# 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:** 20
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/381 "2012-08-21T02:30:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The distinction is that poll taxes and literacy tests were not related to voting qualifications. On that basis, even prior to the amendment disallowing the former, they were struck down. In what way is having a college ID related to voting qualifications? [http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/http;//www.portal.state.pa.us;80/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS\_0\_160329\_1240057\_0\_0\_18/PAVoterIDLaw-CollegeandUniversityIDsFAQ.pdf](http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/http;//www.portal.state.pa.us;80/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_160329_1240057_0_0_18/PAVoterIDLaw-CollegeandUniversityIDsFAQ.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/382 "2012-08-21T03:13:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > This board is so monolithically leftist . . . Why don’t you ask **Olentzero**'bout that? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/383 "2012-08-21T03:32:54Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > …It is wildly anachronistic to apply Marxist principles to the 1780s. There was no bourgeois ruling class. … Wait a tick, Karl Marx didn’t write _Common Sense_? You mean it was Engels? > [@](#): > > …This is a topic for another thread, I suppose, but the Howard Zinn take on this particular moment of history is just wrong. .. No such thing in history. In physics, yes. Zinn was attempting a breakthrough, an alternative to an American history sanitized for your protection. Well, maybe not your protection. I think he succeeded, and if his work stirs debate, so much the better. A hundred flowers bloom, thousand schools contend, that sort thing. I am nothing but a fan of the American Revolution. For its time and place, nothing short of a secular miracle. But we need not pretend it was accomplished by angels, or selfless men anxious to rid themselves of power. Personally, I think the miracle of checks and balances came about because nobody trusted power, but few of them trusted each other any further than Al Hamilton could throw “'Lil Jimmy” Madison. What I mean is to address a natural surprise that voting rights are not as fully Constitutionalized as one might reasonably expect. But if the stunning ambiguity and contradiction of the Second Amendment is anything to go by, perhaps its best that they didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/384 "2012-08-21T05:37:22Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > In what way is having a college ID related to voting qualifications? > > [http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/http;//www.portal.state.pa.us;80/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS\_0\_160329\_1240057\_0\_0\_18/PAVoterIDLaw-CollegeandUniversityIDsFAQ.pdf](http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/http;//www.portal.state.pa.us;80/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_160329_1240057_0_0_18/PAVoterIDLaw-CollegeandUniversityIDsFAQ.pdf) You could also ask, “In what way is having a motorcycle operator’s endorsed drivers license related to voting qualifications?” Both your question and mine obscure the answer by focusing attention on the specific type of ID. In fact, having a state-issued college ID is simply a form of identification that’s issued under rigorous enough state-controlled conditions to qualify as reliable ID. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/385 "2012-08-21T05:41:19Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Why don’t you ask **Olentzero**'bout that? Obviously the observation is relative. As compared to the general run of American voters, this board is leftist. As compared to the average European, the board probably leans center-right. As compared to Olentzero, it’s positively fascist. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/386 "2012-08-21T12:40:34Z")
Worth noting that there is one potential course that still remains for opponents of PA voter ID other than winning over one of the Republicans on the now 3-3 PA Supreme Court: the DOJ bringing suit under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. That doesn’t seem likely at the moment, but they did require PA to turn over a bunch of information that, judging by the Commonwealth’s conduct at the trial, they probably did not have or could not produce. > [@elucidator](#): > > What I mean is to address a natural surprise that voting rights are not as fully Constitutionalized as one might reasonably expect. But if the stunning ambiguity and contradiction of the Second Amendment is anything to go by, perhaps its best that they didn’t. Forgive me for misreading your comment. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/387 "2012-08-21T14:05:06Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > …Forgive me for misreading your comment. It never happened. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaptics](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/278dde/32.png) [@Sinaptics](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaptics)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/388 "2012-08-21T14:16:25Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > but they did require PA to turn over a bunch of information that, judging by the Commonwealth’s conduct at the trial, they probably did not have or could not produce. Can you elaborate on this? What information and what conduct specifically? Are you referring to them stipulating that no in-person fraud has happened or is likely to happen? ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/389 "2012-08-21T14:24:43Z")
> [@Sinaptics](#): > > Can you elaborate on this? What information and what conduct specifically? Are you referring to them stipulating that no in-person fraud has happened or is likely to happen? I’m referring to the 16 points of information sought in the DOJ’s [letter](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2012/07/23/justice-department-letter-requesting-pennsylvania-voter-data/) [pdf warning]. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/390 "2012-08-21T14:26:59Z")
