Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Legislation would force voters to show ID at polling places (Pennsylvania)
Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | June 28, 2002 | Amy Worden

Posted on 06/28/2002 6:07:02 AM PDT by South Hawthorne

Legislation would force voters to show ID at polling places

By Amy Worden
Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau

HARRISBURG - House Republicans have approved a bill that would require residents to present identification before voting, infuriating Democrats and civil rights activists who describe it as a "poll tax" that would disenfranchise voters.

The measure's sponsor, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe (R., Butler), said it was aimed at curbing voter fraud, not preventing legitimate citizens from voting.

"We were concerned about the fraud that is alleged to have taken place in areas of Pennsylvania," Metcalfe said. "We don't want to harm anybody's ability to vote."

The measure, which requires voters to present a voter-registration card or photo identification at the polls, was added to a Republican-sponsored bill concerning poll workers' compensation. The bill passed the House late Wednesday on a party-line vote and now goes to the Senate.

Democrats said they were blindsided by the late amendment. They disparaged it as a blatant political move designed to hold down voter turnout in Democratic strongholds in a year when Pennsylvania residents will pick a governor, and an attempt to shut out low-income, elderly and minority residents from the voting process.

"This is a violation of the equal-protection clause of the Constitution," said Rep. Mark Cohen (D., Phila.).

Eleven states have laws requiring some type of identification at the polls, but only South Carolina requires a photo ID and has no option for voters without identification.

The other states requiring IDs, such as Delaware, have "escape hatches," Cohen said, allowing voters the option to sign an affidavit testifying to their identity at the polling place.

In Pennsylvania and New Jersey, voters need only show that their signatures match the ones in the voter rolls.

Opponents said the proposal would create a "poll tax" because residents who do not drive would need to pay for a photo ID.

Rep. Babette Josephs (D., Phila.), said the ID system would intimidate urban voters who may not have driver's licenses, and thus suppress turnout.

"We have many senior citizens in our state who have voted without incident in most, if not every, election since turning 18," Josephs said. "Now we'll be turning them away. This is not how the Democratic electoral process is supposed to work."

Pedro Rodriguez, executive director of the Action Alliance of Senior Citizens of Greater Philadelphia, said the bill puts an "extra burden" on the elderly and their ability to vote.

"We find that to be really offensive," he said. "To say you will solve voter fraud with a photo ID is ridiculous. The way to prevent it is to have inspectors and an informed citizenship."

Metcalfe said the Democrats were using seniors as "a straw argument" to defeat the bill.

"Every one of us has seniors in our districts," he said. "It's not unreasonable to ask for ID the same way you ensure safety on the highways by requiring a driver's license."

Metcalfe said most counties have agreed to issue new voter-registration cards at no cost to individuals who have lost them.

In a fiery floor debate on Wednesday, Democratic lawmakers charged that the bill was an election year attempt by Republicans to sideline Philadelphia voters, who overwhelmingly supported Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ed Rendell in the May primary.

"This is an outrageous attempt to steal the election," Cohen said. "This shows Mike Fisher can't win on a fair vote." Fisher is the Republican gubernatorial candidate.

Cohen and others said the bill threatens civil-rights laws established over the last 50 years.

"This will make Pennsylvania in 2002 look like Mississippi or Alabama in 1952," he said.

"At a time when states and the federal government are looking at making it easier to vote and establishing more reliable voting procedures, this can only be seen as an attempt to disenfranchise people," said Larry Frankel, legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union in Pennsylvania.

Republicans said the bill represented a non-partisan effort to wipe out fraud. "We need to do what we can to do to protect the integrity of every true and honest vote," said Steve Miskin, a spokesman for House Majority Leader John Perzel (R., Phila.), who cited a recent study by the Republican National Committee that found tens of thousands of duplicate registrations in Pennsylvania.

If the bill becomes law, Democrats said, it would likely be struck down by the courts.

"Absolutely, this will be challenged," Cohen said. "Anytime [similar bills] have been challenged in other states, they've been found to be unconstitutional."



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: democrats; fraud; id; sham; votingtwice
"We have many senior citizens in our state who have voted without incident in most, if not every, election since turning 18," [Said Rep. Babette “Babs” Josephs] “Often times, voting repeatedly in the same election”

The way to prevent it is to have inspectors and an informed citizenship."[Said Pedro Rodriguez]

So, exactly what would the inspectors inspect if no I.D. is required? Is Mr. Rodriguez naive enough to think that the reason citizens vote more than once is because they don’t know it is wrong? Or maybe he just thinks we’re dumb enough to believe that is the case.

Republicans said the bill represented a non-partisan effort to wipe out fraud.[ said Steve Miskin]

Come on Miskin, you’re sounding as bad as Rodriguez. If the vote was split down party lines, then quite obviously it isn’t “non-partisan”. The Democrats have long come to rely on bolstering their power by vote fraud, changing… well, enforcing the rules late in the game will seem like a blow below the belt to those who can’t think rationally.

This shows Mike Fisher can't win on a fair vote. said Rep. Mark Cohen

Actually, what it shows is that Republicans believe that Mike Fisher CAN win on a fair vote.

