Getty Images
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett (R) expects to stop thousands of his eligible constituents from voting this year.
The case against Pennsylvania's dubious new voter-ID scheme seemed to be going pretty well. The state official responsible for overseeing Pennsylvania's elections process, for example, acknowledged in court, "I don't know what the law says." Asked to defend her claim that 99 percent of voters already have a valid form of ID, she couldn't.
Making matters worse, officials also conceded there's been no reported in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania and there isn't likely to be in 2012, either.
But a court ruling this morning said none of this matters, and the Republicans' voter-suppression scheme can move forward.
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson said he wouldn't grant an injunction that would have halted the law requiring each voter to show a valid photo ID. Opponents are expected to file an appeal within a day or two to the state Supreme Court as the Nov. 6 presidential election looms.
The Republican-penned law – which passed over the objections of Democrats – has ignited a furious debate over voting rights as Pennsylvania is poised to play a key role in deciding the presidential contest in November. Opponents had asked Simpson to block the law from taking effect in this year's election as part of a wider challenge to its constitutionality.
Republicans defend the law as necessary to protect the integrity of the election. But Democrats say the law will make it harder for the elderly, minorities, the poor and college students to vote, as part of a partisan scheme to help the Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, beat Democratic Obama.
The Republican judge didn't rule on the merits; he refused to block the dubious law from taking effect as the larger legal challenge continues.
Attorneys challenging the law will take the matter to the state Supreme Court, but there's little reason for optimism -- the justices on the Pennsylvania high court bench are split between three Republicans and three Democrats, and a 3-3 ruling would leave today's decision intact.
Remember, one of the GOP policymakers responsible for creating this mess said the law was approved to "allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania." As of this morning, Republicans are one step closer to rigging democracy to make this goal a reality.
Also watch for widespread "chaos" in Pennsylvania voting. The state is somehow supposed to process the paperwork for hundreds of thousands of eligible voters who don't have the required ID over the course of a couple of months -- a task that's an unrealistic logistical nightmare.
All of this is necessary, state Republicans insist, to address a problem that doesn't exist. Welcome to GOP-brand democracy in the 21st century.
Leave a Comment:
Absolutely sickening. Creating and instituting laws for a problem that doesn't exist. The only voting irregularities, anywhere recently, have been in the treacherous waters of Teapublican primaries and they only involve counting procedures NOT illegal voting.
Not true. I live between Milwaukee and Chicago. Vote fraud is pervasive. The Minnesota clown owes his senate seat to vote fraud; 177 convictions and counting.
There is a chance we will get this thrown out, but meanwhile, Democratic volunteers in PA have to use up a lot of their time trying to find and help the voters who don't have the very specific types of ID needed. Many people don't know about the law or mistakenly think they have good ID, so it is a monumental task.
this disgusts me to the core... more that the bill based the PA legislature in the first place but i'm glad at least that as radical my Governor is he vetoed a similar attempt in VA
Okay, if your really concerned about voter fraud. then lets try this, have a table setup at each polling place and if someone doesn't have a picture id then take their picture and give them an id. then that person can go to the next table show their id and cast their vote. see case closed everyone votes and everyone has and id.
Here's what you do: you don't issue a stay, the election goes forward under the new law, and has its desired outcome, thanks to the law,
Then you strike down the law as unconstitutional....but since a do-over would be so expensive, and have grave ramifications for the national election, and yadda, yadda, you also declare there is no possible remedy. Sorry.
Cake, had, and eaten.
Rachel, you really need to do a better job informing your viewers and readers. Voter ID has already been ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court in 2008 (Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181). Liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, opined: The law "is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting 'the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'"
A recent poll shows American support for voter ID at 75%, including a majority of Democrats. It's constitutional. It's popular. More states will pass it. You guys will just have to figure out how to win elections without the votes of the deceased, felons, and illegal aliens.
Pennsylvania has its own state right-to-vote, protected by its own state constitution. At the level of the state, constitutional issue, the precedent in Crawford isn't dispositive.
If vote fraud was committed primarily by Republicans, every single person here moaning and wailing about the unfairness of it all, would be screaming for voter ID yesterday. Of course since vote fraud is pretty much exclusively a "progressive" practice it either doesn't exist or it's WAY overblown. There is not one single legitimate argument against voter ID laws. NOT ONE. Unless of course you are so racist that you think minorities are too stupid or incompetent to get an ID.
my goodness, so many lefties getting worked up about ensuring fair and legal voting. I agree with an earlier comment, it sure seems like lefties think the poor and minority voters are just too stupid to be able to get an ID. It takes an ID nowadays to buy beer, open a bank account, see an R-rated movie, etc, etc, etc. Getting an ID to vote isn't a big deal, as most rational Americans understand.
