Lead plaintiff in Pennsylvania voter ID case gets her photo ID

[Orogeny]

I guess her right to vote wasn’t really supressed just because she didn’t have a photo ID.

articles.philly.com/2012-08-18/news/33249335_1_penndot-id-new-voter-identification-law-penndot-center

From the article:

The day after a judge upheld Pennsylvania’s new voter identification law, the lead plaintiff in the suit seeking to block the law went to a PennDot office and was issued the photo ID card she needs to vote.

Since she was the lead plaintif and now has a photo ID that she can use to vote, what does that do to the case? She can’t still claim that she is being impaired by this law, right?

Peace

Tim

 

[Caldera]

Much ado about nothing.

 

[bellasbane]

More from the article:

"Nothing has changed since Viviette Applewhite, 93, testified in July. The law stands. She still doesn’t have a driver’s license or Social Security card. The name on her birth certificate is still different from the name on her other documents - all of which, under the law, should have barred her from getting her photo ID.

But at precisely 1:16 p.m. Thursday, she got it anyway."

Are we supposed to believe the law is just going to be ignored for every person who presents themselves at a PennDot office to get a photo ID without the proper documentation?

If that’s true, it means anyone could get a photo ID - or multiple IDs with different names on them. If this is an example of how the law is going to be enforced, it does not seem as if it was ever intended to eliminate fraud.

On the other hand, forcing people to make a special trip to a PennDot office and leading them believe they would be denied an ID when the got there if they don’t have the proper documentation would have the effect of suppressing the vote across certain demographics. In that case, then that’s just more evidence of the laws true intention.

 

[Orogeny]

Are we supposed to believe the law is just going to be ignored for every person who presents themselves at a PennDot office to get a photo ID without the proper documentation?

Wow. You have direct evidence that a photo ID can be obtained by those who supposedly are being supressed and this is the reaction?

On the other hand, forcing people to make a special trip to a PennDot office and leading them believe they would be denied an ID when the got there if they don’t have the proper documentation would have the effect of suppressing the vote across certain demographics. In that case, then that’s just more evidence of the laws true intention.

Sounds to me like someone convinced her of that, but I bet it was someone screaming SUPRESSION!!! SUPRESSION!!! THE EVIL GOP IS SUPRESSING YOU!!!

Now, since you have evidence that that isn’t happening, your response is still SUPRESSION!!!

Sad.

Again, though, I ask, what becomes of the lawsuit now that the lead plaintif has show it to have no merit?

Peace

Tim

 

[bellasbane]

Wow. You have direct evidence that a photo ID can be obtained by those who supposedly are being supressed and this is the reaction?
Sounds to me like someone convinced her of that, but I bet it was someone screaming SUPRESSION!!! SUPRESSION!!! THE EVIL GOP IS SUPRESSING YOU!!!

Now, since you have evidence that that isn’t happening, your response is still SUPRESSION!!!

Sad.

Again, though, I ask, what becomes of the lawsuit now that the lead plaintif has show it to have no merit?

Peace

Tim

Look at the facts:

1. 
   *]The PA House majority leader declares on videotape that the voter id law passed by the Republican legislature will help Romney win the state.
   
   *]The justification for the law is that it will eliminate voter fraud - but less than 5 cases of voter fraud have been verified that could have been prevented by a photo ID. All the nonsense about Democrats stealing past elections by busing in people is just that - nonsense. If it were true, it would have shown up on the state report.
   
   *]That the law adds an extra burden to voting is indisputable. A person without ID is required by law to go to a PennDOT location and bring all the right documents with them in order to get an ID that will allow them to vote. This may not seem like a big deal to you, but it is a hardship for many elderly and urban dwellers who do not drive. Both are disproportionately affected by the law and both tend to vote Democratic.
   
   *]Now it seems from the article you linked to that the justification in #2 isn’t being enforced, but the burden to getting to a PennDOT location remains. That means the only practical effect of the law will be to suppress the votes of people who do not have photo ID (i.e., the elderly & urban dwellers who do not drive).
   
   You’re the one using all caps and exclamation points. I am just stating the obvious, despite all the Republican propaganda to the contrary. Elections should be nonpartisan, but Republican state lawmakers have suddenly started passing all sorts of measures to limit people’s access to the polls and the reason for that is pretty obvious.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Look at the facts:

1. 
   *]The PA House majority leader declares on videotape that the voter id law passed by the Republican legislature will help Romney win the state.
   
