Pennsylvania Voter ID Law Trial Set

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

WackyDan

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
4,794
68
91
I'm almost getting tired of these voter id threads. Every single last person on ATPN, every single GOP lawmaker passing these laws, every single politician and thinking adult in this nation knows that voter fraud is so rare as to virtually not exist. And every single person who's heard of these laws knows they're not about preventing fraud but about voter suppression. The problem is no matter how much everyone KNOWS with a zero percent uncertainty that this is about voter suppression, the people who support the suppression won't admit it because then they'd be admitting they're attempting to suppress voters!

That's the problem in the end. No matter how obvious and 100% true it is, the people doing the dispicable act can't admit to it.

They found 2600 non citizens registered to vote on florida... Thank you motor voter!
2600 can make a difference in local elections...

Funny how liberals hate the idea of photo ID for voting but the gov't requires a photo ID for Medicare recipients...
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,611
47,219
136
Now it turns out that PA is abandoning the voter fraud argument at trial because they have absolutely zero evidence of it ever occurring. They apparently think the argument is so bad that it causes more harm than good.

Gee, shocker.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
<snip>

They didn't take any personal responsibility? It sounds like they worked jobs and raised families? I don't see what leads you to believe they didn't take any personal responsibility.


1) Never drove a vehicle
2) Never went beyond public high school education
3) Must not be drawing any government benefits
4) Never worked in last 30 years

#1-2 ID is provided
#3 ID required to show proof of who you are
#4 ID required by Federal law.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,272
103
106
I have a modest proposal for the any state with voter ID law:

Anyone who is a registered Republican, regardless of whether they currently have a state-issued ID or not, must appear at a state voter-registration office and present a certified American birth certificate or certified American naturalization papers to establish that they really, really are an American citizen. Existing drivers licenses, passports, and voter ID cards will NOT be accepted, because they might be fake. When this new verification process has been completed, they will be issued a NEW, state-certified "I really, really am eligible to vote" ID card.

Clearly, any Republican motivated to vote will not allow such a law to stand in the way of their obtaining the new, improved ID card. Anyone who doesn't make the effort to obtain the new, improved ID card is clearly lazy and shouldn't be able to vote.

There's no evidence that fake ID cards for Republicans have been a problem in the past. There's no evidence that fake ID cards for Republicans will be a problem in the future. And it's abundantly clear that such a law would significantly reduce the number of Republicans voting in the 2012 general election. Still, one can't be too careful . . . .

Nice argument, but notice you're trying to apply it only to one particular set of voters, as opposed to applying it equally to all (equal treatment under the law anyone?), and your argument includes onerous requirements. I find it hard to imagine getting an ID over the span of 4 years is onerous.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
35,903
27,559
136
Minorities are not being prevented from getting an ID in any way, shape or form.

Unless they are illegal.

I have no ill will toward anyone who votes either way, as long as they are citizens of this country. I resent you slandering me by suggesting otherwise :colbert: But golly, requiring an ID to get cigarettes, or to buy beer, or heck to even buy a freaking tube of glue at the store isn't too much to ask, yet asking to show ID before you vote - obviously way more important than beer or glue - is asking too much? Really?

Please stop trying to defend this Democrats. You're not smart, and you're certainly not smarter than the conservatives on this board who see right through this. To steal your wording :D

Elderly woman who is poor who has voted all her life and would have to travel 80 miles away and spend money she doesn't have on a birth certificate is an undue burdon. Esp so close to the election. There are many examples like this a you forget most people don't follow this stuff until close to election day where they will be turned away.

Conservatives don't want tracking of gun and ammo purchases but bitch about non-existant voter fraud.

BTW - Why no new restrictions on absentee ballots? How to we know who is filling them out/sending them in?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Nice argument, but notice you're trying to apply it only to one particular set of voters, as opposed to applying it equally to all (equal treatment under the law anyone?), and your argument includes onerous requirements. I find it hard to imagine getting an ID over the span of 4 years is onerous.

Just change "registered Republican" to "registered voter" to understand what voter ID laws do to people who do not have currently valid photo ID.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,611
47,219
136
1) Never drove a vehicle
2) Never went beyond public high school education
3) Must not be drawing any government benefits
4) Never worked in last 30 years

#1-2 ID is provided
#3 ID required to show proof of who you are
#4 ID required by Federal law.

A lot of this is simply wrong.

