• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Pennsylvania Voter ID Law Ruling: Judge Halts Enforcement Of Law For Election

emperus

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2012
7,270
740
126

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Simpson ordered the state not to enforce the photo ID requirement in this year's presidential election but will allow it to go into full effect next year.
Valid law :thumbsup:- but the state has not setup the mechanism to properly handle the requirement within the needed time frame :(

Procrastinators are going to have to find another excuse :biggrin:
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,567
3
0
Great.

The attempt to prevent legal voters from voting is the most despicable act in American politics in many years.

I hope that everyone remembers this not for just a year or two but for a generation. Relegating the Republican party to the ash heap of history is the way to go.
 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,548
649
126
Good news. Since my mother has stopped driving, I don't think she has a valid photo id anymore.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,439
1
81
I was just reading the front page of a newspaper that said Vancouver (Washington) is banning fireworks for every day of the year except July 4th. That law takes effect in 2014. I think it's funny that people try to shoehorn a voter ID law in the few months before a major election, but something serious like fireworks needs a 21 month window for people to prepare. What a country....
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
The law was there 8 months prior.

The problem is that with the lawsuit; the state was not going forward with the logistics needed to implement the law.

Then with 6 weeks left; the state is unable to deliver as required. To be expected.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
25,649
10,705
136
Good news!

I have no problems with voter ID as long as its issued fairly with national standards and the states provide resources to impliment.

The burdon should be on the state not on the citizens.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Good news!

I have no problems with voter ID as long as its issued fairly with national standards and the states provide resources to impliment.

The burdon should be on the state not on the citizens.
Up to this point the opponents have been complaining that it puts an unfair burden on the citizens.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,567
3
0
What is scary is that there are plans in other states to change the picture i.d. requirements by dropping many of the types that have been allowed under the new laws.

Yes, this shit is going to go on for years.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,779
3,306
126
Good news. Since my mother has stopped driving, I don't think she has a valid photo id anymore.
I don't know your specifics, but I assume if one cares about voting and makes it to the voting booth then they can also visit the DMV for a photo ID.
 

Todd33

Diamond Member
Oct 16, 2003
7,842
2
81
Got to solve that non problem... good thing there are not any other issue to worry about.

Any voter id laws in non-swing states?
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
&#4314;(&#3232;_&#3232;)&#4314;

Somehow the law was a ploy to get Romney reelected but also somehow this decision isn't a ploy to get Obama reelected. Gotcha.

Unless something changes, the law goes back into effect next year. How convenient.

Says a lot when the judge has to cite how shitty the state is at doing its job in order to invalidate a law requiring ID. The law has been on the books for six months but somehow that isn't long enough for the state to get their shit together and provide for the ID's.

Sad day on many levels for a PA resident.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
State was not going to invest resources if the law was going to be struck down.

the anti-ID people were tossing out all these stats without anyone actaully looking at where the numbers came from.

FUD ruled up until the appeals court
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,979
1
0
Voter impersonation is almost non-existent. The resources, time, and expense to implement this practically useless law is the equivalent of demanding an MRI for a broken fingernail.

There is only one purpose for laws such as these; to keep voters that are perceived to vote Democratic away from the poles. The purpose has been spelled out enough in enough places by Republican sources (memos, strategy guides, and at least one address) to make it obvious.
 

AlienCraft

Lifer
Nov 23, 2002
10,539
0
0
I don't know your specifics, but I assume if one cares about voting and makes it to the voting booth then they can also visit the DMV for a photo ID.
What about the "vote-by-mail" bunch? There is no requirement to actually visit a polling place in order to cast a vote.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
What about the "vote-by-mail" bunch? There is no requirement to actually visit a polling place in order to cast a vote.
The ballot is mailed to the residence listed by the registered voter.
If the voter is no longer there; the Post Office returns the ballot.

