How does Minnesota’s vouching process for same-day registration work and how often is it used?
Executive summary
Minnesota’s same-day registration system allows voters who lack qualifying ID or current proof of residence to have another registered voter “vouch” for their address at the polling place; a single voter may vouch for up to eight people and residential-facility staff can also vouch for residents [1] [2] [3]. The mechanism is rarely used in recent elections—state data show vouching accounted for less than 0.6% of votes cast in the 2024 general election, and roughly 71% of those vouching cases were people already registered who had moved without updating their address [4] [5].
1. How the vouching process actually works at the polls
On Election Day a person who lacks one of the enumerated proofs of residence may appear at their precinct and be accompanied by a registered voter from that precinct who signs a sworn oath attesting to the applicant’s residence; the registrant completes the same voter-registration application and the voucher signs a proof-of-residence oath in front of election judges [1] [2] [6]. Election judges are explicitly prohibited from vouching unless they personally know the prospective voter is a resident of the precinct, and the law requires the secretary of state to publish guidance for residential facilities and employees on vouching procedures [2].
2. Legal limits and identity verification steps
Minnesota separates proof of residence from identity verification: vouching verifies residence but not identity for registration purposes, and other identity checks (state ID number, last four SSN, etc.) remain part of the registration framework for other application paths; electronic registrations are verified against government databases when possible [2]. The statute caps the number of people one voter may vouch for at eight in a single election day, and people who were vouched for cannot themselves vouch for others [2] [7].
3. How often it’s been used and who uses it
Official state reporting and post‑election summaries indicate vouching is a small slice of the electorate: in the 2024 general election fewer than 0.6% of votes were associated with the vouching process, and most of those vouched voters (about 71%) were previously registered but had changed address without updating their registration [4] [5]. Older analyses and advocacy pieces note that usage has fluctuated—one 2016 estimate put vouching at around 6% of same‑day registrants in that cycle—illustrating that local practices, demographic patterns (e.g., senior living residents), and legislative changes influence rates over time [8].
4. Safeguards, verification after the fact, and contested claims
Minnesota officials say that vouching only establishes a residence claim and that registration and identity information is cross‑checked in the state election database after elections; inconsistencies may trigger follow‑up or perjury investigations [5]. Critics point to the post‑count verification model as a vulnerability—votes cast after same‑day registration can be verified only after they are counted—while proponents argue that vouching expands access for people who lack current IDs, notably residents of assisted living who may not have updated driver’s licenses [8] [4] [3].
5. Why vouching is in the headlines now and the policy debate ahead
The vouching process drew federal scrutiny when the U.S. Department of Justice requested Minnesota’s vouching records as part of a broader probe into same‑day registration practices and compliance with federal law, a move that has sharpened partisan debate and prompted calls both to preserve Election Day registration and to tighten procedures such as adding provisional ballots or additional ID checks [9] [4] [7] [10]. Legislative proposals and media narratives sometimes emphasize isolated older figures or ideological frames—advocates for change cite historical spikes and narrow margins in key races while defenders stress decades of use, small current utilization rates, and protections for seniors and residents of care facilities [8] [4] [3].