text:
Judge Halts Pennsylvania's Voter ID Law Until After Nov. 6 General Election
Commonwealth Court judge rules after hearing two days of testimony. An appeal to the state Supreme Court is possible.
A judge ruled today that Pennsylvania's tough new Voter ID Law should be put on hold until after the Nov. 6 general election, according to an Associated Press report.
The ruling can be appealed to the state Supreme Court, which said it would expedite any further action in the case since Election Day is just five weeks away.
Do you agree with the ruling? Tell us in the comments section below.
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson heard two days of testimony last week, as directed by the Supreme Court, to determine whether the state has made it easy enough to get a photo ID in order to vote.
Opponents say the law disenfranchises voters—especially the young, poor and elderly, who tend to vote for Democrats.
Supporters say the law will prevent voter fraud—but that justification sparked controversy when GOP state Rep. Mike Turzai of Bradford Woods said the law will allow Gov. Mitt Romney to win Pennsylvania.
Some political analysts called the voter fraud prevention argument "a sham."
Tuesday, Oct. 9 is the last day for Pennsylvanians to register to vote in the general election.
jim mang
4:42 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
how can anyone go through life in this country without an id? cash a check? anything? so vote and need an id, great you should need one.
Ellie Enlightened
12:37 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
How is this common sense. Now fraud can run amuck. Do you go to the doctor? They ask for ID, Do you drink? They ask for ID. Do you fly or smoke? They ask for ID. Only liberal morons agree with this. The only reason NOT TO have ID is FRAUD.
12:51 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
And Ellie has called anyone that is a liberal a moron.
We really value your opinion now, Ellie. Tell us more!
1:19 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
James - I've posted below that Republicans are not stupid.
Ralph's opinion = Ellie's opinion
1:22 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I agree this isn't common sense and I hope that they appeal it to the Supreme Court. Just last night on the Evening news they were talking about Voters Fraud (Democrats). and we need this law in place now.
1:24 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
cc - Last night on the news they also discussed the voter registration fraud done on behalf of the Republican party.
10:49 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
what a crock...such a sham represents whats happening to america...have to show validation to cash a check but not to vote...well stupid people you wanted change and now you have it...whimper away!
Ralph Meyer
11:03 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Given that voter ID fraud is just about non-existent, that the price of voter ID when voter ID is already checked, and that the stupid, corrupt, republicans pulled this garbage to try to get Romney and Ryan unfairly elected (corruption!!!) by denying the vote to those who would likely vote sensibly for President Obama, the voter ID law is a bunch of corrupt nonsense. And this isn't a whimper, dingbat, it's anger at a party that's gone south of anything reasonably decent!
Fred Freitag
11:11 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I guess you don't read much. It's NOT a change but back to the way it was BEFORE this new voter law. The change was perpetrated by Republicans to discourage voting by the young, poor and elderly, who tend to vote for Democrats.
Ellie Enlightened
12:39 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Hey Fred Freitag How do you think Al Franken won? Pay attention.
12:48 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Really harsh to call people stupid because they did not go for a change without their vote on it! The people had nothing to do with the change. The change was coming from the GOP.
I actually believe in ID's to vote because an ID will also protect a person. But why wasn't this put on the books until the year of a presidential vote? And why were we told we could get it done for free? I have used an ID for years and it just so happened that 2012 was my year to re-new it. No one offered a free one. It was $13. It is sad but for many people $13. is a lot of money. I hope this is worked out in the next year with the "people" being involved. Paying money to vote is illegal ! True ID's should be free
2:29 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
You don't have a constitutionally protected right to cash a check though, while voting is the most basic constitutional right we have. Therefore if the matter is eventually taken to the SCOTUS, it will judge the law under strict scrutiny, meaning the government will need to prove it has a compelling interest in infringing upon the right. That will be very difficult to prove considering there is almost no voter fraud that would be stopped by voter ID laws.
So the basic argument is that if the government is going to curb our most basic right it has to have a clear reason that would demonstrably benefit the voters more than it would disenfranchise them. Voter registration laws are an example of a law that has those qualities. I don't think Voter ID is.
2:37 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
this is no change, it is stopping the change in rules.
If you believe for some reason that voting without showing ID is a problem, then why were you not complaining when GWB was twice elected without the need for PA voters to show any photo IDs at the polls?
5:24 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I guess the people that think it's unfair to require ID for voting think that one shouldn't be required to by alcohol, open a bank account, etc., right?...
The answer will undoubtedly be "no."
It's sad that people think ensuring a fair vote is less important than carding a kid trying to but a six pack...
Ed M
6:39 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
"The change was perpetrated by Republicans to discourage voting by the young, poor and elderly, who tend to vote for Democrats."
Do you have anything to prove this statement, Fred?
Come on People
9:44 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Why is everyone under the impression that only people who would vote for democrats don't have ID's. Isn't that saying something on how people think? Also if they can't make it to go get the FREE ID being offered everywhere, what makes you think they would be able to make it to the polls on voting day. I vote to call it even, half would vote for Romney & half for Obama. End of discussion
Stella Neely
10:51 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Why not set up places in certain areas to accomodate voters, such as Cranberry Twp Municipal Building for areas around southwest Butler County. Take a picture, load it to a laptop, print it right out, laminate it and the voter has the I.D necesary! Then again, might not work, probably to simple for the State Government to deal with it!
Matthew Cook
10:54 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I don't understand why the judge punted. What is the justification for kicking it past the election? Make a decision. 'Put on hold?' After the election, then what? This is a law duly enacted by the Pennsylvania legislature.
John Marshall
10:55 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
No this is not right, who is this judge? Just goes in favor for Obuma once again!!!! This is not right!!!
Robert L. Beiler
11:01 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I don't understand Rep. Turzai's statement?? Does that mean Obama can only win PA with voter fraud???
I am in favor of the Voter ID Law. If you have nothing to hide you should be for it also.
Bob Zanakis
11:22 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
What a spin on reality. It means the only way Romney can win is by voter supression. I have to say that Faux News followers are the as loyal as any puppy I have known in my lifetime. Can't say they are as smart as them though.
Fred Freitag
11:24 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I guess you obviously just don't understand Robert. There has been NO voter fraud in PA - there was an ulterior purpose behind the new law which was to prevent voting.
Ed M
6:41 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
"I guess you obviously just don't understand Robert. There has been NO voter fraud in PA - there was an ulterior purpose behind the new law which was to prevent voting."
Do you have any facts to back that statement up with, Fred?
Lori B
7:38 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Ed M- any facts to back it up? How many cases of voter fraud have been taken to the courts in Pennsylvania?? It's a non-existent problem, that according to Turzai himself- is to help get Romney elected.
Ed M
9:48 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
I don't know how many have been taken to court Lori. I'm not the one making the claim.
Cheryl Petursson
11:08 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Its good that the ruling was overturned until after the election. Many would not be able to vote. Does anyone know how much supposed voter fraud was happening in Pennsylvania
Bob Zanakis
11:20 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Finally a Republican judge who makes a decision based on the facts and not political effects of the judge's ruling. Quite refreshing I must say. But in all reality, it was the Republican Chief Justice of the PA Supreme Court that voted with the 3 Democrats on the court to send it back to the superior court to make sure the state had the capibility to issue nearly 700k voter id's prior to the election when the state's own testimony (PennDot) said that about 16k is what they expect to handle. Justice can be done when political correctiveness is avoided for the good of the commnonwealth. I am proud once again.
proud American
11:24 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Come on in Acorn you now are free to sign up everyone you can find no questions will be asked. Does this surprise anyone just like the federal government has stopped Lockheed in Virginia from sending out lay off notices because of the defense cuts about to happen Jan. 1. even thought the law states they needed to go out before the election. The stated they would pay for any law suits that might arise from the lay offs. Political corruption at its best.
12:27 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Your paranoia is showing, along with your lack of facts.
Acorn disbanded two years ago, even after several rulilngs that they did nothing illegal. Breitbart got his wish and you sheep continue to believe everything you're told by the far right.
You might want to check out the current voter registration fraud accusations against a Republican backed organization in Florida. Sorry, you probably haven't heard about this on Fox.
The Zeitgeist
12:45 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Once again, a conservative confusing voter registration fraud, like what republicans are doing in Florida and South Carolina as I write, with in-person voter fraud, which literally does not exist in PA. Registering fake people to vote does not constitute voter fraud, unless the "fake" people actually show up at the polls.
Lou Laughlin
1:50 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Does it really matter whether or not it's Republican or Democratic based fraud? What's important is that fraud IS in fact happening, and this story is just one example. That's the lesson to be learned from that story!
What is the most important civil thing we as a citizen can do? It is to VOTE, and through that process provide people to represent us, and create a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people". What I don't understand is why protecting the sanctity of this process is seemingly not important?
If presenting an ID is not a good way to do this, then let's come up with a better one? We are a smart and creative people, we should be able to solve this problem.
We may not get it right the first time, but doing nothing just leaves the door open to actual voter fraud that IS in fact occurring whether or not you choose to believe it or not.
I think that every person has the right to vote, and should not be in any way prevented from doing so, but that doesn't mean that right (or any right) doesn't require some effort on the person to exercise it, or protect it.
I believe, that walking into a polling place without any one validating I am who I say I am, feels to me like that right is not being protected.
2:42 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Thanks, Zeitgeist, athought I'd have to explain that to proud American again.
proud American
3:38 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Same group a different name ACORN is now Affordable Housing Center of America same employees and tax ID number. They have also been working with the occupied wall street movement
proud American
6:09 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
What is to stop a a fake registration person from showing up at the polls to vote Voter ID
Lori B
7:54 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Lou- it's not a small thing for many people on the fringes (patients in nursing homes or with limited mobility, homeless, etc...). Just because they are involved in mainstream society, does not mean they're less entitled to vote.
