.

Poll: Ardmore Reacts To Voter ID Decision

Will this decision stick? Both sides had said they would appeal this ruling.

UPDATE 2:55 p.m.: "It’s disappointing, mostly for the hundreds of thousands of people who will be disenfranchised," said Sen. Daylin Leach (D-Montgomery/Delaware).

Leach said that, historically, the courts have ruled to prevent temporary majorities from limiting others' right to vote.

"I believe the [state] Supreme Court—or I’m hopeful it will—will take up its traditional role and not disenfranchise voters for partisan reasons," he added.

UPDATE 2:15 p.m.:  “I think that the court obviously ruled on the side of common sense,” said Lance Rogers, chairman of the Republican Committee of Lower Merion and Narberth.

Rogers noted the law was implemented months ago and said there are still almost three months to take steps to make sure no one is denied the right to vote. 

“The one thing I think that people have lost sight of is that this legislation is designed to protect the sanctity of one person, one vote,” Rogers said. “And all those people out there who are talking about how this is somehow designed to preclude others from voting have lost sight of the fact that a broken system means we all lose out and that all our votes are for naught.”

UPDATE 12:05 p.m.: State Rep. Tim Briggs (D-Montgomery) issued the following statement: “I am of course disappointed in today’s ruling. There is no doubt it will deny hundreds of thousands of eligible Pennsylvania voters their constitutional right to vote. The ruling is not only a tragedy for those whose rights will be denied under the law, it is a slap to the fundamental, constitutional rights of all Pennsylvanians, all American citizens. I continue to hope and believe the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will right this wrong and see, as the nation has so clearly witnessed, that this law was contrived for no other reason than partisan gamesmanship at the expense of our constitution, our state and its citizens.”

UPDATE 12 p.m.: "I think One-Term Corbett will come to regret this," said Mark Taylor, chairman of the Democratic committee of Lower Merion and Narberth.

In a phone conversation with Patch, Taylor called the law and the court decision today "an affront to every citizen in the commonwealth. ... I think the Republican legislature and governor, despite wrapping themselves in the phraseoolgy of American democracy and values, have engaged in direct conduct to infringe upon them."

He said appeals are likely, but in the meantime, local Democrats "will make every effort to educate as many voters as possible about the law, about whether they are potentially going to have a problem with their ID, and we’re going to to do everyting we can to overcome the hurdles that have been set up. Despite my disagreement with it, it is the law at this time."

Taylor said he believes the law disproportionately disenfranchises women as well as seniors, when maiden names and hyphenated last names do not match the voter rolls.

UPDATE 11:40 a.m.: A spokesman for Rep. Mike Gerber (D-Montgomery) issued the following statement: "Rep. Gerber is disappointed with the court’s decision but will continue to work vigorously to ensure his constituents have all the resources needed to comply with the law and to vote in November."

UPDATE 11:25 a.m.: About 25 of the 175 clients of ElderNet of Lower Merion and Narberth don’t have identification acceptable under the new law, said staff member Emily Waldron.

“Our clients are annoyed because a lot of them are disabled and voting for them is already difficult,” Waldron said. “So adding this other component, it’s frustrating, and for our volunteers it’s frustrating.”

ElderNet has trained 30 volunteers this week on how to help clients get additional identification, helping them assemble their personal paperwork for applications and driving them to Norristown to pick up the IDs.

“We’re going to get them IDs regardless of whether the law passes or not, but it’s a shame they didn’t overturn it,” Waldron said.

UPDATE 11:05 a.m.: A Lower Merion spokesman said they would have no comment on this morning's ruling. Leaders of the local Republican and Democratic committees have not been reached for comment.

UPDATE 10:40 a.m.: The NAACP vowed to appeal the ruling. National president Benjamin Todd Jealous issued a statement saying, ""This law, like other state laws enacted across the U.S., has the potential to suppress thousands of votes in the Commonwealth during this election. The NAACP, in conjunction with its state conferences, will continue to combat these efforts on the ground and mobilize voters. We will have to fight for our right to vote again."

UPDATE 10:30 a.m.: State GOP Chairman Rob Gleason issued a statement saying, in part, "I am pleased that the Commonwealth Court recognized this law for what it is – commonsense reform to ensure that every voter and every vote is protected."

The Commonwealth Court ruled Wednesday morning not to stop Pennsylvania's controversial from going into effect.

., will not grant an injunction that would have halted the law requiring 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 presidential election fast approaches, according to the Associated Press.

The challenge to the law was brought by voter advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the NAACP.

