballots are who they say they are.

And yes, there’s tons of proof of voter fraud. That’s beyond dispute. The sad truth is that Common Cause MN and the League of Women Voters-MN have denied the existence of voter fraud despite the abundance of proof. It’s sad that these organizations enthusiastically participate in echoing the DFL’s spin.

Passing the Photo ID constitutional amendment ballot won’t end their spin but it will help clean up Minnesota’s election system.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

18 Responses to “Arne Carlson ignores Minnesota’s Constitution”

  • Liz Adams says:

    Find me some of those people eligible to vote that Do Not have voter i.d.. Seems most do for other reasons, they have to produce i.d.. This is 2012, gone are the days when we could leave our doors unlocked, when we did not need so many lawyers, and we could be sure only eligible votes were cast!

  • eric z says:

    Bravo for Arne. Kiffmeyer is a piece of work.

    May the voters of Elk River, Sherberne County retire her from the legislature this November. Do it, as a civic service owed the remainder of the State.

  • Shoebox says:

    Arne has become addled.

    Yeah, change is bad Arne, Social Security didn’t exist when you were growing up…should we end that? Jim Crow laws were still the rule of the day when you grew up, should we reinstate those?

    Progressives think change is great…as long as it’s happening to someone else!

  • Bill C says:

    It is nice when people so clearly articulate that they are in favor of voter fraud, as “eric z” did in the post above this.

    There is only one intellectually honest reason that someone could be against Voter ID: Democrats need voter fraud to win. All the other arguments against voter ID have been laid to rest by the good hard work of MN Majority.

  • Jethro says:

    Arnie Carlson, Earl Potter, and now Eric z are hereby nominated for the 2012 profoundly stupid award. Congratulations.

  • Patrick says:

    Jethro well spoken. I would put some of the other University Liberal administrators in that group also.

  • Wharf Rat says:

    Listen folks, honorable people who’ve had their time in the spotlight, leave it when they’re done serving.

    Arne keeps coming back and back and back, and should do the honorable thing and truly identify himself as who he is – a Democrat. At least, Mr. Governor, please, please leave the Republican Party. When have you once, just once, critized the tax and spend lefties since you’ve left office??

    You’re a useful idiot for the lefties, just like the ‘moderate’ Christine Todd Whitman, former governor of New Jersey, who was suprised that Democrats called her an extremist when she was up for a cabinet position in Bush 43’s administration.

    Arne, it’s time to resign and join another party. You also caused us to lose to the goofiest governor in state history by your endorsement of the indpendence candidate. I’ve met Gov. Dayton – it’s scary, there’s nothing there. I could go one, but please go away.

  • eric z says:

    Bill C. – Get real.

  • SMH says:

    This state has existed — prospered, actually — for over 150 years without voter ID as proposed by Kiffmeyer et. al. And, the Republicans who argue we need this amendment play out scare tactics with scant factual data.

    This screed’s author claims that “voter fraud is running rampant” and that it’s “”beyond dispute there’s tons of proof of voter fraud … (an) abundance of proof.” Unfortunately the author’s enthusiasm for an ill-conceived amendment results in hyperbole rather than facts. While there have been a handful of examples of voter fraud, most have been forms that no photo ID system would forestall. (The largest cohort of fraudulent votes are from felons whose voting franchise have been removed. But felons can still have and display drivers license.)

    Just saying something is rampant doesn’t prove it. And there’s a paucity of examples for something that “runs rampant” and for which there’s “tons” — nay, an “abundance!” — of proof. Put up, already .

  • Gary Gross says:

    First, the commenter hiding behind the initials SMH is Rick Mons. Mons is a prominent DFL activist who won’t hesitate to spew the DFL’s dishonest spin.

    Yes, voter fraud exists in Minnesota, just like it exists in other states. I wrote about how corrupt Minnesota’s election system is in this article. Here’s a telling exchange between an undercover investigator & a Scott County government worker:

    COUNTY WORKER: So you were saying that this gentleman…

    INVESTIGATOR: Yes, Thomas Brady…

    COUNTY WORKER: doesn’t want to come in and vote. So if you filled…if he filled this form out, then he would get on the list where he would automatically, every election, get one of these forms in the mail, which he would then fill out and mail to us, and then we would send him the ballot.

    There’s no verification of Thomas Brady’s identity. Considering the fact that the person getting this ballot isn’t the Super Bowl MVP Thomas Brady, that’s proof right there of voter impersonation. Photo ID will definitely prevent that type of voter fraud.

    Mons said that “The largest cohort of fraudulent votes are from felons whose voting franchise have been removed.” Let’s rewrite that so that it’s accurate. It should say “The largest cohort of fraudulent votes that we’ve detected are from felons whose voting franchise have been removed.” Mons can’t know what the corrupt election judges won’t look for, namely that people who receive ballots are who they say they are.

    As for the “paucity of examples” that Mons refers to, let it be noted that he’s ignored this proof of voter fraud:

    VACANT AND NON-DELIVERABLE ADDRESSES: The United States Postal Service (USPS) has flagged the addresses recorded for nearly 100,000 voters as being either “vacant” or “undeliverable”. We visited approximately two-dozen of these undeliverable addresses to verify the USPS results and discovered approximately 50% of the addresses in our sample to be correctly flagged, in that the addresses did not exist. We have taken photographs of empty lots and non-existent addresses where our investigation revealed invalid addresses.

