# Pennsylvania Upholds Voter ID Law **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 15, 2012, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582 "2012-08-15T17:21:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/301 "2012-08-19T00:45:56Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I’ve seen just about every cite on this case,… Oh? But not this one? Strange, how such powerful news has been hushed. Given the present state of frantic debate, I would have thought such a rock solid case would get more attention. Liberal media, is it? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/302 "2012-08-19T00:53:29Z")
Well, when media sources argue in the face of 100 convictions that the cases shouldn’t have been pursued in the first place and that it signifies nothing, how are we not to assume liberal bias? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/303 "2012-08-19T00:59:38Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I’ve seen just about every cite on this case, and they all say it’s crap, while gliding over the fact that there were actual convictions, and not just a handful. And the only way to get a conviction is to prove that an ineligible voter voted knowing they were ineligible. That’s not easy. Which means that the 100+ convictions were the tip of the iceberg. > > And I love the complaint “draining county resources”. Sounds more like sour grapes that the counties spent resources and actually found voter fraud. So the fact that no cases of in person impersonation voter fraud were found, which is the only thing that Voter ID can protect against, doesn’t change your mind? The fact that it was felons voting has no weight at all on your decision process. Even knowing that felons have normal IDs? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/304 "2012-08-19T01:55:38Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > So the fact that no cases of in person impersonation voter fraud were found, which is the only thing that Voter ID can protect against, doesn’t change your mind? > > The fact that it was felons voting has no weight at all on your decision process. Even knowing that felons have normal IDs? If a felon votes, he can deny it. “It wasn’t me!” a jury needs a poll worker to remember how he looked, or some other evidence. If a felon votes in a state with photo ID, denying it is much tougher. A jury can convict him on the inference that he was the guy. Voter ID can help protect against other problems besides in person impersonation. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/305 "2012-08-19T02:11:05Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > There isn’t a right to vote in Pennsylvania’s constitution. Just a passage about qualified electors and reasonable regulations on what constitutes a qualified elector. > > If I missed something, by all means let me know. [http://sites.state.pa.us/PA\_Constitution.html](http://sites.state.pa.us/PA_Constitution.html) > [@](#): > > Elections > Section 5. > Elections shall be free and equal; and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/306 "2012-08-19T02:12:05Z")
If a state allows a felon to register or stay registered, the fault is with the system that allows that to happen, no? Your hypothetical is about a registered voter showing up to vote and being allowed to. Your claim that showing an ID would prevent that is risible. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/307 "2012-08-19T02:13:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If a felon votes, he can deny it. “It wasn’t me!” a jury needs a poll worker to remember how he looked, or some other evidence. > > If a felon votes in a state with photo ID, denying it is much tougher. A jury can convict him on the inference that he was the guy. > > Voter ID can help protect against other problems besides in person impersonation. Only if his lawyer is an idiot. “The poll worker must have not even looked at the ID.” ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/308 "2012-08-19T02:23:43Z")
Well, a bit more to it than that, which I very well may have cited in the Pit thread aka The Long March… In Minnesota, there was a bit of fuzz between felony conviction and felony sentencing. Some people convicted of felony were deprived of voter rights, then subsequently had their sentences reduced to probation, which quashed that action. But one set of names has only that they were convicted of a felony, and made no notice of the revision. Honest mistakes all around, but provoked by a unwarranted assumption and an eagerness to accuse. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/309 "2012-08-19T04:04:05Z")
voter ID also helps settle cases like this: “When I went to vote this morning, I was surprised when they told me I had already voted absentee. I had not! I vote in every election, even primaries. I’ve never had a problem before. My name was right. My address was right. The address was right. The early absentee vote in my name is fraud…The fraudulent early absentee vote could not be pulled from the system.” Jack, VA “My son David went in to vote today. They told him he had already voted. He insisted that he had not yet voted…Did someone send in an absentee ballot falsely calming to be him? Someone is trying to steal his vote.” -Dale, AZ “Our daughter-in-law just phoned me to say that when she and our son arrived at the polls to vote today, they were told that they had already voted by absentee ballot. The insisted that they had not done so, and were then told that they could vote again! They refused." -Gloria, Colorado Read more: [http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/02/roundup-voter-problems#ixzz23xfu9Zgn](http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/02/roundup-voter-problems#ixzz23xfu9Zgn) ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/310 "2012-08-19T05:52:08Z")
Fox News has blogs?! Far out! No shit, we can go read blogs on Fox News? In-fuckin’-credible! It’s like you’ve opened up a whole new world for me! ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/311 "2012-08-19T05:57:46Z")
Again, very convenient to say something doesn’t exist when the very people you would trust to find out aren’t interested in finding out. But the fact is, 81% of Americans in a recent poll DO believe that this is going on, so it would behoove the authorities to actually find out, rather than taking on the attitude that they’d rather just assume nothing is going on. > **[TheBlaze](https://www.theblaze.com/tag/washington-post-poll-nearly-75-of-americans-support-voter-id-laws)** > > News and entertainment for people who love America. What’s the harm in doing a thorough national study of the problem? Let’s settle the issue. Find out exactly how much fraud there is, and then take steps to reduce it as substantially as we can. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/312 "2012-08-19T06:17:21Z")
