Pennsylvania Judge Blocks Voter-ID Law

[bellasbane]

A Pennsylvania judge on Tuesday blocked the state’s controversial voter-identification law from taking effect in time for the November election.

Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson said he thought the measure, which would have required voters to show a photo ID at polls, could have kept some people from voting, as opponents of the law had argued.

“I’m still not convinced in my predictive judgment that there will be no voter disenfranchisement,” Judge Simpson wrote.

Earlier this month, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered Judge Simpson to block the law unless he determined there would be no voter disenfranchisement and that new state voter IDs are easy to obtain.

Judge Simpson previously rejected claims that the law would prevent some people from voting, and he refused to block the law when it first came before him in August. The law could still take effect at a later date or face a renewed challenge by opponents to block it completely.

online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444004704578032211743100582.html

 

[ringil]

Good news! The GOP’s efforts to keep minorities, the elderly, and the handicapped from the polls will not go ahead- at least in time for the election.

cnn.com/2012/10/02/politics/pennsylvania-voter-id/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

[Lochias]

A Pennsylvania judge on Tuesday blocked the state’s controversial voter-identification law from taking effect in time for the November election.

Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson said he thought the measure, which would have required voters to show a photo ID at polls, could have kept some people from voting, as opponents of the law had argued.

“I’m still not convinced in my predictive judgment that there will be no voter disenfranchisement,” Judge Simpson wrote.

Earlier this month, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered Judge Simpson to block the law unless he determined there would be no voter disenfranchisement and that new state voter IDs are easy to obtain.

Judge Simpson previously rejected claims that the law would prevent some people from voting, and he refused to block the law when it first came before him in August. The law could still take effect at a later date or face a renewed challenge by opponents to block it completely.

online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444004704578032211743100582.html

The laziness of our poor country truly knows no bounds anymore.

 

[meltzerboy]

A Pennsylvania judge on Tuesday blocked the state’s controversial voter-identification law from taking effect in time for the November election.

Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson said he thought the measure, which would have required voters to show a photo ID at polls, could have kept some people from voting, as opponents of the law had argued.

“I’m still not convinced in my predictive judgment that there will be no voter disenfranchisement,” Judge Simpson wrote.

Earlier this month, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered Judge Simpson to block the law unless he determined there would be no voter disenfranchisement and that new state voter IDs are easy to obtain.

Judge Simpson previously rejected claims that the law would prevent some people from voting, and he refused to block the law when it first came before him in August. The law could still take effect at a later date or face a renewed challenge by opponents to block it completely.

online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444004704578032211743100582.html

I wonder how much enthusiasm for the voter ID legislation in PA there will be among advocates after the Presidential election.

 

[ringil]

It looks I was late in posting a thread on this very good news.

Nice to see this transparent ploy of the GOP be prevented, if only for now.

 

[Tampa_Dave]

It looks I was late in posting a thread on this very good news.

Nice to see this transparent ploy of the GOP be prevented, if only for now.

I don’t see a law requiring voters to present identification as a “ploy”. Acceptable identification is soooooo easy to get in the year 2012, at least for for lawful citizens. The most basic functions in American society require suitable photo identification. The integrity of the voting process warrants any minor inconvenience to individual citizens, particularly when most states are offering every means available to assist citizens procure identification. We are discussing simple identification, not poll taxes.

 

[_Abyssinia]

It looks I was late in posting a thread on this very good news.

Nice to see this transparent ploy of the GOP be prevented, if only for now.

Washington post poll said 60% of democrat support voter ID so it is hardly a republican ploy

Poll shows majority of Pennsylvanians support new identification law

 

[Tampa_Dave]

Washington post poll said 60% of democrat support voter ID so it is hardly a republican ploy

Poll shows majority of Pennsylvanians support new identification law

Democrats supporting voter ID laws! Surely you jest.

 

[Lochias]

It looks I was late in posting a thread on this very good news.

Nice to see this transparent ploy of the GOP be prevented, if only for now.

Guess you’d better tell your local DMV what a “ploy” driver’s licenses are, then.

Same with your local governmental representatives for state IDs.

Better lump Social Security cards in there, too.

 

[ringil]

Guess you’d better tell your local DMV what a “ploy” driver’s licenses are, then.

Same with your local governmental representatives for state IDs.

Better lump Social Security cards in there, too.

I’m talking about those who don’t drive, people in their 80’s and 90’s, the handicapped, rhe blind, the unsophisticated, the destitute, mentally disabled individuals, those who have lost their IDs. . . .

 

[Myqyl]

Allowing the poor to vote? Must be a Socialist Agenda…

 

[Tampa_Dave]

Good news! The GOP’s efforts to keep minorities, the elderly, and the handicapped from the polls will not go ahead- at least in time for the election.

cnn.com/2012/10/02/politics/pennsylvania-voter-id/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

The GOP is trying to insure that young, old, whites, minorities, able-bodied people, handicapped citizens, and all other Americans provide ID to ensure integrity at polling booths. Democrats want anyone willing to pull the (D) lever at the polling station, regardless of their eligibility to vote. Shades of Daley’s Chicago and Huey Long’s Louisiana-style politics at work.