Pennsylvania passed a law in March requiring all registered voters to show a  before voting. This is one of the strictest voter ID laws in the nation. 

Opponents of the law say it disproportionately targets the elderly as well as the poor and minorities, who typically vote Democrat. Furthermore, critics say that the burden of obtaining an acceptable ID for these people would keep them from voting. They add that preventing voter fraud (the supposed purpose of the law) is not a serious concern.

Thirty states have some sort of Voter ID law, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, of those, 19 do not require a photo, six require a photo and five, including Pennsylvania, have strict photo requirements.

kurt gutzler August 15, 2012 at 02:13 PM
not good for the dems
Brian A. August 15, 2012 at 02:18 PM
Regardless of the appeal, the ACLU and NAACP should now focus on helping legal, registered voters obtain proper ID for the election. Because surely we can all agree that all legal, registered voters, regardless of their race, income status, or social standing, should be able to vote if they want to.
kurt gutzler August 15, 2012 at 02:28 PM
absolutely...just what the republics wanted...road blocks and difficulties in voter turnouts
Pamela August 15, 2012 at 02:31 PM
The Republicons can't win elections on their record - or their plans for the future - so they must resort to underhanded tactics like this.
Adrian Seltzer August 15, 2012 at 02:49 PM
This is going to create long lines at the polls. It is going to be a nightmare
Wynnewoodie August 15, 2012 at 03:06 PM
How will Romney and his Republican allies in PA deal with the inevitable electoral backlash once voters fully comprehend the catastrophic impact of Ryan's draconian (and dystopian) economic policies? Simple! Disenfranchise affected voters preemptively!
Adrian Seltzer August 15, 2012 at 03:12 PM
If you need help filling out the forms or a ride to a Photo ID office, please contact me through the Patch. I will be blogging on the subject.
Douglas Martindale August 15, 2012 at 03:23 PM
"roadblocks and difficulties in voter turnouts"? I must say I'm completely baffled at what is so terrible about requiring an ID to verify identity. For whatever reason, everyone is fine with the requirements to show ID to: buy cigarettes, booze, notary work, buy a house, rent an apt, buy spray paint (in some areas), use a credit card (some vendors), drive a car, use a bank, gamble, pick up your mail/UPS, get on a plane, get on Greyhound, enter many political campaign events, pick up tickets at the Phillies, to apply for welfare, to cash a check, to apply for Medicaid, blah blah blah!!! I was actually carded at Cosi the other day as my credit card was new an unsigned. While I'm adamantly against sandwich suppression, in this case, I overlooked it. I don't know if the ACLU would take my case, but having already eaten some of the evidence, it would probably get thrown out.
Adrian Seltzer August 15, 2012 at 03:44 PM
Douglas, First, voting is a right, not a privilege. Some of the ID acceptable in the above cases, like your social security card are not acceptable to vote. That is the issue. I do like your sense of humor though.
Douglas Martindale August 15, 2012 at 04:00 PM
Sure, but just like I have a "right to bear arms", I still need and ID to buy a gun.
E. Ogens August 15, 2012 at 04:38 PM
We in Florida need an ID to vote and for everythng else imaginable. Get a grip. This is 2012. ID"s will be made available to those who need them!!! It is not a sham. Pa. needs to get with the program. They also need to stop listening to the Democratic Progressives. The real Democratic Party has been taken over by idiots. What a shame. People need to start rading and find out the real truth.
E. Ogens August 15, 2012 at 04:40 PM
Please correct: What a shame! The word reading needs correcting, too.
Wynnewoodie August 15, 2012 at 04:49 PM
The "real truth" is that the PA Attorney General could not come up with a single instance of in person voter fraud in PA, yet the PA legislature passed this bill, which will cost PA taxpayers in excess of $10 million dollars to implement. Why would PA Republicans, who claim to be fiscally conservative, throw $10 million dollars at a problem that doesn't exist? Because, in the words of PA House Republican Leader, Mike Turzai, "Voter ID will allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8
JoAnn Weinstein Erfer August 15, 2012 at 05:01 PM
not good for citizens. not good for people who have voted their whole lives. very bad for women - whose name, if they marry, don't match their birth certificates. not good for poor people, the elderly (there are republican elderly) not good for anyone. Cheaters never win.
E. Ogens August 15, 2012 at 05:01 PM
The people vote in Pa., not Governor Romney!!!!! We show ID's in Fla., does that interfere with Obama's minions voting for him? What are the facts that it doesn't exist????? If it exists in every other state, why not Pa.? What happened with the Black Panthers in Phila? I am sure lots of people were intimidated not to vote with or without ID's!!! What happens when people need to by cigarrettes, liquor, go to the library,airp[ort, passport get a job, get stopped by a policeman go to political events and book signings? etc. etc.
