Skip to comments.Judge refuses to halt Pennsylvania’s voter identification law
Posted on 08/15/2012 10:24:49 AM PDT by TonyInOhio
HARRISBURG, Pa. A tough new voter identification law championed by Republicans can take effect in Pennsylvania for Novembers presidential election, a judge ruled Wednesday, despite a torrent of criticism that it will suppress votes among President Barack Obamas supporters and make it harder for the elderly, disabled, poor and young adults to vote.
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson said he would not grant an injunction that would have halted the law, which requires 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 election looms.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Funny though as I posted today.. coming home from work on the Randy Rhodes show(although it was a substitute today) and they gave this example of a 96 year old who had voted for the last 70 years who wasn’t going to be able to vote because while she had her birth certificate she didn’t have her marriage certificate to certify her current last name and how it was such a burden to get her marriage certificate. They complained how it was hard for elderly to get down to the dmv.. although they made no mention that they can seem to make it to the polls but not the dmv. I think that arguement is lame. Basically they are saying people are so lazy that they won’t be bothered to do one or two fairly simple things so that they can vote.
I say good then they shouldn’t vote. If they are that lazy they won’t jump through a few minor hoops to get a State ID then they clearly are too lazy to even know who they are voting for.
They left out the word “controversial.” Yeah, it’s “controversial” to want election integrity.
We’re falling into the trap the left always sets. They throw some sob story out, and we conservatives try to counter their argument. We should be talking about why the left doesn’t like voter ID laws, rather than countering their latest 96 year old woman disingenuous sob story. When they roll a sob story out, instead of responding to the sob story, we should respond by saying, “You just don’t like voter ID laws because it prohibits you from committing vote fraud.”
Isn't there a federal law that says you can't change your laws within 90 days of an election, or was it just in Florida, where Holder's people (the DOJ) used that argument to try and stop voter purges. What would make judges above that law?
As I have been saying for years. The ONLY reason to oppose voter ID is to facilitate CHEATING. You should see the lil ol ladies in Philly getting everyone voter ID’s. You have to have ID to get welfare or any state service. PA voter ID is free. Folks that dont have the credentials can STILL vote on a preliminary ballot that is only counted if results of regular ballot are within .05%.
You need a damn ID to REGISTER to vote in most states. How can it be a burden to show ID to vote, when they did the same to register?