 

[Lochias]

I’m talking about those who don’t drive, people in their 80’s and 90’s, the handicapped, rhe blind, the unsophisticated, the destitute, mentally disabled individuals, those who have lost their IDs. . . .

None of those people would have issues with the proper help. I don’t see you jumping up to volunteer that help, only pointing fingers.

And…the unsophisticated? Really? It’s gaffs like that that makes it really really hard to take opinions like yours with anything but a grain of salt. Or twelve.

 

[Will_B]

When I was in High School we were taught that all U.S. citizens over the age of 21 had the right to vote, except convicted felons. While I was in the army this age was lowered to 18.

Now we have non-citizens and convicted felons voting. We also have the dead voting… It’s called voter fraud…

How do you end voter fraud…
One way is to show a photo ID at the polling place.

There is no reason that any citizen can not obtain a photo ID.
When you register to vote you need a birth certificate or other proof of citizenship… At the same time have your picture taken. Not too difficult, or is it.

 

[andrewstx]

Good news! The GOP’s efforts to keep minorities, the elderly, and the handicapped from the polls will not go ahead- at least in time for the election.

cnn.com/2012/10/02/politics/pennsylvania-voter-id/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

[mary_bobo]

Good news! The GOP’s efforts to keep minorities, the elderly, and the handicapped from the polls will not go ahead- at least in time for the election.

cnn.com/2012/10/02/politics/pennsylvania-voter-id/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Are you as concerned for the military members who cannot get an absentee ballot because the JD is not cooperating? And the majority of these applications waiting to be acted on are in toss-up states.

 

[johnnykins]

I don’t see a law requiring voters to present identification as a “ploy”. Acceptable identification is soooooo easy to get in the year 2012, at least for for lawful citizens. The most basic functions in American society require suitable photo identification. The integrity of the voting process warrants any minor inconvenience to individual citizens, particularly when most states are offering every means available to assist citizens procure identification. We are discussing simple identification, not poll taxes.

Actually it’s simple only for some. My 88 yo father in law can’t walk and no longer has a valid license or passport: he let them expire. He’d love to vote absentee, but can’t now as he cannot produce the required ID. No doubt we could load him into the car, use a wheel chair which he hates with a passion, wait the 1.5+ hours it now takes in my jurisdiction to get an ID, and take him home exhausted. BTW - yes that’s 1.5 hours at a minimum due to staffing cuts. I renewed my tags on-line and when they never showed up I spent 3 hours in line waiting to get them- no refund for the '“convenience fee” of on-line renewal. Also, this is in a GOP controlled county and state.

It also takes time and money to get an ID - which may just be the same as a poll tax for many of the poor.

Oddly, many conservatives would have a right royal duck if the government mandated IDs - claim it infringed our rights. Heck, I’ve heard that before.

Finally, it’s clear the whole voter ID ploy is a gambit by the right to disenfranchise the poor and minorities - never been much dispute on that except by the disingenuous. Really, it’s a terribly unseemly thing that does not reflect well on the right.

 

[awsiukiewicz]

Good news! The GOP’s efforts to keep minorities, the elderly, and the handicapped from the polls will not go ahead- at least in time for the election.

cnn.com/2012/10/02/politics/pennsylvania-voter-id/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

PLEASE help me…I can’t believe that you honestly believe that voter I.D. is some sort of attempt on the part of GOP to keep ANYONE from voting…Please…explain to me how there is ANYONE in North America that doesn’t have an I.D. if someone can get to the polls they can surely manage to find there way to a location to get a valid I.D. you can’t do anything w/out identification…sorry I just don’t buy it…I am certain that even people living in abject poverty could find some Democrat to get them to some place where they could get I.D…Peace…I’m open to yr feedback here…PAX

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I don’t see a law requiring voters to present identification as a “ploy”. Acceptable identification is soooooo easy to get in the year 2012, at least for for lawful citizens. The most basic functions in American society require suitable photo identification. The integrity of the voting process warrants any minor inconvenience to individual citizens, particularly when most states are offering every means available to assist citizens procure identification. We are discussing simple identification, not poll taxes.

Where was this discussion 4 years, 3 years, 2 years ago? It is suspect because of the timing, in reference to the upcoming election.

Would we rather disenfranchise some people because of a ‘short notice’? No answer needed. The question is posed as food for thought, and to demonstrate that it is timing that makes such action suspect.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

PLEASE help me…I can’t believe that you honestly believe that voter I.D. is some sort of attempt on the part of GOP to keep ANYONE from voting…Please…explain to me how there is ANYONE in North America that doesn’t have an I.D. if someone can get to the polls they can surely manage to find there way to a location to get a valid I.D. you can’t do anything w/out identification…sorry I just don’t buy it…I am certain that even people living in abject poverty could find some Democrat to get them to some place where they could get I.D…Peace…I open to yr feedback here…PAX

It’s suspect because of the timing of this action. Where was the concern 4, 3, 2, years ago, after the last election, and in plenty of time for anyone to acquire ID? It’s a little close to the elections to believe it wasn’t to disenfranchise some voters.