[http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/the\_fake\_voter\_fraud\_epidemic\_and\_the\_2012\_electio.php?ref=fpblg](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/the_fake_voter_fraud_epidemic_and_the_2012_electio.php?ref=fpblg) Of special interest to fans of political cunning, skulduggery, and the Rovian arts of rat-fuck…and who isn’t?..this article posted by _Talking Points Memo_ (without which no citizen dare hope to be well-informed). It concerns the rise and rise of the Fraudulent Fraud Squad (not their real name), and concerns the efforts of a hearty band of Republican operatives to alert a slumbering America to the grave threat of voter fraud. Many of your favorite characters make appearances…Hans Spastickovsky, Michelle Malkin, and many others less familiar to fans of slime mold. Of special interest to our subject, the American Center for Voting Rights (ACVR) which… > [@](#): > > …created a phony think tank, the “American Center for Voting Rights” to testify before a congressional committee and push the line that “voter fraud” was rampant. (The term “voter fraud” is actually relatively new, and more election crimes appear to be committed by election officials and party operatives than voters.) > > ACVR relied upon discredited allegations of election fraud, and upon proven evidence of voter registration fraud. Some of the allegations had racial undertones, such as a focus on a false registration of “Mr. Jive F. Turkey, Sr.” … Further… > [@](#): > > …ACVR eventually disappeared in the dark of night, with the website coming down without warning and Thor Hearne scrubbing his resume of references to his organization. But by then many on the right were pushing the voter fraud line hard. For example Dick Armey claimed that 3% of votes cast were fraudulent Democratic votes and that the problem was especially bad in “urban areas” in the “inner cities.” Michele Malkin suggested that voter fraud would infect the 2010 elections, but she abandoned the claim when Republicans gave Democrats a “thumping” in that election… Well, no, one doesn’t scream about voter fraud when one wins, now does one? > [@](#): > > …Importantly, Republicans tied their claims of voter fraud to ostensible fraud prevention measures which would be most likely to depress Democratic turnout, but they ignored measures which would actually combat real problems of fraud. So Republicans pushed hard for voter identification laws, which would prevent one person from impersonating another at the polls… Of special local interest in the People’s Republic of Minnesota… > [@](#): > > …More recently, von Spakovsky and his co-author John Fund wrote a book in which they rely on wholly discredited allegations that fraudulent voting was responsible for Al Franken’s win in Minnesota over Norm Coleman in the recount and litigation over the disputed Minnesota U.S. Senate race… The article is chock-a-block with links to sources, documents, all that sort of good stuff. Want to know how “voter fraud” became the obsessive figment of a tiny Republican imagination? Start here. Joe Bob \*\*'luc \*\*says “Check it out!” Immediately. At once! Put that down, and go read it. Tremble, and obey! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/391 "2012-08-21T14:36:33Z")
See also the Wikepedia page for this organization… > **[American Center for Voting Rights](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Center_for_Voting_Rights)** > > The American Center for Voting Rights (ACVR) was a non-profit organization founded by Mark F. "Thor" Hearne that operated from March 2005 to May 2007 and pushed for laws to reduce voter intimidation and voter fraud, and supported requiring photo ID for voters. > ACVR was founded in Midlothian, Virginia, as "a non-partisan 501(c)(3) legal and education organization committed to defending the rights of voters and working to increase public confidence in the fairness and outcome of elections" and d... ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/392 "2012-08-21T16:54:01Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The distinction is that poll taxes and literacy tests were not related to voting qualifications. Were they now? The most respectable (if that) arguments in favor of your position relate to \*motivation \*to vote, performing the “reasonable” (your word, often repeated, self-justifying) means to obtain the ID you purport to require. When pressed, proponents have claimed, in effect, that if you don’t care enough to get an ID, you don’t care enough to vote, and some have gone so far as to play the “they’re just so lazy and stupid they shouldn’t even be allowed to vote” card. Rationalizations for poll taxes included that a motivated person, or not lazy and stupid, would be able to afford it, and someone who lacked such motivation should not be allowed to. Rationalizations for literacy tests went directly to the lazy-and-stupid point. But poll taxes, literacy tests, and ID laws (for a problem that effectively doesn’t exist and wouldn’t be addressed by those laws) were and are all still plainly manifestations of Jim Crow racism laws in particular, and class warfare more broadly. Someone able to grasp the meaning of earlier generations’ attempts at denying democracy \*should \*be able to grasp the current one as well. There simply are no arguments in favor of these laws that can withstand either logical or attitudinal scrutiny, even from a bunch of pseudonyms on a damn Internet board. Let’s not pretend there are two sides to this argument. There aren’t. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2012, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/393 "2012-08-25T16:16:22Z")