It’s simply laughable that the dems believe that the electorate of PA would think that this measure is some type of ploy to keep loveable old minorities struggling to reach the polling stations in their walkers from casting a ballot. Well, actually, almost no one challenged the fact that we had a 98.6 turn out in the 2000 election in Philadelphia. Maybe they’re not that stupid after all…

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

1 posted on 06/28/2002 6:07:02 AM PDT by South Hawthorne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Legislation would force voters to show ID at polling places

Most common form of identification for the run-of-the-mill democrat.

2 posted on 06/28/2002 6:19:44 AM PDT by TightSqueeze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Geez Louise, in DC and Maryland, I have had to show some ID every time I came to the polls. They didn't insist on a drivers license, nor necessarily the sort of photo ID that you would need to cash a check, but something - like a library card or even a recent voting announcement mailed to my home - to show that I'm me.
3 posted on 06/28/2002 6:28:16 AM PDT by DonQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle; gwmoore; buckeye63
Opponents said the proposal would create a "poll tax" because residents who do not drive would need to pay for a photo ID.

The measure, which requires voters to present a voter-registration card or photo identification at the polls, ...

Metcalfe said most counties have agreed to issue new voter-registration cards at no cost to individuals who have lost them.

Democrats are LIEberals.

I got a voter registration card when I registered, showing my state and federal district numbers. Everyone gets one, so it is not a burden to present it at the polls. However, since it is nothing more than a cardboard printout, it is easy to forge, so those good dead Demoncrats can continue to vote. They need a better way to purge the rolls of ineligible voters across the state.

4 posted on 06/28/2002 6:28:33 AM PDT by brityank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TightSqueeze
The Senate Dummycrats in MadsTown, WI won't allow this legislation to come to the floor citing the same arguments. Funny thing, I have to show a picture ID to shop at Sam's Club and a picture ID to work out at the YMCA. This requirement certainly does not prevent minorities from doing either thing, and nobody objects. I also have to have a picture ID to cash a check, drive a car, and many other daily tasks.

Methinks that the whole anti-ID/ anti-picture ID mantra from the Dummycrats is because they are afraid that their historical method of stealing elections will be undermined.

5 posted on 06/28/2002 6:34:24 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
"At a time when states and the federal government are looking at making it easier to vote and establishing more reliable voting procedures, this can only be seen as an attempt to disenfranchise people," said Larry Frankel, legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union in Pennsylvania.

This outcry is absurd. We have an ID requirement in Kentucky and the most commonly used - asked for by polling officials - is our photo ID drivers licenses.

The Penna. Dems just don't want anything to get in the way of their voter fraud system IMHO.

6 posted on 06/28/2002 6:34:27 AM PDT by toddst
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DonQ
In order to vote in Mexico a picture ID is required. Your signature must match the one on record and a thumb print is required. Since illegal Mexicans vote like crazy in our elections you would think we would take similiar measures. This country is pathetic with our lack of self respect.
7 posted on 06/28/2002 6:46:08 AM PDT by willyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: toddst
State drivers license. Now we know why the Dems. and others are pushing to let illegals have licenses.
8 posted on 06/28/2002 6:47:56 AM PDT by willyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
It is about time. You gotta shake you head at people who claim that showing an ID is a form of racism, or a huge burden.
9 posted on 06/28/2002 7:16:13 AM PDT by Hacksaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brityank
My thoughts exactly. Since basically anyone in PA who either drives (photo drivers licence), or has a photo id (yup, you bet welfare recipients gotta have these, sorry dumbs, you lose here),or has a concealed carry licence (has photo id looks roughly the same as a drivers license), there is plenty of id there to produce at the polls.

Please also note, that at least in Delaware county, there is the "voter's affidavit" to sign, after the registrar has checked your name off the voting rolls, indicated that you showed up to vote on the master card book, then you sign the affidavit, which, then proves you have, indeed, voted in the election. There is already plenty (at least here, in my precinct, (Upper Darby) where basically everyone knows everyone else, most all have been here for years, and are known to all the poll workers anyway.

This is more Dumoflop lieberals trying to vote the dead, as usual (gee, how else do you have 165% of voters voting, as reported (with perfectly straight faces), in certain Philly precincts, by the big 3 agitprop outlets here.

I'm all for showing the darn license, you have to do it a lot when using a credit card (fraud protection there) so why not voting? Won't bother me a bit!

Thanks, brityank for passing the info along.

Greg

10 posted on 06/28/2002 12:36:37 PM PDT by gwmoore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
A great idea and about time.

"This is a violation of the equal-protection clause of the Constitution," said Rep. Mark Cohen (D., Phila.).

Sure, sure.

11 posted on 06/28/2002 1:21:56 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Temple Owl
ping
12 posted on 06/28/2002 1:22:20 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Opponents said the proposal would create a "poll tax" because residents who do not drive would need to pay for a photo ID.

And any voter who doesn't live within a short walking distance of the polling place would have to pay bus fare or would have to pay for gas in their car to get to the polling place, thus creating a "poll tax", right?

