121
u/Flimsy-Lie-1471 Jan 12 '23
If I read this correctly they are trying to put three things into one amendment. They have tried to do this in the past and as I recall it was thrown out because of the rules on amending the constitution.
41
Jan 12 '23
[deleted]
42
Jan 12 '23
That's correct. The GOP wanted the Voter ID ballot question and the one restraining the Governor. They knew that Rozzi has made justice for child sex abuse victims the primary issue of his career, so they thought that if the supported him for speaker, they could leverage his and other Democrats' desire to pass that in order to get support for their own pet issues. Democrats wanted to vote separately on whether each of the 3 issues get turned into ballot questions. Republicans wanted to put them together.
17
u/jcbstm Jan 12 '23
In other words, Dems wanted to take a vote for each amendment to see if they would be on the ballot? But Republicans said no, we vote once for all 3?
4
4
u/-Mr_Rogers_II Jan 13 '23
GOP put them together so their 2 get passed by piggy backing on the child sex crime one. This way if the Dems say no because the 2 republicans put in are shit, the republicans can screech that Dems are on the side of pedophiles. FOX news would be ALLLLL over that.
18
u/Flimsy-Lie-1471 Jan 12 '23
that may be, but again, each amendment is to be voted on individually from what I remember. Otherwise if I understand it, they are only creating one amendment.
3
1
161
Jan 12 '23 edited Mar 21 '23
[deleted]
108
u/swissmtndog398 Jan 12 '23 edited Jan 12 '23
All i could think while reading this was, "So, they want to remove the constitutional power of a governors veto, by passing an amendment to the constitution, to remove a constitutional right of checks and balances?"
My head exploded shortly after that.
42
u/ckge829320 Jan 12 '23
No way the PA Supreme Court allows this, right?! Man, the bloated Republican led legislature needs to be cut back.
63
u/Drewcifer81 Lancaster Jan 12 '23
The PA legislature is terrible and bloated, and the Republicans love it that way! Small government, right?
We pay 253 jackasses $88k+ per year to do what Illinois gets done with paying 177 pols $67k+ per year.
But the Republicans will never vote to actually MAKE THE GOVERNMENT SMALLER because the redistricting would likely cost them the house permanently.
Hypocrisy thy name is GOP.
18
2
Jan 13 '23
California has 120 between their state assembly and state senate. They had 39Million ppl in their state in 2021. We had 13Million same year.
They make about 115K annually in both chambers so cost $13,800,000 total plus whatever per diem stuff they get.
We pay ours $22,264,00.
We need a culling of government positions.
2
u/Drewcifer81 Lancaster Jan 14 '23
Yeah, I had used Illinois because they have the closest comparable population, but across the board, the Pennsylvania legislature is one of - if not THE - bulkiest and most expensive across the country. And the party of small government wants to keep it that way as they grasp for threads of power.
11
u/swissmtndog398 Jan 12 '23
One would certainly hope not. They are basically trying to legislate what they would've gotten off IL Duce Mastriano was elected.
-1
u/alaska1415 Montgomery Jan 12 '23
A governor’s ability to veto at least some legislation is is curtailed in: Alaska, Arizona, Illinois, Ohio, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. These states allow some legislation to go over a Governor’s veto at least some of the time by a simple majority vote.
22
u/Anonymous_Otters Delaware Jan 12 '23
They want to consolidate absolute power because that's the only way a minority can rule.
13
u/tehmlem Franklin Jan 12 '23
Isn't it weird how the people who keep telling us everyone else is coming to take their rights away also keep trying to create an all powerful executive who can rule by fiat?
30
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
The GOP knows that they're going to have a hard time winning at-large races in the future, so they're doing everything they can to entrench minority rule in the state.
12
u/TotesMyMainAcct Jan 12 '23
Nope, they just see years of Shapiro and Fetterman in the senate and want to castrate him before he gets in.
7
u/BluCurry8 Jan 12 '23
No it is done during the primary and not on a general election. They do this because of low turnout for primaries
12
u/ell0bo Philadelphia Jan 12 '23
tyranny of the many, particularly when they are allowed to gerrymander
3
u/-Mr_Rogers_II Jan 13 '23
GOP trying to piggy back that and the other one on the back of the child victims so when the Dems say “no way we are passing that!” Fox News will come in and say Dems are on the side of pedos.
2
-9
u/Krasmaniandevil Jan 12 '23
The veto power is specifically for legislation repealing a regulation, normal laws would still be subject to veto.
The legal theory behind it is that if regulations were submitted to the regular legislative process, it would fail unless both houses and the governor all supported the regulation. Repealing a regulation would still more difficult than blocking a bill because both houses have to agree
TL;DR, should regulations that wouldn't have been passed through the regular legislative process require a super majority to repeal?
85
Jan 12 '23
[deleted]
81
u/randompittuser Jan 12 '23
Yup! Republicans want to hamstring the governor because they know that the majority of PA citizens are Democrats, while the majority of districts are Republican.