Tax Payer II
11:26 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
No one in America should be walking around without a photo ID.
2:45 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Really, Tax Payer II, don't dare leave home without it? What's next, ID numbers tatooed on our arms?
Alex Vallas
11:30 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
This was an obvious attempt by the Pa. GOP to make it extremely difficult for many eldersly, poor and people of color to vote. They admitted as much when they introduced the bill. There should be NO obstacles for Americans to vote, and it was shown there was no fraud in past elections. Since the Supreme Court ruling giving PACs the ability to spend hundreds of millions to influence votes, we have lost something in the US where money takes precedence over the average citizens voice. It is pathetic..... Are we going back to Poll Taxes?
John Spoon
11:45 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
"people of color"? Age i could possibly see but race? come on. thats a cop out
Bill Biel
11:59 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
The was it was done was obviously an attempt to keep certain people away from the polls. Anybody with half a brain knows that.
Now, that being said, I see nothing wrong with having to present a proper I.D. in order to vote, but don't try to rush it through simply in order to defeat a certain candidate, which is exactly whay this is all about.
In another four years...or even less, with proper planning, it might not be such a bad idea.
Alex Vallas
12:30 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
John Spoon
11:45 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
"people of color"? Age i could possibly see but race? come on. thats a cop out
------------------------Actually, Blacks are among the most likely to be affected according to numerous news sources.
Lou Laughlin
2:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Alex, why do you think people of color and elderly wouldn't have an ID? If they don't have one, they had (and still have) plenty of time to acquire an ID free of charge from at any PennDOT Driver License Center.
Maybe I'm just uneducated, and don't understand, and I'm willing to learn.
I've had to pull out my ID just to buy something at a store, visit the welfare office, visit any government agency for that matter, to get medical attention (even the dentist), and many other places... I have a voter's ID card (as does every registered voter) but they don't even ask for that!
The list of acceptable IDs for this new law is pretty large. I find it hard to believe that anyone couldn't find a way to get one of these IDs, if they don't already have one:
-- Photo IDs issued by the U.S. Federal Government or the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
-- PA Driver's License or Non-driver's License photo ID
-- Valid U.S. passport
-- U.S. military ID- active duty and retired military
-- Employee photo ID issued by Federal, PA, PA County or PA Municipal government
-- Photo ID from an accredited PA public or private institution of higher learning, including colleges, universities, seminaries, community colleges and other two-year colleges
-- Photo ID issued by a PA care facility, including long-term care facilities, assisted living residences or personal care homes
2:50 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
John Spoon,
In Philadelphia, a Democratic stronghold, 44 percent of the population is African-American; voters who live in the the city's most heavily African American census tracts are 85 % more likely to lack a valid ID than a voter who lives in a predominantly white area.Voters who live in heavily Hispanic areas, are 108 % more likely to lack the specified ID than those in white neighborhoods
Ed M
6:44 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
"This was an obvious attempt by the Pa. GOP to make it extremely difficult for many eldersly, poor and people of color to vote."
Let's see..... most poor people have photo ID's since they need them to get welfare benefits. Most elderly have photo ID's for the same reason. I have no idea what people of color has to do with this.
Jo Paytas
9:46 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
@Lou you say that people have "plenty of time to acquire an ID free of charge from at any PennDOT Driver License Center." Have you been to one of these centers? Speed is not one of their qualities and they are not equipped to handle any overflow. Plus, you are assuming everyone who may need one can easily hop in their car and get one. The folks that will be effected by this are the very same ones who don't have a car nor the money to pay the fee. Imagine expecting an elderly person to take several buses, then wait at a center for possibly over an hour, then travel back home, all for an ID? If someone doesn't have a car, why would they need a licence? If they are not a student or in the military, again, no ID. If you don't have the money for a car or school, i doubt you are planning on vacationing anytime soon outside the country, so no passport. And only so many people can work the the state, so if you aren't one of them, out of luck with an ID.
I agree that folks should have some sort of ID to vote, i am not against it at all, but i don't think the law should take affect in a presidential election year. We've had decades and decades to put this in affect, why the rush now. Voter fraud isn't rampant. But using it as an excuse to prevent folks from voting is no different than a poll tax. Give folks a chance to get an ID. After election day this year, they will have 4 years to get it. A true "plenty of time" to save up for the ID and get to a location.
B-W Proud
11:31 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Voting is a right, but how do you stop voting fraud? Obama was elected and voter fraud was at an all time high. As for the 94 yr old mother, if she can be taken to vote, then what is the big deal to take her to get a photo done at the DMV? Since Obama has been in office, all my doctors offices are asking for both your health insurance card and a photo id. Maybe its time everyone should be required to carry some type of photo id! I am all for it - what do people have to hide!
11:48 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
B-W Proud - Voter fraud was not at an all time high when President Obama was elected.
11:52 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
There is NO reason that voter ID should not be part of the voting process. The claim that it keeps people from voting is an outright lie. ANYONE in Pa can get an ID for FREE at any time, the proof is here and always has been http://bit.ly/xTg6LP. That argument is a mute point.
11:59 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I really don't understand what the big deal is about showing a photo id! for election and or anythings else.
12:30 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Doreen - And you probably will never understand. Don't worry about it.
1:32 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Agree!!! you have to show ID to buy ciggarettes, to fly, to drink... but not to vote for who is going to run the country????? and really......how exactly is this a ploy to affect democratic voters? why would they not be able to get IDs?? i know that i do not want dead people and non-citizens voting for my president!
1:39 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Amos - Instead of ID how about a spelling and grammar test before you're allowed to vote?
2:52 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I really don't understand what the big deal is about showing a photo id! for election and or anythings else.
that would be because you happen to have one of the ones they will accept, Doreen.
Ed M
6:46 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Then how about you educate us, Mike, and give us the facts as to why having to prove who you are to vote is a bad thing.
11:59 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Finally , a smart decision...If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Pretty simple!
Fred Freitag
12:00 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Yes, the proposed voter ID is free but the voter has to jump threw hoops to get one.
Here's a link to persons who had problems:
Here is a link about the problem of requiring a voter ID as proposed in PA:
Susan M.
12:03 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
People have had plenty of time to get their ID. This is just ridiculous. I am sure if they wanted to apply for food stamps or Government money they would have their ID handy.
Fred Freitag
12:08 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Please read those "links" I supplied and you might understand the problem. This has nothing to do with food stamps or other government aid!!
12:12 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Susan M - You're painting with an awfully broad brush.
Can I make the assumption that you're a white old man that owns an excessive amount of firearms and is a hedge fund manager?
Susan M.
12:20 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
My POINT IS: this is just another excuse to help perpetuate voter fraud. It isn't that difficult to get an ID. I hate the excuses...lame....if I was a guardian of a 90 year old person, I would have had that ID 5 x by now. Just get it done.
12:28 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Susan M - if you were guardian to a 90 year old then they would be lucky. Many 90 year olds don't have guardians. Are they lazy?
Ellie Enlightened
12:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Yea now they can take the mental patients to vote again. DON'T TELL me different. They used to take them out of Mayview with the name written on their hands. They take them from old age homes also. I KNOW BECAUSE I SAW IT FIRST HAND AND WORKED THERE.
12:52 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Ellie - Are you saying that hospital patients don't have a right to vote?
1:39 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
In this day and age there are many options for help to get whatever you need, verbal, phone, web and places etc.........
Susan Seibel
5:25 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
This is not true, Susan. A large population of voters with every right to vote as you live in assisted living facilities and can no longer drive, or didn't ever drive. They may not have valid driver's licenses, which may have been their only photo ID. Such places can provide a photo ID, this all came about so quickly that they have not been able to manage it with all the other duties these usually understaffed facilities must perform. A great number of the elderly in the state would not be able to vote. Delaying this until after the election is the only way to make sure this election is fair. If Romney needs to win through underhanded tactics, then he should not be president.
12:07 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
First world problems Fred, jumping through hoops or not the argument is still not valid as again, everyone can get an ID for free in PA, bottom line. It may be an "inconvenience" for some but that is no excuse not to take advantage of that offer. The Brennan Center is not a good source to pull from as they are quite biased and funded by liberal sources along with George Soros. http://www.nationalcenter.org/PR-Brennan_Center_072612.html It takes just as much effort to obtain a free ID as it does to go to a voting booth, I stand by my observations, there is NO reason for anyone NOT to have an ID in PA.
John Spoon
12:14 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Imagine how much would get done if people quit whining they can't do something and make an effort to get what they need to do what they want. Naw, we want to have everything done for us because we're entitled to. No wonder people think Americans are lazy, read these comments and you'll see more excuses than actions. I'm proud to prove who I am when I vote.
Kathleen Gaberson
4:27 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
There is a polling place in every precinct, and many people can walk to their polling places or catch a ride with a neighbor. But to get to the much smaller number of PennDOT license centers is a real hardship for many people. How often do you have to ride a bus, Brad?
Fred Freitag
12:12 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Then Brad - we agree to disagree. I, for one, am ecstatic about the court ruling.
proud American
12:12 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Ray just today another factor of Obama care is going into effect if a medicare patient is readmitted too many times in a 30 day period because of complications the hostpitals will have a fine placed on them. Part of their medicare payments will be deducted this year it is one percent and will go up to three percent. they are being measured by three medical conditions (heart attacks, heart failure, and pneumonia) then they will add the following condtions (joint replacements, stenting, heart bypass, and treatment of stroke.)If this is not an attack on the elderly I don't know what is the majority of people with these issue are the elderly. How long before hospitals won't readmit will give them medicine and send them home. Anything to have Obama care and the elderly will pay the price to be able to fund it. And prople are outraged becuase they need a voter id a sorry state this country is in. Doctors on the news are stating this is one more way Obama care is getting between them and their patients and this is just the tip of the iceberg.