First off they may be of an age that they can not produce the documentation the new law requires to get "Proper ID". They may not have the means to travel and get the "Proper ID". They may work at jobs that pay hourly wages and can not take the time off to go and get "Proper ID" because they would loose money that they need to pay their bills. Buying beer, opening a bank account, seeing a R-rates movie, etc. etc. are privileges not a Constitutional Right. We are rational Americans and we understand that when people like yourself try and wrap the suppression in pretty paper with a bow on it, that once you remove the bow and the paper it is still UGLY SUPPRESSION.
The right to keep and bear arms is a right guaranteed by the US constitution. The left routinely labels ID and registration requirements for firearm permits 'common sense'.
The constitution also provides guarantees regarding the right to trial, sue, etc. I still need an ID to get into the court building.
First bearing arms can kill people, therefore your need to present photo ID and register your weapons. Unfortunately that still has not stopped the SENSELESS killings in a Movie Theater or a House of Worship.
Because of terrorism and zealots you need ID to enter a court building to ensure the safety of the people within the court building.
So Republicans are still Suppressing the Vote so they can prevent people who would historically vote Democratic from exercising their right to vote.
Lorr: What voting-range age would a person be who couldn't get the required documentation? If you can't travel to get the ID, how do you expect them to travel to vote? If they work a job then they probably have a car and a valid drivers license. Tough to get work these days without some sort of ID, isn't it? Even if they had a job (with no ID), I'm sure that 99.999999999% of the very few people this would apply to could work something out with their boss to shift some hours and go get their ID. Their boss is probably a republican anyway and we are pretty understanding about such things.
80 plus. Perhaps the voting polls are close to where they live or they family members are going to vote and take them with them, after work. Have you ever lived on the East Coast, you do not have to have a car and therefore would not have a valid license. To ride the bus or subway - no ID necessary. Yes as a Republican boss he would NOT allow him the time to vote.
If you are employed, legally, you should have filled out an i-9 form, which requires ID of some sort, which either would suffice for voting or would be what you need to get a state issued ID. No one of working age who is employed should have an issue with this law, republican boss or not.
I don't know anyone 80+ who hasn't gotten around to getting an ID, and most aren't working anymore so you don't have to worry about those nasty republican bosses. But, let's say there are some and they need a ride to a polling place. I'm sure they don't stay at home except on election day (if their health allows them to get about). The point being that if they can get a ride to the polls, or the post office, or the grocery store, etc... then I'm sure they can also get a ride to the DMV or wherever they have to go to get an ID. I wouldn't worry about it too much if I were you because this age group is more likely to vote Republican anyway. You know, as people get older they get wiser. There may even be hope for you someday!
Face it, people of working age who don't have an ID by now probably aren't registered voters and have no intention of voting, and aren't too concerned about it. But, if they desire to vote they can ride the bus or subway over to the DMV and get themselves an ID.
I just wanted to note that there are ways to protect legal voting without the used of an ID. Currently, they confirm your identity at the polls and check you off by ststing your name and your address. This can be strengthened by requiring you to enter a PIN or password. These do not require the possession of an ID card.
It's a shame all of those illegal aliens, convicted felons and dead people will no longer be able to vote in Pennsylvania. They are being unfairly disenfranchised. And since minorities and the poor don't cash checks, buy liquor or cigarettes, use a debit card, or get any government services, they don't have valid IDs ant won't be able to vote either. What a shame.
Please provide proof that illegal alients, convicted felons, and dead people actually have been voting in PA. The Republicans who argued before the court stated outright that they have no proof that any such activity has been occurring, how is it you happened to find such proof?
One has to wonder why the liberals are so against voter ID..we already have illegal aliens taking advantage of our medical and educational services at no cost to themselves..the American people, at least those who are logical thinkers, are fed up with this "freeloading"...if we have to pay, they should pay also..but, the biggest problem for us that do support voter IDs is stopping those illegal aliens for voting and putting into office those that will continue the handouts..I feel that there should be an easy to get national ID card available to all CITIZENS of the USA...and, paid for by the Federal Government..then, how can their be an argument that ANYONE is being disenfranchised?...thank you..
