Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Playinghardball

(11,665 posts)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 07:22 PM Aug 2012

Shocker: PA Judge Upholds Voter Disenfranchisement Law, Setting Up Chaos Like 2004 in Ohio

Unless stopped by future litigation, look for long lines and delays on Election Day.

Pennsylvania’s Democratic strongholds in 2012 are poised to follow in the ugly footsteps of Ohio in 2004, where tens of thousands of inner-city voters waited for hours and hours before casting ballots in the election that sent George W. Bush to the White House.

On Wednesday, Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson, a Republican, issued a ruling upholding Act 18, the state’s new photo ID law affecting polling place voters. While voting rights groups will appeal to the state Supreme Court, the part of their case built on lessons from the past two presidential races—where administrative hurdles and snafus disenfranchised thousands in battleground states—was resoundly rejected by Simpson.

“Petitioners did not establish, however, that disenfrachisement was immediate or inevitable,” he wrote. “On the contrary, the more credible evidence on this issue was offered through Commonwealth witnesses. I was convinced that efforts by the Department of State, the Department of Health, PennDOT, and other Commonwealth agencies and interested groups will fully educate the public.”

Simpson said in a footnote that 1 percent of the state’s electorate, which would be 89,000 registered voters, or "somewhat more" lack required IDs. Regardless of whether that figure is correct, or a much larger initial estimate by the state that 575,000 registered voters lack the ID is more credible, the emerging reality on the ground in Democratic strongholds is not good.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2012/shocker-pa-judge-upholds-voter-disenfranchisement-law-setting-chaos-2004-ohio
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Shocker: PA Judge Upholds Voter Disenfranchisement Law, Setting Up Chaos Like 2004 in Ohio (Original Post) Playinghardball Aug 2012 OP
I read that the ACLU is appealing this. ananda Aug 2012 #1
what a brazen hack that judge is-- librechik Aug 2012 #2
Re: "No Ticket - No Laundry!" Voting Requirements compuable Aug 2012 #3

ananda

(28,876 posts)
1. I read that the ACLU is appealing this.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 07:24 PM
Aug 2012

The panel is 3-3, so if one of the Reeps votes our way, fine.
If not, it goes back to Sampson's ruling.

Fingers crossed.

compuable

(2 posts)
3. Re: "No Ticket - No Laundry!" Voting Requirements
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 08:22 AM
Aug 2012

Re: "No Ticket - No Laundry!" Voting Requirements

Regarding citizens' new voting-related requirements like I stated earlier, is the 'sticking point' - I totally agree with the politicians' favoring this and their premise: that it is a fact that many, many poor, minority and senior citizens do not have; and therefore cannot produce even a basic photo ID.

Most favor ID for voting, of course - that's obvious. However, at the same time - filling out and signing a voting ballot with a valid address and the forms that locality sent to your home; is a most definitely a basic right that these governments owe to their citizens.

By the same token, someone shouldn't have to fork over a picture ID for the same municipalities to some elected autocratic dictatorial official; in order for the firefighters from that area; to proceed to plug in and then turn on the hoses and put out the fire because you do not have valid and up-to-date home insurance photo ID.

Or to pick up grandma when she keels over - just because a particular political party believes it is inconvenient or that you may not have your valid, paid-up and current health insurance card and a photo ID. That's obvious. Most people would like everyone to have a valid insurance card. Making it the REQUIREMENT for service is unjust.

Nobody is currently disputing that they NEED and ID for a more convenient life in our modern society. These affected people are nearly all; likely not showing their ID because they most often do not HAVE one available - not because of 'the refusal to offer' one - as is now being 'required' in more and more places.

Additionally, not having the ability to have/carry any basic valid ID on you AT ALL can have other unintended (even dire) consequences as well. In our neighborhood an elderly man passed out in the street one time a while back and someone saw him and called an ambulance.

He wasn't from that area and evidently had absolutely nothing inside his wallet that identified exactly who he was or where he was from or most importantly in this case, who to contact in an emergency.

Unfortunately, hospitals can actually do precious little for someone who finds themselves in this precarious type of situation - without being able to ascertain past medical information or the even knowing the persons name. In this case, the local TV station covered this and luckily his children came forward and were able to find him, thank goodness.

If these affected citizens were potential voters were right-leaning voters, the Republicans would be sending interns as volunteers in stretch-limo bus service to their homes and offering to assist in pulling the voting levers for them. (lol)

We should also offer their parents more assistance in obtaining ID. It is an undisputable it fact that many, many poor, minorities (and also 'senior' not-yet-citizens) do not have; and therefore cannot produce even a basic photo IDs for Non-Citizens.

I believe that - as a society - we are we should also be very concerned about as well as possibly come to offer some more assistance to just about 'anyone' out there who does not actually have either the knowledge, financial means or the wherewithal to be able to apply for, keep and carry around a basic photo ID in the first place.

One cannot even accomplish even very basic undertakings in our modern society; such as enter a bank and open an account or cash a check, register your children for school, apply for needed senior-related financial and medical government benefits and literally dozens of other basic things in the modern world without being able to produce a current (as well a legitimate) photo ID.

Not having an ID can severely jeopardize a person's ability to do many of these things - not to mention not being able to cast a ballot in states that require a citizen produce one beforehand. Therefore I think it would also be more prudent to place more of the emphasis on offering more assistance to these fine folks; as well as addressing their voting requirements.

Additionally, I entirely agree that these laws are being enacted by those who have absolutely no concern whatsoever as to why the people have no ID at all... and that they are being entirely disingenuous, regarding the 'proven to be fantasy' claims of even the remote possibility these laughable proclamations regarding any rampant 'multiple voter' fraud.

Making it the REQUIREMENT is that sticking point - these laws are being enacted by those who don't care as to WHY the people have no ID at all. Their only concern that because those affected by the law do not vote for their party - and requiring ID is a way to deny them the 'opportunity' to vote for the other side. See the Truth Here - Site URL: to is http://tinyurl.com/clqd2jc

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Shocker: PA Judge Upholds...