The elderly for example have frequently had driver's licenses in the past but they have expired. Similarly, social security does not need a continuing photo ID requirement, and food stamps and the like have alternative identification procedures available that do not require photo ID.

Regardless, it is extremely telling that despite the prevention of voter fraud being the entire reason for this law, Pennsylvania finds the case for it so weak as to not even bother including it in its arguments. I mean think about that for a minute. They aren't even trying to argue that their law fulfills its stated purpose.

Instead it fulfills a different purpose, suppressing unfriendly votes.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,272
103
106
Just change "registered Republican" to "registered voter" to understand what voter ID laws do to people who do not have currently valid photo ID.

That's a fair point, if you believe that merely having an ID is an onerous burden. Given that you need ID for the most seemingly minor things in everyday life, I just can't see how that's a major burden.

On the flip side, without any evidence of voter fraud, this might be a solution looking for a problem. I don't think we want to wait until there's some incident where an election is compromised by fraud to address it, but we don't want to jump the gun and add unneeded burdens either. I guess it comes down to: is getting an ID a significant burden?
 

actuarial

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2009
2,814
0
71
That's a fair point, if you believe that merely having an ID is an onerous burden. Given that you need ID for the most seemingly minor things in everyday life, I just can't see how that's a major burden.

On the flip side, without any evidence of voter fraud, this might be a solution looking for a problem. I don't think we want to wait until there's some incident where an election is compromised by fraud to address it, but we don't want to jump the gun and add unneeded burdens either. I guess it comes down to: is getting an ID a significant burden?

You're contradicting yourself here. The question should be: is getting an ID an unneeded burden?
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
1) Never drove a vehicle
2) Never went beyond public high school education
3) Must not be drawing any government benefits
4) Never worked in last 30 years

#1-2 ID is provided
#3 ID required to show proof of who you are
#4 ID required by Federal law.
First, there are many legitimate voters who meet those criteria. More importantly, however, your presumptions are wrong. You're ignoring the fact that things change and life goes on. There are millions of people, primarily elderly, who once had jobs and valid DLs, but do not have a current State-issued photo ID today. My mother is but one example. She is retired and disabled. She stopped driving years ago and let her license lapse. She already has bank accounts, a home, utilities, etc., and has had them for years ... so she hasn't needed a DL for anything in ages. Under these laws, she would be disenfranchised unless she makes an extra effort to jump these unnecessary hurdles imposed by the RNC suppression drive.

Granted, she is fortunate I am available to help with transportation and expenses as necessary. Many poor and home-bound people, however, do not have such support at hand. These suppression laws add burden -- a cost -- without offering any material benefit. It seems like the party of business would recognize that failure if their intent was legitimate.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
So in reality; she has no way to prove who she is?

Given a 4 year period; those that need to get the IDs should be able to obtain them.
There are plenty that are willing to help them get to the polling places to vote; those same shuold be able to help get the same "handicapped" person to get to a government office to get the needed ID.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,061
1,459
126
They found 2600 non citizens registered to vote on florida... Thank you motor voter!
2600 can make a difference in local elections...

Funny how liberals hate the idea of photo ID for voting but the gov't requires a photo ID for Medicare recipients...

And if those 2600 people had an id, they'd still be able to illegally vote. And how many legal voters got purged? That's not voter fraud, it's registration fraud or registration error. Funny how conservatives want to equate a Constitutionally guaranteed right with an opt in government program.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,176
28,168
136
Many more will be denied the vote because they have not attempted over x years to resolve the issue.

Too inconvenient - typical, want everything handed to them on a platter rather than get up to get it.
Why should I have to do what you want me to do in order to exercise my right to vote? What makes you think anyone should have that authority?
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
So in reality; she has no way to prove who she is?
She has an expired DL. She has a SS card and a voter registration card. She has a debit card, credit cards, utility bills, bank statements, and all sorts of similar documents. None of these are acceptable, however, under the RNC voter suppression laws. She would have to pay for a certified copy of her birth certificate, hire transportation to the closest DMV (about 1/2 hour away, since the state closed all the local offices to save money), wait in one or more long lines (difficult due to her poor health), and pay what is for her a significant charge for an ID she doesn't really need for anything else.

It is deliberate voter suppression.


