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.