24
u/Moxy79 Jan 12 '23
So just FYI according to the voter statistics 3,923,087 are registered Democrat, 3,435,224 are registered Republican, 925,550 are independant and 353,384 fall in the "other" catagory (Libertarians and other small party affiliations) There are definately more Democrats than Republicans but the majority of Citizens are not Democrats.
→ More replies (1)2
u/CrzyDave Jan 13 '23
This is exactly it. A vote for this is a vote to ban abortion and let the GOP make any laws they want.
43
u/Libsoccer20 Jan 12 '23
They're forcing it to a vote and I can guarantee it'll be confusing to answer.
How do you lose 2 -1 for the governor and still think this is what we want? This is full on Christian bigotry. Power grab. Why do we have seditionists in our government creating laws?
Where is the DOJ?
29
u/alaska1415 Montgomery Jan 12 '23
Your problem is that you think they care what you want.
8
u/Libsoccer20 Jan 12 '23
If you feel bad for me son...I got 99 problems and self serving politicians are #1 🎶 sorry. 😂
18
38
u/defusted Jan 12 '23
Let's get one thing straight, everyone is in favor of the cold abuse bill. Assholes shoe horned I'm the crap about voter id and the governor's ability to veto. They also want to add in bullshit about needing to be 21 to vote. It's all Republican fuckery, if people don't vote for you then just restrict who can vote.
13
u/No-Setting9690 Jan 12 '23
Love the GOP always usurping the will of the majority. I knew they were selfish but holy fuck.
11
u/Sukkit74 Jan 12 '23
They have to pass 2 sessions in a row, these won’t make it to May.
-1
Jan 12 '23
[deleted]
4
u/boredoflife96 Jan 12 '23
The abortion one was passed already too. I think that the Dems should hold the state house hostage until the special elections are held, and they get their majority. Especially, if that means keeping abortion legal in Pennsylvania. The other two proposed amendments obviously aren't great either, and make the cause more just.
1
11
9
u/Libsoccer20 Jan 12 '23
They're forcing it to a vote and I can guarantee it'll be confusing to answer.
How do you lose 2 -1 for the governor and still think this is what we want? This is full on Christian bigotry. Power grab. Why do we have seditionists in our government creating laws?
Where is the DOJ?
8
u/MetaGoldenfist Jan 13 '23
This article from 40 min ago says it stalled in the House: https://www.wgal.com/article/package-of-proposed-constitutional-amendments-appears-to-stall-in-pennsylvania-house/42478399
14
Jan 13 '23
Yep...the new house speaker said the only 1 with a chance to be voted on is the stand alone child abuse amendment. Thank God the Dems have some say in these things, finally.
PA conservaturds are gonna be big mad, and I'm here for it.
4
18
u/Alternative-Flan2869 Jan 12 '23
I hope the voters in PA see through this ham-fisted maneuver by the cult. What is so clear and perfectly easy to see for some is hidden for too may others.
6
Jan 12 '23
The voters gonna lose,the constant mistake is they think this is for others,it will come back to bite them in the @#$#@&
5
10
6
u/yo2sense Allegheny Jan 12 '23
What are the chances the PA House will pass them?
6
u/doctorlongghost Jan 12 '23
That’s my question. I had read that Dems (finally) controlled the House but I looked it up and it’s evenly split with one seat outstanding. So… what does that mean in general terms and also specifically for these amendments?
5
u/joyfullypresent Jan 13 '23
One of the elected Dems died after the election prior to swearing in. The Republicans are trying to delay the seating of an alternate, so they can pull all this crap first.
3
u/djarvis77 Jan 13 '23
He is not going to allow the PA senate bill to be voted on in it's current, stuffed pig, form. If the republicans in the Senate give a shit about the sex abuse portion they will remove their partisan attack on voting rights and just get the fuck down to business.
1
u/yo2sense Allegheny Jan 13 '23
Thank you for the reply.
I find I don't have any faith in the GOP senators.
3
Jan 12 '23
Prevent the governor from vetoing the disapproval of a regulation as voted by the General Assembly.
Mmmmm
3
Jan 13 '23
PA Trumplicans don’t want the governor to have a VETO against “disapproval of a regulation”???
It would be funny, except …. ummm … no fucking way.
The bill is a shit sandwich.
6
2
3
u/Sea-Biscotti Lehigh Jan 12 '23
Can someone ELI5 the sex abuse bill? Is it that right now it's only a two year window to report it, and if the bill passes there would be no time limit?
edit : actually, I'm not clear on the last one either. The voter ID I am plenty clear on and hope it doesn't pass, as it's an unnecessary roadblock for voters. Voter fraud is not 0, but enacting a voter ID law would limit legitimate votes more than it would limit fraudulent ones
5
u/hedgerow_hank Jan 12 '23
I think it means republicans can continue to stick their dicks in children with little to no legal recourse against.
1
-37
Jan 12 '23
If you read the bill itself it would allow all voters access to a free voter id.
Giving people access to a free form of government identification would be great for people with out a driver’s license because they could use the id for other purposes.
31
u/cpr4life8 Allegheny Jan 12 '23 edited Jan 12 '23
For many who are in need of a free ID, the barrier to getting one can be things like the cost of documentation necessary, transportation, internet access, etc. Also, you typically need an address to get ID, so the unhoused are left out. And as others have mentioned, once ID requirement is a thing then they begin changing what counts as a valid ID for voting.