   *]The justification for the law is that it will eliminate voter fraud - but less than 5 cases of voter fraud have been verified that could have been prevented by a photo ID. All the nonsense about Democrats stealing past elections by busing in people is just that - nonsense. If it were true, it would have shown up on the state report.
   
   *]That the law adds an extra burden to voting is indisputable. A person without ID is required by law to go to a PennDOT location and bring all the right documents with them in order to get an ID that will allow them to vote. This may not seem like a big deal to you, but it is a hardship for many elderly and urban dwellers who do not drive. Both are disproportionately affected by the law and both tend to vote Democratic.
   
   *]Now it seems from the article you linked to that the justification in #2 isn’t being enforced, but the burden to getting to a PennDOT location remains. That means the only practical effect of the law will be to suppress the votes of people who do not have photo ID (i.e., the elderly & urban dwellers who do not drive).
   
   You’re the one using all caps and exclamation points. I am just stating the obvious, despite all the Republican propaganda to the contrary. Elections should be nonpartisan, but Republican state lawmakers have suddenly started passing all sorts of measures to limit people’s access to the polls and the reason for that is pretty obvious.

1. 
   From what I have read on the reports of voter fraud it leans democrat, which means if voter fraud is prevented that will help Romney
   
   When a report shows over 150 cases of voter discrepancies in 1% of districts there is a problem with voter fraud
   
   American University Center for Democracy in Election Management found that 99% of eligible voters possess the proper ID. If somebody can go to vote, why can they can get photo ID?
   
   Study by the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and University of Delaware looked at data fom 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006 elections. At both individual and aggregate levels, they found voter ID laws do not affect turnout across ethnic / racial or socio economic lines. Study said, ‘concerns about voter identification laws affecting turnout are much ado about nothing.’
   
   journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=3260864
   
   American University surveyed of registered voters in Indiana, Maryland, and Mississippi looked at whether registered voters had photo IDs concluded, ‘showing a photo ID as a requirement of voting does not appear to be a serious problem in any of the states’ because ‘[a]lmost all registered voters have an acceptable form of photo ID’
   
   Less than 0.5 percent of respondents had neither a citizenship documentation or photo ID
   
   american.edu/spa/cdem/upload/VoterIDFinalReport1-9-08.pdf
   
   2008 election survey of 12,000 registered voters in 50 states found that less than 9 people could not vote because of voter ID laws
   
   dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/49847/2008%20Survey%20of%20the%20Performance%20of%20American%20Elections%20Executive%20Summary.pdf?sequence=5
   
   John Lott in 2006 did a study that found voter ID laws have no effect on voter turnout but found that reducing voter fraud, through ways such as voter ID, may have a positive impact on voter turnout
   
   papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=925611
   
   Study by the University of Missouri on turnout in Indiana showed that in the first election after the voter ID law was enacted, voter turnout by about 2% overall in Indiana in 2006. There was no evidence that counties with higher numbers of elderly, minorities or poor, or those who were less educated caused an reduction in voter turnout. ‘The only consistent and statistically significant impact of photo ID in Indiana is to increase voter turnout in counties with a greater percentage of Democrats relative to other counties.’
   
   munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2008/0102-voter-id.php
   
   2004 Georgia did not have a voter ID, in 2008 it did. Voters rose from 22.66% from 2004 to 28.74% in 2008. Turnout in Georgia increased 6.7% in 20008 from 2004. According to JCPES Black share of voters increased from 25% in 2004 to 30% in 2008. In the 2008 Georgia midterms total turnout was up 19% from 2006. 44% more Black Americans voted in the 2.1. midterms in Georgia than did in 2006.
   
   In the 2008 Georgia presidential primary over 2 million voters voted compared to the 2004 election when there no voter ID law. Number of Black voters voting in the 2008 primary doubled from 2004.
   
   There were 100000 more votes in the Democrat primary in 2008 than in the Republican primary after voter ID was enacted so the claim voter ID laws suppress Democrat turnout is not true.

 

[bellasbane]

From what I have read on the reports of voter fraud it leans democrat, which means if voter fraud is prevented that will help Romney

When a report shows over 150 cases of voter discrepancies in 1% of districts there is a problem with voter fraud

American University Center for Democracy in Election Management found that 99% of eligible voters possess the proper ID. If somebody can go to vote, why can they can get photo ID?

