On May 30, 2012, a collection of the DFL’s special interest allies filed a lawsuit in their attempt to thwart the will of the people. In their attempt to thwart the will of the people, they also sought to undo the work of a properly elected legislature.
Friday afternoon, the Minnesota Legislature announced that they would fight for the will of the people:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
June 8, 2012
Senate – Steve Sviggum 651-296-4814
House – Jodi Boyne 651-296-5522
SENATE & HOUSE REQUEST LEGAL INTERVENTION TO PROTECT CITIZENS RIGHT TO VOTE ON VOTER ID
St. Paul- Minnesota Senate and House leaders announced Friday that they will file paperwork to request to intervene in litigation brought forth by special interest groups in an effort to remove the Photo Identification Constitutional Amendment from the ballot.
The Photo ID Amendment was passed by the state legislature earlier this year and is scheduled to appear on this November’s ballot. On May 30, 2012, special interest groups opposed to Voter ID filed a claim to block citizens from voting on the issue in 2012.
“It is my very strong feeling that the integrity of the election process will be enhanced with photo ID. The legislature, in a bipartisan effort, placed this very clear and concise question before the citizens for their judgment in the November election. With our action today, we intend to protect the right of citizens to vote on this important of election integrity,” said Senate Majority Leader David Senjem (R-Rochester).
“This request is needed to protect the Minnesota Legislature’s right to pass and place constitutional amendments on the ballot,” said Speaker of the House Kurt Zellers (R-Maple Grove). “It is unfortunate special interest groups who are opposed to photo ID are using any means necessary to prevent citizens from voting on this important election integrity measure.”
The Legislative Coordinating Commission will meet next week to adopt a formal resolution on the matter.
Speaker Zellers and Majority Leader Senjem were diplomatic. I won’t be. The DFL and their special interest allies fight for election integrity in their private balloting. In fact, they fought for election integrity at the DFL State Convention. That means that it’s only in public that they fight against election integrity.
The DFL’s motto could easily be ‘Election integrity for me, not for thee.’
The DFL knows that Minnesota’s election system is flawed. They admitted it in their debate on the DFL State Party Constitution. Rick Varko of Senate District 64 rose in opposition to the amendment to allow absentee balloting in their presidential preference ballot. Here’s Mr. Varko’s motion:
I move to strike Section 10, which allows for the option of absentee ballots in the presidential preference ballot.
I’m against this section for three reasons. One, I don’t believe that the Central Committee can come up with any mechanism that will genuinely prevent somebody from printing out a stack of absentee ballots, submitting them and getting them improper votes for a candidate.
This wasn’t a motion made by a GOP plant as a prank. He isn’t the only person that thinks that somebody could print a “stack of absentee ballots”, either. Varko’s motion passed overwhelmingly.
That’s an implicit statement that they know absentee ballots are prime opportunities for voter fraud. In fact, it isn’t that difficult to make the argument that it was an explicit admission that the absentee ballot system is a great opportunity for voter fraud.
The DFL stopped short of saying that the only way to prevent absentee ballot voter fraud was by requiring photo identification. They stopped short of that by not adopting absentee balloting.
Minnesota’s election system doesn’t have that luxury. Minnesota’s election system has an absentee ballot provision.
The League of Women Voters-MN, the ACLU-MN, the Jewish Action Community and Common Cause filed this lawsuit in an attempt to thwart the will of the people. They’re attempting to say that the legislature doesn’t have the right to do what Minnesota’s Constitution provides for it to do.
Voters would be well-advised to remember that the DFL legislators opposed election integrity with their votes but support election integrity when it’s an internal DFL matter.
It’s time to tell the DFL that their situational support for election integrity isn’t acceptable.
Tags: Constitutional Amendment, ACLU-MN, League of Women Voters-MN, Common Cause, DFL State Convention, Absentee Ballots, Election Integrity, Precinct Caucuses, Straw Polls, DFL, Kurt Zellers, Dave Senjem, Photo ID, We The People, MNGOP, Election 2012