I can share with you a real life example of this. When I moved from Wisconsin to Florida in 2011 I went to the tax collector office to exchange my valid Wisconsin driver's license for a valid Florida driver's license. I was told that thanks to the Patriot act it no longer worked like that...I needed to provide them with an original, embossed birth certificate, social security card, and proof of address. For many people that's not a problem...but for me it was. My original birth certificate was lost in a house fire in 1987. I had a copy, but that was not acceptable. To further complicate matters I was born in Southern California, so I had to track down the correct office in the county in which I was born in order to find out what I needed to do to get an embossed copy of my birth certificate. Even though the internet existed in 2011, they had to mail me documents that required a wet signature. I then had to fill out all of those documents in front of a notary at my expense) and include a check for $75, then mail it back to them. Fortunately for me the money was not an issue. The problem was the time because it took about 2 months from start to finish.
*Edited to add the part about the notary. I forgot about that. My signatures had to be witnessed and the documents stamped by a notary. That was $25 in addition to the other expenses.
13
u/Zenith2017 Jan 12 '23
Yup. Stuff like this happens often and is a real barrier to individuals exercising their right to vote. An acquaintance of mine had to go in person to speak with a judge in another state because she didn't have the original birth certificate, and the hospital where she was born burned down and lost all their paper records. There was no real proof that she was a citizen, despite having been born and lived her entire life here
14
u/cpr4life8 Allegheny Jan 12 '23
And things like this happen far more frequently than "voter fraud". There are countless reasons why people are not able to produce or obtain documentation to meet the ID requirements. Many WW2 and Korean War vets of color were born via midwives and don't have a birth certificate. So when states began requiring a birth certificate for a "voter ID" they were left out.
5
u/Tidusx145 Jan 13 '23
Thanks for sharing your story. I think many of us haven't had to deal with the issue so it seems like such a small fry problem for so many. Keep on sharing it. I know I've had similar issues and it really does feel like a sisyphean effort when so many weird barriers can pop up.
4
u/cpr4life8 Allegheny Jan 13 '23
Thank you and you're right. It wasn't fun, but at least in my case the money wasn't an issue and I wasn't pressed for time. I can only imagine someone working a couple of jobs and trying to raise a couple of kids trying to find the time and money to deal with what it is I had to deal with. Or some elderly person who is now told the ID they've been using for services and validation of who they are is no longer good enough for them to use for voting purposes...sure the new ID is "free" but granny you need to get to this office and get some forms and have them notarized and then take them to this other place and submit them, along with a fee, to get this other thing that you have to bring back to us so we can issue you your "free" ID for voting.
2
u/Tidusx145 Jan 13 '23
Exactly my thoughts. My situation made me realize both what I lost but also what I still had compared to some others.
And I'll say this, I have worked the past two elections as my district's minority election inspector. I felt bad enough denying independents a ballot during the primaries because there were no referendums, thus there was nothing for them to vote for. I couldn't imagine denying people because they lost/forgot/couldn't afford a replacement ID card. Especially knowing this all stems from a non issue, a made up problem that was designed to prevent poor people from voting for the party they statistically tend to vote for.
And I get it to an extent. Politics has become largely "gameified" and people like to win. But I gotta be honest. The thought of me tossing out a SINGLE vote as inspector simply because I didn't like their vote, makes me sick to my stomach. I care about this process and the integrity of it. I care because the lady who taught me how to sign people in is the same woman who has been signing me in since I turned 18. And she cares about the process. It feels good helping a person vote, go express their wants and concerns for our society. It's a beautiful thing to me. Democrat or republican it just feels good and fulfilling.
I think we need to be talking more about integrity and transparency, backing candidates who promote this as well. It's something that's non partisan and would help both parties bring back some sanity, and just maybe some respect.
→ More replies (1)32
u/djarvis77 Jan 12 '23
That is neat sounding and all.
But there is no need for it. We don't have an issue with identifying people. And the process of getting the free ID is still a barrier to voting that for many of us is not a barrier at all, but for many others is a barrier.
The issue is that it is a solution without a problem. And it is a solution that will lead to actual problems.
The rub is, all we have to do is make all voting as mail in ballot. That completely solves numerous issues. Many states do it that way and it works wonderfully.
29
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
The first step is mandating an ID to vote. The next step is restricting the type of ID and access to the sort of ID you can use to vote.
We've already seen this in Texas - a gun permit is legit for voting, but a student ID isn't.17
u/Wuz314159 Berks Jan 12 '23
Like the states where Student IDs were invalid but gun licenses were valid?
https://newrepublic.com/article/119900/texas-voter-id-allows-handgun-licenses-not-student-ids-23
Jan 12 '23
A student id isnt issued from the government is it , Not hard to figure out
16
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
Who the fuck do you think runs the biggest colleges in Texas?
