Voter ID Not Ready for Implementation in Pennsylvania
I have always believed that it is reasonable to require voters to prove that they are who they say they are, and that government has an absolute right to require photo voter identification.
Having said that, I wonder if the law that is set to be in effect next month's election at this moment could have been executed in any more convoluted, jumbled manner that it has been. Some voters received an ambiguous, unclear letter from the Commonwealth, which causes them to wonder whether their identification will be valid, and whether John B. Smith will be able to cast a ballot if his registration reads as "John Smith."
The money and time that have been wasted on this issue, and the hand-wringing and angst it has caused, indicates that the provision is not ready for implementation at this time.
State Supreme Court Justice Debra Todd appropriately asked the Commonwealth attorney during debate on the matter, "What's the rush (to implement this)?" What's the rush indeed ...
The legitimate desire for voter ID to be implemented was sullied when Republican House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (whom I have known as an honorable man), apparently naively believing that his incendiary and offensive remarks would not exit the room in which he made them, told a group of Republican partisans that the measure would enable Mitt Romney to capture swing state Pennsylvania. Representative Turzai told me in email communication that his remarks were taken out of context, yet he did not explain how, nor, to my knowledge, has he ever addressed the matter with the media at length. It is reasonable to conclude that his remarks were meant in the way they were spoken, which is that voter ID as it currently stands will keep from the polls those who are not inclined to vote for Mitt Romney, i.e., Democrats.
I want the Commonwealth to find the means to honor the will of the Legislature and to fairly implement Voter ID. If that means that it will not be in effect until next year or the year after that, so be it. I do not want to have on my conscience that any qualified voter was precluded from casting their ballot because a restrictive law kept them home on Election Day.
Steve Karas
9:50 pm on Monday, October 1, 2012
"Honorable" men do not support and cosponsor restrictive voter ID legislation which directly targets poor people and minorities when there is NO VOTER fraud in the state of PA. There is not one case of a vote cast, counted, and later proved to be fraudulent.
Eric Gordon
12:50 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Steve, I hate to burst your bubble, but voter fraud exists all over the Commonwealth.
For a first-hand example, I personally know of an election judge who said, "They can pass a voter ID law, no problem. Every time a voter comes in, I'll make them show an ID. Each time they come in, all day long, I'll make them show their ID!"
Now, I know you are probably thinking this was in a bright red Republican precinct, but shockingly, this was an election judge in Crafton, PA, a heavily-democratic area (please note my sarcasm). Another example of fraud is in Philly, where some precincts report 5000 to 0, Dem to GOP votes. That is statistically impossible.
Voter fraud exists, Steve. Anybody who argues otherwise is either completely ignorant or bold-faced liar.
Ed M
6:49 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Why do people have a problem proving who they are?
SLR
8:02 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Sorry Eric. During the trial the Commonwealth attorneys could not provide a single example of voter fraud. This is just a way to undermine the voting process. Shame on the supporters of this bill. Shame, shame, shame.
Roger
8:36 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
SLR, do we assume that because of the few prosecutions, you conclude there is no voter fraud? Poor basis, to be sure.
I expect you can say the same about the 2010 election, with Black Panthers standing outside the voting area with night sticks. The charges of intimidation were dropped. Using your argument, can we say there was no voter intimidation?
Mike
8:57 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
PLEASE STOP ARMCHAIR QUARTERBACKING THIS DISCUSSION.
IT IS TIME TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER TOPIC.
Veronica Votes
9:42 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I have an idea! Since Tattoos are the rage in today’s world why don’t we just require everyone to get a PA State Authorized "Bar Code" tattoo on our foot, right or left with our identity permanently embedded in our skin? Yes voting halls may end up smelling a little since all that exposure of feet but "No-Voter fraud"!