Saturday, January 18, 2014

Pennsylvania judge strikes down voter ID law

Pennsylvania's Voter ID law has been ruled unconstitutional because it "places an unreasonable burden on people trying to exercise their right to vote" according to Judge Bernard L. McGinley. This ruling will be battled in the PA Supreme Court. Other states are trying to overturn voter ID laws as well on the grounds that they are unconstitutional as well.

7 comments:

  1. Voter I.D. laws are a perfectly reasonable way to prevent voter fraud—nor do they violate any constitution. The key here is that they offered services that ensured that those who did not drive could still receive photo I.D.—those who actually wanted to vote would be able to vote. While some may say that voter fraud is so miniscule that it is not worth preventing, consider the 2000 election. Florida was won by 537 votes (or consider the MN Senatorial election in 2008)—these are both instances where voter fraud could make a difference (and in the case of the MN election it probably did).

    ReplyDelete
  2. The article also says that the services that would provide a photo ID were limited and the wait time lengthy. Conversely, in those situations where voter fraud could have made a difference, citizens who are eligible to vote but couldn't due to Voter ID laws could have also made a difference in the election results. I stand by Judge McGinley's ruling that they are unconstitutional only because it prevents certain demographics from voting. Photo IDs are not as accessible to some as they are to others.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm with Olivia, the cons of voter ID laws far outweigh the pros. While voter fraud is a problem, it is miniscule. While it may affect a close race, the people who are fraudulently voting probably are more educated on issues than some who do vote. Voter ID laws prevent many students, elderly people, and citizens that are below the poverty line from voting because they don't have photo IDs. These are Americans. Important Americans who have voices to be heard. We also already know that the youth demographic is low and voter ID laws are not helping.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think voter ID is very important to our voting system. Voter fraud would be pretty easy to do without ID. And it doesnt make sense why any civilized person wouldnt have one. I think that if you are not responsible enough to get a voter ID, you shouldnt vote at all.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with the judge's ruling. I also agree with Olivia in that certain demographics might have a harder time gaining access to a photo ID than other groups of people. With the voting numbers so low, we should be making it easier for people to vote, not harder. We live in a country where the people should be heard, not suffocated with unnecessary voting laws.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I agree with the judge on this one. Requiring ID does present unreasonable burden on those exercising their right to vote. This one was clear because for some people, finding proper identification requires great work. Voter ID laws are a great way to provide a fair election, but those responsible need to improve the laws to make it easier to enforce.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree with Riley and Olivia, and the judge of course. If I didn't have my license I would have no idea how to just get a card with my ID on it. There are many people that live in the city who don't have their licenses because they use public transportation; they too could struggle with finding some sort of ID. It just wouldn't be fair that such a silly thing as ID would restrict someone from voting.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.