13 posted on 06/28/2002 1:44:21 PM PDT by usadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
I am so disgusted with vote fraud, especially in Philadelphia, that I am willing have everyone show photo id along with fingerprints. Stealing votes is even more rotten than robbing widows and orphans.
14 posted on 06/28/2002 1:51:37 PM PDT by Temple Owl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Good post Owl. We b eat 'em on school vouchers, now let's nail them on vote fraud.
15 posted on 06/28/2002 1:53:22 PM PDT by Temple Owl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
"Opponents said the proposal would create a "poll tax" because residents who do not drive would need to pay for a photo ID." OH PUHLLEZE!!!!! Chances are, at some point in your day, you'll need ID to write a check. Are we supposed to believe these people never pay by check?


16 posted on 06/28/2002 1:58:41 PM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
All Pennsylvanians need to hold their reps' feet to the fire on this one. The alternative is living in a dictatorship.
17 posted on 06/28/2002 1:59:02 PM PDT by denydenydeny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Let's say the legislation passes and gets signed into law. Who is checking your ID at the door?

I don't think that the State of Pennsylvania is hiring a bunch of bouncers for November.

18 posted on 07/09/2002 6:31:13 AM PDT by jz638
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
The measure's sponsor, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe (R., Butler), said it was aimed at curbing voter fraud, not preventing legitimate citizens from voting.

Exactly. 99% of legitimate citizens have some form of picture I.D. And if they do not, guess what? They have all the way until November to make sure they get one! And the DNC can start sending out notices to every registered Democrat right now making them aware. They could also set up a fund from their contributions to pay for an I.D. for anyone who can not afford one($20), you know, instead of spending the money on lavish hotels, limos and vacations.

19 posted on 07/09/2002 6:40:26 AM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
I'm having trouble with the math here. The voting age of 18 hasn't been around that long. It was 21. Would someone please 'splain to me how a person of 18, say, 25 years ago, could jump to senior citizenship so soon?
20 posted on 07/09/2002 6:44:38 AM PDT by Lois
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soccermom
Actually a lot of them don't have checking accounts, either because their credit is so bad that no bank will give them one, or just because they don't know anyone who has one (a cultural thing). That's why their neighborhoods are full of check-cashing businesses -- people don't have accounts into which they can deposit checks they receive. However, I'd be surprised if the check-cashing businesses don't require photo ID.
21 posted on 07/09/2002 7:17:22 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Thank you for this post. It soothes my mind to know that there is an effort in Pennsylvania to counter the Philadelphia machine that blatently assults on the streets those who dare oppose them.

I wish them luck but doubt the corruption in the city of brotherly love will be thwarted.

22 posted on 07/09/2002 7:24:11 AM PDT by bert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Opponents said the proposal would create a "poll tax" because residents who do not drive would need to pay for a photo ID.

Rep. Babette Josephs (D., Phila.), said the ID system would intimidate urban voters who may not have driver's licenses, and thus suppress turnout.

I figure anyone who doesn't have a driver's license would have a photo ID. How else would they cash their welfare and Social Security checks.

23 posted on 07/09/2002 7:59:45 AM PDT by reg45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Atta boy Owl! Keep it on the front burner. Hopefully we can eventually send some of these vote thieves to jail.
24 posted on 07/17/2002 12:21:40 PM PDT by Temple Owl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
Maybe their mug shots would suffice.
25 posted on 07/17/2002 12:23:10 PM PDT by Temple Owl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Temple Owl
It's about time! Yaa-HOOOOO!!!!!
26 posted on 08/20/2002 11:01:37 AM PDT by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
The Dems will always ensure that welfare recipients, the elderly in walkers, etc. will get to the polls. But to help those who can't stretch their welfare check past their potato chip and fritos bills (that they munch in front of their TV all day long while I'm out busting my butt at work paying their bills), let's pass an amendment providing a free State I.D. for those who can't afford one.
27 posted on 08/20/2002 11:05:07 AM PDT by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle
Hope this gets through!!!! There was fraud in the 2000 election in Phila, and the despicable Democrats want to do it all over again.

My congressman in the Lehigh Valley, Pat Toomey, is being attacked by O'Brien, who is financed by the national Democrats and unions.

28 posted on 08/20/2002 7:27:21 PM PDT by Dr. Scarpetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle

Just to clarify the record, the original vote in the PA House, before the bill was Rendellified (watered down to meet his original objections), 29 Democrats voted for the bill -- a photo ID only, bill which also prohibited felons from voting. It became a party-line vote when Rendell became scared the vote might be fair and honest.


29 posted on 03/19/2006 5:21:44 AM PST by SpokesmanSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle

Jeepers creepers, you have to show ID to cash a check, don'cha? To get benefits? To buy booze? What's the prob with showing some form of ID to vote?


30 posted on 03/19/2006 5:27:12 AM PST by mewzilla (Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owl_Eagle

FWIW, I just voted yesterday by absentee ballot. It was the last day to get one in person at the courthouse. I filled out my request form, turned it in and was handed my absentee ballot. The gentleman asked me to fill it out, enclose it in the envelope and turn it back in where he date stamped it. Never once did he ask for and ID. Go figure.


31 posted on 11/01/2006 7:13:34 AM PST by Trinity5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson