Posted Monday, 26 December 2011 by Independence Party E-mail
View IP Caucus Sites in a larger map
1) The BEST way to caucus is live and in-person with your friends and neighbors. The Independence Party has more than 45 caucus locations planned throughout the State. Check the interactive map below or the Minnesota Secretary of State's Caucus Finder.
Posted Tuesday, 20 December 2011 by Dean Barkley Comments (1) E-mail
.png)
A lot of people have asked me what I think about the constitutional amendment to ban marriage for same-sex couples. So I tell them the same thing I said when this came up during my 2008 U.S. Senate campaign.
It is long past time we acknowledge that the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution applies to all Americans, regardless of their sexual orientation, in the same way it applies regardless of race, religion or gender. I believe Minnesotans share my desire for their neighbors to enjoy the same rights, privileges and treatment that they receive.
I am proud that the party I co-founded has not only taken a stand but is actively working to defeat this amendment in next November. The proposal runs counter not only to the IP platform but who we are as Minnesotans. However, it won’t be an easy fight. In 29 other states a well-funded opposition has relied on outside wealth and fear tactics to change the conversation.
To fight back we need a people-powered movement.
The IP is a proud partner of the statewide coalition to defeat this amendment. And they're looking for 250,000 people to pledge to vote NO. It’s an ambitious goal, but I know they can do it.
I urge you to click here and pledge to vote NO on this constitutional amendment.
We have a chance to stand united next year not as partisans but as Minnesotans. I know first hand how gridlocked our political environment is. But this coalition of Independents, Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Libertarians and others will win on this issue if we stand united.
That’s why I’m counting on you to pledge to vote NO. Click here to take that pledge and share your support.
Thank you for taking a stand.
Sincerely,
U.S. Senator Dean Barkley
Posted Wednesday, 30 November 2011 by Kathy Bonnifield and Carolyn Jackson E-mail
On May 26, 2011, Governor Dayton vetoed a bill that would have required Minnesota voters to present only one of three IDs to vote — a valid State driver’s license, a valid State ID card, or a Minnesota Voter ID. Had this passed other IDs — such as a student ID, Military ID, or U.S. passport — would not be considered appropriate identification to vote. The impact of this legislation would have been felt by a number of populations — including many of the people who register to vote on Election Day.
Requiring a current photo ID to vote only addresses voter impersonation.
One side claims that voter impersonation does not occur while the other side says that it might happen but goes undetected. But, could massive voter impersonation really go undetected? Consider the number of people the impersonator would have to pass — from election judges and the party challengers at the precinct (whom they would need to assume doesn’t know who they are impersonating) to the person they are impersonating (how sure are they that the person standing behind them is not the individual or a friend of the individual)?
In Minnesota not one voter has stepped forward to say that someone impersonated them.
Barriers.
Requiring a voter photo ID creates a barrier to vote. This is especially true for people who might have an ID but not the correct ID. If the proposal had become law, over 144,000 eligible voters would have immediately had a barrier to the ballot box because they do not have a current Minnesota driver’s license or Minnesota ID card.
Anytime a voter moves, their ID would no longer be valid. Consider college students — when looking at four precincts with student housing in Northfield, we can see that over 1,300 people registered to vote on Election Day in both 2010 and 2008. In fact, many students who chose to vote at their college address would have to have one ID to vote in the August primary and another ID to vote in the November general.
Finally, if Minnesota were to follow Wisconsin’s example, many absentee voters and mail-in voters would need to find a photocopier so they can send a copy of their valid ID along with their ballot documents. (In 2010, over 45,000 Minnesotans in rural areas were registered as mail-in voters.)
Some argue that no one has lost their right to vote because of a voter ID. Consider Sister Julie McGuire, who was a poll worker in Indiana. She had to turn away her friends — elderly nuns living in a retirement facility. The nuns were registered to vote but didn’t have the right government-issued ID. Sister Julie McGuire could identify them. But that was not good enough — they needed a specific type of identification. She and the nuns would have broken the law if they voted. The same would hold true here — an election judge would have to turn away people they personally know if they did not have the right ID.
State Costs: Voter IDs, Voter Education.