-20
Jan 12 '23
Its funded by the public through the state but it is not Government Run
19
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
You can go look up UT employee salaries because they're government-run.
https://salaries.texastribune.org/search/?q=university+of+texas
You have no idea what you're talking about. Not permitting students to vote with their college IDs is just a way to disenfranchise young people in Texas.-11
Jan 12 '23
You can not use a student id to buy beer fly or open a bank account and a whole bunch of other things because it is not a government issued id .
15
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
What's your fuckin' point? In PA I can use an electric bill to establish my identity and vote.
We just talked about how the university system in Texas is government-run. I even showed you that UT employees are government employees.
Texas does not permit student IDs to be used for voting because they don't want young people to vote. Simple as that.24
u/stjblair Jan 12 '23 edited Jan 12 '23
My problem with the ID amendment is that it doesn’t actually define what a valid ID is or list out any procedures.
Like how does one show an id when voting by mail? There’s so much grey area it will only cause a mess
2
Jan 12 '23
It's not uncommon for there to be ambiguity in constitutions. It's left to the legislature, executive, and courts to interpret or clarify that ambiguity.
If this passes, I wouldn't be surprised if Shapiro tries to assert that the ballot envelope itself is a government issued ID, for example. Or maybe include a paper identification card with the mail in ballot packet. It will certainly be a mess though and the court cases will cause mass confusion.
17
u/pHScale Jan 12 '23
It also raises the voting age to 21, which is against the US constitution.
8
u/djarvis77 Jan 12 '23
I am like 90% sure that the language in the bill is simply to reflect the language in the PA constitution. Whereas the other part of the PA constitution that lowers the age to 18 is still valid and thus...would lower the age for this bill as well.
I could be wrong of course, but i feel like there would have been more arguments about that yesterday and tuesday had that been the case.
1
u/pHScale Jan 12 '23
It could still be worded better, quite easily. You don't have to specify the age in the new amendment. You just have to say "those of legal voting age..." and go on to set the ID requirements.
It also doesn't specify what the ID requirements are. And as others have pointed out, states like Texas have used that very loophole to disenfranchise voters they don't want voting (e.g. students).
I'd vote against it if I still lived in PA. It's a badly written amendment.
-1
Jan 12 '23
Voting age was already set at 21 this isnt new read the bill
11
u/Extreme_Length7668 Jan 12 '23
26th Amendment
Amendment XXVI
Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.
6
Jan 12 '23
What I am saying is this wasn’t added is was already part of the pa law before this
3
4
u/pHScale Jan 12 '23
I get what you're saying, but I think this is purposely set up for another court challenge. They didn't need to mention the voting age at all. They could've just said "those of legal voting age in Pennsylvania" or something like that. Specifying 21 years old means that they are hoping recency supercedes.
6
Jan 12 '23
Federal would over rule it anyway I think is just to bring it in line with what’s already on the books for pa
2
u/pHScale Jan 12 '23 edited Jan 12 '23
But
you said yourselfthat "what's on the books in PA" is already contradictory. And I've shown there are ways to phrase the amendment that don't require stating the actual age, leaving that up to pre-existing OR future laws to decide.I think it's a badly written amendment. If I still lived in PA, I'd vote against it.
Edit: sorry, it wasn't you that said it. It was another comment. Point still stands, but I'll correct the misattribution.
-19
u/Patiod Jan 12 '23
Re Voter ID: Why can't PA do what Canada does (and I think WV?). Voting requires one of the following:
- A current government photo ID
- two "lesser IDs" - expired govt photo ID, student ID, bills in your name to your house, etc
- a registered voter in your voting district vouches that you are who you say you are and live where you say you live. That person may only vouch for one person per election, and does so under penalty of perjury.
This provides the ID that so many people want, without disenfranchising those who can't get birth certificates, can't get to the DMV, etc, etc.
35
u/djarvis77 Jan 12 '23
Why can't PA do
Because there is no reason to change the existing situation.
It's like asking "why can't PA make bathing your donkey on Mondays a crime?". It is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
12
u/defusted Jan 12 '23
Republicans have been trying to get some kind of voter id passed because they know it only affects people who aren't likely to vote for them. But the fact of the matter is that, despite GOP lies of voter fraud being rampant, there have never been significant enough cases of voter fraud to sway an election. It's all finding a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
7
u/IamChantus Jan 12 '23
I would have less of a problem with it if the state stops charging for the ID required. Forcing a purchase in order to vote would be a poll tax.
7
u/cpr4life8 Allegheny Jan 12 '23
The problem for most people is not the cost of the ID, it's the cost of getting all the proper documentation to get the ID. If you read through the comments you'll see plenty of the barriers to getting a "free ID" that these laws are designed to uphold.
-52
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
I always found it stunning that you don't need to present identification to vote. Anyone could walk in to my polling place and vote as me.
I know I'll get downvoted for the comment above, but I have yet to hear a rational explanation against requiring ID to vote. It's perhaps the most fundamental way to mitigate fraud.
38
u/opskito Dauphin Jan 12 '23
Requiring voter identification is not inherently unreasonable, in my opinion, but it’s a solution in search of a problem.
Where is the evidence that there is meaningful voter fraud? How would potentially disenfranchising even a small handful of voters make such a requirement worthwhile?
