I honestly thought this was internet nonsense when I first saw it. The kind of claim that collapses the second you look at an actual statute. Instead, I pulled the thread and found myself staring at Minnesota election law thinking, wow, they actually did this. And yes, it is absolutely real.
Minnesota allows registered voters to vouch for up to eight other people in their precinct so those people can register and vote. No photo ID. No proof of residency. Just someone else saying, yeah, I know this person, they live here. That is it. That is the system. The statute spelling this out is Minnesota Statutes § 201.061, subdivision 3, and the practice is openly acknowledged by the Minnesota Secretary of State. This is not some rumor cooked up on social media. It has been around since the 1990s, quietly sitting there like a ticking time bomb.
The idea of vouching sounds more like getting into a nightclub than participating in the most important civic process in the country. “He’s good, trust me” is not a security standard. It is a punchline. Yet here it is, baked into state law. You can literally have one person function as a human ID factory for eight other voters. And if that sounds insane, congratulations, your instincts are working.
Activist Scott Pressler, who spends an unhealthy amount of time actually reading election rules instead of chanting slogans, has explained how this works in practice. One registered voter shows up, signs an oath, and suddenly eight people who cannot or will not prove who they are or where they live are now eligible to cast ballots. There is no realistic way to audit intent, no meaningful deterrent, and very little chance of enforcement after the fact. Once the vote is cast, the damage is done.
People will rush to defend this by yelling about racism, because that is always the reflex. Voter ID, they claim, is discriminatory. That argument falls apart the second you apply it anywhere else in life. Want to buy alcohol? Show ID. Want to smoke? Show ID. Want to board a plane, rent a car, open a bank account, or pick up concert tickets? Show ID. Somehow none of that is racist. The rules apply equally to everyone, and society functions just fine.
What actually is racist is the implication that certain groups are too incompetent to obtain identification. That is an insult masquerading as compassion. Setting basic, uniform standards is not oppression. It is how a serious country operates.
Minnesota, a state that already struggles with credibility and governance, decided that election integrity was optional. Is it any wonder the state is a political mess? When you design systems that prioritize convenience over verification, you invite abuse. And yes, the reason voting gets treated differently from every other adult responsibility is obvious. Loose rules make it easier to pad totals, and padded totals keep the Democrat Party comfortably in power.
This law is absurd. It should never be allowed anywhere. Secure elections are not a radical idea. They are the bare minimum.
Leave a Comment