The New York Times is a little upset because half a million people might be denied a ballot, but, not to worry. The same Governor and political appointee who promoted this law now say they will help voters comply with the law:
There is no evidence that Judge Simpson contorted law and precedent to reach his conclusion. He even described Mr. Turzai’s comment as “disturbing” and “tendentious.” But his ruling, in a case brought by potentially disenfranchised voters, is a clear and disturbing illustration of the way Republicans have manipulated legislation for their own ends, placing a veneer of civic responsibility on a low-minded and sleazy political ploy.
The real reasons for voter ID laws are quite clear. The desire to dampen the Democratic vote after 2006, and particularly in the wake of President Obama’s election, prompted six states to decide, virtually simultaneously, to pass voter ID laws.
Their stated reason — combating voter fraud — is easily dismissed, since there are virtually no documented cases of impersonation fraud that could be reduced with an ID card. Mr. Turzai was simply indiscreet; most Republicans know better than to speak the truth out loud.
Judge Simpson acknowledged, as did the state in the lawsuit, that there have been no prosecutions or even investigations of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania. But he said there wasn’t any evidence of that in Indiana, either, and yet the United States Supreme Court upheld a nearly identical ID law there in 2008, so he was obliged to do the same. He also didn’t appear to be very concerned about the burdens that would be placed on the voters who do not currently have ID cards, saying infirm voters could use absentee ballots, which do not require the same level of identification, or get one of the free cards that the state — in a hollow promise — has vowed to distribute.
On that hollow promise.
The judge relied in part on a press release where the state director of elections promoted herself for several paragraphs and then assured that she would quickly cobble together some half-ass plan to allow those voters who do not have a driver’s license a voter ID.
“As we work to ensure that Pennsylvanians have the identification they need to vote this fall, this new card will provide another photo ID option for voters,” Aichele said.
“We believe these new cards will be a safety net for those who may not currently possess all of the documents they need for a standard photo ID from PennDOT. Our goals are to continue making voters aware of the new voter ID law and helping those who may not have proper identification obtain it,” she added.
The new voter photo identification cards are scheduled to be available at PennDOT’s Drivers License Centers beginning the last week of August. The identification cards can be issued to registered voters who may not have all of the documents necessary to obtain a non-driver’s license photo ID from PennDOT, primarily a birth certificate.
Love the safety net language, by the way, and the rhetorical effort to split voters into two classes, first class and second class. Sometime or other in August those lesser voters may have a shot at an ID.
Anyway. I’ll be following whether the hollow promise in this self-promoting press release becomes a reality, because if it doesn’t, then Governor Corbett and his political appointee misled the court and the people of Pennsylvania.
Board of Election people here have a phrase they use for a high-turnout in a particular precinct. They say voters “blew the doors off in 7” (or whatever). Here’s hoping voters in the targeted city, Philadelphia, somehow surmount the barriers and ignore the state’s hollow promises and blow the doors off with turnout, because Republicans should not be rewarded for this. It’s despicable.
Todd
Why not just do purple ink on fingers to ID those who already voted? I hear that’s worked before…
MikeBoyScout
As a native of Western PA, the way that the people of Pennsylvania, where the Constitution was adopted and the Declaration of Independence was crafted have allowed their inalienable rights to be oh so easily taken away is very sad.
Davis X. Machina
Let’s say your local judge refuses to issue a stay, your state runs the election under the new law, then, after the election, some higher court strikes the new law down as unconstitutional.
Hey, constitutional rights vindicated!
But at the same time, the higher court(s) say ‘Hey, guess what? There aren’t any comfortable legal remedies… a do-over would be expensive, and throw the national results into doubt — which is something this court is understandably loath to do. Harumph, harumph”
Not only are there no fingerprints on the corpse, there’s no corpse…. This has been gamed out all the way to the end.
It’s the perfect crime.
JoyfulA
The Secretary of State is married to the governor’s press secretary, is she not? Their work is interchangeable.
Thoughtcrime
Kay,
Do you know the absentee rules and feasibility of going that route?
MikeBoyScout
Not too proud to bleg…
The ACLU is vigorously fighting for voting rights and fighting against the attack on voting rights in PA and across the nation. If you’ve some spare change you might want to give ’em a hand.
https://ssl.capwiz.com/aclu/issues/alert/?alertid=61015236&type=AN
mamayaga
This makes me so tired. We fought this battle more than 50 years ago, and now it has to be fought all over again?