E. Ogens August 15, 2012 at 05:02 PM
Fix: by to buy.
JoAnn Weinstein Erfer August 15, 2012 at 05:04 PM
You don't need a "government issued" ID with an expiration date to get a drink, or buy cigarettes. Elderly people can't wait hours at the PennDot. They have enough ID to get their meds, be treated in a hospital, ride the bus, but they can't get birth certificates needed for the state issued, non-drivers ID. There's a three month backlog on getting your birth certificate. How convenient!
JoAnn Weinstein Erfer August 15, 2012 at 05:05 PM
not if you buy said ID through mail order, I'm guessing
Pamela August 15, 2012 at 05:27 PM
Florida? Isn't that where the zombie apocalypse is starting? Are you SERIOUS? Democrats being taken over by idiots? We don't hold claim to Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann. Or the "Tea" Party, for that matter.
Adrian Seltzer August 15, 2012 at 05:36 PM
Again, voting is not a privilege, it is a right. That puts it in a different category than all your examples of when you need ID. Also a lot more different IDs are acceptable for your above example than are acceptable to vote. That is the issue. During the court proceedings, the State of PA said there were no examples of in person voter fraud. If people are voting for dead people then their signature has to match that dead person's and the poll worker (there are poll workers of both parties at the polling place) have to let it pass when it doesn't. This would be another example of in person voter fraud, again none in PA. This law doesn't address duplicate votes because the address does not have to be current on your id, it also doesn't address phoney voter registration. I don't have a problem with needing ID to register to vote, which is constitutional in this state, but changing the game midstream is a different story for people who do not drive and only have for example, a card from the VA for ID, or a woman whose name is different on her driver's license and voter registration due to marriage or divorce and for those who have been voting legally for years.
Wynnewoodie August 15, 2012 at 05:36 PM
The Senior Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Patrick Cawley) stipulated that: 1) There have been no investigations or prosecutions of in person voter fraud in PA, and they have no knowledge of any investigations or prosecutions in other states; 2) They are unaware of any incidents of in-person voter fraud in PA or elsewhere; 3) They have no evidence that in-person voter fraud has ever occurred in PA; 4) They have no evidence that in-person voter fraud is likely to occur in 2012 without the voter ID bill. http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/ApplewhiteStipulation.pdf So why exactly is the legislature spending $10 million taxpayer dollars on this, not to mention potentially disenfranchising 750,000 - 1 million PA voters?
Pamela August 15, 2012 at 06:33 PM
Exactly.
E. Ogens August 15, 2012 at 06:46 PM
My Dear Pamela, Your sarcasm is not appreciated and you are not funny!!!! You certainly were not taught appriateness along the line. I should have used the term uneducated, incompetent, seudo-intellectuals. for the present administration. We are not discussing Palin nor Bachman, You really need to stay in the present as that is where we are now. Seek the truth in whatever you do. Look for the facts and come to a solution. Just don't listen to the rhetoric of others. Persnally, I would be worrying more about the economy and the state of the USA rather than voter ID's. I am not sure but I believe in Pa. we did have to show I'D's to vote??????
Douglas Martindale August 15, 2012 at 06:49 PM
JoAnn, according to the PA Liquor Control Board, for the purchase of alcohol, "The only acceptable forms of ID in PA are a valid photo driver's license or state ID card, a valid photo armed forces ID, and a valid photo passport or travel visa."
Douglas Martindale August 15, 2012 at 07:06 PM
All this passion against the government intruding on our right to vote....I love it. I only wish there would be this sort of anger against the million other roadblocks the gov't puts up on us living our lives!!
Pamela August 15, 2012 at 11:36 PM
http://front.moveon.org/this-video-might-stop-romney-from-becoming-president/ All part of the plan.
Pamela August 15, 2012 at 11:37 PM
Why is it that "conservative" voices are invariably grammatically incorrect and rife with misspellings? http://front.moveon.org/this-video-might-stop-romney-from-becoming-president/
Douglas Martindale August 16, 2012 at 12:07 AM
Too busy workin'!!...Just kidding :-)
Adrian Seltzer August 16, 2012 at 04:33 AM
Want to know if your id is valid for voting, what other forms of iD are valid, or what to do if you don't have a valid ID, ask your questions on my new post Voter ID gets real. Just hit home tab at top of page.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something