The most obvious cost of a voter ID is the requirement to provide a free voter ID to anyone who does not have one. But, there are hidden costs including voter education. In Georgia, a federal court delayed implementation of voter ID until tens of millions of dollars were spent on voter education. Currently, Tennessee has a publicity campaign underway and is extending the hours of driver's service centers to accommodate its voter ID requirement. In addition to education and drivers service center costs, small Minnesota precincts that currently use mail in voting will have to begin again to pay for in-person voting. This new cost comes in a time when those same communities are considering whether to pay for police and fire services.
Local Costs: Provisional Ballots and Election Judges
Provisional ballots were created to ensure that voters were not erroneously dropped from voter rosters. Election Day registration provides greater protection to voters than provisional ballots. But because a voter photo ID requirement would contract voting rights, Minnesota would have to implement a provisional ballot system. Costs span from printing of the provisional ballot envelope as well as additional election judges on Election Day as well as provisional ballot judges in each county after Election Day. In fact, in Madison, Wisconsin they recently conducted “mock” elections to determine the needs of precincts on Election Day due to their new voter ID requirement. They determined that they needed to double the number of election judges.
Focus should be on increasing voter turnout. Not on unneeded, costly barriers.
Minnesota prides itself with the highest levels of voter turnout in the country, but in 2010, over 1.5 million eligible voters did not vote. Instead of focusing on the creation of costly barriers, we should be focusing on increasing voter turnout.
Platform: no to voter ID
The Independence Party should support reform that gives strength, not limits, to the right to vote. Vote to oppose voter ID at the January platform convention.
Kathy Bonnifield is the Executive Director of Citizens for Election Integrity MN. She can be reached at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it . Carolyn Jackson is the Lobbying Coordinator at ACLU-MN. She can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it . The League of Women Voters Minnesota has taken a strong position against voter photo-ID requirements, and has information and resources on its website, www.lwvmn.org Read the vetoed bill, SF509, at https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bin/bldbill.php?bill=S0509.6.html&session=ls87 and the veto message at http://mn.gov/governor/multimedia/pdf/Ch-69-SF509.pdf
**EDITOR'S NOTE** The authors requested and were granted the opportunity to make their case to the Independence Party. The IP would be happy to publish thoughtful reactions as well.
Posted Wednesday, 30 November 2011 by Matt Lewis E-mail
Posted Friday, 11 November 2011 by Mark Jenkins E-mail
Posted Friday, 11 November 2011 by Mark Jenkins E-mail
Republicans and Democrats have often used their elected offices to encourage political participation within their party while throwing up road blocks in front of the opposing party. Whether it is drawing political boundaries that protect their own party members, closed party primaries or “unfunding” political campaign refund programs, the current two party system continues to demonstrate that your participation matters if, and only if, you support one of their parties.Posted Tuesday, 08 November 2011 by Matt Lewis E-mail
The Independence Party is regularly rounding up commentary, the latest campaign information, events, and updates from our partners. And we want to hear from you! If you've missed our previous issues that's ok. Just sign up for our mailing list to get the next one!Posted Monday, 07 November 2011 by Matt Lewis E-mail
A week of intensive GOTV events wraps up comprehensive RV awareness campaign
ST. PAUL – In just a few short hours, St. Paul voters will experience Ranked Voting for the first time – and the new voting system’s Capital City debut is expected to be every bit as successful as its Minneapolis implementation in 2009.
Voters in wards 1, 2 and 3 – each of which has three or more candidates running for city council – will have the chance to rank candidates in preferential order on the ballot. A voter’s vote always counts for her highest-ranked candidate who can use it to get elected. Her second or additional choices are backup choices, and will only count if her first choice is eliminated – as would happen in a traditional runoff.
A voter may rank only one choice, but is encouraged to rank as many candidates as she likes to ensure that her ballot continues to count if her favorite candidate is defeated.
FairVote Minnesota, the city of St. Paul and Ramsey County have spent months educating St. Paulites at neighborhood and community festivals, public forums, and demo elections, as well as through door-knocking, voter mailings and print and online media. See schedule of educational activities over the past several months on our educational website at http://votestpaul.org/.