12:16 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
proud American - That is complete nonsense.
Just because you desperately want something to be true doesn't make it true.
proud American
12:35 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Read the Observer-Peporter today mike page A-9 PENALTIES PROMPT EXTRA ATTENTION (MEDICARE FINES OVER HOSPITALS' READMITTED PATIENTS) also on the morning news with doctors talking about what it means to them and patients and how it will affect the way their illness is handled. Any one of these illness can be a complications issue anyone with heart failure has a problem with pneumonia and may need hospitilized more then once in 30 days as an example. We needed to make sure this election was as fair as possible and voter id was made a republican-democrate issue not a fair election issue. If a democratic governor had passed this law when a republican pesident was trying to get relected these comments would be the other way around.
Kathleen Gaberson
4:34 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
These new Medicare regulations are designed to help and protect elderly people, not to attack them or to get between them and their physicians. Hospitals who accept Medicare funding will have to deliver higher quality care to prevent complications that result in readmission within 30 days. The selection of health conditions covered by this new regulation is based on findings that complications can be prevented by delivering care that is based on sound scientific evidence instead of tradition or physician and hospital preference. This is better for ALL of us--Medicare beneficiaries as well as those of us who pay into the system in the form of taxes and who also pay for our own health care. When Medicare leads the way, health care costs can be controlled on a big scale. Isn't that what health care financing reform is all about?
Ed M
6:51 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
The best care can be delivered and an elderly person can end up returning to the hospital multiple times in a 30 day period. This regulation was designed to penalize, nothing else. The government has it's hands in may too much of our personal lives.
proud American
9:04 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Kathleen you tell me how this is helping patients? If the hospitals are going to be punished and fined for a patient being readmitted they won't be admitted again in the 30 day period they will give them medicine and send them home. All of the illness that are listed in elderly patients usually are chronic no matter how good the care is. You take someone with congestive heart failure they can be fine on monday and gasping for breathe on friday that is part of their condition not poor hospital care. This is just another way to pay for Obama care and is an attack on the elderly getting the best possible care. Government needs to get out of the health care business and my personal care it is between me and my doctor.
12:14 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Fred, I respect yours as well as everyone else's view, I simply disagree. I would like to commend you however for discussing it in a mature and respectable manner as too many people are too willing to let their emotions take over on threads like this and not discuss things rationally. I respect you for that.
Fred Freitag
12:19 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
You too Brad. I understand your arguments and concerns - I just disagree with them as causing undue hardship upon one entitled to exercise their Constitutional rights.
Ellie Enlightened
12:42 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
What hardship? How is this common sense. Now fraud can run amuck. Do you go to the doctor? They ask for ID, Do you drink? They ask for ID. Do you fly or smoke? They ask for ID. Do you get Social Security or welfare? They ask for ID. Only liberal morons agree with this. The only reason NOT TO have ID is FRAUD.
Ed M
6:53 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
What undue hardship? You have to show photo ID to buy alcohol, cigarettes and some meds. Is that also a hardship?
12:40 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
See above comment by me - It was found that Acorn did nothing illegal, lost their funding and disbanded 2 years ago. Their true crime - registering minorities and the poor to vote. At least that's a crime in certain facets of the right wing.
Find a new boogieman
Current group committing voter registration fraud - a Republican backed group in Florida -
12:21 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Amazing how Republicans keep talking out of both sides of their mouth, They lobby for smaller government while all the while sticking their noses in everything. They are as power hungry as they are money hungry. And they don't like to share. Empathy is a word they confuse with sympathy...and that in a nutshell is why Mitt will lose.
12:30 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Regardless of whether or not you think voter photo identification is a good idea, I think most of us agree that this country creates laws much too easily. This was a good decision and any law that is created should be highly contested and subject to proving its own absolute necessity for the good of American citizens (and not for the good of any particular political party). The commonwealth court has decided that the law needs more time to be properly implemented, and with no proof of in person voter fraud ever impacting an election, I think this is an excellent decision.
Kudos to the many efforts of the PA citizens who protested and petitioned for this law to be halted until after the election (or abolished completely). It seems as if the courts heard and agree.
Bob Zanakis
12:40 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/voter-registration-fraud-gop-backed-firm-spreads/story?id=17370445 Seems the only voting fraud to appear this year has been on the GOP side of the isle. When ACORN was thrashed by the right wing politicians and followers, there was a public outcry. Where is the outcry today when the Republicans are caught in a worst act of voting suppression? They all are silent. What does that say for the right wing leaders and their blind faith fallowers who say one thing but do another? It is a clear indication of their hypocrasy. If they were true to themselves and our country, the outrage would be just as much today as it was two years ago. Their silence is all telling.
proud American
3:10 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Because no need for a scandle the group doing the wrong was fired.
Ellie Enlightened
12:41 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
For those posting there is no voter fraud how did Al Franken get elected? He was losing. How does 200K votes register in Philly BEFORE the polls open? How is this common sense. Now fraud can run amuck. Do you go to the doctor? They ask for ID, Do you drink? They ask for ID. Do you fly or smoke? They ask for ID. Only liberal morons agree with this. The only reason NOT TO have ID is FRAUD.
12:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
They're silent because this isn't being reported on Fox or talked about by Rush. That means they don't know about it.
B-W Proud
12:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Mike: fake voter registration will be most likely caught when you go to vote & show your valid photo id.
Ellie Enlightened
12:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Yea now they can take the mental patients to vote again. DON'T TELL me different. They used to take them out of Mayview with the name written on their hands. They take them from old age homes also. I KNOW BECAUSE I SAW IT FIRST HAND AND WORKED THERE.
12:52 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Ellie, i don't even know what to say lol...You are definately in another world and have expressed no interest in Enlightenment. Are you sure you just Worked at Mayview? Your lack of compassion is astounding. I hope you are retired.
Peggie P. Richardson
12:58 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
It's not the Republicans who are registering dead people and felons to vote. One look at the corruption in places like Chicago and it doesn't take long to see the need for voter I.D. In this age of computer generated everything, I can have a photo I.D. in seconds. Now what is the excuse for not having one.
1:05 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
The excuse? Because requiring ID to vote is an infringement upon our rights as citizens.
You want to know why a whole lot of people in your community disagree with you. There is the reason.
Ed M
6:54 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
How is it an infringement on our rights, Mike? How would you feel if you went to the polls to vote and found out you already did?
Peggie P. Richardson
10:59 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Just the opposite, our rights are infringed upon by allowing people to vote who don't have the right. Note the people who protest and their motives.
11:27 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Ed M and Peggy - You want to know why people are disagreeing with you and I told you.
Peggie P. Richardson
2:17 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
That's Peggie (with an ie). Little details can mean a lot.
Ed M
5:32 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
You told us nothing, Mike, except you opinion. Facts, please.
8:53 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Ed M - Peggie wanted to know what the excuse was for people that disagree with her.
I gave her the popular opinion of people who disagree with her opinion.
That's called an opinion.
Opinions are personal beliefs that drive how people feel about certain issues.
Can you provide facts as to why your favorite color is your favorite color?
Can you provide facts to back up your opinion regarding Coca-Cola Classic vs New Coke?
Do you now understand the concept of an opinion?
Ed M
2:01 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
I never asked why people are disagreeing with me. I asked "How is it an infringement on our rights, Mike? How would you feel if you went to the polls to vote and found out you already did?"
Care to answer?
2:44 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Ed M - You barged in on a discourse between Peggie and myself.
You know that you and I don't see eye to eye on this issue, amongst many others.
Why are you seeking me out and banging your head against a wall asking a pointless question like that. A question in which you already know my answer.
Susan M.
1:02 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Mike, if you would have read the comments, I was commenting about one of the posters who is the guardian of a 90 year old person and didn't help them get an ID. and in response to your question: If you are 90 and don't have a guardian---then obviously you have the wit and capacity to get your own ID and if you do not---then you don't have the capacity to even know it's election season....stop the excuses. They are really lame.....nothing more I can say about that.
Paula Lim
1:08 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Celebrating!!! Now I can sleep better tonight knowing that those.0002% (not counting stealing the elections in 2000 & 2004) who have been cheating (ex. Ann Coulter using her brother's address) can continue with their non-existent election fraud. Hopefully Mike Turzai has an eraser to make the correction on his "to do" list!
1:08 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Does anyone know how much taxpayer money has been spent in Pennsylvania this year to try to put this voter ID law into place? There are cuts being made right now to schools, public services, and the funds being spent for kids in Medicare, but our state has found the money to solve a voter fraud "problem" that doesn't exist. How many people were prosecuted after the last election for voting twice?
Most voter fraud that has a REAL effect on the outcome of an election doesn't come from one person voting two times... it comes from larger scale things like "lost ballot boxes".
Or from things like trying to prevent people from casting their votes in the first place. This Voter ID requirement is the REAL voter fraud.
3:00 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Sheri, you make too much sense for some here, and the rest of us already knew this.
1:11 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
This below is from that PA site. As you can see, if you are ALREADY a voter you can get free a replacement voters id card. If you would like to reg. as a new voter you can't get the card until you prove registration. But you can't reg. to vote if you do not have id.
If PennDOT staff is unable to verify the customer is registered to vote, we will still process their request for a Department of State ID. However, the ID will be mailed to the customer when the Department of State is able to confirm they are a registered voter.
If you lost your Department of State Voter ID or need to change your name, please click here to request a free replacement Department of State Voter ID.
3:01 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
If you would like to reg. as a new voter you can't get the card until you prove registration. But you can't reg. to vote if you do not have id.
catch 22, eh?
1:14 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
all you morons . what is the problem with showing ID. keep supporting the radical Obama. he has us on the road to hell you're just too stupid to know it. whats the problem with showing id? how about people that pay zero in taxes cant vote.
