that makes too much sense for our legislature to pull off

Registration is not the problem. All of the voters who sued to challenge the law are registered to vote and have been voting for decades. The issue is that they do not have and, more importantly, cannot obtain one of the "free" IDs offered by PennDOT. As a result, these registered voters are disenfranchised. You can read more about it here:

http://freeandequalpa.wordpress.com/summary-of-applewhite-petition/

Really? Can you please point me in the direction of some statistics on voter fraud in Pennsylvania? Because I really just see it as a form of harrassment from the right.

It is simple. In the many places, including north of Allentown, mexican illegals were voting. They were caught. It is not right for non-citizens to control our country by cancelling votes of citizens. People who are afraid to have an ID probably should not be voting!

You have proof of these Mexican illegals voting, Rich? I've never seen or heard of this.

And how are non-drivers supposed to get to a PennDOT office in the Lehigh Valley? You giving rides?

Really Daryl? Ever heard of LANTA. It's a bus service that takes you anywhere you want to go in the Valley. I think it's a new service!

As Daryl says, it's a hurdle to get non-drivers to where they need to be. We constantly drive my elderly mother around for this, that and the other thing. She's frail and we're not putting her through such aggravation in order to vote. She said "Forget it, too much trouble." So there's one person who's dropping out because of the hassle.

LANTA stops right in front of the PennDOT center on Airport Road at least 20 times a day. There is ways to get the things you need, even if you aren't a driver. Alot of people have never even driven a car, yet they manage to get their groceries and such. What a silly leftist remark.

The voters who sued to challenge the law went to a Drivers' License Center repeatedly, but were refused a "free" ID. You can educate yourself here:

http://freeandequalpa.wordpress.com/summary-of-applewhite-petition/

I do not drive nor possess a driver's license. I also am poor and on assistance. And guess what? I have more ID's then all of you and I vote in every election, local, state and national and haven't missed a single vote in decades. The myth of poor folk not having any ID has grown so tiring to me that I am about to scream. Poor people usually have more ID's then richer people and more ways to prove who they are (via governmental and school IDs). And all this crap about not having rides, etc? Are you serious? So where do they get their food? Where do they get their clothing, etc? Rides, that's how. From friends, family and public transportation that's how. There is absolutely no reason to oppose the voter ID law based on these criteria. Showing ID makes perfect sense and will leave NO ONE hanging. If anything, it will assure that every vote will be valid (or at least more valid than our current system is). For those trying to also add the myth of this being some right wing conspiracy, dare I mention the Al Gore vs. George Bush election in Florida?!?! Back then the left was whining that we needed better security measures and better ways of making sure votes were valid, etc. For what it's worth, I am not even voting for either of the two parties (as both are just the same animal in different clothing)... so I'm not banging the drums for either side here. It's just common sense. Such a non-issue to divert you sheep even more...

Thanks, Joe, that's a great reply. If anyone has that big a problem, it seems that they're not very motivated to do anything to ensure their rights.
The offer still stands for Northampton County & Easton folks.....if you need help, call the Republican Committee.....610-438-3319.

Why should I? You are working hard to take away the voting rights of people like Kathy's mother. An 80-year-old woman shouldn't have to jump hurdles to exercise her rights. And Matt, LANTA is a great concept until you actually have to use it to get anywhere. Let's see you try to get to a PennDOT office with LANTA. Try doing it if you're a working single mother. Think she has the time during PennDOT business hours to get a photo ID? This law is voter suppression, not election security.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't there a penndot office right next to the bus terminal in Allentown off of American Parkway? To me, these are not hurdles; just excuses.

http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/pdotforms/voterid/VoterAffirmationNoProofofID.pdf

The above link is to the form you will need to fill out if you wish to vote but do not have an ID. This is plain silly, if you can't for the life of you find the time and resources to get an ID card, how on earth would you find the time to walk or crawl to the voting place.....but it should put the lefties at ease because we know their just worried about living citizens being able to vote, LOL

Ted that election had nothing to do with fraud that could have been stopped by ID. that was an absentee ballot fraud case. The authorities saw what happened and made the correct call. Let's compare apples to apples. This law is a solution searching for a problem. Turzai and Corbett are hoping Romney can pull of a miracle in PA and that's it and that's all.

As I said, photo ID's won't stop ALL voting fraud, but it will go a long way in reducing it. The case I cited raises the question of who's watching the watchers? Requiring ID at the poll eliminates most discretion on the part of the poll worker and it is very transparent if someones name, picture, and address don't match.