If the voter is there; they are supposed to fill it out and sign it. that is an affidavit that they are the one that the ballot is addressed to and they have filled it out.
As soon as the ballot gets submitted back into the mail system; it because US Postal fraud if the wrong person signed it. Not a good thing. Also, I would hope that signatures are compared for mail-ins to the registration card.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Voter impersonation is almost non-existent. The resources, time, and expense to implement this practically useless law is the equivalent of demanding an MRI for a broken fingernail.

There is only one purpose for laws such as these; to keep voters that are perceived to vote Democratic away from the poles. The purpose has been spelled out enough in enough places by Republican sources (memos, strategy guides, and at least one address) to make it obvious.
It is not that difficult to obtain a non state ID with a person name on it.
Look at the false IDs used by students as an example.

Add picture and flash it at the polling place.

The capability exists; people apparently do it because they have been aught.
Who knows how many are not caught?
 
Feb 4, 2009
28,660
9,252
136
Good as I've said before I really don't think its completely unreasonable to ask for ID when voting but three problems
1st) it doesn't deter mail in votes at all
2nd) if the ID is not super, super cheap or free and incredibly easy to obtain its essentially a poll tax to keep poor people away
3rd) there really doesn't seem to be any evidence of widespread voter fraud so why all the fuss right before an important election? Also if someone is really concerned about people casting multiple votes why not go old school like the Mideast and use finger dye to show you voted for anyone who refuses to show ID?
 

Bitek

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2001
9,174
3,167
136
The ballot is mailed to the residence listed by the registered voter.
If the voter is no longer there; the Post Office returns the ballot.

If the voter is there; they are supposed to fill it out and sign it. that is an affidavit that they are the one that the ballot is addressed to and they have filled it out.
As soon as the ballot gets submitted back into the mail system; it because US Postal fraud if the wrong person signed it. Not a good thing. Also, I would hope that signatures are compared for mail-ins to the registration card.
What a laugh as this is the procedure for verifying Id now.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,807
1,123
126
Here's hoping this ruling gets appealled to a higher court and the law gets completely thrown out. It greatly angers and disturbs me that so many people see nothing wrong with taking away other's most basic rights merely because they lack s state issued document and failed to jump through a bunch of contrived hoops.

This is not the sort of crap our ancestors fought the Revolution for. The GOP should be shamed.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Good as I've said before I really don't think its completely unreasonable to ask for ID when voting but three problems
1st) it doesn't deter mail in votes at all
2nd) if the ID is not super, super cheap or free and incredibly easy to obtain its essentially a poll tax to keep poor people away
3rd) there really doesn't seem to be any evidence of widespread voter fraud so why all the fuss right before an important election? Also if someone is really concerned about people casting multiple votes why not go old school like the Mideast and use finger dye to show you voted for anyone who refuses to show ID?
1) Mail in fraud is partially controlled by the US Postal system - See previous post

2) the State should make the ID cheap if not free - otherwise it would be claimed to be a poll tax - that is illegal per USSC.

3) this has been going around for years with the same results - people complaining about disenfranchising a certain group that is unable to get off their duff to get an ID. Yet those same advocates have yet to show any stats on people that vote that do not have an ID and of those; which will refuse to get an ID if required.

The PA was done after the last middle election - the timing is the fact that the state did not try to prepare for such. No matter what the election cycle is; there will be people complaining that the election is being tainted of they need more time.

If one can not get their tail moving in 9-10 months to get an ID after the original law was passed, why would you think they would do so period.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Here's hoping this ruling gets appealled to a higher court and the law gets completely thrown out. It greatly angers and disturbs me that so many people see nothing wrong with taking away other's most basic rights merely because they lack s state issued document and failed to jump through a bunch of contrived hoops.

This is not the sort of crap our ancestors fought the Revolution for. The GOP should be shamed.
It has gone through two courts.
The plaintiffs have not demonstrated disenfranchisement.

they will have to show that a group of voters is being excluded by variables outside the voters control. And they are unable to do so as long as the state will issue the proper ID at no cost to avoid it being called a poll tax.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
What a laugh as this is the procedure for verifying Id now.
If verified, they will usually look at the picture and the face.

However, I do not control the guidelines for the votring and mail-ins
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY