Many have said that the voter ID amendment is a problem in search of a solution. As mentioned in “Fact checking the voter ID campaign,” an editorial from Oct. 1, evidence suggests that voter impersonation is not an issue. Voter impersonation is the only type of fraud that required photo identification would prevent, and this kind of fraud does not exist in Minnesota. It would, however, prevent 70.9 percent of the students in Minnesota from voting, according to a survey conducted by Minnesota Public Interest Research Group in May. A little research would reveal that those who are disproportionately affected by the amendment are students, people with low income, people with disabilities, people of color and the elderly.

That is to say nothing of all the people who move frequently and are unlikely to have an ID with a current address — these citizens’ ability to vote would also be put in jeopardy. Many of the specifics of this mandate, such as the process of casting an absentee ballot, are left to the next legislative session in spring of 2013. You decide: Is it common sense to agree to an amendment that is not fully defined yet? Is it common sense to disenfranchise millions of voters to prevent a problem that doesn’t exist?