Given how desperately we need a better Supreme Court, and a better judiciary in general, I cannot understand progressive purists who are planning to sit this one out because of Obama’s flaws. He is not the perfect president, but if you wait until we achieve Liberal Paradise on Earth with a holy and perfect leader before you will even participate, then we will keep slipping backwards.
Steve
This is a state court ruling, but is there a parallel federal proceeding as well? This is a federal election and constitutional rights are at stake.
Hill Dweller
@JoyfulA: The Secretary of State said, on the stand, that she had no earthly idea what was in the legislation. The Governor admitted he didn’t have a clue what was in the legislation.
This is blatant voter suppression, but the Village is worried about Biden being mean to Willard.
Bobby Thomson
Judge Simpson erred in relying on the testimony of an official who clearly lied as to how she derived the figure that only 1% of voters lacked ID.
That said, I wouldn’t get your hopes up as to reversal on appeal. It will be too easy for the Supreme Court to defer to Judge Simpson’s findings of fact.
JGabriel
__
__
Kay @ Top:
It’s a Catch-22 though, isn’t it? If Philadelphians do blow off the doors with turnout, Republicans will just say that proves their Voter Suppression Law wasn’t onerous and didn’t suppress the vote.
And the GOP will just look for new ways to make the laws more onerous and suppressive the next time around.
Christ, this is enraging.
.
Davis X. Machina
@Steve: Crawford v. Marion Co., the Indiana case ,closed that door pretty conclusively.
Ben Franklin
@mamayaga:
Regressives are just that; Regressive.
rikyrah
you’ve been terrific reporting on this Kay. thank you so much for keeping us informed. I’ve been sharing these as best I can.
The Other Chuck
@JGabriel: If everybody voted, there probably wouldn’t even _be_ a Republican party to try it next time.
Gex
Adding more and more slapped together policies isn’t going to make the process better. But the GOP knows that. And they love it. They get to make it worse while “helping.” It’s their core competency.
Steve
@Davis X. Machina: Really? Isn’t the Pennsylvania law much more onerous? Why is the DOJ bothering to sue Texas, if Photo ID is obviously constitutional?
Baud
I hope this experience provides an impetus to move to a national popular vote system. There will be much less incentive to disenfranchise a few thousand people in a state if we didn’t have swing states.
Thanks for your reporting on this Kay.
scav
Robosigning as Governance. Why am I not surprised?
PurpleGirl
@Steve: Probably there is something in the Civil Rights and Voting laws from the 1960s that separates out southern states for special treatment. Pennsylvania probably didn’t get mentioned in the laws as subject to special monitoring and Texas did.
Roger Moore
@Hill Dweller:
Then how in hell can she enforce it? Is she just going to do WTFSW and wait for somebody to sue her over it? Oh, wait, she’s a Republican; of course that’s what she’s going to do.
Davis X. Machina
@Steve: Texas is covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, and PA is not.
Roger Moore
@Steve:
Under the VRA, DOJ has increased power to sue states (and some smaller areas) that have a history of discrimination. As I understand it, states that fall into that category have both a pre-clearance requirement (i.e. the DOJ gets to vet changes to their voting before they can go into effect) and a lower standard of proof. There the DOJ only has to prove a discriminatory effect to get the law tossed, not discriminatory intent.
Brian R.
The courts should clearly strike this down, but I hope we’re not just counting on that. What’s going on in terms of identifying people at risk under the law and making sure they get IDs?
Hill Dweller
@Roger Moore: The State’s attorney admitted that there was no voter fraud, and the new law was unlikely to stop voter fraud.
This judge is every bit as corrupt as the Republicans running the government in Pennsyltucky.
They hastily hired one of Willard’s campaign bundlers to help promote the new law. I’m sure that will be helpful.
cat48
Sleazy Bigots!
JMS
That’s the spirit. Speaking of Philadelphia, in the mayoral election in 2003, some may remember that John Street was elected rather handily to a second term despite those seeing a close race, in part because of last minute surge of voters who came out to vote for Street in response to reports that the FBI had been bugging him. Street may have been corrupt, but he was our corrupt mayor, dang it.
So, I think if Philly voters, and anyone else targeted by this are given a chance to understand what has happened, it would be great to see this backfire on Republicans. Keep in mind too that some number of Dem leaning voters who already have proper ID may be on the fence about coming out to vote, but something like a little outrage could get them to the polls.
mainmati
@MikeBoyScout: Me too. I’m from Pittsburgh though regrettably don’t live there anymore. I never thought the PA legislature, in the state that is the home of the Continental Congress and the Declaration of Independence would ever degrade themselves into systematic disenfranchisement of voters. Our democracy is truly at the brink, at this point.
xian
if they steal this one i’m in the street till we mubarak the motherfuckers.