1:23 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Kevin - People who disagree with you are not morons.
President Obama is not a radical.
We're not all on the "road to hell"
Do you mean that a 90 year old WWII veteran can't vote if they don't pay income tax? I assume you mean income tax because we all pay taxes when we buy things.
3:02 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
kevin, name calling only weakens YOUR opinion.
Express your side without name calling, maybe someone will take you seriously. Otherwise, no.
Bob McKee
1:17 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
What's the problem? I'm 66, I've lived in Pennsylvania all my life and have had a photo ID since I was 16. Doesn't everyone? If not, How do you prove you are who you say you are?
1:28 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Bob - Here is why some folks are upset. Imagine if you were not allowed to go to church until you applied for and received your "Church ID" that allowed you to practice your guaranteed right to practice your religion.
Would you feel that wasn't fair?
What's the big deal? If you've got ID then if should be ok.
3:06 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Bob McKee1:17 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012 What's the problem? I'm 66, I've lived in Pennsylvania all my life and have had a photo ID since I was 16. Doesn't everyone?
No, Bob, everyone doesn't have one of the specifically listed forms of PHOTO ID included in this law. What PHOTO ID did you have at age 16? If you are 66, then your PA drivers' license at age 16 did NOT have a photo on it, either. By 21, you may have secured an LCB card though....and your voters registration card, as well.
Which does not have a photo on it.
Ed M
6:57 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Nice red herring, Mike. Going to church is not even remotely close to voting. Did you have to show ID the last time you bought certain medication at CVS?
1:34 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
you have to show ID to buy ciggarettes, to fly, to drink... but not to vote for who is going to run the country????? and really......how exactly is this a ploy to affect democratic voters? why would they not be able to get IDs?? i know that i do not want dead people and non-citizens voting for my president!
1:37 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I find it funny the party the slams the military uses them as an example. no I'm talking about the people on welfare who will vote for Obama for free stuff
1:41 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
kevin - I'm a veteran and I'm a democrat. Were you in military? Which branch?
1:45 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
what is the big deal? everyone should have an ID anyway! you should be able to prove you are who you are? We are talking about people who are voting for who is going to run our country! hello?????
John Linko
1:47 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
The legislature, as usual, is writing procedural checks that the state's infrastructure could not cash. The politics of the Voter ID act were trumped by the practical challenges of implementing it in time for Rep. Mike Turzai's stated goal for the law - handing the GOP Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes. The court was shown this, and agreed. It's as simple as that.
Concerned Citizen
2:17 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Wow...really? Do you have proof that Turzai's goal for the law was specifically to win the state for the GOP? (I'm asking in an ironic way, because I know you certainly can't have "proof" of that) Your next line is just as laughable..."The court was shown this, and agreed" What alternate reality are you living in? There were plenty of reasons for the court to decide what they decided, but to turn it into something that it wasn't is reprehensible. The lengths some people (liberal OR conservative) will go to to make their point is ridiculous. Everything you said was a complete fabrication, and an unintelligent fabrication at that. I'm not saying this law shouldn't have been put on hold, mind you...I'm just saying that you, John Linko, specifically, made a fool out of yourself with that post.
3:00 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Concerned Citizen
Mike Turzai said it himself and a camera recorded him saying it
Turzai: Voter ID Will Allow Romney to Win Pa.
1:49 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
@mike, i fail to see the connection. poor argument. so i'm not the best speller! you need to come up with something better!
2:06 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
And you'll probably never see the connection. Don't worry about it.
Susan M.
2:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
amos, when they have nothing better to say or facts to back them up they resort to personal attacks. Ignore it.
4:10 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Amos, here's a connection:
Ed M
7:01 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
That's no connection, NE12Ukid. That's just history. Ya got anything from this century?
From a students eyes
1:56 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
How hard is it to get an ID? Who in this conversation doesn't have one? Know anyone that doesn't have one that is a legal voter?
Nobody? Then what's the argument?
Fred Freitag
2:02 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I know many that don't have IDs that would allow them to vote. There are literally thousands in PA.
Specifically, in Pennsylvania, nearly 760,000 registered voters, or 9.2 percent of the state's 8.2 million voter base, don't own state-issued ID cards, according to an analysis of state records by the Philadelphia Inquirer. State officials, on the other hand, place this number at between 80,000 and 90,000.
3:09 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Who in this conversation doesn't have one? Know anyone that doesn't have one that is a legal voter?Nobody? Then what's the argument?
Probably nobody HERE on the internet, but what about the people who are not on the internet, who do not drive, who may not be able to obtain their birth certificate?
Not everyone has the same circumstances, "from a students eyes". If you are a student, learn some history and also some sociology, might open those eyes to things you just didn't realize existed.
Ed M
6:50 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
NE12Ukid it seems in your examples the problem is not having a valid photo ID.
Tia Sutter - using two names.
Danny Rosa - using two names.
Joyce Block - using two name. Never had anything changed to her married name.
Bea Bookler - lost all her documentation. Based on what was posted would qualify for an absentee ballot which does not require a photo ID.
Dorothy Barksdale - doesn't have a birth certificate.
Gloria Cuttino - doesn't have a birth certificate.
Grover Freeland - doesn't have a birth certificate.
Interesting how people can blame something on someone else because they don't have the proper documentation.
From a students eyes
2:09 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
And how many of these people without IDs would be unable to get a free one from the state? I don't understand what the issue is.
Also it's possible to have an identification that is not state issued. (not sure if these are accepted by the state law though) so that number is even lower.
Fred Freitag
2:18 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
You can easily look up the PA voter ID requirements. However, to simplify the matter for you:
All of these must have an expiration date placed thereon - no expired ID's are acceptable.
a PA department of state ID
a PA driver's license
a Pa non-driver's license ID
a currently valid US passport
a currently valid gov't employee ID
a currently valid PA university ID
a current valid ID from a PA care facility
3:16 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
from a students eyes still asks: And how many of these people without IDs would be unable to get a free one from the state? I don't understand what the issue is.
Maybe these few examples will help you UNDERSTAND, student:
Tia Sutter, a former attorney who worked as a Philadelphia assistant district attorney for more than 10 years, is a registered voter who had tried for years to get photo ID. Sutter, 61, doesn't drive and her only photo ID is from when she was a college student in 1978. Her Social Security card is under the name Tia Sutter. Her New York-state birth certificate is under the name Christine Sutter. She has been told that she cannot get a state issued ID because her names don't match. "I thought I knew my legal name," she said. "I'm not sure anymore." To change her name on her SS card, she was told she would need a court order, which would cost $400 and would take months."My roots and my future are all in Pennsylvania," Sutter said, choking up with emotion. "It's hurtful to me that this is now a question of 'papers please.' If your papers aren't in order, you can't vote."
3:17 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Danny Rosa, 63, of West Chester is the son of a Puerto Rican woman and was born in New York. He doesn't know why his birth certificate identifies him as Danny Guerra, his grandmother's maiden name. But since he was a boy, he has always gone by the surname Rosa, the name of his stepfather who raised him. Rosa was the name on his night school diploma and it was the name on his Air Force honorable discharge certificate, which hangs on a wall in his living room.
"You're proud of that?" plaintiffs' attorney Marian Schneider asked him. "I am proud," he said. "It's about the only thing I ever completed."
A regular voter, he wanted to comply with the new law. So he spent the better part of a day gathering his paperwork and making two trips to the local PennDOT driver's license center where he waited about an hour each time. (He doesn't drive and had to get a ride.) "I showed him (the technician) my birth certificate and he told me my name's no good," Rosa said.
"I served in the service for four years," Rosa said. "I don't do it (vote) just for kicks. It means something special to me. I think it should be important for everybody."
Because the next two plaintiffs were not physically able to make the trip from their homes to Harrisburg, their video depositions were played in court in lieu of testimony.
continues with two more examples.....
3:18 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Joyce Block, 89, was born in Brooklyn, married in the 1940s. She is Jewish and her marriage certificate is in Hebrew. Her Social Security card and her birth certificate are in her maiden name, "Joyce Altman." She never got a driver's license "because I felt everyone was safer without me on the road."
Since registering to vote when she was 21 - she voted for FDR - she has not missed an election.
In 2010, ill and in the hospital, she was determined she was not going to miss the election and refused to vote by absentee ballot. "I wanted to make sure I voted," she said. "And I carried and carried on until they let me take a wheelchair and I voted."
When she heard about the new law, she had her granddaughter take her to the PennDOT center. She was told that because her Social Security card and birth certificate were in her maiden name, she could not get photo ID. She showed the technician her marriage certificate. He said he couldn't read Hebrew.
Block has a large family and a great support system. She is politically active and complained to her state senator, who called PennDOT. When she returned the next time to the center, there were no problems. But she agreed to be a plaintiff because she wants to make sure that others without such a support system are not disenfranchised.
3:18 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Bea Bookler, 94, was born one year before the ratification of the 19th Amendment, guaranteeing American women the right to vote.
Today, she seldom leaves her room at the Devon Senior Living Center. She spends her days reading and watching television.The only times she goes out anymore are on rare and special occasions, when her daughter will take her out for lunch. Also, she goes out twice a year to the election polls, which are next door to her home. Bookler is unsteady and shakes during her testimony and says it's just too hard to get around anymore.
Over the years, she has lost her Social Security card and her birth and marriage certificates. While she could sign a form attesting that she has no identification and be granted a special ID used solely for voting, it would still take a trip to PennDOT, something she is physically unable to do.
"It's too hard," she said. "You can see I'm not exactly mobile. I get dizzy and shaky."
During her testimony, Bookler was asked why, if it's so hard, she bothers to go to the polls. The question seemed to confuse her. "I would never not vote," she said.
"How proud I am to live in a country is a real democracy. And anything that prevents people from voting is taking away our democracy.