Poor Madcow has to take out a dictionary to determine what a voter is. She hasnt caught up to all the new dead votes
Geez... why is there all this anger about showing ID? I have to show ID for so many less important things in my life, but not to do the most important thing in a democracy? Who is against voter fraud? Put your hands up! Okay, the best way to prevent voter fraud ... from anyone ... is to ensure registration and then show ID to confirm identity. Why is that so hard
WELL SAID!!...unfortunately, we, in this country, have become cynical..we use to vote with no apprehension that all was not on the up and up...that has all changed..we now have to worry about non-citizens and dead citizens voting..where has all this worry come from?..hummm...seems to me the worry has come from the democratic party, and, instances like the Black Panthers trying to intimidate voters, and, the justice department refusing to prosecute them for that...in other words, by insisting on voter IDs, citizens in the USA are only trying to protect their country in one of the few avenues left to us...the voting booth..
Seems to me that the reason there is no great collection of voter fraud could be because no one has seen fit to challenge anyone; hence, it's probably been going undetected. I've voted for over 40 years and no one has even questioned the name I provide. This law--and I don't see how anyone can live in this society without some form of picture ID--is more than reasonable, and those who protest so much (the democrats) perhaps are realizing that the possibility of fraud has been significantly reduced.
What a stupid propaganda article. But of course that's all that Benen can write. It is clear that he hasn't even read the Judge's opinion. Given the United States Supreme Court's ruling (in which ultra-liberal Justice John Paul Stevens joined in upholding an ID requirement) it does not appear to me that the Judge could have ruled any other way particularly in the context of a preliminary injunction hearing. All you lefties should just calm down and go get an ID. You will need it to cash a check, fly on an airline, buy alcohol and tobacco, get an abortion, rent a car, etc., etc. and otherwise live in our modern society.
"Democrats say the law will make it harder for the elderly, minorities, the poor and college students to vote, . . . "
Really? And how does having an ID make it harder to vote?
Show me one college student without a driver's license, and I'll show you a solar power company that Obama invested taxpayer money into, then received a percentage back as a campaign "contribution", that has NOT gone bankrupt.
Show me a "poor" person who is receiving food stamps who does not need a picture ID to apply for federal aid, and I'll show you a document from Fast and Furious that Obama has NOT hidden or destroyed under the guise of executive privilege.
Show me a minority that does not need a picture ID to cash a check at the local Currency Exchange, and I'll show you a federal budget surplus and unemployment under 5% under the Obama regime.
And show me an elderly person who does not need a picture ID to sign up for Social Security and Medicare, and I'll show you an Obama budget.
The reason over 2/3s of Americans approve of voter ID laws is because voter fraud is real, and in many localities, specifically those run by Democrats, it is legendary.
Let us not forget the stolen US Senate seat of Al Franken who in Democrat controlled counties received more votes than there were eligible voters to vote. And of course, this flagrant fraud was upheld by the Democrat-controlled Minnesota Supreme Court.
Let us not forget the Obama regime supports voter suppression by the New Black Panthers, and refused to prosecute flagrant voter intimidation, presumably because the New Black Panthers are part of the grassroots of the Obama election campaign.
Let us also not forget that AG Eric Holder, rather than requiring states to purge their voter rolls of people who had died or moved - in accordance with the law, was in fact suing Florida for trying to do just that. Presumably, there would not be enough available names with which to stuff the ballot boxes.
Finally, let us not forget that when Democrats and unions collected signatures to recall Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, included were such "eligible voters" as Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck.
If I might paraphrase Michael Corleone, if anything in this life is certain, if history has taught us anything, it is that Democrats will do anything to win elections, including lying and cheating and stuffing ballot boxes.
Oops, I take that back. There is one thing Democrats absolutely will not do - that is tell the truth about themselves. They know if they did, they would never get elected. And in the end, getting elected is all that matters.
With Democrats, history has repeatedly shown the ends always justify the means, including changing 200-year-old Senate rules and voting under cover of darkness like thieves in the night on Christmas Eve night to pass Obamacare.
I would think even leftist "journalists" and "opinion-makers" would understand if one vote is cast fraudulently, that disenfranchises one voter. But as I say, with the Left, it's always the end-game, no matter the means.
Truzak - best post yet. If we are truly against voter fraud ... truly against it ... then we should do all we can to prevent it. But that perhaps doesn't fit the agenda for some.