Having been a polling place supervisor in Indiana (which has a requirement that has passes muster in the US Supreme Court, I can also say that the ID requirement works very well in keeping the polling place moving along. Just the few seconds saved at the sign-in book quickly multiplies very quickly with hundreds of voters that all show utp at the peak times. We had many experienced poll workers that had been at the same place forever, but they really didn't know too many of the voters personally.

The ID requirement also help me in one of my biggest tasks - getting displaced voters to the right poll. Usually 5-10% of the voters weren't in the book, usually because they forgot where to go or because prescincts changed, and with the voter's ID that included date of birth and address, it was a simple 30 second call to a hotline to get them popinted in the right direction. Without the ID, the process would have been like "telephone" and taken many times longer. Finally, no one was turned away - they could always vote a provisional ballot, even if they didn't have ID or weren't registered.

It would be extremely easy to perform an empirical study to determine if voter impersonation fraud was occurring: (1) check the poll books to see whether people who died before any given election signed in to vote; (2) contact a statistically significant number of voters who signed in to vote at any election and ask whether they in fact voted; and (3) check to see whether anyone who fraudulently registered to vote actually signed in to vote. The fact that the proponents of the law have not done this study (or, if they have, have not published the results) is telling.

Right. And I'm sure very few people who live in the Macungies are without a car. It's kind of a necessity of life there. So the concept of someone who lives in Bethlehem or Allentown who doesn't have a car is a foreign concept to you. But there are people like that who don't drive, don't have a car and can walk to their polling place. That's how cities are built. But I'm sure you have no idea about that. In your world, everybody has to have a driver's license. Right?
Elections have been held in this state for 225 years with no photo IDs, just voter registration cards. Still, no one has offered any compelling reasons why this is suddenly necessary. Just rationalizations and excuses, like "it just makes sense." No it doesn't. Not when it disenfranchises 750,000 currently registered voters.
And for the record, I could care less what party they belong to. I have never couched this as a left or right issue. The law is unjust to anyone who will get turned away in November because they have no photo ID.
Finally, typing in all caps is just bad manners. It gives the appearance that you are yelling. Yelling isn't necessary or desirable here. If you can't behave with good manners here, we don't need you. GO AWAY.

Well geez dont you think after 225 years we should start doing it right. Look out your window things have changed during the last 225 years. And i do understand the concept of people living in cities who dont drive. I have even known some surprize surprize. And when they really wanted to go somewhere they usually found a way. Maybe a bus or a taxi maybe a friend or family member maybe a neighbor. Will there be people who cant get out, sure unfortunately we dont live in a perfect world but there are times you just have to make an effort and not an excuse! I liked the post were someone complaind because it took two hours to go to the license center. Geez we are talking about once every four years to make one trip to the licence center. I mean really, if this is a hardship you have either lived a charmed life or you worry to much. And daryl i do respect your opinion i just disagree but thanks for the dialogue.

Wayne wrote: "Indiana's voter ID law was upheld by the Supreme Court."

You are oversimplifying the holding of the Crawford case. The Court did not hold that photo ID laws are per se Constitutional, but rather held that the plaintiffs who challenged the Indiana photo ID law had not come forward with enough evidence to show that the law violated the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Justice Scalia highlighted that in his concurring opinion: "The lead opinion assumes petitioners' premise that the voter-identification law 'may have imposed a special burden on' some voters, but holds that petitioners have not assembled evidence to show that the special burden is severe enough to warrant strict scrutiny." So if different plaintiffs came forward with solid evidence on the burden issue in some future case, the Court could easily reach the opposite conclusion.

Also, Crawford will not apply to the lawsuit challenging the PA Photo ID Law. The plaintiffs in the PA case have alleged only violations of the Pennsylvania Constitution, not the federal Constitution. A case holding that Indiana's photo ID law does not violate the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution is irrelevant to a case challenging the PA photo ID law as violative of the PA Constitution. Here's another way to look at it -- the US Supreme Court will lack jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the PA Supreme Court's final judgment in the PA case because the suit alleges no violation of federal law.

Wayne wrote: "A provisional ballot will be provided for anyone without their ID, right?" Correct. But under the law the ballot will not be counted until the voter presents ID within 6 days of the election. So if a voter does not have an cannot obtain photo ID like may of the voters in the lawsuit, their provisional ballot will not be counted.

"A qualified absentee voter is not required to provide proof of identification if the voter is entitled to vote by absentee ballot"

Only those who are out-of-town or unable to make it to the polls due to illness may vote absentee. You cannot vote absentee just because you do not have an ID -- at least not without violating the Election Code.