"Democracy is only real if we all participate."
Susan M.
3:26 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
So because people are neglectful and don't follow the law (you are supposed to let the government know when you change your name when you get married), we should let them slide? Bea can go to lunch with her daughter and then stop and get her ID, as soon as she gets her new Birth Certificate that is as easy as sending a form into the Vital Statistics office of the town you were born in. Or wait, don't tell me...she doesn't know where she was born!
4:15 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Bea Bookler, 93, Chester County Ms. Bookler is a Caucasian woman born in Philadelphia in 1918. Graduating from Philadelphia's Overbrook High School at the height of the Depression, Ms. Bookler was forced to get a job to earn money and could not go to college. She worked as a secretary until she married a World War II veteran in 1945. She raised two children and now also has two grandchildren. Ms. Bookler was widowed in 2006 and now lives in an assisted living facility in Devon, Chester County. Ms. Bookler has voted regularly since casting her first ballot for Franklin Roosevelt in 1940. She has now grown frail with age. Going to the polls to vote twice a year is difficult for Ms. Bookler, but it is so important to her that these are two of only a handful of excursions away from her assisted-living facility that she has mustered the energy to take in recent years. Ms. Bookler does not presently have a photo ID acceptable under Pennsylvania's photo ID law. While she has the official documents necessary to get a valid ID from PennDOT, to actually get that ID she must go to the nearest PennDOT Driver's License Center about ten miles from her home. Doing so would require her to arrange transportation and would be an enormous physical hardship. Unfortunately, because she neither has nor can get an ID acceptable under Pennsylvania's voter photo ID law, she will not be able to vote in November, an election she believes may be her last.
4:21 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Susan M insists: ... she gets her new Birth Certificate that is as easy as sending a form into the Vital Statistics office of the town you were born in. >>>>>>>>
Tell these three voters how easy it is, Susan.
Dorothy Barksdale, 86, born at home by a midwife in rural Halifax County, Virginia in 1926. After Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Ms. Barksdale worked as a poll official in Philadelphia. She has not missed voting in a single election since at least 2001.She and her niece have tried for three years to obtain a birth certificate from the state of Virginia, which has advised them that they have no birth record.
4:21 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Gloria Cuttino, 61, is an African-American woman born in SC. She moved to Philadelphia at a young age. Ms. Cuttino's mother died when she was sixteen, leaving Ms. Cuttino alone to care for her three younger brothers and sisters. Forced by these circumstances to drop out of school, the teenage Ms. Cuttino began working at a commercial laundry to support the family. Ms. Cuttino raised four children, one of whom is a Philadelphia police officer, and now has ten grandchildren. She has over the years worked on behalf of local candidates for elected office.
She has been trying for over one year to get her birth certificate, which she needs to get a ID, from SC, which has told her they have no birth record. She has recently worked with a pro bono lawyer, who has determined that the only way to get a "delayed" birth certificate is to seek census and other records, which will cost approximately $100, and to then employ an attorney in South Carolina to petition the court. Unless enforcement of the photo ID Law is enjoined, Ms. Cuttino will not be able to vote in November.
4:21 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
and finally,
Grover Freeland, 72,is an African-American man born in Buffalo, NY. He is a U.S. Army Veteran who was drafted in 1964 and served two years stateside before being honorably discharged. He graduated with a Bachelor of Arts and a Masters degree from Philadelphia's University of the Arts. He believes that if a person is good enough to put his life on the line in the army then he should be able to vote. His only photo ID card is what is known as a "veterans card," which is issued by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. While it contains encoded information on sensitive matters, like his medical records, the card is not recognized as valid by Pennsylvania's voter photo ID Law.
Mr. Freeland has tried unsuccessfully to retrieve his birth certificate, which he will need to get a photo ID acceptable to vote, from the state of New York. Consequently, come November this veteran of the U.S. Armed Services will be unable to show the requisite identification and will not be able to vote.
2:09 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
@Mike, it is funny how some people just cannot argue a point without getting nasty! why can't you just argue your point without attacking me personally???
From a students eyes
2:12 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
And to those who don't believe that voter fraud exists, you are worse than the birthers.
3:19 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
You really should read the other posts and links before making a post like that, student eyes.
Susan M.
2:14 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Fred Freitag--How many of your 9.2% in the states 8.2 million "voter base" are actually registered voters? What does the "voter base" mean?
Fred Freitag
2:31 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
In politics, the term base refers to a group of voters who almost always support a single party's candidates for elected office. Base voters are very unlikely to vote for the candidate of an opposing party, regardless of the specific views each candidate holds. In the United States, this is typically because high-level candidates must hold the same stances on key issues as a party's base in order to gain the party's nomination and thus be guaranteed ballot access. In the case of legislative elections, base voters often prefer to support their party's candidate against an otherwise appealing opponent in order to strengthen their party's chances of gaining a simple majority - typically the gateway to overarching power - in a legislature. [Wikipedia]
Stephanie Davis
2:22 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
People forget that it's a constitutional right to be able to vote, i.d. or no i.d. (Fortunately our constitution chose not to regulate the right to obtain beer or cigarettes, hence the need for i.d. in these situations.) The decision to postpone the voter i.d. law allows people adepate time to obtain an i.d. and, for many, this could not have done this before the election. Read the above stats and learn how many people do not have i.d.s. This is reality and having such a law would certainly target specific groups, in addition to violating their constitutional rights.
Susan M.
2:36 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Didn't they already have adequate time? How much time is adequate?
3:01 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
oh wait mike, she spelled adequate wrong. ... go on.. attack her!
3:24 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Yeah!!!! Let's celebrate that we can't spell properly!
Everybody else is a nerd because they like to cite examples, spell words, put together sentences so that they can be read.
3:29 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
@mike, your behavior is not at all, "grown up." you are in fact, scary!
3:32 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Sexual Chocolate (drops the microphone...)
Sue T
4:16 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Actually, if you read the constitution it's not an open ended right to vote. The contsitution gives rights to specific groups of people through a series of amendments. For example, an amendment was needed to specifically give women that are citizens the right to vote. Basically, now you have the right to vote if 1) you are a citizen, and 2) you are 18. So, to exercise your right, you need to supply proof that you meet the criteria. An ID provides that proof.
5:23 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
That is a really good point Sue T that I was actually making in a two part comment that for some reason is not showing up (though I have the confirmation in my inbox).
Voting is not an explicit right. The problem I have with your explanation is you then say "So, to exercise your right, you need to supply proof that you meet the criteria. An ID provides that proof." But this latter part of the message is not in the constitution and serves as your own justification for the voter id laws which is almost as bad as simply saying "it is my constitutional right to vote." You are now saying, "it is your duty as a citizen to prove that you are a citizen through the specific measures outlined by the state." The constitution does not ban voter regulations, just as the constitution does not justify voter regulations.
5:28 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
ie: The constitution should not really be a part of this conversation. (and neither should a comparison to gun laws and the second amendment which was the subject of my comments that are not showing up...sad...they were really good. :)
Sue T
5:47 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
that is true Erin, I was trying to make my post short and sweet because I only had a couple of minutes to post. The constitution doesn't specifically say an ID can provide proof or other regulations, but doesn't ban them. It's open-ended leaving it up to the state to both legislate voter regulations and enforce the rights. I'm big into personal responsiblity, and I think if you are going to take the time to educate yourself about the candidates, and get out and take the time to stand in line to vote, that you will also take the personal responsiblity to get an ID. I strongly believe that exercising ones rights in this country doesn't come "free". You need to put some effort in also. The legitimate argument I see here is time frame. Eight months seems sufficient to me, but I don't know the full history (for example how prepared the state was to issue id's 8 months ago).
6:05 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Yeah, the problem with these terms like "personal responsibility" and "entitlements" is that they become so politicized they take on entirely new meanings. I would say that I am big into personal responsibility as well, but I do not see being required to have photo identification to vote, especially when it has yet to be proven necessary, a part of this political sense of "personal responsibility." I just don't see photo id factoring in under that concept.
Did you read the documents from the PA Supreme Court's decision? I think that it was sufficiently proved that the law was in fact not implemented as planned in eight months. I also don't know that "eight months" is accurate if you are counting from the time PennDot enacted looser requirements to obtain a voter id, and when those looser requirements actually took place. If I remember correctly, that was something like 10 weeks.
I think that this country is entirely too comfortable creating new laws that may be created with the best of intentions (or not) but almost always end up encroaching on someone's rights. I firmly believe that there should be a burden of proof on the proposed law to prove it is absolute necessity. I think in 20-50 years when students are studying the history of this election, they are going to refer to this string of laws as "voter suppression laws" much in the same way we study voter suppression tactics before 1960s or in the late 19th century.
Bob Zanakis
2:45 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Concerned Citizen
2:17 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Wow...really? Do you have proof that Turzai's goal for the law was specifically to win the state for the GOP? (I'm asking in an ironic way, because I know you certainly can't have "proof" of that) Your next line is just as laughable
Well I guess those people who watch Fox News missed this video. It was posted everywhere else on TV and online. That alternate universe does make people miss the obivious.
Turzai: Voter ID Will Allow Romney to Win Pa.
3:21 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Do you have proof that Turzai's goal for the law was specifically to win the state for the GOP?
Turzai said so, that should be proof enough, unless Turzai is just a liar.
Concerned Citizen
2:50 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
@ Bob
First of all, unlike you, I'm not a party parrot, and I don't get my news from one source. That two second clip, taken way out of context, is what you're posting as proof? And your nonsensical attempt at a "witty quip" is even unintelligible...FAIL.
3:31 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Can't believe you never heard about this, CCitizen, it happened back in June.
He said it.
Or maybe he IS just a liar?