Great idea, just put these laws in abeyance until such studies are done. Guess who isn’t going to like that? Go on, guess who will insist that elections go according to the new! improved! laws until the study is done. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 6:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/313 "2012-08-19T06:23:10Z")
Works for me. Republicans know that voter ID isn’t where the major fraud is, but it is low hanging fruit. And something we should do even if there is no fraud. There’s no terrorists impersonating someone else getting on planes, why do we require ID to get on a plane? If the standard for requiring ID is that there has to be a genuine problem to prevent, then there are many areas where we need to stop requiring ID. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/314 "2012-08-19T06:43:54Z")
An eminently reasonable plan. Best part: it doesn’t adversely affect Dem leaning voters! The Republicans will love that part, they have been agonizing over that for weeks! Don’t waste another moment, **Adaher** , shoot this idea to your nearest Republican leader, it’ll be a smash hit! Hurry along, now, get back to us when this all settled… ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/315 "2012-08-19T06:49:27Z")
When did this all start? It seems like any major changes to voter laws should be initiated immediately after elections to give people time to appeal and/or comply. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/316 "2012-08-19T13:24:52Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Only if his lawyer is an idiot. “The poll worker must have not even looked at the ID.” And the prosecution calls every poll worker that could have seen him and asks each if they checked every ID. The jury is entitled to believe the poll workers. That case is legally sufficient for conviction. In contrast, the same case with no Voter ID is not. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/317 "2012-08-19T13:26:53Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, a bit more to it than that, which I very well may have cited in the Pit thread aka The Long March… > > In Minnesota, there was a bit of fuzz between felony conviction and felony sentencing. Some people convicted of felony were deprived of voter rights, then subsequently had their sentences reduced to probation, which quashed that action. But one set of names has only that they were convicted of a felony, and made no notice of the revision. > > Honest mistakes all around, but provoked by a unwarranted assumption and an eagerness to accuse. What’s the problem? Cast a provisional ballot, show up with your probation papers, problem solved. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/318 "2012-08-19T15:20:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And the prosecution calls every poll worker that could have seen him and asks each if they checked every ID. > > The jury is entitled to believe the poll workers. That case is legally sufficient for conviction. > > In contrast, the same case with no Voter ID is not. I worked as a doorperson and bouncer when I was younger. Trust me, people don’t look at IDs very well. If you tell me that of the three thousand people you serviced, you remember client X, and he’s not wearing a rainbow wig and deely-boppers, you’re likely full of shit. Didn’t you say you used to be a defense attorney? Think like one for a second. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/319 "2012-08-19T15:41:07Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > voter ID also helps settle cases like this: > > “When I went to vote this morning, I was surprised when they told me I had already voted absentee. I had not! I vote in every election, even primaries. I’ve never had a problem before. My name was right. My address was right. The address was right. The early absentee vote in my name is fraud…The fraudulent early absentee vote could not be pulled from the system.” Jack, VA > > “My son David went in to vote today. They told him he had already voted. He insisted that he had not yet voted…Did someone send in an absentee ballot falsely calming to be him? Someone is trying to steal his vote.” -Dale, AZ > > “Our daughter-in-law just phoned me to say that when she and our son arrived at the polls to vote today, they were told that they had already voted by absentee ballot. The insisted that they had not done so, and were then told that they could vote again! They refused." -Gloria, Colorado > > Read more: [http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/02/roundup-voter-problems#ixzz23xfu9Zgn](http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/02/roundup-voter-problems#ixzz23xfu9Zgn) In Pennsylvania, the state in question in this thread, if you vote Absentee, you still have the option of showing up at the polls on election day, voiding the absentee ballot, and voting in person. Problem solved. It sounds like the Colorado case you cited had a similar option and refused. That was the voter’s fault. My cite is the statement at the very bottom of the official PA absentee ballot application. > [@](#): > > WARNING – IF YOU ARE ABLE TO VOTE IN PERSON ON ELECTION DAY, YOU MUST GO TO YOUR > POLLING PLACE, VOID YOUR ABSENTEE BALLOT AND VOTE THERE. (PDF, sorry.) [http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/http;//www.portal.state.pa.us;80/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS\_0\_160329\_1240045\_0\_0\_18/AbsenteeBallotApplication.pdf](http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/http;//www.portal.state.pa.us;80/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_160329_1240045_0_0_18/AbsenteeBallotApplication.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2012, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/320 "2012-08-19T15:54:43Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > I worked as a doorperson and bouncer when I was younger. Trust me, people don’t look at IDs very well. > > If you tell me that of the three thousand people you serviced, you remember client X, and he’s not wearing a rainbow wig and deely-boppers, you’re likely full of shit. > > Didn’t you say you used to be a defense attorney? Think like one for a second. I am. The poll worker does not need to testify that he remembers the individual to establish a legally sufficient case. And what is your training in legal sufficiency? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582.md?page=17)