Minnesota lawmakers are politically divided on the best way to better protect the state’s voting system and to encourage more people to participate in elections.
Democrats, who hold narrow majorities in the House and Senate, are pushing a bill they call the Democracy for the People Act. They say it would automatically register people to vote, make it easier to cast ballots, protect voters from misinformation and shed more light on who spends money to influence elections.
“It really is a bill that makes a choice to protect and expand multiracial democracy,” said Rep. Emma Greenman, DFL-Minneapolis, the chief sponsor of the bill in the House, where the legislation was debated Thursday and approved 70-57 along party lines.
Democrats’ envision that “people of every background, every ZIP code, every generation, every race, every political persuasion come together to make decisions to think big and solve problems and govern together,” Greenman said.
Republicans oppose the legislation saying it is a partisan bill, which Rep. Paul Torkelson, R-Hanska, suggested should be called the “Protect Democratic Victories Act.” He said the bill will stifle political speech and lead to legal challenges.
“We have a long history in Minnesota of bipartisan support for elections bills,” Torkelson said. “This bill has zero Republican support.”
What’s in the bill?
The legislation would automatically register eligible residents to vote when they get a new or renewed driver’s license or state identification card. Other state agencies also would be able to create similar systems and residents could opt out if they wanted.
Sixteen- and 17-year-olds could preregister so they are able to vote after they turn 18.
“This early exposure to civic responsibility plants the seeds for a lifelong commitment to active participation in our democratic process,” said Kailez Campbell, a teen voting activist, who spoke in support of the legislation Thursday.
The bill would allow residents to sign up to permanently receive absentee ballots by mail. Sample ballots would have to be made available in multiple languages and the state would have to provide some translation services to voters on election day.
The legislation also would prohibit intimidation and interference with voting and make it a crime to transmit false materials with the intention of impeding on people casting ballots.
Finally, the bill would tighten campaign finance rules by broadening the definition of “expressly advocating” for a candidate, which requires financial disclosures under campaign finance laws. It also would limit how corporations could donate to candidates including restrictions on companies with “foreign influences.”
Why are Republicans opposed?
Rep. Torkelson and Rep. Harry Niska, of Ramsey, both of the GOP, say the changes to the state’s campaign finance laws are the most problematic for Republicans.
They said the proposals aim to hinder groups that typically donate to GOP candidates, such as corporations, while holding unions and other groups to a lesser standard.
“It is trying to silence publicly traded corporations and a lot of other corporations,” Niska said. “It picks and chooses which speakers are going to be excluded from the market place.”
Niska pointed to language that prohibits companies with any foreign ties from certain political activities, but does not include the same restrictions for unions and nonprofit organizations with international reach.
What’s next?
Before approval, the House debated the bill at length Thursday with Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party members voting down Republican efforts to modify the bill.
Next it will be debated in the Senate, where DFLers have a one-seat advantage. Sen. Liz Boldon, DFL-Rochester, who is the primary sponsor in that chamber, said she was confident the bill would win approval, but a timeline for a vote had not been determined.