Mike Turzai, the Republican legislator made headlines in June when HE SAID THE LAW WOULD HELP MITT ROMNEY WIN THE STATE IN NOVEMBER, repeated the falsehood that the state has a history of election fraud."The many election reforms enacted, including voter ID, are aimed to ensure citizens and registered voters have the right to vote and have their vote counted," Turzai said"It is unfortunate, but there has been a history of voter fraud in Pennsylvania," .
As they fought to defend the law in court, state officials conceded that NO ONE had EVER been prosecuted for in-person voter ID fraud and that there was no evidence that it had ever occurred in the state.
in context:
June 23, Turzai was ticking off list of legislative accomplishments including abortion clinic regulations and passage of Castle Doctrine, saying they happened because GOP controls House, Senate and governor's office. Then he SAID "Voter ID, which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania — done."
3:34 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
The camera that recorded him saying that was made by liberals
Concerned Citizen
2:55 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
And for you to automatically assume that I back the conservative stance on this issue proves that you didn't even read my whole post. I didn't say that it should NOT have been put on hold, I was pointing out that John Linko's statement was fabrication. Do you have another two second sound bite taken out of context proving John Linko's statement that the Court "was shown this and agreed", maybe another two second sound bite taken out of context? Read the whole post next time.
L Ryba
2:55 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Voter fraud is primarily present in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, which are Democrat strongholds. The (Philadelphia) Black Panther situation in the last presidential election is probably one that will be in everyone's memory. Voter ID is intended to insure one vote for one person, that's all anyone wants.
3:03 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
L Ryba - Can you please refresh everyone's memory by citing the "Philadelphia Black Panther" situation? I've never heard about it
And voter fraud is not present in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
Susan M.
3:15 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
It's not Mike? OMG....absolutely NO VOTER fraud in Pittsburgh or in Philadelphia? How in the world did you get those stats and who collected them and can verify them?
3:32 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Susan, during the recent court hearings, state officials conceded that NO ONE had EVER been prosecuted for in-person voter ID fraud and that there was no evidence that it had ever occurred in the state.
Sue T
4:06 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
"during the recent court hearings, state officials conceded that NO ONE had EVER been prosecuted for in-person voter ID fraud and that there was no evidence that it had ever occurred in the state."
And how would someone be identified and prosecuted for in-person voter ID fraud? I've never been asked for and ID to vote once since I moved to PA about 20 years ago. You can't find what you don't look for.
Ed M
6:53 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Let's see.......ya don't need ID to prove who you are to vote so how would someone be prosecuted for voter fraud?????
proud American
3:26 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
New Black Panther Party voter intimidation caseFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
The New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case, sometimes known simply as the Black Panther Case, is a political controversy in the United States concerning an incident that occurred during the 2008 election for president in the United States. The New Black Panther Party and two of its members, Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson, were charged with voter intimidation for their conduct outside a polling station in Philadelphia. The Department of Justice later narrowed the charges against Minister King Shabazz and dismissed the charges against the New Black Panther Party and Jerry Jackson. The decision to dismiss the charges has led to accusations that the Department of Justice under the Obama administration is biased against white victims and unwilling to prosecute minorities for civil rights violations. These charges have been most notably made by J. Christian Adams, who in May 2010 resigned his post in the Department of Justice in protest over the Obama Administration's perceived mishandling of the case, and by his former supervisor Christopher Coates
3:31 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
proud American - So when was the court case? Was there a civil case to follow up the unsuccesful criminal prosecution?
Also, wikipedia is fine if you want to find out the full name of the Skipper from Gilligan's Island (Jonas Grumby) but you should really not use it for this purpose.
3:53 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Bill o Reilly rated FALSE by politifact:
3:54 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Bipartisan agreement: Fox-hyped New Black Panthers case is a phony scandal
3:56 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
if you are going to use wiki, at least include the link so people can read the whole story, not just the first paragraph, and none of the rebuttal.
proud American
6:27 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Mike if you think people standing in front of a voting site with billyclubs in your hand is not imtimidating you are dead wrong. The reason their wasn't a court case the Dept. of Justice Eric Holder (the same person who didn't know where the guns went when given to the drug cartel) stopped it . The Obama's way of handling any issue he feels will hurt his image.
8:47 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Okay so the court decided that this was not an instance of voter intimidation, but you have made your own (admittedly less informed as we are all less informed than those involved with the judgment of this case) decision that it was. Personally, before I made any sort of judgment in my own mind, I would want to see a picture of these black panthers standing outside a polling station with weapons. Wikipedia is great for general info, but we should be more careful and require evidence when passing judgment ourselves.
Regardless, what the toot does this have to do with photo id being required to vote?
We will all be able to find instances of different political parties or interest groups partaking in less than honorable measures to gain the kind of votes that they want. This has happened forever in every instance of politics...ever...in the world or in time. But I have yet to see a described instance that actually took place in which presenting photo id would have prevented these less than honorable measures.
We should never enact a law in order to discover a crime. Doesn't that seem absurd to anyone else? Someone in my neighborhood is probably abusing a child. This does not mean that everyone in my neighborhood should be subject to proving that they are not abusing their child through regulation. Even if it meant that child abuse would not happen in this neighborhood. Right?
8:50 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
And why would the guilty verdict of black panthers intimidating voters hurt Obama's image?
proud American
8:49 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Mike wikipedia has no skin in this game so why do you feel what they print is not fair,or honest,
9:03 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
The problem with Wikipedia is that it can be edited by just about anyone.
3:49 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Peggie P. Richardson
12:58 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
It's not the Republicans who are registering dead people and felons to vote.
No? The Republican Party of Florida paid Strategic Allied Consultants $1.3 million to register voters starting in July
3:51 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
@ mike, your audacity kills me. you claim to have concern for disenfranchised voters should this voter ID law go through, yet you attack and talk down to people on here!
nofire pitts
12:21 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Amos, get over it!!!
Meanwhile, back to our regular programming..............
3:59 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
from ballotpedia "Some recent examples of elections in which actual fraudulent votes were cast on behalf of dead people include a 2005 state senate election in Tennessee that was decided by fewer than 20 votes; in this case, a post-election verification process established that two fraudulent votes were cast on behalf of dead people. Three election workers were indicted, and the results of the election were voided. The mayoral election in Miami in 1997 was nullified by a judge because of widespread fraud, including a number of established cases of fraudulent votes cast in the name of dead people. Election inspectors looking at the 1982 gubernatorial election in Illinois estimated that as many as 1 in 10 ballots cast during the election were fraudulent, including votes by the dead.[1] "
4:27 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
So you are saying that they do this in TN and FL and they also catch them, but that somehow proves that in person fraud at the polls is happening in PA, necessitating a restrictive photo ID law?
4:30 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
you actually think that it would be restricted to only those states?
Kathleen Gaberson
4:58 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
And what about the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania? How many cases of in-person voter fraud have been identified?
10:00 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
According to the statements made during the case hearing, NONE.
4:03 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Bob McKee1:17 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012 What's the problem? I'm 66, I've lived in Pennsylvania all my life and have had a photo ID since I was 16. Doesn't everyone?
No, Bob, everyone doesn't have one of the specifically listed forms of PHOTO ID included in this law. What PHOTO ID did you have at age 16? If you are 66, then your PA drivers' license at age 16 did NOT have a photo on it, either. By 21, you may have secured an LCB card though....and your voters registration card, as well.
Which does not have a photo on it.
4:04 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
from CNSNEW.COM on illegal immigrants voting, "In 2011, Colorado's secretary of state found by comparing drivers' licenses that Colorado had potentially as many as 16,270 non-citizens on its voting rolls."
Kathleen Gaberson
4:15 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Hallelujah! Now I won't have to wear a T-shirt with "You can see my ID when you pry it from my cold dead fingers" to the polls on Election Day. The law was passed to discourage poor, elderly, and young people and people with disabilities from voting. If you don't own a car and don't drive, how are you going to get to the places where you can get an ID? Public transportation in this region is a joke now--routes have been eliminated and buses run infrequently. Want to transfer twice and walk over 1/2 mile (one way) to get an ID? And what if you're elderly and don't have your original birth certificate? Or you rely on Access (which you must pay for)?
There has been no documented voter ID fraud in this Commonwealth. And we already have a way to check the identities of voters who show up at the polls: compare their signatures that day with the signatures on file with their voter registration. If you want to tighten up the voter registration process, okay. But don't make it difficult for people to exercise their constitutional right to vote once they are registered. If we require everyone to show ID, there will be many who appear at the polls with improper documents (e.g., expired passport or driver's license) and each one of those cases will take enormous amounts of time to resolve, leaving the rest of us waiting in long lines for much longer than usual. I can't think of a better way to discourage people from voting, ally people who cannot stand for long periods of time.
Susan M.
4:37 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Kathleen, can you reference the article where you got that information from? I can't believe the law would be passed to discourage poor, elderly, and young people from voting!!! That is just appalling! I would have thought it was passed to help eliminate voter fraud that was running rampant in the last election. Please post the information for us to see, especially this: "The law was passed to discourage poor, elderly, and young people and people with disabilities from voting."
Kathleen Gaberson
8:39 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Susan M.,
I should have made it clearer that it is my opinion that the law was passed to disenfranchise certain groups of people. However, other folks who have commented have pointed out that Mike Turzai said that the law would help Mitt Romney win the state in November. I interpret that to mean that the law was passed to manipulate the outcome of the election by preventing votes from citizens who would otherwise vote for President Obama.
Now, can you reference a source for your assertion that voter fraud was rampant in the last election? Do you have solid evidence that in-person voter fraud took place in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania during the last election?
Ed M
6:57 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
"The law was passed to discourage poor, elderly, and young people and people with disabilities from voting."
Proof please.
"There has been no documented voter ID fraud in this Commonwealth."
That's because there is nothing in place so a person has to prove who they are.