Violet
@mamayaga:
It has to be fought every day. Every fucking day.
liberal
@xian:
Agreed.
There should be a two-prong strategy:
(1) trying to ensure they lose the election;
(2) making sure there’s hell to pay if they steal it
liberal
@Violet:
Sadly enough, true; eternal vigilance and all that.
Old Dan and Little Ann
If you can’t beat them, cheat them. Rachel Maddow is talking about this now.
Violet
So are any left-leaning SuperPACs readying ads for the Philly area saying things along the lines of “Republicans don’t want you to vote. Why do you suppose that is? Because they want to screw you over more than they already do. Are you going to let them do that?”
Someone should.
General Stuck
@Violet:
Human beings have always had to fight for rights and justice, even in a country with a parchment to live by that says it’s not only a good idea, it’s the law. And it never ends, because human nature never ends for one group or another wanting to call the shots, and with republicans the primal urges for power and control are run riot in the empty spaces betwixt their ears and they scheme to steal power when they don’t have the votes in a democracy. When nirvana arrives, then we rest.:)
Quarks
The ACLU is gathering specific names of Pennsylvania citizens who will not or may not be able to vote under the new rules:
http://www.aclupa.org/legal/legaldocket/applewhiteetalvcommonwealt/voteridclients.htm
Regarding this current hollow promise of photo voter IDs for people without driver’s licenses, I note the ongoing problem: you still apparently have to get to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get the licenses, which as the ACLU notes can be problematic for elderly voters who don’t drive.
Violet
@liberal:
There is no try. The two-prong strategy is:
(1) Make sure they lose the election;
(2) Crush them
Southern Beale
Ed at Gin And Tacos has a piece up about this too. He says:
While I want to see these VID laws repealed too, that ain’t gonna happen before November. While fighting all of the court battles we also need to be doing massive Voter ID drives.
rikyrah
must go viral!!!
One Term More set to music from Les Miz!!
this rocks!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0WHw32bv9BQ
NotMax
OT:
Harry Harrison, a writer probably best know for his Stainless Steel Rat, has died at 87. Noted specifically because one of his novels was made into a movie so often mentioned here.
PurpleGirl
@Quarks: …get the licenses, which as the ACLU notes can be problematic for elderly voters who don’t drive.
Doesn’t Pennsylvania have a non-driver license? I have one from NYS and under the Restriction field it says “Non-Driver”.
ETA: But in every other respect it is a driver’s license and looks the same.
Ben Franklin
OT but the Brits may be storming the Ecuadorian Embassy to get Assange. This is odd. The Embassy was going to make a decision about amnesty tomorrow at noon
japa21
So the judge
a) agrees that 1% may not have appropriate ID
b) acknowledges that some people would have difficulty obtaining the ID
c) states there are problems but…
d) upholds it because the state promises to do something.
First of all, I think the law should be enjoined until the fix is in place and shown to be working.
Second, if due to the law one eigible voter is denied the right to vote, or even if it is determined that one eligible voter may be denied the right to vote (and I think that test was met) the law should be thrown out.
PurpleGirl
@NotMax: Bummer. He was a master of the genre. I liked his anthologies a lot too.
ETA: He was reportedly working on another book, but was keeping it secret. His most recent book was published in 2010.
Phoenician in a time of Romans
I’d love to see someone invoke that piece of shit judgement “Bush v Gore” about unequal treatment in suing over this crap.
liberal
@Ben Franklin:
OK, I looked into the InterTubes quickly and saw something about that. How is that legal?
liberal
@Violet:
Your link goes to Obama answering a question about anger.
I’m not talking about emotions; I’m talking about actions. (NB: am supposed to be working now; didn’t have time to watch entire clip.)
Steve
@liberal: Embassies are usually treated as though they’re the sovereign territory of the other country, but they actually aren’t as a legal matter. The embassy is in Britain and Britain ultimately has jurisdiction over it.
If you remember the issue from earlier this year with the blind Chinese dissident, the reason it was a touchy diplomatic situation is that a Chinese citizen can’t just walk into the U.S. embassy in China and request asylum. As a legal matter he’s still in China.
