When it comes to the voter ID amendment, do you know what your vote really means?  The Spectrum summarizes arguments for and against the amendment and the implications of voting “yes” or “no” before Blake students and faculty head to the polls on Election Day.
Text as it will appear on the ballot:
“Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to require all voters to present valid photo identification to vote and to require the state to provide free identification to eligible voters, effective July 1, 2013?”
VOTING YES:
Minnesota Constitution would be amended to require all voters to present valid photo identification to vote, and to require the state to provide free identification to eligible voters effective July 1, 2013. If one does not have proper identification at the time of voting, he or she will be given a “provisional ballot.” These allow the voter’s ballot to be counted after the election, once they possess proper identification.

ARGUMENTS FOR AMENDMENT:
Many believe this amendment will help protect against “voter fraud,” the term for when unregistered voters or those otherwise not entitled to vote are able to cast their ballots. Those in favor of the amendment argue that identification will not be hard to come by, as the Amendment indicates that the state would be required to provide these IDs.

VOTING NO:
Minnesota citizens would be able to proceed in voting as is: no required government-issued identification and no provisional ballots.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST AMENDMENT:
Those against the amendment say that there have been very few to no legitimate cases of voter fraud. They argue that the amendment could make it harder for those who lack a government-issued ID to vote, including the elderly, low-income, or minority groups.