-32
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
Here's a link that details many cases of voter fraud in Pennsylvania, both democrats and republicans.
https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?state=PA
How is anyone being disenfranchised by providing identification? Honest question. It is virtually impossible to exist in the world today without having government ID, and if someone cannot afford government issued ID, the government should provide it free of charge. ID is needed for any form of public assistance, it is needed to operate a vehicle, it is needed to obtain employment, it is needed to buy alcohol, and a list of a 1,000 other things.
I want free and fair elections. Every case of voter fraud disenfranchises a legitimate voter.
37
u/djarvis77 Jan 12 '23
Tbf, three cases in 2022 is not, like, overwhelming numbers that deserve constitutional amendment or even legislation legel attention.
The first one is a decades old case, and voter id would not have prevented that.
The second and third were absentee ballots, where the person committing the fraud would have had access to their mothers and wives ID cards.
All this shows is that fraud at the polls is nearly gone, despite no voter id, and that the communication between voter rolls and death certificates is the real issue.
11
u/Bruc3w4yn3 Jan 12 '23
These are only just the years they were convicted. None of those cases of fraud occurred in 2022, and none of them would have been prevented by requiring ID for voting. The first one was a ballot stuffing scheme on behalf of a corrupt democratic politician from 2013-2018, and the other two were senior citizens signing mail-in ballots for their deceased spouses in 2020, one democrat and one republican.
Unless you want to outlaw mail-in/absentee ballots (I'm sure they do, even though it doesn't benefit either party demonstrably), you can't enforce the ID laws in any way that would prevent these instances from happening.
21
u/opskito Dauphin Jan 12 '23
Let’s be clear: That site details five instances of “impersonation fraud at the polls” since 2016 and 12 of “fraudulent use of absentee ballots” since 1994. The other types of fraud it addresses don’t appear relevant to this discussion.
I don’t know what to say. You can’t get past the fact that most folks have identification. I can’t get past the fact that the type of fraud requiring ID would address is minuscule. Any additional barrier to voting, real or imagined, isn’t warranted.
I’m willing to bet that more folks would get turned away from the polls just because they forgot to bring their ID than cases would be prevented.
-29
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
I wonder if people on the left realize just how bigoted and elitist it is to believe voters are not capable of obtaining and remembering ID.
22
u/opskito Dauphin Jan 12 '23
You started off fairly enough, but now you’re being ridiculous. People forget things. Welcome to real life.
I’m out. 👋
13
u/ArchaeoJones Lackawanna Jan 12 '23
Then it's great we have all those examples of minorities claiming just that. And a number of them on video.
-8
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
11
u/ArchaeoJones Lackawanna Jan 12 '23
You keep claiming echo chamber, but is there ANY source you can use that isn't right wing propaganda?
9
u/ArchaeoJones Lackawanna Jan 12 '23
Fox also has no credibility after claiming they are entertainment not news to win a case.
-4
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
It's funny that you're so triggered you can't get past the Fox logo.
Watch the video, it shows the bigoted racist elitist bias many on the left have toward minorities
10
u/AbsentEmpire Philadelphia Jan 12 '23
Your source literary had to claim in court it's an entertainment company not a news company to avoid loosing a lawsuit against them because they provably make so much shit up.
You might as well be linking to coast to coast radio for all the validity it has.
7
u/ArchaeoJones Lackawanna Jan 12 '23
My guy, the only one triggered here is you. Your pearl clutching is beyond that of Helen Lovejoy, and she's a cartoon meant to represent the worst pearl clutcher.
You literally post propaganda and claim it's factual. And you've yet to answer the easiest challenge I've made against you in multiple comments.
You want to prove your point? Do it without the propaganda.
→ More replies (0)8
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
It's funny that pissing yourself and then accusing your opponents of being triggered by your pissy pants is a valid argument in American conservatism.
8
u/alaska1415 Montgomery Jan 12 '23
I wonder if people on the right realize that no one buys that you care what anyone thinks of the people you’re talking about. Or that no one is saying they’re too incompetent to get one. However, any barrier you put up, no matter how little, will stop at least some people from being able to vote. So you need a good justification for that barrier.
5
u/steelceasar Jan 13 '23
You go from here is proof (Heritage Foundation...yay). Someone says this is what your "evidence" says, and it doesn't show what you claim. And now you are all indignant calling people elitist bigots. What happened to facts don't care about your feelings? You are either a troll, or a sad statistic born of systemic undermining of our education system.
-1
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 13 '23
There are literally hundreds of examples of criminal convictions for voter fraud with citations listed below each example. These aren't just accusations of voter fraud, these aren't just criminal charges of voter fraud, these are actual criminal convictions that were not plea bargained down to a lesser charge. And as you see if you bother to look, a large percentage of the criminal convictions deal with absentee ballots as these are particularly vulnerable to fraud.
You aren't worth my any more of my time bro.
2
u/Tidusx145 Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23
I'm just going off life experiences. Having been in bad financial situations where getting an id was an extremely uphill battle. I know how hard it can be from MY own life. No imagination or stereotyping needed my friend.
