Bluestem Prairie

Voting rights and voter challenges; remember 1-866-OUR-VOTE voters services hotline

Some on the right are making much ado about voter fraud and trying to bully other voters at the polls; a federal judge appointed during the Bush era just shot down one attempt in the Cities. Jeff Fecke points out that the group is advising its followers to go ahead, break the law, and later swallow the misdemeanor charge.

Lovely.

To help voters from being intimidated by this malarky, here is the Voter's Bill of Rights from the Secretary of State's web site:

MINNESOTA VOTER'S BILL OF RIGHTS (M.S. 204C.08, subd. 1b)

For all persons residing in this state who meet federal voting eligibility requirements:

1. You have the right to be absent from work for the purpose of voting without reduction to your pay, personal leave, or vacation time on election day for the time necessary to appear at your polling place, cast a ballot, and return to work.
2. If you are in line at your polling place any time before 8:00 p.m., you have the right to vote.
3. If you can provide the required proof of residence, you have the right to register to vote and to vote on election day.
4. If you are unable to sign your name, you have the right to orally confirm your identity with an election judge and to direct another person to sign your name for you.
5. You have the right to request special assistance when voting.
6. If you need assistance, you may be accompanied into the voting booth by a person of your choice, except by an agent of your employer or union or a candidate.
7. You have the right to bring your minor children into the polling place and into the voting booth with you.
8. If you have been convicted of a felony but your felony sentence has expired (been completed) or you have been discharged from your sentence, you have the right to vote.
9. If you are under a guardianship, you have the right to vote, unless the court order revokes your right to vote.
10. You have the right to vote without anyone in the polling place trying to influence your vote.
11. If you make a mistake or spoil your ballot before it is submitted, you have the right to receive a replacement ballot and vote.
12. You have the right to file a written complaint at your polling place if you are dissatisfied with the way an election is being run.
13. You have the right to take a sample ballot into the voting booth with you.
14. You have the right to take a copy of this Voter's Bill of Rights into the voting booth with you.

And here are the basics for vote challenges:

An election judge, an authorized challenger or other voter may challenge an individual, based upon the personal knowledge they know that the voter is not eligible to vote at that precinct.  Minnesota statutes 204C.07 and 204C.12 address challenges to voters.

Challenger Appointment

 

• Partisan appointments - Major political parties can appoint voters who are residents of Minnesota from that party to act as challengers.
• Non-Partisan appointments - Non-partisan candidates can appoint voters who are residents of Minnesota to act as challengers at the polling place for each precinct. 
• Election question appointments - Upon receiving a written petition signed by at least 25 eligible voters, the mayor of a city, school board of a school district or board of supervisors of a town shall appoint one voter who is a resident of Minnesota for each precinct.

Only one challenger for each candidate, party or question is allowed in the polling place at any given time.

For more information on voting challenges refer to our documents on Election Day Challengers and the Role of Challengers in the Polling Place.

Also see the fact sheet Challenges and Vouching Must be Based upon Personal Knowledge! for more information.

The documents and factsheets are worth reading and downloading. On the challengers' roles here:

Challengers must not speak to voters and must make all challenges in writing. The statute prohibits challengers from talking to voters (Minnesota Statutes, secti on 204C.07, subd. 4 read in combination with Minnesota Statutes, secti on 204C.12, subd. 2).

If a challenger has personal knowledge that an individual is not eligible, they should speak directly to the Electi on Judge to provide notice that  they intend to challenge this voter. They should then fill out the form to challenge the voter. Once the grounds for the challenge have been put in writing, the Election Judge will question the voter.

Challengers may not check to see how many people have voted in a precinct, because they may not go within 6 feet of the ballot counter or speak to voters inside the polling place.

Challengers must NOT:
• Be disruptive
• Make lists of who has or hasn’t voted
• Handle or inspect registration cards, files or lists
• Attempt to influence voting
• Take pictures within the polling place
• Go within 6 feet of the ballot counter
• Make challenges on the basis of mail sent by a political party that was returned as undeliverable or, in
the case of registered mail, was refused by the recipient.

Election Judges have a right to eject a challenger from the polling place for violating any of these provisions after being informed not to do so.

Voters, too, have responsiibilities if challenged. For example, if a voter is challenged, refuses answer questions or sign the polling place roster, leaves and returns ready to vote, he or she is not allowed to vote:

Subd. 4. Refusal to answer questions or sign a polling place roster. A challenged individual who refuses to answer questions or sign a polling place roster as required by this section must not be allowed to vote. A challenged individual who leaves the polling place and returns later willing to answer questions or sign a polling place roster must not be allowed to vote.

So those who are flagged should defend their voting rights immediately upon being challenged-- and should only accept challenges from the election judges, not the individuals who are challengers.

Those with questions should call the 1-866-OUR-VOTE voter services hotline. The nonpartisan service is provided at no cost to callers by Common Cause, the League of Women Voters and other groups. 

Parkinson's disease vet fights back for Walz in Mankato Free Press

One of the more pathetic attacks against Congressman Walz is that he doesn't care about veterans, despite his own service in the National Guard, his widely-recognized work on the House veterans committee, and the dozens of public meetings he's held with vets since taking office in 2007.

Perhaps the most egregious of these attacks was an LTE in the Mankato Free Press on October 15.

A reader faulted Walz for working on getting Agent Orange being recognized as a cause of Parkinsons Disease among Vietnam vets. The writer felt that only county veterans' service offices should address vets' needs:

The Mankato Veterans Services office is open eight hours each day, Monday to Friday.Veterans, this is where you should go for assistance, not, in my opinion, to Walz’s office.

Take that, vets! In a letter published Saturday, Michael Trok, the veteran featured in the ad fired back:

Several days ago, Elwin Gunnick wrote a letter to the editor criticizing Rep. Tim Walz for an ad that features my personal story.

I have never met Gunnick, but I want to tell him why I am supporting Walz and  encouraging my fellow veterans and neighbors to support him as well.

I suffer from Parkinson’s Disease due to my exposure to Agent Orange while in Vietnam. When I tried to get the Veterans Administration to help me with the cost of medical care, I was denied because, at the time, the VA did not recognize Agent Orange as being a contributing  factor to the development of Parkinson’s. After reviewing the literature on the relationship between Parkinson’s and Agent Orange I found that the VA’s position just was not right.

It was frustrating at first because no one appeared to be listening or caring. Then I met Walz and things started to change; he listened  to us, he read the research and he, then, fought for us.

Through his work on the VA Committee, we started to turn the corner and last year, the VA announced that it would assume that if a person served in Vietnam and had Parkinson’s Disease, Agent Orange was responsible.

In an age when many politicians talk the talk about veterans, but not stand behind them, I understand  Gunnick’s skepticism. But, Walz is not a politician like the others.

He walks the walk and  follows through. He is doing the right thing and we need him back in  Congress.

Michael Trok

Wabasha

Trok knows his stuff. The struggle of Agent Orange veterans to get their syndrome recognized was a long one, and I was shocked when I first learned that Parkinson's in Vietnam Vets was not yet considered as a result of Agent Orange exposure, since there are many farmers who develop the disease as a result of working with farm chemicals. The connection is no secret.

Moreover, veterans are often advised to enlist their U.S. representatives and senators and their staff to resolve issues between their individual cases  and the federal bureaucracy. In fact, the Parkinson's issue was first brought to my attention by a friend (and veteran) who at the time worked on vets' issues as a member of Walz's congressional staff.

That Walz followed through and kept dogging the VA about this speaks to his dedication to veterans. Moreover, many county veteran service officers apparently share a high regard for Walz. This year, Walz received the Legislator of the Year Award from the National Association of County Veterans Service Officers (NACVSO)

Perhaps Walz's Republican critics believe the county veteran service officers association is also exploited by having the ear of a United States Representative who listens to their needs and works for the veterans they serve. Funny, but I highly doubt Randy Demmer himself would suggest that a Demmer office wouldn't help vets with case work. That's too bass ackwards even for a Hayfield Republican.

For myself, I wish all 535 members of Congress walked the walk for vets like Tim Walz does (sadly, the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America only grade 19 members at A+ along with Walz). I count among my friends some very fine young people serving in the Army, Guard, Marines and Navy--and there should be champions for them when they leave the military. Nearly all of the newspapers in the First that endorsed agreed, and singled out Walz's work for veterans as a strong reason to re-elect him to a third term.

Perhaps those who don't take newspaper endorsements to heart will heed Trok's words. We all should.