And this just in… [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444270404577607160943756548.html](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444270404577607160943756548.html) > [@](#): > > In a letter to the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, Pennsylvania General Counsel James Schultz wrote that while the state had provided the Justice Department with tens of thousands of documents, the fishing expedition by Justice was going too far. “In light of the absence of authority for your request for information, I question whether your inquiry is truly motivated by a desire to assess compliance with federal voting rights laws, or rather is fueled by political motivation,” he wrote. > [@](#): > > Pennsylvania’s Republican governor, Tom Corbett, is pushing back on U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder this week, calling a Justice Department inquiry into the state’s voter ID law “unprecedented” and the department’s interest in the matter politically driven. (Note: quote is taken from _Daily Kos_, referencing the article cited, but the article is behind a pay wall. Cite offered in deference to concerns about liberal cooties…Further quotes are from _Kos_) > [@](#): > > A state judge has nevertheless rejected a challenge to the law brought by the Pennsylvania ACLU and others. Officials are now seeking to delay until mid-October an appeal of the case to the state supreme court. How transparent can you get? And why, you may well ask? > [@](#): > > GOP platform committee has approved an amendment supporting states that have passed laws requiring restrictive voter-IDs and proof of citizenship. The amendment was proposed by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach. Delegates in support said it’s all about Democrats stealing elections: > “I think we have to acknowledge and be bold that people on the progressive side are willing to cheat in ways we could never before fathom,” Tamara Hall from Montana said. Hall said she had a disabled daughter who cannot read, write, count or tell time who voted without her permission. > > “For cookies and milk they had her vote,” Hall said. “You have no idea the extreme these people will go to to steal an election.” To date, there is no indication that she was kidding. ---
**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 25, 2012, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/394 "2012-08-25T18:28:33Z")
So what can the Justice Department do in response to this kind of stonewalling? What are their options short of sending in federal troops? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2012, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/395 "2012-08-25T23:34:13Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > So what can the Justice Department do in response to this kind of stonewalling? What are their options short of sending in federal troops? Is there some law that Pennsylvania officials are flouting? What would be the possible justification for federal troops? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2012, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/396 "2012-08-26T01:04:55Z")
Try to remain calm, **Bricker** , as I very much doubt if federal troops are a plausible option, or that friend **davidm** imagines that they are. ---
**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 26, 2012, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/397 "2012-08-26T01:16:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Is there some law that Pennsylvania officials are flouting? What would be the possible justification for federal troops? None. That’s why I said “short of”. It was hyperbole to make a point. States have some level of obligation (not necessarily legal, but ethical) to be cooperative on an issue like this. Why would Corbett balk at handing over the requested documentation? As far as I can see, the Justice Department is asking for existing documentation and is not asking for any new studies or new compilations of information. Here’s the letter requesting the information: [http://bradblog.com/Docs/DOJ-Letter-on-Pennsylvania-Voter-ID-Law\_072312.pdf](http://bradblog.com/Docs/DOJ-Letter-on-Pennsylvania-Voter-ID-Law_072312.pdf) So why is this such a problem for Corbett? Surely all existing documentation exists as computer files and emailing the files or burning them to a CD should not be a huge drain on resources. I work in IT and I’ve had to help in complying with similar requests due to court cases a couple of times over my career and it’s not difficult or time consuming and consumes very few resources. I don’t know how accurate his gripe about “tens of thousands of documents” is but even if it’s accurate it’s not difficult to find and copy that number of documents with modern information technology. It sounds like he’s simply throwing around big numbers to make it sound like the state is being unduly burdened by an oppressive Justice Department. So it seems like Corbett is being stubborn either for the sake of being stubborn or in an attempt to run out the clock. As a public official he should be willing to comply with Justice Department requests, especially when they don’t impose an unreasonable burden. ---
**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 26, 2012, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/398 "2012-08-26T01:17:36Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Try to remain calm, **Bricker** , as I very much doubt if federal troops are a plausible option, or that friend **davidm** imagines that they are. Actually I was considering storm troopers. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2012, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/399 "2012-08-26T01:25:37Z")
I’m sure the well-regulated militia is up to the task. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2012, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582/400 "2012-08-26T01:50:35Z")
Why, it seems to me that transparency on those facts and records would be a marvelous boon to voter confidence! Like that “780.000” number, now that just has to be an exaggeration, its probably much lower than that, perhaps only a few dozens of thousands. But, you know, in a very close election, that could prove to be very important, as the Counselor has so tirelessly insisted. Shirley anyone truly dedicated to the sacred principle of voter confidence would be eager to have all these facts and evidence before the public eye! So that all these silly notions be put to rest. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pennsylvania-upholds-voter-id-law/631582.md?page=21)