Emerald
Lookit, they brought a knife to the fight, we need to bring a gun. First, defy the law–go all Rosa Parks on ’em. Poll workers in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia could accept absolutely any ID offered. The law is deliberately confusing about that anyway so it ought to be easy. PA is not going to arrest those folks.
Also start churning out fake IDs. I mean, every high school kid knows how to get one.
Illegal? The “law” is illegal. We have a duty not to comply.
Easy for me to say of course. I’m in California.
Mike
I thought it was nearly impossible to vote absentee in PA, which is why McCain went there late, since there was very little early voting. Did they loosen the restrictions?
I know that the SCOTUS ruling mandated a loophole for absentees. If vote by mail in PA was liberalized, then we can certainly exploit that loophole to our benefit. We are good at the early voting thing.
Quarks
@PurpleGirl: Yes, Pennsylvania has non-driver’s licenses, which are official state issued photo IDs. The problem is, according to the article Kay just cited, voters have to go into the Department of Motor Vehicles to get them. (This is also true in Florida — I have a state ID, not a license, but I had to go into a DMV office for it.)
If you are elderly, disabled, or don’t drive, this can be problematic. It could also be solved by allowing people to get these state IDs by mail, the way U.S. passports currently (if slowly) work, but apparently that isn’t the solution either Pennsylvania or Florida is working with.
kay
@Mike:
I looked and I believe PA has restrictive absentee balloting. I think that option is only going to be available to those over 65, basically.
PA is like a perfect storm for disenfranchisement. No early voting, limited absentee balloting, very restrictive rules on validating a provisional ballot, and now some of the most onerous restrictions in the country on election day.
It’s a fucking voter access nightmare.
This law should have never gotten thru a statehouse. It may be the single worst state in the US for access to a ballot now, taking all those factors together.
It’s worse than Texas or South Carolina.
Valdivia
I saw this through the dept of health for getting birth certificates. hope this helps those trying to get a valid id.
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/voter_id/20978
Violet
@liberal:
It’s not a long clip, so if you have time you might enjoy it. It’s the clip during the 2008 campaign where he says he listens to his opponents and tries to understand their side, but if he understands they aren’t acting in good faith, he will crush them. It’s funny, but a great insight into how he works.
kay
@Valdivia:
PA voters need to take a good look at the Democrats in the statehouse, too.
They got nothing. No concessions. How did they let this thru like this? This justifies walking out if the chamber like we saw in Indiana and Wisconsin.
Are they such a numerical minority they let one of the most restrictive laws in the country go in with NO concessions from the other side?
Get SOMETHING . Early voting, no – fault absentee, don’t just sit there like potted plants. Don’t just let them disenfranchise 20% of Philadelphia.
Argive
@JMS:
Oh man, that whole conspiracy bullshit was just insane. I could not believe how many people in this town honestly thought that George Bush and John Ashcroft were trying to steal the mayoralty of Philadelphia. Of course, the degree to which many Philadelphians hate the Republican party should not be underestimated. As a Philly resident, I plan on spending what free time I have between now and the election going door to door and making sure people have proper ID.
One thing that I think we should keep in mind when discussing this law: Philadelphia is very bad at keeping city records up to date. Because of how inefficient City Hall is, it can be difficult to remove yourself from the voter rolls once you move out of town. I’m curious to know how many of the registered voters without ID cited in these studies are college students who no longer live here or something like that.
Lojasmo
My voting venue changed AND I was dropped from the rolls due to redistributing. If the upcoming referendum passes, I will be out of luck nest time this happens.
Fucking republicans.
stibbert
one thing’s for sure – if the PA Supreme Court or the DOJ’s complaint doesn’t vacate the the PA voter-ID law, i won’t be working as a county election official in November.
i’m not gonna sit behind the table on election day & tell anyone, “No, you can’t vote.”
Mike
@kay: They are vastly outnumbered. They really have no clout at all.
opie jeanne
On The Daily Show tonight, Brian Williams dismissed the problem as “only 12 counties” that are affected by this problem, without mentioning that the counties included cities like Philly.
Triassic Sands
We have a spectrum of words to describe anger, from slightly ticked all the way up to enraged and beyond. Now, it seems, we need a similar full scale to describe degrees of cynicism. Cynical is about three or four words short of the word needed to describe my feelings about the modern Republican Party and their overt efforts to steal elections.
There may not be any voter fraud, but there is an extreme overabundance of fraudulent politicians, whose contempt for democracy and fair play is truly appalling.
History books may well describe Republican voter ID as nothing more than a 21st century poll tax couched in high-minded rhetoric.