Governor Walker to sign Voter ID today

I had coffee yesterday with a couple of women who worked very hard to get the bill passed and to make sure there were provisions, like the residency requirement of 28 consecutive days, to further protect the vote.

Here’s the final bill. Here’s the Legislative Reference Bureau report on the final amendments.

The two stressed there were other details they were still hoping to see made law, but they admitted there’s only a three week window and any more advancements were unlikely. In addition, they conveyed a sense of surprise at how much this issue had been placed to the back burner until a few constituents made it knows the bill was a priority to conservative voters. They also suggested the court battles I fear won’t happen until after the November 2012 vote since “victims” of the bill will need to be determined before a suit can be filed. Perhaps by then, Wisconsin will have swung to the Republican presidential candidate and Obama will be yesterday’s news.

I will confess they had nothing but praise for Senator Mary Lazich, who came through in yesterday’s discussion as the clear leader in putting this bill forward when others seemed content to let it pass.

Leadership, when it finally happens, is a beautiful thing.

P.S. Governor Walker: Thank you.


  1. Scottie looks a lot better now, eh?

  2. Only if it sticks. 🙂

  3. John Foust says:

    Yeah, that sunglassed Mike Ellis slamming the vote through must’ve made you swell with pride in the way he was conducting himself, right? Heck, no need to even let the Dems vote, right?

    Let the lawsuits begin. If you don’t spend the time talking about the law before you pass it, surely you’ll spend the time and money later.

  4. Randy in Richmond says:

    I don’t know about Wisconsin but your last paragraph nails Obamacare right on the nose. And that affects everyone in the country, not just the voting public of one state. And I don’t think Harry or Nancy wore sunglasses.

  5. John Foust says:

    I agree they didn’t have an adequate discussion of the problems with health care. If you didn’t like the ramrodding then, you shouldn’t applaud it now. Unless of course, It’s OK If A Republican Does It.

    Your tangent isn’t as tangent as you’d hoped. Please, defend Ellis’s behavior. Why are Wisconsin’s Republicans behaving like they wouldn’t like others to behave? Why is Cindy cheering?

  6. Because there’s a BIG difference between FooFooDust Pie/Sky ObozoCare and common sense voter ID.

    But John isn’t capable of noticing.

  7. John Foust says:

    It’s like Dad29 invents his own language and repeats it, expecting everyone to understand.

    This is horrid politics. The WisGOP intends to disenfranchise voters. You do recognize that fewer people will vote in the future, don’t you? Who will be less likely to vote?

  8. I see this as an opportunity for community activists to help the supposedly disenfranchised potential voters get their necessary ID.

  9. “Who will be less likely to vote?”

    1) People who are dead
    2) People who do not live in Wisconsin
    3) People who already voted under a different name

    Those evil Republicans and their VOTER SUPPRESSION!!!!!!!!!

  10. 🙂

  11. i did do a cursory reading of the new law. what stood out are all the requirements to vote. i am fine with a drivers license but to earmark those who get a traffic ticket is a stretch and maybe a violation of equal protection of the laws. this is a whole lot for volunteer poll workers to administer. hope everyone renews their license on time. for the non-drivers, good luck. a class A felony for falsification of a form will be hard to prove as the element of a felony is intent. it is beyond me why anyone would want to cheat in voting when the turnouts are so low

  12. it is beyond me why anyone would want to cheat in voting when the turnouts are so low

    You don’t know any Democrats, who will tell you that “One vote here and there won’t make a difference,” while smiling about it. They BRAG about cheating.

  13. Randy in Richmond says:

    Here’s something to at least think about. In the recent Supreme Court election, Prosser defeated Klossenburg by 7,006 votes. This is 0.467 % of the total vote. There are 3,542 precincts in Wisconsin. Switch one vote per precinct and the election results change, or if Kloopenburg could have gotten two votes more per precinct she would have won.

    I make no allegations here but results like these could tempt some to attempt to circumvent the election laws.