" And we already have a way to check the identities of voters who show up at the polls: compare their signatures that day with the signatures on file with their voter registration."
I don't sign my name the way I did when I registered to vote 38 years ago and no one has ever questioned me on my signature.
How would you feel if you went to the polls to vote and were told you already voted?
4:21 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
@NE12Ukid, i am all for helping anyone who might have a difficult time getting an ID. people had to register to vote. why is having an ID such a big deal? maybe there is fraud...maybe there isn't. if there is a way to help prevent it or decrease the possibility, why not?
4:30 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
If there is fraud, then there will be four years before the next presidential election for all this to be worked out, hopefully in a fair and equitable fashion, amos.
I still see no reply from the GOP members who insist there was in person ID fraud at the polls in 2008, but who never said a word in 2000 or 2004....
and I'd love to see what kind of photo ID BobMcKee says he had when he was 16.
James Stiegel
4:25 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Mike, this is From Andrea Bosco (former Peters Patch Editor) " Also, just a reminder to everyone: We ask that you comply to our Terms of Use (http://peters.patch.com/terms), and use first and last names—we believe in transparency. Thanks!
4:31 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
But how do we know that you are James Stiegel. You could be Juan Valdez for all we know.
Susan M.
4:35 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Been there, done that, James Stiegel...Too many liberals decided to harass me.....
James Stiegel
4:36 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Mike, I'll provide you with my ID. Just give a time and place and we can meet up. I have nothing to hide.
James Stiegel
4:40 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
But Mike proves why voter ID requirements are needed. Anyone can say they are James Stiegel, but I have the ID to prove who I am.
Susan M.
4:45 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
So, when I go to the polls, I can try to be Juan Valdez too! They can't ID me!!!
4:52 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
James Stiegel, this is from your link:
We want everyone to enjoy Patch, so you may use the Service without registration (i.e., signing up with a name, email address and password). However, in order to access some aspects of the Service, you will need to register for an account. Your account is for your sole, personal use. You may not allow others to use your account and you may not assign or otherwise transfer your account to any other person or entity. (If another person or entity wants an account, they can easily sign up themselves.) We ask that the e-mail address you provide when you register be a valid e-mail address for you. We encourage, but do not require, that the user name you provide be your real name.
10:01 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Understood, James.
I am quoting the current terms of PATCH.
proud American
12:13 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
James Stiegel the terms read We encourage but do not require that the user name you provide be you real name
James Stiegel
9:34 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
NE12UKID and proud american, I know how to read. I posted Andrea's comment because at one time, when I only used my first name, she provided me this response. I guess my reason for posting that comment is that I find it amusing that many of you seem so passionate about this issue, yet hide behind fake names. Are you not proud of what you believe in? Do you fear others because of your beliefs? I would never be intimidated by another because of what I believe in and you all should feel the same.
John Stuart Mill..""A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
9:49 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
James Stiegel - I cannot use my full name because I was sent to prison by a military court for a crime I didn't commit.
I promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Dormont underground. Today, still wanted by the government, I survive as a soldier of fortune.
If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find me, maybe you can hire Mike.
Ed M
6:59 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
We have to register with our full names. There is no requirement we use our full names in the forums.
Sue T
4:26 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Specifically, in Pennsylvania, nearly 760,000 registered voters, or 9.2 percent of the state's 8.2 million voter base, don't own state-issued ID cards, according to an analysis of state records by the Philadelphia Inquirer. State officials, on the other hand, place this number at between 80,000 and 90,000.
Would be more interesting if this was taken a step further. What are the percentage of registered Dems vs Rep vs Independ.
That would show if there is a true bias or not.
Tony Montana
4:42 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
If after reading Pennsylvania`s "voter ID law" you are not convinced it was created to help suppress certain people from voting you might be brainwashed.,
If after listening to Mike Priva-Turzai brag about voter ID enabling Mitt Romney to win PA. doesnt convince you that it had partisan intentions...you might be brainwashed.
If you are still using the lame "Black Panther voter intimidation argument"you obviosly dont know that they were a subversive organization not interested in elections and in 2008 had less members than The Spinners singing group.
I have no problem with showing a valid ID to exercise your right to vote but I do have a problem with creating an obstacle course of technicalities to getting THE ID that point straigt to disenfranchising a group of voters that typically vote against the party creating the law....duh!
4:57 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson said in his ruling that he was concerned by
the state's stumbling efforts
to create a photo ID that is easily accessible to voters
and that he could not rely on the assurances of government officials
at this late date that every voter would be able to get a valid ID.
Simpson's ruling could be appealed to the state Supreme Court, although state officials weren't ready to say Tuesday whether they would appeal. He based his decision on guidelines given to him days ago by the high court justices, and it could easily be the final word on the law just five weeks before the Nov. 6 election.
Simpson's ruling will allow the law to go into full effect next year, though he could still decide later to issue a permanent injunction as part of the ongoing legal challenge to the law's constitutionality.
Election workers will still be allowed to ask voters for a valid photo ID, but people without it can use a regular voting machine in the polling place
would not
have to cast a provisional ballot
or prove their identity to election officials afterward.
Kathleen Gaberson
5:01 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
I need to edit my own comment--couldn't see the last line when I submitted it. Delete everything after "...discourage people from voting." I was trying to add that people who could not stand for long periods of time would be discouraged from voting if requiring voter ID would lengthen the lines at the polls, but I ran into the character limitation. Sorry.
Ed M
7:01 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
"I was trying to add that people who could not stand for long periods of time would be discouraged from voting if requiring voter ID would lengthen the lines at the polls"
You should have left that off because that is not a valid reason, it's an excuse.
James W. Wood
5:30 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
The Truth be known !
STATE REP. MICHAEL TURZAI: Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania—done.
The Fix is in and the Poor will not get to vote! It is a Pole Tax !
Tom Gollick
5:40 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
If, as cc noted: "Just last night on the Evening news they were talking about Voters Fraud (Democrats)". and as Mike quickly responded: "Last night on the news they also discussed the voter registration fraud done on behalf of the Republican party", it would seem voter fraud IS happening, and both parties are guilty, Therefore, shouldn't we all support a policy that may prevent those fraudulent practices?
6:41 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Voter ID laws have next to nothing to do with voter fraud actually happening. Real voter fraud happens by buying votes or coercing people to vote for a certain candidate, tampering of votes by those in charge of an election, tampering with electronic machines, only registering voters for a certain party (such as what the Republicans were caught doing recently), etc. In-person voter fraud by pretending to be someone you're not does not happen in Pennsylvania (as in zero; we haven't had any cases of it) . Preventing a huge number of people from voting is what delegitimizes an election, not a type of voter fraud that doesn't actually occur. There's not even an argument here. The republicans put Voter ID in place to prevent democratic votes, and they know this, but they sell you a demonstrably false reasoning that people somehow buy because it sounds good.
Mike Jones
6:14 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Just watched state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe on PBS NewsHour complaining about the activist judges ruling to delay the implementation of this law. So three Republicans on the state Supreme Court and Judge Simpson, a Republican, are now activist judges? I don't know what to say...
6:19 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
WOW! I just got home from work and I am wondering...what the heck do you people do for a living? A lot of people living off my tax dollars I guess!
Susan M.
7:16 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Yes, I am probably doing the same thing that you do on the weekends, while I am hard at work!
7:48 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Here's why you need voter ID......notice the number of CONVICTIONS mentioned? Keep on saying that there's no fraud out there my Democrat friends.....repeat the lie long enough to get everyone to believe it
Mike Jones
8:43 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
@Roy... Is a convicted felon allowed to hold a valid driver's license after his/her release from prison?
Jon Wain
8:23 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
i love this judge.good ol american stand ,don,t throw this in my corner yins cry babies.man your ground and live with the outcome yins sissys. now thats what built this country.VOTE MOVE ON ! sissys
10:44 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
This is the statement that Daryl Metcalfe released. Mike Jones is talking about it above.
" Rather than making a ruling based on the constitution and the law, this judicial activist decision is skewed in favor of the lazy who refuse to exercise the necessary work ethic to meet the commonsense requirements to obtain an acceptable photo ID."
Metcalfe is a PA State rep for these areas:
(Cranberry, Adams Township, Mars, Evans City, etc...)
Mike Jones
10:55 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
@Erin... I'm confused by Metcalfe's comment that this ruling caters to the "entitlement mentality" of our society. How is voting an entitlement? It is a right. In fact, Metcalfe's new law has created a new entitlement because every Pennsylvanian is now entitled to a free Photo ID provided by Allegheny County, PennDOT or DoS. That's a lot of tax money.
I have quite a few ideas on how to protect the vote. It would make sure no one is disenfranchised or votes twice. But it's nuanced and complicated. Maybe I can share my ideas here when things simmer down.
5:59 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
I am confused as well and do not have an explanation. I can say that I loathe the entire "entitlement" conversation. Feeling one is entitled to something from the government (a feeling that all of us have to some degree) does not necessarily mean that the person is lazy. And a distinction in semantics starts to really matter when politicians give a word/title a negative connotation and then irresponsibly label anything they want with it. Now Metcalfe has created a group within his supporters (so white people in suburban neighborhoods of similar incomes) that consider anyone opposed to the voter id or anyone who does not have photo id "lazy."
You should share the ideas. I am, however; hesitant to support the creation of any new law which I think is pretty much the attitude that all law creators should have with the burden of proof being on the law to prove that is necessary. I have a feeling though that we could safeguard our voting system much more easily than this whole mess...just a feeling.
6:51 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
His statement (in full) is quite confusing, but not surprising, after all, he is just doing his best to put forth the party line.
Mike Jones
9:08 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Here are some of my ideas of how to prevent voter fraud without (hopefully) disenfranchising legal voters…
1: Cross-check voter registration with death certificates/social security numbers to purge dead people from the rolls. There has to be an electronic database with death certificate information that could easily be processed by the county election boards.