    RETURNED POSTAL VERIFICATION CARDS: In addition, the state’s primary registration verification tool is the Postal Verification Card (PVC). These post cards are mailed to newly registered voters. If the PVC is successfully delivered to the stated address, the voter is assumed to be legitimate. If the card is returned as undeliverable mail, the voter’s identity is in question and they are supposed to be challenged for proof of identity and residence at the polls in the next election. Over 46,000 of these postal verification cards have been returned to the county auditors as non-deliverable since 2004. About 38,000 of them were from 2008 and 23,000 stemmed from Election Day Registrations (EDRs). After accounting for legitimate reasons for undeliverable PVCs, over 6,000 unexplained, undeliverable PVCs resulting in challenged voter status remain outstanding from the 2008 election, and over 1,200 from 2010.

    Just because Mons won’t accept this proof as proof that voter fraud exists doesn’t mean it isn’t proof. It just means that Mons is willing to ignore verifiable proof.

    Now that I’ve put up a tiny fraction of the proof Mons demanded, it’ll be interesting to see whether Mr. Mons will now shut up. I’m not holding my breath on that.

  • IndyJones says:

    Arne,Arne,Arne….Have you ever been on a commercial airplane? Bought an airline ticket, have a credit card, library card, bank account, ebt card, have a DOT job, rent or buy a car, buy cigs or liquor, R rated movie or strip club, buy sudafed, rent PO box, fill a prescription, have you never driven a vehicle, had a security clearence, take out a loan, buy or rent a house… have to be dead not to need a picture ID. And thats the point, we don’t want the dead, illegals, felons, or multijurisdiction voters “voting”. I mean…really..WTF.

  • IndyJones says:

    And one more thing Arne…even that idiot Richard Lugar of Indiana has figured out you can’t vote in a state election when you no longer live there. Now why the hell he can run as senator, that is mind bogling, but none the less at least he can’t dilute the vote.

  • walter hanson says:


    Since you don’t know that Mom’s work hard you have no right to say that other people should get real. Mary is doing a great job and I bet will get reelect by a bigger margin than 2010.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • Prominent DFL Activist -- or Rick Mons to my friends says:

    Sorry about using a nom de plume in my earlier post but apparently Gary finds it unacceptable. And here I thought those other handles used by those who agree with Gary were made-up names. I’m honored to meet Indy, Wharf, Shoebox and the other gents with no apparent last name and will make sure I don’t offend our host and use a handle. And if those aren’t their real names, I’m sure Gary will inform us. After all, Gary is even-handed and hates it when rules aren’t applied evenly.

    As to the “data” Gary has provided. Blimey it’s still unpersuasive. For example a review of 24 cases from a cohort of 100,000 isn’t exactly rock solid, take-it-to-the-bank reasoning to amend the Constitution. But that’s my opinion and a minority opinion on ths esteemed blog.

    Now, a few other observations. I shall be quick as the hour is short:

    Bill C (last name is apparently optional for Gary in Bill’s case or Bill has the shortest last name in history) writes: “There is only one intellectually honest reason that someone could be against Voter ID: Democrats need voter fraud to win”. I guess one could also conclude that there is only one intellectually honest reason that someone could be for Voter ID: Republicans need to disenfranchise elderly and poor voters to win.

    And for those who cheer drumming Carlson out of the GOP: isn’t it ironic how so many of your party now complain about the takeover by the Ron Paul folks? You folks must write loyalty pledges on Magic Slates or those infamous Etch-a-Sketch toys.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Rick, I’d be surprised if you found my proof persuasive. Astonished might be more appropriate but that’s another story. I noticed that you didn’t address the PVCs not getting delivered because the addresses didn’t exist. It’s apparent that you think 24 cases “from a cohort of 100,000” isn’t persuasive. First, saying that it was from a cohort of 100,000 is exceptionally misleading. This is from Minnesota Majority’s report:

    We visited approximately two-dozen of these undeliverable addresses to verify the USPS results and discovered approximately 50% of the addresses in our sample to be correctly flagged, in that the addresses did not exist.

    In other words, the addressses of 12 of the 24 returned PVCs didn’t exist. I further noticed that you didn’t respond to correcting you when you said “The largest cohort of fraudulent votes are from felons whose voting franchise have been removed.” Remember how I corrected that to say “The largest cohort of fraudulent votes that have been detected are from felons whose voting franchise have been removed”?

    You still didn’t bother responding to the central question of this debate because it’s the one that blows your arguments out of the water. You still didn’t explain how you’d know that the person getting a ballot is an eligible Minnesota voter. That’s ok, though, since I’ve seen other DFL activists avoid that question like vampires attempt to avoid wooden stakes.

  • walter hanson says:

    DFL Activist:

    Just curious. Our union along with a bunch of others recently had a vote on the contract. We asked for the people to show some type of ID to verify the name that we were marking on the ballots. If that standard is needed for unions shouldn’t Minnesota have the same standard or are you saying unions don’t know how to handle an election?

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • IndyJones says:

    Prominent DFL activist…Jones is my name and I’m from Indy. I am also a retired elderly voter…with ID. In order to work I needed an ID, background check, fingerprints, and a drug test all along with an ID to get my occupation license. And every day I had to pass through metal detectors and was subject to random drug tests. If I had to do this just to provide for family surely a simple ID isn’t a problem. If I can do it so can all the rest of the old farts besides myself. Do it and do it now. I don’t want fraudsters diluting my vote.

  • Let’s talk about the testimony of the election judge who had 13 people register using the local laundromat as their “home address”. How is that not fraud Mr. DFL Activist?


Leave a Reply