Given a 4 year period; those that need to get the IDs should be able to obtain them.
There are plenty that are willing to help them get to the polling places to vote; those same shuold be able to help get the same "handicapped" person to get to a government office to get the needed ID.
What should be and what is are often two very different things. Further, as has been frequently pointed out and almost as frequently ignored, at least some of these suppression efforts are NOT giving voters four years. As has also been pointed out frequently, even in those cases where the state will provide the ID for "free", it does nothing to help with other costs like a certified birth certificate or transportation.

It is deliberate voter suppression.
 

TheVrolok

Lifer
Dec 11, 2000
24,254
4,076
136
She has an expired DL. She has a SS card and a voter registration card. She has a debit card, credit cards, utility bills, bank statements, and all sorts of similar documents. None of these are acceptable, however, under the RNC voter suppression laws. She would have to pay for a certified copy of her birth certificate, hire transportation to the closest DMV (about 1/2 hour away, since the state closed all the local offices to save money), wait in one or more long lines (difficult due to her poor health), and pay what is for her a significant charge for an ID she doesn't really need for anything else.

Hell, Wisconsin had it's law recently amended because it didn't allow Veteran's ID cards to be used at valid ID. Veteran's ID cards issued by the government required an amendment to be valid ID. Shows the amount of deliberate thought and care that were put into making sure to avoid voter fraud.
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,348
3,426
126
Elderly woman who is poor who has voted all her life and would have to travel 80 miles away and spend money she doesn't have on a birth certificate is an undue burdon. Esp so close to the election. There are many examples like this a you forget most people don't follow this stuff until close to election day where they will be turned away.

Why would she have to travel? In PA you can do it by mail or online. Granted the processing times for mail can be long and should be addressed
 

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
The people who think this is has anything to do with voter fraud are morons. It's simple, this will NOT stop voter fraud. This will make it harder for a large number of people to vote.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Why should an 80 year old, who has had no need of it until now, have gone through all that trouble? To have it just for the fun of having it? If his/her life did not require it, so what?

Previously the 80yr old had it and needed it.

the purpose of the law is to apply to all people; not just a select few.
those that are affected can also find a way around it; the law should not be altered because it is an inconvenience to a few.

those few can resolve the issue; given time and resources if asked.
 

TheVrolok

Lifer
Dec 11, 2000
24,254
4,076
136
Previously the 80yr old had it and needed it.

the purpose of the law is to apply to all people; not just a select few.
those that are affected can also find a way around it; the law should not be altered because it is an inconvenience to a few.

those few can resolve the issue; given time and resources if asked.

Go read the numerous lists of voters who have been trying to gain ID and are unable due to loss of records, etc.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Why should I have to do what you want me to do in order to exercise my right to vote? What makes you think anyone should have that authority?

How can you prove that you physically have the right to vote?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Go read the numerous lists of voters who have been trying to gain ID and are unable due to loss of records, etc.

And I agree, a month before an election is not the time.

However, this has come up multiple times over the years.

If people want to get the information; they ahve the time to work out the issues.
most do not; expecting others to take care of them.

An illegal vote should not be tolerated when everyone has the ability to prove who they are and that they are legal.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,999
109
106
I'd like to thank the OP for posting in a large text size. That makes it MUCH easier for my aging eyes to read...:rolleyes:

At least the OP didn't capslock it. I actually thought it WAS easier to read. It isn't like we're reading ATPN on e-ink monitors. (That would be awesome for non-gaming applications) Yes, I do have a problem with focusing on backlit LED screens or CRTs on occasion.

On another note, I will find out how the voter ID laws will affect me soon. I just had to re-register to vote and request the DMV to update my listed address in my state due to moving and getting married this past year. I can completely see how this would affect the elderly and extremely poor because public transport largely DOES NOT EXIST in my state and many DMV/county records offices in more rural counties are only open one day per week, primarily in the black belt. A vote for a democrat is largely like pissing in the wind here due to the large amount of "conservatives" and recent gerrymandering though, so even if I do get disenfranchised this time around, it won't be affecting the outcome.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,176
28,168
136
How can you prove that you physically have the right to vote?
Registering has always been sufficient, why is it no longer sufficient? Because cameras were invented? Did our forefathers have to carry around miniature paintings of themselves to prove they had the right to vote?
 

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
Let's make everyone get a state-issued license before they speak out against the government in any way, because that first amendment only applies to citizens. I want you to prove you have the right to free speech, and if you don't have your ID card with you, give what's obviously an illegal trying to destroy our country the sound beating he deserves! And since they don't have the ID to prove they get protection from cruel and unusual punishment...