Enforcement of Pennsylvania voter ID law blocked

[mostpost]

The same judge who declared the law constitutional has now said that it can not be enforced because the commonwealth does not have the right to disenfranchise voters. The new ruling comes as a result of an appeals court directing Judge Simpson to take another look at the case.

This comes from a radio report so I do not have a link.

[boxcar]

The same judge who declared the law constitutional has now said that it can not be enforced because the commonwealth does not have the right to disenfranchise voters. The new ruling comes as a result of an appeals court directing Judge Simpson to take another look at the case.

This comes from a radio report so I do not have a link.

But it's perfectly fine for fraudulent voters to disenfranchise the votes of legal voters? Even YOU...yes, EVEN YOU...would understand how that would work, wouldn't you? Do you need an explanation?

Boxcar

[HUSKER55]

HOW DO YOU DISENFRANCHISE AN ILLEGAL ALIEN FROM VOTING?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Pretty sure that he upheld the law itself, but blocked the implementation of it until it can be shown that the rate of those that need to attain licenses meets up with the rate of licenses actually issued.

[mostpost]

But it's perfectly fine for fraudulent voters to disenfranchise the votes of legal voters? Even YOU...yes, EVEN YOU...would understand how that would work, wouldn't you? Do you need an explanation?

Boxcar
Explain to me how a fraudulent voter is going to vote in your place. How would he know to give your name when he went to your polling place? How would he know which polling place is yours? If they asked him to give his address, how would he know what your address is? In Pennsylvania they asked Tom Corbett (the governor not the space cadet-although it is hard to tell the difference) how many cases of this type of voter fraud he prosecuted while Attorney General. I think he said less than five and only one resulted in a conviction. It's a solution to a problem that does not exist.

[Steve R]

But it's perfectly fine for fraudulent voters to disenfranchise the votes of legal voters? Even YOU...yes, EVEN YOU...would understand how that would work, wouldn't you? Do you need an explanation?

Boxcar
From a report by the Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law (http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_the_truth_about_voter_fraud/):

"Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare. Most citizens who take the time to vote offer their legitimate signatures and sworn oaths with the gravitas that this hard-won civic right deserves. Even for the few who view voting merely as a means to an end, however, voter fraud is a singularly foolish way to attempt to win an election. Each act of voter fraud risks five years in prison and a $10,000 fine - but yields at most one incremental vote. The single vote is simply not worth the price.

Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often.

Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud. Although there are a few scattered instances of real voter fraud, many of the vivid anecdotes cited in accounts of voter fraud have been proven false or vastly overstated. In Missouri in 2000, for example, the Secretary of State claimed that 79 voters were registered with addresses at vacant lots, but subsequent investigation revealed that the lots in question actually housed valid and legitimate residences. Similarly, a 1995 investigation into votes allegedly cast in Baltimore by deceased voters and those with disenfranchising felony convictions revealed that the voters in question were both alive and felony-free.

Many of the inaccurate claims result from lists of voters compared to other lists - of deceased individuals, persons with felony convictions, voters in other states, etc. These attempts to match information often yield predictable errors. In Florida in 2000, a list of purged voters later became notorious when it was discovered that the “matching” process captured eligible voters with names similar to - but decidedly different from - the names of persons with felony convictions, sometimes in other states entirely. A 2005 attempt to identify supposed double voters in New Jersey mistakenly accused people with similar names but whose middle names or suffixes were clearly different, such as “J.T. Kearns, Jr.” and “J.T. Kearns, Sr.,” of being the same person. Even when names and birthdates match across lists, that does not mean there was voter fraud. Elementary statistics students are often surprised to learn that it is more likely than not that among just 23 individuals, two will share a birthday. Similar statistics show that for most reasonably common names, it is extremely likely that at least two people with the same name in a state will share the same date of birth. The ostensible “matches” may not represent the same person at all.

Other allegations of fraudulent voting often turn out to be the result of common clerical errors, incomplete information, or faulty assumptions. Most allegations of voter fraud simply evaporate when more rigorous analysis is conducted."

[bigmack]

When do people like mostie & SteveR actually ask themselves why people can't just get an ID, being that it's FREE and 'the system' is bending over backwards for them to obtain one WITHOUT an ounce of encumbrance?