Study by the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and University of Delaware looked at data fom 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006 elections. At both individual and aggregate levels, they found voter ID laws do not affect turnout across ethnic / racial or socio economic lines. Study said, ‘concerns about voter identification laws affecting turnout are much ado about nothing.’

journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=3260864

American University surveyed of registered voters in Indiana, Maryland, and Mississippi looked at whether registered voters had photo IDs concluded, ‘showing a photo ID as a requirement of voting does not appear to be a serious problem in any of the states’ because ‘[a]lmost all registered voters have an acceptable form of photo ID’

Less than 0.5 percent of respondents had neither a citizenship documentation or photo ID

american.edu/spa/cdem/upload/VoterIDFinalReport1-9-08.pdf

2008 election survey of 12,000 registered voters in 50 states found that less than 9 people could not vote because of voter ID laws

dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/49847/2008%20Survey%20of%20the%20Performance%20of%20American%20Elections%20Executive%20Summary.pdf?sequence=5

John Lott in 2006 did a study that found voter ID laws have no effect on voter turnout but found that reducing voter fraud, through ways such as voter ID, may have a positive impact on voter turnout

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=925611

Study by the University of Missouri on turnout in Indiana showed that in the first election after the voter ID law was enacted, voter turnout by about 2% overall in Indiana in 2006. There was no evidence that counties with higher numbers of elderly, minorities or poor, or those who were less educated caused an reduction in voter turnout. ‘The only consistent and statistically significant impact of photo ID in Indiana is to increase voter turnout in counties with a greater percentage of Democrats relative to other counties.’

munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2008/0102-voter-id.php

2004 Georgia did not have a voter ID, in 2008 it did. Voters rose from 22.66% from 2004 to 28.74% in 2008. Turnout in Georgia increased 6.7% in 20008 from 2004. According to JCPES Black share of voters increased from 25% in 2004 to 30% in 2008. In the 2008 Georgia midterms total turnout was up 19% from 2006. 44% more Black Americans voted in the 2.1. midterms in Georgia than did in 2006.

In the 2008 Georgia presidential primary over 2 million voters voted compared to the 2004 election when there no voter ID law. Number of Black voters voting in the 2008 primary doubled from 2004.

There were 100000 more votes in the Democrat primary in 2008 than in the Republican primary after voter ID was enacted so the claim voter ID laws suppress Democrat turnout is not true.

None of your statistics can be generalized to the present Pennsylvania law and are therefore not valid evidence for your assertion that this specific law is either necessary or will have no impact on the outcome in Pennsylvania.

“Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, DONE! [applause]”

• Pa. House Republican Leader Mike Turzai speaks on June 23, 2012

youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

In fact, Mr. Turzai clearly thinks it will favor the Republicans.

 

[_Abyssinia]

None of your statistics can be generalized to the present Pennsylvania law and are therefore not valid evidence for your assertion that this specific law is either necessary or will have no impact on the outcome in Pennsylvania.

“Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, DONE! [applause]”

• Pa. House Republican Leader Mike Turzai speaks on June 23, 2012

youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

In fact, Mr. Turzai clearly thinks it will favor the Republicans.

99% of eligible voters have photo ID.

Court upheld the law, the judge not does think it infringes voters

 

[_Abyssinia]

None of your statistics can be generalized to the present Pennsylvania law and are therefore not valid evidence for your assertion that this specific law is either necessary or will have no impact on the outcome in Pennsylvania.

“Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, DONE! [applause]”

• Pa. House Republican Leader Mike Turzai speaks on June 23, 2012

youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

In fact, Mr. Turzai clearly thinks it will favor the Republicans.

Court upheld the law, judge not does think it disenfranchises voters

What evidence exists that photo ID law disenfranchises in PA

 

[JonNC]

None of your statistics can be generalized to the present Pennsylvania law and are therefore not valid evidence for your assertion that this specific law is either necessary or will have no impact on the outcome in Pennsylvania.

“Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, DONE! [applause]”

• Pa. House Republican Leader Mike Turzai speaks on June 23, 2012

youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

In fact, Mr. Turzai clearly thinks it will favor the Republicans.

And Mr. Obama thinks that ACA (Authoritarian Care act) will lower health care cost. Neither one of these opinions are more than that; opinions.
The law was approved by the duly elected representatives of the people of Pennsylavnia, and determined constitutional by the courts. That’s how a constitutional representative republic works. If the people desire th repeal of the law, they will turn out the current legislature and governor.

Jon

 

[meltzerboy]

None of your statistics can be generalized to the present Pennsylvania law and are therefore not valid evidence for your assertion that this specific law is either necessary or will have no impact on the outcome in Pennsylvania.

“Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, DONE! [applause]”

• Pa. House Republican Leader Mike Turzai speaks on June 23, 2012

youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

In fact, Mr. Turzai clearly thinks it will favor the Republicans.

This is why I believe voting procedures, particularly for Presidential elections, should not be determined according to a statewide basis but instead should be a uniform and standardized process. That would eliminate the present (and past) mess in Ohio with respect to hours of operation, early voting and diverse county procedures. The means of voting–whether online, paper ballots, punch-cards, etc.–should also be standardized. And either there would be voter ID for all states or for none. I can’t help it: I’m a federalist.

 

[bellasbane]

The law was approved by the duly elected representatives of the people of Pennsylavnia, and determined constitutional by the courts. That’s how a constitutional representative republic works. If the people desire th repeal of the law, they will turn out the current legislature and governor.

Jon

Ummm, that would be true of all the Jim Crow laws - it didn’t make it them right, now did it?

 

[rlg94086]

None of your statistics can be generalized to the present Pennsylvania law and are therefore not valid evidence for your assertion that this specific law is either necessary or will have no impact on the outcome in Pennsylvania.
“Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, DONE! [applause]”

• Pa. House Republican Leader Mike Turzai speaks on June 23, 2012

youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8
In fact, Mr. Turzai clearly thinks it will favor the Republicans.

Of course he does. That’s because he clearly thinks the Democrats cheat.

To charge that Republicans will benefit from disenfranchising real voters, you would have to show that these supposed disenfrancised voters are more likely Democrat than Republican. Do you have such evidence?

 

[Orogeny]

You’re the one using all caps and exclamation points. I am just stating the obvious, despite all the Republican propaganda to the contrary.

The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit claiming that requiring an ID to vote is somehow discriminatory against (fill in the blank). The day after losing in the first time the suit is ruled on, she is able to easily get a photo ID. Propaganda? Really?

Elections should be nonpartisan, but Republican state lawmakers have suddenly started passing all sorts of measures to limit people’s access to the polls and the reason for that is pretty obvious.

Yep. Non-partisan obviously means illegal ballots to democrats. Sorry. A photo ID is not an obstacle to voting as our lead plaintiff just showed. Maybe it is just too obvious?

Peace

Tim

 

[seekerz]

It’s a shame when politicians are so afraid of nonagenarians that they feel no shame over inconveniencing or confusing them. Like taking candy from a baby…Who are the elderly going to impersonate? The last generation of decent human beings…?

 

[rlg94086]

It’s a shame when politicians are so afraid of nonagenarians that they feel no shame over inconveniencing or confusing them. Like taking candy from a baby…Who are the elderly going to impersonate? The last generation of decent human beings…?

The elderly aren’t being targeted by voter ID laws. The illegitimate voters are the target.

BTW…the elderly generally vote more conservative…

 

[seekerz]

The elderly aren’t being targeted by voter ID laws. The illegitimate voters are the target.

Matters not who is being targeted, the elderly are being caught up in the net. BTW, where is the evidence of ‘illegitimate voters’ in PA?

PS: What does it matter who they vote for? It’s THEIR choice and they earned the right to exercise it in peace.

 

[rlg94086]

Matters not who is being targeted, the elderly are being caught up in the net. BTW, where is the evidence of ‘illegitimate voters’ in PA?

PS: What does it matter who they vote for? It’s THEIR choice and they earned the right to exercise it in peace.

The reason I made that point is that the current Democrat/liberal meme is that the Republicans are disenfranchising voters through voter ID laws, so they can win. There is no logic in that argument.

I’m not worried about the “evidence for ‘illegitimate voters.’” Others have posted information about it, but it just plain makes sense to require an ID to vote.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit claiming that requiring an ID to vote is somehow discriminatory against (fill in the blank). The day after losing in the first time the suit is ruled on, she is able to easily get a photo ID. Propaganda? Really?

Absolutely. The State is not going to violate its own legal requirements for obtaining a photo ID for the average citizen. Its quite clear that Mrs. Applewhite was given one, in violation of State regulations and in a manner completely out of reach for anyone else, in order to eliminate her legal standing which effectively eliminates her ability to appeal.

 

[rlg94086]

Absolutely. The State is not going to violate its own legal requirements for obtaining a photo ID for the average citizen. Its quite clear that Mrs. Applegate was given one, in violation of State regulations and in a manner completely out of reach for anyone else,** in order to eliminate her legal standing** which effectively eliminates her ability to appeal.

Is there evidence that the State took action to eliminate her legal standing, or is that just supposition on your part?