Clerks Say ID Requirement Didn't Turn Voters Off

But that didn't preclude some from testing the law, putting stickers on their driver's licenses and showing their frustration.

Some voters were a little disgruntled when they found out they had to show an "acceptable" form of identification at the polls for the Feb. 21, 2012 primary election.

But most voted anyway.

For the first time, voters were required to show a photo ID before they could receive a ballot. Some said the new voter ID law would prevent people from even showing up to the polls, and they said that the law discriminates against people who are poor and homeless.

Criticism aside, area clerks and poll workers said yesterday went off without a hitch. That didn't keep some from testing the limits, however.

One Mount Pleasant man refused to vote when he found out his veteran's identification card wasn't acceptable, and a person in Caledonia thought they would be cute and put a monkey face over their picture on their driver's license when they handed it over to the poll worker.

Here's how things went in several area communities:


Things went great. We had two voters who didn't have proper ID. However they were able to go home and come back with the correct photo ID and vote.

Lynn Galyardt, director of finance and administration


For the most part we didn't have any problems. There were a couple of people who were kind of creepy. One person put a monkey face on his driver's license. A couple of others didn't like the idea of having to sign the poll book so they jammed their pen into the paper and ripped the paper.

Karie Torkilsen, village clerk


People need to know that they have to sign the poll book in order to vote besides giving photo ID. That really needs to get out for future elections. If they refuse to sign the poll book they will not go any further. Before they get the ballot they have to sign the poll book. All it is is that we match the signature on the ID with the poll book.

Kathy Kazsa, Clerk Treasurer


Greenfield’s election inspectors said that voters came to the polls prepared with proper photo ID. I was told that some electors were proud to show their photo ID and made comments as such, while others appeared to be disappointed with the new requirements, yet they still provided photo ID, as required.

Jennifer Goergen, City Clerk

Mount Pleasant

Traffic was slow; perhaps the slowest in recent memory, but the day was a good trial run for residents to get used to new polling places and workers to get comfortable with new procedures because of Voter ID.

We didn't have any problems, really. We expected to get a little flak from people about having to show ID, but people were more than willing to go along with the new law. This year will be busy for elections so this was a good trial run for everyone.

Sue Stearns, deputy clerk/treasurer

According to a story by the Racine Journal Times, when a Mount Pleasant man presented his veteran's card as his identification, the poll worker refused to take it and asked him if he had a driver's license. But he refused to present it and walked away without voting.


We've had no one object. In fact many people have said they're glad we're finally asking for ID.

Beverly Subel, poll worker

Oak Creek

Poll workers said they did not have any problems related to the new voter identification law that was in effect for the first time.

Nearly all voters came prepared with the proper identification.

Christa Miller, acting city clerk


Only about 151 eligible voters came through Village Hall to cast a ballot.  No problems with Voter ID. This was a smaller election, which was a good way to get people into the routine of showing their ID and the poll workers felt comfortable with the whole process.

Mary Cole, Village Clerk/Deputy Treasurer


The new voter ID laws went very smoothly yesterday. If someone didn't already have it out, they had no problem getting it out for us. I didn't hear any complaints from people voting.

Sue Freiheit, Sussex Village Clerk


Voter response to the ID requirements was mixed — with some all ready with their IDs and had no comment to those who voiced disapproval for the new law.

“The majority of voters were in favor of the voter ID and signature” that's required under the state’s new election law.

Gwen Simonis, a poll worker at Wilson School

mau February 24, 2012 at 07:43 PM
@Jay, where did that story come from.
mau February 24, 2012 at 07:48 PM
I seem to recall it was McCain and Feingold who compromised and came up with the campaign finance legislation. Then it was McCain and Obama who had a gentleman's agreement to abide by the compromise campaign finance legislation. And it was then Obama who broke this agreement and went hog wild with collecting campaign donations while McCain abided by the law.
Don Niederfrank February 24, 2012 at 07:49 PM
CD, ok, ok, once. And I can see your point about our being an evenly divided state =and for that reason= insuring a fair and proper election is important. And =for the same reason= I'd add that it is important that we do not disenfranchise persons unnecessarily. And I think that's part of the problem with this issue--honest elections and complete enfranchisement are both important. And much of what we think about each of these is very speculative. The word "moot" seems to apply here. Can we agree to disagree? Thanks for hanging in there w/me in this dialogue. :-)
mau February 24, 2012 at 08:17 PM
@JRH, and this is all in jest. Where is Rees when we need him. Alias = alternative name (Rees' favorite) Acronym = name using initials (muah) Moniker = nickname or alias @Jay, Obama is taking SuperPac money. He just got a big donation from the not funny comedian Maher. I would say a $1 million donation isn't from a middle class citizen but from a 1%. Where is the outcry from the 99%? http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/maher-donates-1-million-obama-super-pac-131123895.html
Bren February 24, 2012 at 08:45 PM
Oak Creek, spending $5-6 million because of 15 voter fraud incidents, or approximately $333,333 per incident is a wise expenditure in your mind? And that is 5-6 "million." The Capitol cleaning did not cost millions, it cost whatever it costs to mop floors, remove posters and tape residue. The recall effort I believe will save our state money in the long run. Example, didn't you see the article in the MJS about the $1.1 million that will be paid to 3 private law firms for services rendered in the gerrymandering project (in which 18 times as many voters as needed were switched around), and for litigation because of the lawsuits. That's all about opportunism and poor judgment. Our budget still isn't balanced, even with egregious cuts to K-12 education, Homestead and EIC, and removal of public employees off the tax rolls. Now Walker is taking nearly $26 million of the mortgage settlement to fix his $143 million budgeting error (lower tax revenue). You may call me an "idiot" for not agreeing with you, and although your good opinion is important to me, no matter how many times I look at the numbers and the deeds, I cannot agree that Scott Walker has Wisconsin's best interests in mind.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »