Ballot Issues: Minnesota
by Breanna Fuss, Reporter
November 04, 2012 6:31 PM
For Minnesota voters, there are some major issues on Tuesday’s ballot. We sat down with Minnesota's Secretary of State to learn about those issues, and how voters can make sure they are making an educated decision.
Minnesota voters are facing some tough decisions on Tuesday. If two amendments proposed by legislators are passed, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie said they can’t be undone.
"When you put something inside of a constitution its more or less for forever,” said Mark Ritchie, Minnesota’s Secretary of State.
Prompting him to warn voters to study up on the issues on the November ballot.
"What if there are unintended consequences? What if there are things as humans we have failed to remember or are flawed in our thinking,” said Ritchie.
Amendment one is asking voters if the Minnesota Constitution should be amended so only a man and a woman can wed.
"There is a lot of discussion of that. One of them is what should be going into the constitution,” said Ritchie.
A vote ‘yes,’ will reinforce the current marriage law limiting marriage only to those of the opposite sex.
A vote ‘no,’ will revoke the proposed amendment, meaning it will still be a law, but residents will have the option to later refer it.
Then there’s amendment two that would require a photo identification to be shown to cast a ballot.
"This new provisional balloting system would be the major change,” Ritchie said.
It would ensure that no one’s vote could be cast by anyone else.
On the other hand Ritchie said it could make voting a lot more difficult for elders and absentee voters.
“Those ballots would have to be verified by a voucher or a witness or notary,” said Ritchie.
Ritchie also said it would cost the state millions of dollars, and if it is passed, effective July 1, the state would have to provide free I.D.’s to voters who don’t already have a government issued I.D.
So remember, a vote ‘yes,’ would amend the constitution to require all voters to present an I.D.
A vote ‘no,’ would keep the current system in place, meaning no I.D. is required.
For more information on these issues and other’s click here
For information on ballot issues in South Dakota click here