Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The judge stated that it INSURES THE INTEGRITY OF THE SACRED VOTING PROCESS
Which is something we don't need to insure, because it's been proven that the integrity of the "sacred voting process" is still rather intact, even without the voter ID.
Turzai let the real goal of voter i.d. slip out. Everybody knows about it of course. Don't know why the Fox trolls bother since they are not fooling anyone.
Did it ever occur to these people who instigated these voter suppression laws that it may also affect many Republican voters who havent updated their id to the current new standards?
Did it ever occur to these people who instigated these voter suppression laws that it may also affect many Republican voters who havent updated their id to the current new standards?
This ardent Ryan/Romney supporter clearly explains why this voter supression doesn't mean anything...
Turzai let the real goal of voter i.d. slip out. Everybody knows about it of course. Don't know why the Fox trolls bother since they are not fooling anyone.
Actually in the court case we are talking about it was established that over 750 thousand register voters in PA lack an approved government photo ID.
Actually that is not true. As the judge pointed out 750K names on the voter rolls do not match the driver rolls AND 1) they didn't check for miscues 2) they didn't check for maiden names 3) aren't considering that other forms of ID work for example retirement home photo ID that are acceptable to vote - or a military ID as some soldiers overseas for long periods do not maintain their IDs, 4) the fact that there is proof of tens of thousands of false registrations 5) they didn't consider that typically when you die your name comes off the driver rolls before the voting rolls.
What was established was that the law "“imposes only a limited burden on voters’ rights, and the burden does not outweigh the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep.” Those seeking to block the law did not show that “disenfranchisement was immediate or inevitable,” wrote Simpson.""
Even the critic in the OP's link says that the ruling is “a careful opinion by a judge who struggled with the evidence and the law and, as I expected, issued a thoughtful, non-ideological and well-done decision. I disagree with the decision’s bottom line… but there is no doubt this is a judge acting in good faith applying the law and facts as he found them.”
There are absentee ballots. There are actually special ballots if you are disabled and one for permanently disabled. There are all kinds of balloting situations they use absentee ballots for. You just have to do what you do in any state and prepare ahead to secure that ballot and get it back in on the right date.
There are special balloting allowances made for the elderly.
There are even "emergency ballots" for those who end up in the hospital. It even states that a veteran in a hospital, or who is disabled, will be allowed to vote even if HE IS NOT PRESENTLY REGISTERED.
Anyone who needs to vote via absentee ballot has no excuse for not doing so.
BTW - they take down info over the phone . . . and verify it. You can give them your social security number. Now, who out there, especially elderly, doesn't have a social security number? You can't get to the polls - read over the list - looks like the state has bent over backwards to make it possible for anyone to vote, even if they are going to be out of town, or working, or it is a religious holiday for them, etc.
Last edited by brokensky; 08-17-2012 at 07:18 AM..
Which is something we don't need to insure, because it's been proven that the integrity of the "sacred voting process" is still rather intact, even without the voter ID.
SO again.
What is the point of voter ID laws?
We don't need to insure the integrity of the voting process? Did you just say that?
SO again....
Why couldn't the people who oppose the Voter ID Law supply the court with a SINGLE case where someone who wanted to vote couldn't because of PA's Voter ID Law that already went into effect and was applied in the last Election?
The proponents DID supply the court with cases of voter fraud.
Yes, forget all about the Pennsylvania Voter's Website's FAQ page completely.......rely on a comedy program on Comedy Central.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