OH, I get it, we're supposed to buy this whack-job narrative of voter "suppression." :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

Republicans want to stop people from voting in PA plain and simple. Gee, I wonder why? :rolleyes:

Here's more info (similar to Steve's paste) from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:
____________________________

Never in my eight years as county solicitor did anyone accuse a voter in Allegheny County of in-person voter fraud. Additionally, lawyers for the commonwealth have admitted in court that they can present no evidence of in-person voter fraud ever occurring in Pennsylvania. With or without the new voter ID law, I expect this will continue to be the case because of long-standing protections in Pennsylvania law.

First, the criminal penalty for voter fraud of up to a $15,000 fine and seven years in prison acts as a significant deterrent. And what would be the payoff for someone attempting to commit in-person voter fraud? If you pass a bad check, at least you get money. If you commit in-person voter fraud, you get to vote, maybe a couple of times, which is extremely unlikely to affect an election. This minimal "benefit" clearly does not justify the risk of serving years in prison and coughing up thousands of dollars.

OK, let's say a bunch of fraudsters conspire to descend on the polls to steal an election. Theoretically, this could happen; practically, it never will.

Given the lack of evidence of one instance of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania, it is doubtful that someone could pull off such a logistically difficult exercise. First is the problem of finding enough people willing to risk their freedom. Second, existing checks would almost certainly detect such a plot.

When you register to vote or change your registration, you fill out a standard form that contains, among other things, your name, address, party affiliation (if any) and your signature. You must provide a driver's license or PennDOT photo ID number or the last four digits of your Social Security number. The form states that if you falsify information, a perjury conviction could get you up to seven years in prison and a $15,000 fine.

This information is entered into the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors, also known as the SURE system. All election officials in the commonwealth have access to this database.



Read the entire article here: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/perspectives/why-voter-id-isnt-needed-for-one-thing-casting-a-fraudulent-vote-isnt-worth-the-risk-of-years-in-prison-654916/#ixzz28B1568yS

[bigmack]

When do people like mostie & SteveR actually ask themselves....
How could I have missed the inclusion of Stinky?

BAM, right on schedule there he is.

This is SUCH a hot button issue for this triad they VOW to form an entity to get ID's for EVERYONE over the next four years so they don't have to go through this conniption over this EVIL "suppression" 4 years from now.

What a laugh.

Hep me, hep me, I'm bein' suppressed.

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002153921/950945654_fat_woman_sex_answer_2_xlarge.jpeg

[bigmack]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch... How does voter "suppression" stack-up with an administration that has created an environment where the entire middle class has been, Buried The Last FOUR Years, as freely admitted by the horses ass himself?

nlvqqNG4hr8

[TJDave]

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002153921/950945654_fat_woman_sex_answer_2_xlarge.jpeg

If you could explain the thought processes that led to this posting. :cool:

[Jay Trotter]

If you could explain the thought processes that led to this posting. :cool:My guess -- a random photo from his porn collection! :lol:

[HUSKER55]

GUYS AND GALS LET US GIVE THIS A REST!

THE NEXT TIME HE POSTS MIGHT SHOW NO PANTIES.

AS YOGI SAYS, THAT IS MORE THAN THE AVERAGE BEAR NEEDS TO SEE!

;)

[Tom]

Explain to me how a fraudulent voter is going to vote in your place. How would he know to give your name when he went to your polling place? How would he know which polling place is yours? If they asked him to give his address, how would he know what your address is?

House parties - you all show and and all this information is handed out to them by anti=American groups like moveon.org.
Last election, the libs/progs used cigarettes -- Hi, ljb, how's it going?:rolleyes: -- to get votes. They pick up bums off the street, take where they ned to go, tell what to say, and given them cigs or cash to vote.

Come on, surely YOU got the emails about this.

[Tom]

My guess -- a random photo from his porn collection! :lol:

Hey now.
Don't be mocking that poor woman, she recently lost her puppy!

[boxcar]

Explain to me how a fraudulent voter is going to vote in your place. How would he know to give your name when he went to your polling place? How would he know which polling place is yours? If they asked him to give his address, how would he know what your address is? In Pennsylvania they asked Tom Corbett (the governor not the space cadet-although it is hard to tell the difference) how many cases of this type of voter fraud he prosecuted while Attorney General. I think he said less than five and only one resulted in a conviction. It's a solution to a problem that does not exist.

Who said anything about any voter using my name. Why would my name have to be used? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: (You are incredibly stubborn human being to not want to understand how one illegal vote nullifies a legal one!