Perhaps the reason there is not a collection of evidence regarding voter fraud is because not much is reported; hence it goes undetected. I have voted for over 40 years and not once have I been asked to verify my name. It is totally unreasonable to live in today's society without some form of picture ID. It seems to me that those who protest so loudly have a more ominous reason for doing so--mainly to perpetuate the ease to which voter fraud can exist. Believe me, this phoney argument about voter supression is nothing but a lightly veiled attempt to sound sympathetic to the masses.
Score one for common sense. Kudos to the state of Pennsylvania.
All this crap about "voter suppression" is pure BS. The real Democrats that are upset about voter ID laws is because thay make it harder for them to steal elections, given that 99.9% of those who vote fraudulently vote for Democrats.
It is a very simple matter for anyone who really doesn't have a suitable ID (which I'm betting is actually a very small percentage of the population) to get one. The state of Pennsylvania will literally send someone to pick them up at their home and will drive them to where they need to go. Their ID will be issued to them free of charge.
If there are still those who would prefer to bitch and moan rather than make the minimal effort needed to obtain a suitable ID, then fine. Let them sit at home on election day. I'll bet that they can somehow come up with ID when it's time to apply for food stamps or pick up their bi-weekly welfare check.
The law even allows you to vote if you forgot or lost your ID or just moved to a new address etc. So what in the hell are the Demoonbats so upset about.
No one is turned away, except of course those who are trying to vote at every precinct in half the state, in which case they better have a whole crap load of fake/forged IDs with addresses in each precinct.
Actually, Steve, you want to see *actual* voter suppression? Look here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU
There is less than 1% voter fraud in this country. This whole country. There is no need for any of these restrictions. Not changes, restrictions as that is what these new regulations are! And, that is because the Republicans cannot win fair and square. They have to lie, cheat and steal to win the Presidential election. They know that, so get rid of many who would vote for President Obama. I never alligned with either party. I always looked at the candidate and what their actions would do for this country. I am now registered a Democrat, because I absolutely now cannot tolerant the Republican party, for this and other actions they have or will take if they win the election. In 2008 I actually liked Romney. Not now, because everything he said then he changed. He sold his soul to get this nomination.
There is a common sense argument to limit the vote in the post "Too Many People Vote" at the "Grumbles From an Old Grouch" blog. (grumblesfromanoldgrouch.com). It would have the added benefit of giving us better laws and (hopefully) better politicians.
The Republicans probably wouldn't like it, because it doesn't discriminate on the basis of minority, poverty or political party. Plus, the effect of all that campaign cash would be lessened a great deal.
ps: Don't let the title fool you.
Democrats have to cheat to win a lot of close elections. From Kennedy and his questionable win over Nixon to Franken, Gore, the Chicago Machine, and all of those local elections stolen by corrupt labor organizations that are now legend, the list goes on. They label the simple asking of ID as some type of massive Constitutional violation but seem to disdain the rest of the document. There is nothing suppressing about asking for an ID to vote. If you are unable to secure simple photo identification in today's world should you really be helping to decide who our leaders are? I thought Democrats fancied themselves intelligent.
This blog is an absurd collection of nonsense. Every statement is dripping with sarcasm and deceit. No, the governer does not expect to disenfranchise thousands of eligible constituents and you can't characterize a simple "prove who you are" requirement as a scheme. 31 states have voter ID laws.
And don't try to make the case there is no such thing as voter fraud. Do you think we are idiots? Time and again we hear reports of more votes cast than the number of registered voters. Recent history - the returns from Madison WI in the recall election or Al Franken's win. Have you forgotten ACORN and their fraud-riden voter registration drives? The list goes on and on.
Some HUGE examples of voter fraud...Al Franken was elected by 1099 convicted felons who voted...overwhelmingly democrat in an election he won by 312 votes.
Bush Gore: 5600 convicted felons voted...again overwhelmingly Democratic. That election never should have been close.
Christine Gregoire stole the Washington State Governor's election in 2004 with rampant, well documented fraud.
So please, don't tell me it doesn't exist. Obamacare wouldn't exist if Franken hadn't gotten elected.
You need photo ID for beer, flying, driving, renting virtually anything including a movie at Blockbuster, cashing a check of any kind, using a credit card, and a myriad of other relatively insignificant everyday tasks. But we shouldn't insure vote integrity for arguably one of the most important things we do? Probably the most imbecilic contention ever.
I always wondered how MSNBC got away, even with its dismal ratings, with such idiots as Anchors. It all makes sense, now.