Election results will be reported on the Ramsey County Elections website. Races in which a candidate receives a majority of first-choice votes will be declared on election night. Those in which no candidate receives a majority of first choices will be manually tallied and reported on Monday, Nov. 14. See details about St. Paul’s ranked voting elections and the counting process at http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/elections/ranked_voting.htm
Jeanne Massey, FairVote Minnesota executive director, and St. Paul voter education coordinator Brian Kimmes are available throughout Election Day to offer information and perspective on the Ranked Voting rollout.
By folding two elections into one in local nonpartisan races, Ranked Voting (or Ranked Choice Voting, as it’s called in other cities, including Minneapolis) accomplishes what traditional two-round elections do – but in a single, cost-effective, higher turnout election.
St. Paul is one of six cities using Ranked Choice Voting tomorrow for municipal elections.
-n-
Posted Thursday, 03 November 2011 by Matt Lewis E-mail
The Independence Party knows that Vikings fans hold a wide range of views when it comes to the ongoing stadium debate. Rather than limit those positions to just a couple of panelist opinions, the IP is opening the floor to anyone who wants to share their vision with the public, express their frustration or react to what's on the table.Posted Monday, 17 October 2011 by Robin Carpenter E-mail
For the last 13 years, as long as I have owned my small business, I’ve spent every October navigating the next year’s health insurance options for our employees. Health insurance is a very important benefit in our office. We have a lot of young families. (One year, our holiday card was a picture of all of the babies born in our office.)
While this time consuming process is important, it is also maddening for two very different reasons. And I don’t think either of them are addressed very well by the Affordable Care Act set to be fully implemented in 2014.
First off, the annual benefits planning is maddening because I don’t think it should be my role as an employer to define the benefits being made available to employees. The needs of employees are very different. I don’t believe I should be dictating the parameters of their individual coverage. The options for small businesses aren’t all that flexible. Choices are limited, so we provide a higher cost traditional plan with moderate co-pays as well as a high deductible plan with a Health Savings Account. And we hope that we are providing at least two solid options that reflect different ends of the spectrum.
Under reform, the state insurance exchanges being readied for 2014 are not a great option for our employees, who typically make more than 250% of the poverty level. They will not be eligible for the Federal subsidies that would allow them to purchase better coverage at lower out-of-pocket cost than they would be able to from us. And it remains to be seen how customized the offering within the exchanges will be.
One innovation that would address some of our needs is now being offered by an entrepreneurial start–up based right here in Minnesota - Bloom Health. Their configurable offerings would address the flexibility required by most of our employees, and it doesn’t require the Affordable Care Act to work.
The second and equally frustrating part of employee health benefit planning that will not be enhanced by the Affordable Care Act is the lack of substantive incentives to make insurance policy holders behave like good consumers. At least with high deductible health plans and health savings accounts that were implemented in the last five years, there is an incentive for consumers to compare price and quality of procedures, doctor visits, hospitals and/or prescriptions. Unfortunately, the health care system doesn’t make it easy for us consumers to make these comparisons. (When was the last time you tried to compare prices at different pharmacies for a prescription covered under your insurance?)
Only in the last couple of years have we started to see some improved options for comparison shopping. But the incentives for comparison shopping are tied to the consumer having a direct vested interest in the outcome. This happens to some extent with a health savings account because the money belongs to the employee/consumer. It’s not clear what incentives, if any, consumers who buy their insurance through exchanges will have to comparison shop for their care.
And, of course, the Affordable Care Act does nothing at the system level to reform the fee for service structure of health care payments.
So what is our company planning to do this year to prepare for open enrollment for health benefits next month? We’re maintaining our benefit levels and have managed to find a third plan choice for our employees, expanding their range of options a bit. And we’re adding a new benefit - Long Term Care Insurance.
Please don’t misunderstand my intent. I fully support the idea of the Affordable Care Act to extend access to health care to the millions of uninsured and underinsured. I also think that employers with lower wage workers and more part time workers will adopt the insurance exchanges at a fast pace. It’s just that none of this actually addresses the true cost of care at a system level or make us better consumers of our care at an individual level.
Robin Carpenter of Edina is the vice chair of the Independence Party of Minnesota 3rd Congressional District.
Page 1 of 19
...here's the operative quote: 'When underdogs choose not to play by Goliath's rules, they win.'
Jack Uldrich in "How the IP Can Win" Join the discussion