Let's use a little device in logic called reductio ad absurdum. Let's say the unions bus in 10,000 union workers who are going to use the names of dead people, who at one time lived in PA and the districts in which they're going to vote, etc. so that these workers can vote. Can you not see how 10,000 illegal votes would cancel out 10,000 legal ones? In a close election, this would be crucial. The machines would now have 10,000 illegal votes that is shouldn't have. Votes are illegally being added to the system that shouldn't be there. Therefore, all the legal voters would be disenfranchised in a close election by these 10,000 illegal votes if the candidate for whom the illegal votes were cast won. Let's say at the end of the count, the candidate of the crooks won by 7,000 votes. But if those 10,000 fraudulent votes had not been allowed into the system, then that candidate would have lost by 3,000 votes.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

From a report by the Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law (http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_the_truth_about_voter_fraud/):

"Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare.

This statement says it all! :lol: :lol: :lol: Truly a sucker is born every minute of every day!

Boxcar

[maddog42]

But it's perfectly fine for fraudulent voters to disenfranchise the votes of legal voters? Even YOU...yes, EVEN YOU...would understand how that would work, wouldn't you? Do you need an explanation?

Boxcar
Maybe you didn't read the above quote:

"Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often."

Less common than voters being struck by lightning!!! Every credible study I have seen on voter fraud comes up with similar figures. So maybe just maybe nationwide there are 2000 cases of voter fraud. The number of voters being not allowed to vote by these voter ID laws?
500,000 to 1,000,000. So what is more important and fair? 400,000 minimum not allowed to vote or 2000 cheaters which will probably cancel each other out anyhow.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57511312/study-voter-id-law-would-exclude-up-to-700000-young-minorities/

"As many as 700,000 minority (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57511312/study-voter-id-law-would-exclude-up-to-700000-young-minorities/#) voters under age 30 may be unable to cast a ballot in November because of photo ID laws in certain states, according to a new study. The lower turnout could affect several House races as well as the tight presidential contest."

Whether voter suppression is the intent of this law MAY be debatable. That it will suppress voters is not debatable at all.

[maddog42]

When do people like mostie & SteveR actually ask themselves why people can't just get an ID, being that it's FREE and 'the system' is bending over backwards for them to obtain one WITHOUT an ounce of encumbrance?

OH, I get it, we're supposed to buy this whack-job narrative of voter "suppression." :lol:

It is not free.


"More than 1 million eligible voters in these states fall below the federal poverty line and live more than 10 miles from their nearest ID-issuing office," it said. "These voters may be particularly affected by the significant costs of the documentation required to obtain a photo ID. Birth certificates (http://www.alternet.org/story/156377/gop_voter_suppression_id_laws_may_affect_millions_ of_legal_voters?page=0%2C1#) can cost between $8 and $25. Marriage licenses, required for married women whose birth certificates include a maiden name, can cost between $8 and $20. By comparison, the notorious poll tax — outlawed during the Civil Rights Era — cost $10.64 in current dollars."

The report concluded that the new voter IDs were the modern-day equivalent of a poll tax, which racist segregationists used for decades in many southern states and a handful of northern cities with large immigrant populations, to prevent "undesirable" eligible voters from voting.


http://www.alternet.org/story/156377/gop_voter_suppression_id_laws_may_affect_millions_ of_legal_voters?page=0%2C1


This article puts Republicans in the same category as racist segregationists.

[maddog42]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/13/backlash-swells-against-voter-laws.html

"These courts smelled a rat,” says Dan Tokaji, a professor of election law at Ohio State University’s Moritz School of Law. “State legislatures overplayed their hand and got greedy. It was transparent that the real reason for these changes was to make it difficult for some people to vote.”


Court after court is overturning these laws. Prominent Republicans in Pennsylvania and Texas have boasted that this means at least 3% advantage for them on election day. Republicans should be ashamed of themselves.
Most of the state legislatures that have passed these laws are Republican controlled with Republican Governors.

[bigmack]

This article puts Republicans in the same category as racist segregationists.
No shit. And you're just dumb enough to buy it.

[mostpost]

There will be a backlash against these voter suppression laws on Nov. 6. People who would not have other wise voted will make the extra effort to get to the polls and they will vote overwhelming against Romney and the Republicans.

Republicans know they can not win a fair election so they have to cheat. There have been a number of stories lately about a Republican based voter registration firm which has destroyed registrations from voters they identified as Democrats.
They have also been caught turning in falsified registrations. This is different from the ACORN scandal in which ACORN flagged the illegal registrations they turned in.

[PaceAdvantage]

Republicans know they can not win a fair election so they have to cheat. Preposterous.