2: Require each voter to show some sort of identification every time they vote. Before this Voter ID law, every person had to show a utility bill, photo ID or something the first time they showed up at a new polling place. Why not do that every time? I don't think people would feel disenfranchised if they had to scrounge up a water bill with their name and address. And I would imagine it'd be difficult to fabricate that to vote for someone else.
3: Is there any way to sync up Social Security information with voter registration? Not sure how to work this, but every legal resident should have a number, so why not put that to use?
4: Dip a person's right index finger into blue ink after they vote. That way they could never vote again in the state (or the country, for that matter) that year.
The biggest problem I see would be with absentee balloting. I would assume many caregivers help the elderly with that, so finding out who filled out the ballot would be impossible.
These are just ideas I've been throwing around. I think they're fair and I think they could work. What is everyone's thoughts?
9:45 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Some good ideas there IMO.
I would like to see new voter ID cards, with photo. These could be phased in, to replace the current no photo card. Register as always, but receive a photo type card. After several elections these would be in the hands of all registered voters.
7:40 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Yeah, exactly. At least phase in the identification with multiple options. At least explore options. Use a freaking computer and get the dead people off of the registry.
It blows my mind that everyone is enraged about this fraud that they were not aware of before this law and have no proof of now...And nobody recognized that their neighbor knowing someone who knows someone who voted twice is a tiny, inconsequential number in comparison with the percentage of people possibly dissuaded or disenfranchised by a hastily implemented law.
Robert E
12:51 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Mitt Romney's campaign is so dead, the Mormons have baptized it.
Robert E
12:57 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
The right to vote is the foundation of any democracy. Yet most Americans do not realize that we do not have a constitutionally protected right to vote. While there are amendments to the U.S. Constitution that prohibit discrimination based on race (15th), sex (19th) and age (26th), no affirmative right to vote exists.
Because there is no right to vote in the U.S. Constitution, individual states set their own electoral policies and procedures. This leads to confusing and sometimes contradictory policies regarding ballot design, polling hours, voting equipment, voter registration requirements, and ex-felon voting rights. As a result, our electoral system is divided into 50 states, more than 3,000 counties and approximately 13,000 voting districts, all separate and unequal
suzanne kennedy
1:10 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Regarding "entitlement", we ARE entitled to certain benefits from the government. We have valid EXPECTATIONS of our government. We've given up certain rights in order to live in a society with civil and criminal procedures.
In exchange for relinquishing those rights, the government collectively offers certain protections so we don't have to fend for ourselves in all matters. Research philosopher John Loche and the "social contract".
Also, many "entitlements" are simply benefits for which people have paid hugely. Social Security an entitlement? Sure - it was also mandatory payment automatically deducted from my paychecks for 40 years! Am I entitled to a return on my mandatory payroll investment? Yes! Workman's comp? Of course - workers are "entitled" to coverage for which they've paid in payroll deductions.
Do people who are UNABLE to pay for certain assurances "entitled" to those assurances at the government's expense? Sure - it is a mark of a civil, well functioning society. If not, people can dispense with the social contract and get those benefits any way they see fit. But we might not like their chosen means...... choose... Read "Regulating the Poor" written in the 1970's regarding increased violence/civil disturbances during 1930's Depression and 1960's civil rights/ antiwar movements. In both cases, the government responded with protections because the social contract was threatened. It is the government's job to collectively provide!!!
Outraged Citizen
2:42 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
"Regulating the Poor" was authored by the same set of people who actively seek to destroy the entitlement programs advocated above. These authors wanted to overload social welfare programs to their breaking points in order to affect their vision of change – an annual salary guaranteed by the federal government. How would this be achieved? That's right, massive redistribution. Nothing serves better as an incentive to me to innovate and work hard like redistributing massive amounts of my income.
How do the authors propose this change would come about? By making millions dependent upon the government which would in turn bolster support for the Democratic Party to the point where we would essentially have one-party rule. This one-party rule could push through these changes without meaningful debate or opposition. Thanks, but no thanks.
3:11 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
I will proudly show my ID at the polls on election day. Im not afraid to hide who I am. Playing devils advocate for a second: What would happen if I went to vote early in the AM (without ID), voted, and then returned with ID before the polls closed to a different clerk. The clerk would say that it says that I already voted and then I could technically lie and say I didnt. Could I then claim voter fraud?
How do we know PA was or was not the target of fraud? After all, what is fraud? Deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage. Fraud only needs to happen once to make the public paranoid.
In the big picture...having an ID is not that big of deal.
4:15 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
In the big picture...having an ID is not that big of deal.
Not for those like you and me who already have photo ID, but a very BIG deal to those who were unable to secure the necessary documents.
11:40 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Greg, did you read the 10 plaintiffs' stories? Some of them have been TRYING to get the necessary documents for several years.
Jon Wain
8:33 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
quit it yins. give the judge some credit for recognizing the fact that the republicans are first of all behind the id craze.and more importantly romutz and barney fife stand no chance of winning. get over it .better yet ,,watch the debate tonight
Margaret French
12:33 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
I am glad we don't need an ID yet.. Due to marriage and divorce am in the process of going through a name change and my drivers license doesn't match my voter ID. As far as cashing a check or going to the doctor... I have been going to each of them for 30+ years and if they don't know me by now then shame on them. Also, my next door neighbor is the one who takes my name at the polls... I would think she knows who I am after all these years too and that I am really me. I will have the proper photo ID for the next one though. Also, as for cashing a check... I just deposit it in my bank account and there isn't any problem... they have both my names on file. And if you mean writing out a check to pay for something in a store, who does that anymore? I always use my debit card. I rarely write out a check.
8:40 am on Thursday, October 4, 2012
I'm with you, Margaret, never need ID in all those places like others say. I would expect the neighbor who is a poll worker to ASK for some ID come November, she'll probably be trained to do that, even though we're KNOWN to her.
But the doctor? Never has before, why would he start now, I'm not voting at the doctors office. He's checking me, and I'm handing over money.
Interesting story about the checks, Margaret.
I rarely CASH checks, usually, like you, just deposit them into my account.
But I had a small check someone had just given to me that morning, when I saw a branch office of my bank ahead, so I asked my friend to pull in there. The teller took the check and asked me for ID. YIKES, when I checked my wallet, it was not in my pocket, I had accidentally left it at home. But she checked my account, and got the cash. I would not be as well known to this teller as to my own doctor, for sure!
But OTOH, another time a different teller refused to accept a US PASSPORT as ID.
Again, these are bank tellers, not poll workers.
6:06 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Margaret last week my daugher in law sent her papers in to where you apply for a voters card and had her name changed so she can vote in next election. She got the paper online, printed it and sent in what was asked. Here is where you can download an application, and print it out. http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt?open=514&objID=1174186&mode=2
Sue T
3:18 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
NE!@Ukid--you are required to show an id at the doctors if you are using insurance/medicare/medicaid . I've had to show an id at the docs for the last 30 yrs. The Affordable Care Act will require us all to have insurance. You will therefore be required to show an id in the future at your doctors, unless you plan on paying the penalty rather then having insurance and continue to pay cash for your doctors visits..
6:00 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Sue, you should know by now that ne12ukid never needs to show a licence for anything as everyone in the world knows her, she went to 20 doctors in one day, had blood test, mri's, massage and never was asked for ID, Do I believe it, NO but some are so full of it too.
11:50 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Sue T3:18 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
NE!@Ukid--you are required to show an id at the doctors if you are using insurance/medicare/medicaid .>>>
I am not on medicaid, am not on medicare, but do have my health insurance, and I do show my health insurance card, but no other ID has been requested at my doctor. Of course old shadow (aka cc) just HAS to write some ridiculously overblown nonsense as if she knows me or anything about me and my family.
Margaret French
9:32 pm on Thursday, October 4, 2012
Thanks anyway cc but I am not going to bother now since we don't need the ID yet. I would of done that but then I would have to change it back again. Too much of a PITA. By the time I get my new photo taken for my license in May I hopefully will have it straightened out. (if the courts don't take too long! LOL)
8:43 am on Friday, October 5, 2012
Courts are the worse especially down at family division. I hear so many of my employees complain about divorces, child support and family division. When they come in and say in 2 weeks I need a few hours off in the morning to go there, I usually just schedule them off the whole day as they never get out of there. A 9 am appointment shouldn't last till 3 in the afternoon.
Ronda Snow
3:17 pm on Sunday, October 7, 2012
Everyone on both sides is completely missing the point. Having ID or not isn't the problem. The problem is the totally erratic, irrational way the law was rushed through and implemented. The problem isn't voters defrauding the system, it's political partisans defrauding the voter. If you want an ID law, fine...show me the numbers. Where's the evidence to support your argument? The side arguing disenfranchisement have HUGE numbers...nearing what, 7, 8, 9% of the entire electorate? What are the numbers supporting voter fraud? 1? Zero?. This issue, like most, requires facts, reason and logic-something I haven't seen from the GOP in a long, long time.
Tara Smith
12:03 pm on Sunday, October 21, 2012
I agree. This did seem rushed, was there ever a specific amount of time distinguished? It many not seem very difficult to get an ID, be that Voter or State ID; for some though, it is. People who live in smaller areas don't always have the easiest way to get around, public transportation in certain areas isn't the most reliable and affording a taxi isn't the most cost effective either. People don't always have family around who can drive them places either. I don't necessarily think that the Voter ID law is a bad idea, I just don't think it's as easy to get as some people think.
Jean Smith
5:46 pm on Sunday, October 7, 2012
They have been trying to get this law passed since Rendell was in office. Now that it was voted out, we will have Acorn running people around to vote in many different voting places. Not far but isn't the the democratic way.