Weather Forecast


Letter: Nothing wrong with voter ID

I find that I must take exception to the West Central Tribune editorial about requiring voter identification.

First of all, having to show a valid ID is not a new or novel idea. It is required when you go to open a bank account. If you use a credit card, a lot of businesses will ask for an ID. And if you want to fly commercially or rent a car you will have to produce a government-issued picture ID.

The editorial stated, "The bill sponsors Wednesday would not estimate the cost of this bill. Some media reports indicate the cost would be between $20 million and $40 million. Even at the lower estimate, the cost would be significant to local government."

I question those cost estimates. The cost for a Minnesota ID card is $18 and $11 if you happen to be over 65 years old. Minnesota has a population of over 5 million people. If you use an estimate of 2 percent who don't have a driver's license, that's a cost of $1.9 million to the individuals and that's not figuring in the people that are not of voting age.

This could easily be done without a huge infrastructure. In other words, keep it simple, stupid. Just have the voter show a valid government-issued ID. The editorial noted the estimated $20 million cost to the taxpayer would average out to $530,000 per conviction. My proposal would only cost $18 per voter at the most.

Do I like the fact that I may have to produce a picture ID when I go to vote? No! However, with ID theft happening, having to produce a picture ID is a reality!

Your editorial says it would make voting so difficult and discouraging that people wouldn't vote. I would like to know what is so hard about showing a picture ID, and what is discouraging about it. Maybe it will discourage (prevent) the illegals from voting and throwing a close election. That's the whole idea of this legislation.

Earl Pederson