[mostpost]

Pretty sure that he upheld the law itself, but blocked the implementation of it until it can be shown that the rate of those that need to attain licenses meets up with the rate of licenses actually issued.

Implementation is blocked for the upcoming election. No ifs ands or buts.
AND NOW, this 2
nd
day of October, 2012, after supplemental hearing
and after consideration of the oral and written arguments of counsel, it is
ORDERED and DECREED as follows:
Petitioners’ Application for Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED in
part. Based on the foregoing Supplemental Determination, the Respondents and
their agents, servants and officers are hereby PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED
from:2
1) Requiring that a registered elector must apply for a PennDOT
product prior to the elector’s seeking issuance of a free DOS ID; and
2) Implementing or enforcing that part of Act 18 which amends
Section 1210(a.2) of the Election Code, 25 P.S. §3050(a.2), and Section
1210(a.4)(5)(ii) of the Election Code, 25 P.S. §3050(a.4), for the general election
of November 6, 2012. It is the intent of this Preliminary Injunction to extend the
transition procedures described in Section 10(1) of Act 18 beyond September 17,
2012, and through the general election of November 6, 2012. Nothing in this
Preliminary Injunction shall preclude the Commonwealth from following transition
procedures described in Section 10(2) of Act 18 (relating to additional education
efforts to those not showing proof of identification for in-person voting) for the
general election of November 6, 2012. All other provisions of Act 18 remain in
effect.
The Court shall conduct a status conference with counsel on
Thursday, December 13, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 3001, third floor,
Pennsylvania Judicial Center, 601 Commonwealth Avenue, Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania. Petitioners shall arrange for a court reporter to be present. After the
conference, the Court shall issue a scheduling order pertaining to the close of
pleadings, completion of discovery, and trial on the application for a permanent
injunction

[boxcar]

Maybe you didn't read the above quote:

"Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often."

Does that stat include all the fraud that is never detected or conveniently overlooked by the bean counters (or would that be vote counters)? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[TJDave]

There will be a backlash against these voter suppression laws on Nov. 6. People who would not have other wise voted will make the extra effort to get to the polls and they will vote overwhelming against Romney and the Republicans.


No, they won't. People who have 'not otherwise voted' don't make extra effort... for anything. Never have, never will. Their house could be burning and they'd still be watching TV.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by mostpost
Republicans know they can not win a fair election so they have to cheat.

And they do this cheating how exactly: By requiring that everyone have an I.D.?
Do you know that the "poor" or anyone else for that matter can't get the right time of day from the government or many businesses or institutions unless they can produce I.D.? Virtually everyone in this society requires you to prove who you are if you're applying for government benefits or buying something that comes under the control of government regulations.

I heard it's so bad today that even convicted criminals can't get into prisons unless they produce I.D. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

Somehow I like the idea of mostie getting bent on, what do they call it, voter suppression. What perfect nomenclature.. Fur nerds.

Next week, mosty & nj (Stucky & Lurch) plan on blowing the lid off a HUGE injustice.

Airline passenger suppression.

http://www.mysecuritysign.com/img/lg/S/Photo-ID-Required-Bar-Sign-S-5218.gif

[johnhannibalsmith]

Implementation is blocked for the upcoming election. No ifs ands or buts.

I guess that I should have specified that - it was obvious that they couldn't meet the standard in time for this year's election. It sounded like you were implying that the law itself was being stricken down.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Airline passenger suppression.
...

Just one reason I don't fly. I feel highly disenfranchised with that industry.

[maddog42]

Does that stat include all the fraud that is never detected or conveniently overlooked by the bean counters (or would that be vote counters)? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

Finally a real, serious question and very pertinent. The voter ID laws won't stop the REAL cheating that is going on behind the curtain where the votes are counted. I don't think anyone has good information on that. Voter exit polls are usually very accurate and have pointed to cheating ( and been correct) in other countries. I would certainly support stricter control on Voter tabulation.

[newtothegame]

Maybe you didn't read the above quote:

"Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often."

Less common than voters being struck by lightning!!! Every credible study I have seen on voter fraud comes up with similar figures. So maybe just maybe nationwide there are 2000 cases of voter fraud. The number of voters being not allowed to vote by these voter ID laws?
500,000 to 1,000,000. So what is more important and fair? 400,000 minimum not allowed to vote or 2000 cheaters which will probably cancel each other out anyhow.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57511312/study-voter-id-law-would-exclude-up-to-700000-young-minorities/

"As many as 700,000 minority (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57511312/study-voter-id-law-would-exclude-up-to-700000-young-minorities/#) voters under age 30 may be unable to cast a ballot in November because of photo ID laws in certain states, according to a new study. The lower turnout could affect several House races as well as the tight presidential contest."