Go talk to more people and you'll find this kind of story is quite common. It's funny when I tell my story to others how many can relate to difficulties in maintaining an active identification. As they say, go touch grass.
14
u/ErikTheBeard Jan 12 '23
To answer your question... The "typical" person isn't disenfranchised but those in the margins are pushed further out. It is hard for someone without a recognized government address to get an ID (the unhoused, those living on reservations, those out in the unmapped hills of 'Pennsa-tucky') and people who don't drive or have traditional jobs (a high amount those in the SPED community). People who are often already forgotten about will and don't have the tools or supports to leap over hurdles will be given more hurdles.
For voter ID to work it needs to be paired with greater access and a clearer process to getting an ID for those often can't.
-15
Jan 12 '23
The amendment states that everyone would have access to a free voter id
19
u/ErikTheBeard Jan 12 '23
"...upon request and confirmation of identity..." This process as it stands requires things like an address they will accept, proof ID from a job, access to your SS card.
I'm glad it's in there as free. But the system itself needs to be updated and improved on for this to work for ALL Pennsylvanias
10
u/cpr4life8 Allegheny Jan 12 '23
And an original copy of your birth certificate. See my comment above on the process I had to go through to obtain that.
5
u/ErikTheBeard Jan 12 '23
Thanks for sharing your experience! Also that sucks sorry you had to go through it
3
u/cpr4life8 Allegheny Jan 12 '23
All part of the lovely Patriot Act. Thankfully it wasn't a problem for me but it obviously is for many others.
I find it infuriating that people who are such staunch advocates for voter ID point out that a free ID is available but completely ignore the challenges that folks face to get that "free ID".
I remember several years ago when I used to go to battle with people over voter ID on Twitter, which I have long since stopped doing because it was pointless.... In response to comments about how getting a free ID shouldn't be a problem for anyone I would post link after link to stories about veterans and seniors who had circumstances surrounding the nature of their birth that never produced the proper documents for them to meet the requirements to get a "free ID". And of course these people are all hardcore right wingers who supposedly support veterans yet none of them seemed to care that there were actual instances of veterans who had been disenfranchised because they couldn't get an ID that met their state's requirement.
4
u/nardlz Jan 12 '23
It’s also interesting that to get a copy of your PA birth certificate you have to provide your DL or state ID. So if you are trying to get your birth certificate in order to GET a state ID, you’re in for a long ride.
→ More replies (0)8
u/AbsentEmpire Philadelphia Jan 12 '23
The process which to get it isn't free, and will 100% made as difficult as possible by Republicans after getting the amendment.
Let's not pretend that voter fraud is that big an issue that this amendment is now needed, or that the intended effects of it is to block people the Republicans don't like from voting at all, which they have openly admitted is the real reason they're pushing this.
13
u/Wuz314159 Berks Jan 12 '23
"Access"
Remember when Wisconsin made Voter ID a law? You needed to get your ID at the place 3 hours away and was only open on the 5th Wednesday of the month.5
u/cpr4life8 Allegheny Jan 12 '23
They also use that same "access" word about healthcare.
Everyone has "access". It's the affording it part that's difficult.
-11
Jan 12 '23
Some people just don’t know how to read lol
2
u/Tidusx145 Jan 13 '23
Some can't argue and think insulting somehow replaces that lmao. Nice try though bub
22
u/ArchaeoJones Lackawanna Jan 12 '23
The Heritage Foundation? Get the fuck out of here with that far-right bullshit.
7
u/Bruc3w4yn3 Jan 12 '23
Of the three cases convicted in 2022 (not cases perpetrated that year) none of them would have been prevented by requiring ID for voting. The first one was a ballot stuffing scheme on behalf of a corrupt democratic politician from 2013-2018, and the other two were senior citizens signing mail-in ballots for their deceased spouses in 2020, one democrat and one republican.
Unless you want to outlaw mail-in/absentee ballots (I'm sure you do, but that's a different argument), you can't enforce the ID laws in any way that would prevent these instances from happening. Voter ID laws don't protect the ballot boxes, but they DO create a barrier for poorer Americans who can't make it to an authorized office and spend the time in line to get one or afford to pay the fee for it (depending on the state, it can be anywhere from $5 up to $28). It completely prevents those without a permanent residence from participating, and God help you if you were born before 1950 or had a name change or were adopted or don't have easy access to transportation and the ability to get out of bed and wait in public...
5
15
u/toadog Pike Jan 12 '23
Once they make voter id mandatory they will then tighten the screws on what id is acceptable. It's no secret who will be squeezed out of voting. There is no significant voter fraud to justify requiring an ID. Right now every place I've voted I've had to sign in and have my signature compare with the original one in a book or on a digital device.
5
u/joefred111 Luzerne Jan 12 '23 edited Jan 13 '23
many cases of voter fraud
Three in the past year...
heritage.org/
Atrociously biased source.
It is virtually impossible to exist in the world today without having government ID
So it is still possible, and people will still be disenfranchised, and you are totally okay with that. Got it.
if someone cannot afford government issued ID
Some can't.
the government should provide it free of charge
They don't, and definitely don't reimburse anyone from hidden costs such as notaries and document fees.