Whether voter suppression is the intent of this law MAY be debatable. That it will suppress voters is not debatable at all.
washington St is one place...how about Minnesota and A Franken?? care to pull up those numbers and how it doesnt matter because it cancels each other out?

[hcap]

Airline passenger suppression.

http://www.mysecuritysign.com/img/lg/S/Photo-ID-Required-Bar-Sign-S-5218.gifI do expect late on Nov 6, when it becomes evident Obama won (maybe an electoral landslide), some republicans will feel like going down to their local voting parlor with both underwear and shoe bombs. Until then voting booths don't get exploded or hijacked to often :lol: :lol:

[JustRalph]

This was anticipated. I have boots on the ground in Ohio and PA that tell me that legal types will be using video around polling places to later prove certain parties were at the polls, for prosecutions in the coming years.

250 GoPro cameras ordered by one group, i am told. Several voter fraud cases that were thought to become high profile in the last few years were not prosecuted because proving the offenders actually went to the polls would be tough. Not this time.

[maddog42]

When do people like mostie & SteveR actually ask themselves why people can't just get an ID, being that it's FREE and 'the system' is bending over backwards for them to obtain one WITHOUT an ounce of encumbrance?

OH, I get it, we're supposed to buy this whack-job narrative of voter "suppression." :lol:

Just got off the phone with my Mom. She is 95 and has No government issued photo ID. She quit driving when she was 85. I asked her if she needed me to take her down and get one. She said no. She wasn't voting this year. Ironic, she would probably vote for Romney.
She hadn't heard of the new voter ID law.
The elderly are getting SCREWED!!!

[Valuist]

If anyone should be aware of voter fraud, its a Chicagoan like Mostpost. Are you going to tell us, with a straight face, they've never had fraud?

[Tom]

Just got off the phone with my Mom. She is 95 and has No government issued photo ID. She quit driving when she was 85. I asked her if she needed me to take her down and get one. She said no. She wasn't voting this year. Ironic, she would probably vote for Romney.
She hadn't heard of the new voter ID law.
The elderly are getting SCREWED!!!

How so?
YOU offered to drive her there.
SHE chose not to go.

[maddog42]

How so?
YOU offered to drive her there.
SHE chose not to go.

My mom has kids to take her to get a photo id. Many elderly do not have anyone to take them. You know this. Many elderly are in a much worse situation than my mom.

[Tom]

You have data to support this?
ID is a rare possession?

I find that pretty hard to believe.

[Tom]

http://geoff82.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/voter-id-laws-how-many-people-really-dont-have-photo-ids/

That same survey said that among the 2000 registered voters interviewed by phone, 97.3% voted (p. 115). Of the 2.7% who did not vote, lack of proper ID was found to be a 5.5% effect. So perhaps 0.15% of voters were inhibited by improper ID.

Why can't expired photo Id be sued - all that matters on it is the PHOTO.
The address is not mandatory, the ID ay be outdated, all that matters is the photo is accurate.

[maddog42]

You have data to support this?
ID is a rare possession?

I find that pretty hard to believe.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/pennsylvania-voter-id-law-elderly_n_1934063.html

I could give you a dozen articles.

"Of the 44,861 active Philadelphia voters aged 80 or older, one in four does not have the required form of ID to vote. That’s a total of 12,313, according to the Inquirer."

[bigmack]

The elderly are getting SCREWED!!!
Where?

[maddog42]

Where?


If you mean which orifice, then the usual. If you mean which state? Well any
state with voter ID laws. The above post cites Penn. laws and philly. I live in
oklahoma and the elderly turnout will be severely affected.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/pennsylvania-voter-id-law-elderly_n_1934063.html

[bigmack]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/pennsylvania-voter-id-law-elderly_n_1934063.html
You're doing yourself a disservice in buying hook, liner & sinker the narrative from LeHuffPost.

Look at how confused they are on the election.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/PennsylvaniaVoterIDLawHaltedButElderlyStillCantRes t.png

[Tom]

We put men on the moon and brought them back home safely numerous times.
We cannot get a geezer to a camera one time.

Hey, the dems do pretty well getting the homeless to the polls.
And the dead.

[rastajenk]

Really...what better way for a party to touch base with its base than to call voters up and ask them if they need help getting an ID? If they do, you give it to them. Safe, legal, helpful.