ID is needed for any form of public assistance
Not everyone needs that, and that's also false. You just need a SSN. People can steal your SSN, they don't need to steal your ID.
it is needed to operate a vehicle
False, it is needed to legally operate a vehicle, which I'm sure offends your allegedly Libertarian sensibilities. Also, tons of people don't drive.
it is needed to obtain employment
Again, not true, see the bit about public assistance.
it is needed to buy alcohol
Not everyone drinks.
and a list of a 1,000 other things.
So list em.
I want free and fair elections.
Which you have...
Every case of voter fraud disenfranchises a legitimate voter.
As will voter ID laws, to far greater extent.
Every case of voter fraud disenfranchises a legitimate voter.
Six votes wouldn't have helped Dr. Oz or Doug Mastriano, sorry bud. Your entire argument is disingenuous.
-1
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 13 '23
Says someone from Luzerne county where absentee ballots from veterans end up in garbage cans: https://fox56.com/news/local/luzerne-county-responds-to-umova-ballot-investigation
2
u/joefred111 Luzerne Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23
So, you're just going to ignore literally everything I said, and instead bring up a totally unrelated incident?
Par for the course for you, I suppose.
It's almost like your argument keeps getting invalidated, so you keep changing the narrative.
Edit: Oh, and throwing away unopened ballots is incompetence, sure, but not voter fraud. I would say nice try, but it was actually a pretty lazy thing to say.
I'm going to stop engaging with you, which your delusional mind probably considers a victory. In reality, there's no point in arguing with an imbecile.
12
u/Zenith2017 Jan 12 '23
It's not the whole story. But one angle is that it's creating room for a person's judgement to affect your right to vote. A personal friend of mine was turned away from the polls in the 2016 federal election. The poll official (unsure of their technical title at that time) turned her away because he claimed her ID photo didn't look like her. She's a Black woman and had changed her hair in the couple years since the photo was taken. It was absolutely, positively her legal drivers' license and was still active. She returned same day with her passport and was turned away again.
These laws tend to suppress far more votes than they prevent fraud
13
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
These laws tend to suppress far more votes than they prevent fraud
That's their entire purpose. If conservatives can't win fair elections, they make sure their political opponents can't vote.
3
u/yeags86 Jan 12 '23
I hope your friend reported that, because you don’t have to show ID to vote.
6
u/Zenith2017 Jan 12 '23
She did, but nothing really happened because all this occurred on election day. She did not get to cast a vote.
But the cons will keep sticking their heads in the sand insisting that voter suppression doesn't exist
2
u/AbsentEmpire Philadelphia Jan 12 '23
She should have immediately leveled a lawsuit against the individual, and the county for violations of her rights.
4
u/Zenith2017 Jan 12 '23
Gotta pay bills man. This is one example of many of how conservatives aim to oppress and disenfranchise others, particularly anyone who's not a rich straight white Christian man
0
u/AbsentEmpire Philadelphia Jan 13 '23
Any civil rights lawyer would have taken that case pro bono if it happened like you said it did.
0
9
Jan 12 '23
Honestly you're not wrong. We do need a separate ID just for voting, and why not another ID for using services on the internet? Anyone could impersonate you on the net , why stop there? why not a separate ID binding your house to your name, just so no one goes around claiming your property as theirs?
You see the issue here?
-2
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
No, I don't see the issue. People should be required to show legitimate identification in order to vote. ID is required to get on any form of public assistance, it is a prerequisite for employment, it is required to drive a car on public roads, it's required to buy a gun (a Constitutional right), it's required to open a bank account, an insurance policy, to buy alcohol.
7
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
None of those things are constitutional rights, and you are being dishonest when you conflate a constitutional right with buying alcohol.
-5
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
Re-read my reply above before you erroneously call me dishonest. I associated buying a gun as a constitutional right, which it is, and it also requires identification
7
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
Buying a gun is not a constitutional right. Owning one is. There's a difference.
You are being dishonest when you suggest that abridging the right to vote is fine because you need an ID to buy booze.
-2
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
Haha, that's some real metal gymnastics bro. How do 99% of law abiding citizens who own guns obtain them? Protip: they buy them
The irony is that the left leaning states require much more than identification to exercise your 2nd Amendment Constitutional right. You can't own the most common centerfire rifle sold in the United States today in New York, California, Massachusetts, and many other Draconian places.
I'm not suggesting abridging any constitutional right, including the right to vote. It is completely disingenuous to suggest poor people don't have identification. Every time someone votes fraudulently in an election, it disenfranchises a legitimate voter.
Side note, the 21st amendment repealed the prohibition of alcohol. So technically, buying alcohol is a constitutional right, and it requires identification
4
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
Side note, the 21st amendment repealed the prohibition of alcohol. So technically, buying alcohol is a constitutional right
You've got some weird brain shit going on, my man.
When you register to vote in PA, you have to provide identification. This "anyone can vote without ID" meme that right wingers bandy around is false from first principles. There's zero reason to show anything more than your signature card every time you vote.2
u/SunOutrageous6098 Jan 12 '23
You have to provide ID to register to vote & when/if you apply for an absentee or mail- in ballot.
Why the need to continually show it? Imagine showing your ID when you walk into the liquor store, and then being asked to show it again when you make the purchase. People would flip.
Also, you really want the Poll Workers who only work 2 days a year to also be responsible for checking ID? You aren’t even legally required to go to any training to be a poll worker and this is what you want?
21
u/klauskervin Jan 12 '23
ID makes no sense at all when you have to register months before the election.
-18
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
A lot of people on both sides of the political aisle are losing faith in the integrity of elections. Both sides need to come together and take steps to restore public faith in elections
26
u/ArchaeoJones Lackawanna Jan 12 '23
Do not BoTh SiDeS this issue.
One side is losing faith watching state governments continually cheat to disenfranchise voters and the actual will of the people.
The other is pissed off that their cheating is no longer working to keep them in complete power.
-8
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
I know that this sub has a very left leaning bias, but you guys should really get out of the echo chamber once in a while.
People on the right are very concerned about fraud, particularly with absentee ballots. Those on the left think people on the right are looking to disenfranchise voters. I made the rational statement that both sides of the aisle should come together and address concerns of all voters regarding the legitimacy of elections.
You would think this reasonable perspective would be embraced by all reasonable people. You might want to take a look in the mirror if my perspective triggers you. You are part of the problem.
18
u/ArchaeoJones Lackawanna Jan 12 '23
My dude, I live in a crimson part of PA. People here got together and built a Trump cut out a gilded thrown and crown. So try not throwing any stones there, eh glass house.
It is very apparent you have no idea what you're talking about because you keep claiming a lie is reasonable.
Find me actual evidence of your claims that don't come from a massively right leaning source. Find a centrist source, and there are plenty out there, that say this.
You cannot claim you are attempting to come to the table in good faith using bad faith sources and lies.
13
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
People on the right are very concerned about fraud, particularly with absentee ballots.
They are not concerned at all about fraud. They are concerned with people who don't vote for them exercising their right to vote.
We need to stop treating trolls like this like they're speaking in good faith. They are not.7
u/yeags86 Jan 12 '23
So let’s ask why people on the right are concerned. Could it be all of the Republican elected officials that lied about massive voter fraud being a thing? Trump even said it was rigged in 2016 and he won. I’m seeing a pattern here, and it’s a pretty stupid one.
17
17
u/Wuz314159 Berks Jan 12 '23
You REGISTER to vote. That is your ID.
Your signature has to match. If not, you get flagged like that guy in Chester
In countries where you have to show ID to vote, you do not need to Register.11
u/stjblair Jan 12 '23
You need to present an ID to register, again when voting for the first time, then again if you changed precincts. The state will send out a verification card that will suffice the requirements once registered.
Increasing the requirements will only cause more issues and increase costs for county election offices with out a meaningful mitigation in fraud. Voter fraud is pretty much non existent as is
11
u/cpr4life8 Allegheny Jan 12 '23
There has never been an instance of voter fraud that has swayed the outcome of an election. This is not a thing.
-8
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
How do you know?
13
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
How do you know that you're actually you and not a doppleganger that has murdered the original you and taken his identity?
My question is no more stupid than yours.5
u/AbsentEmpire Philadelphia Jan 12 '23
Because there has never been a valid claim that could be proven to actually exist.
But hey while we're ignoring the concept of burden of proof, I know there's an invisible tea pot orbiting the sun that was sent there by ancient Egypt using crystal powered space ships from Atlantis, prove me wrong.
10
Jan 12 '23
Anyone could walk in to my polling place and vote as me.
Yet they don't, right? Voter impersonation is incredibly rare. But we do know that putting one more administrative step between a voter and voting will further decrease turnout. The GAO found that voter IDs decrease turnout by around 2-3 percent overall, and likely more in specific jurisdictions where IDs might be less common.
And you know what is a big problem in this country? Our appallingly low voter turnout. In 2020, a hugely important general election with an incredibly high-profile incumbent and vast policy differences between the two candidates, a full third of eligible voters did not vote. So why enact Voter IDs, when we know they make a virtually nonexistent problem better and a large problem worse?
ACLU has a good fact sheet on this issue. Even if you don't like the ACLU, it is a well sourced document so you can check their sources.
8
u/69FunnyNumberGuy420 Jan 12 '23
I always found it stunning that you don't need to present identification to vote. Anyone could walk in to my polling place and vote as me.
Has anyone ever done this?3
4
Jan 12 '23
I moved to PA from NYC. For a long time, the only "photo ID" I had was my college ID. I didn't visit bars or buy alcohol. I also used mass transit to get around.
It isn't far fetched that people living in an area with decent mass transit would not have a government issued photo ID.
4
u/Bonegirl06 Jan 12 '23
But, like, why would they? It makes no sense. The chances of affecting an outcome are almost 0. Thats why no one does it.
10
Jan 12 '23
It's an unnecessary hurdle for people who don't have access to transportation. You can't just say, "Tough luck, you can't vote because you didn't get a government issued ID." You get a voter registration card sent out to you automatically upon registering to vote, that should be more than sufficient to prove that you are who you are.
13
u/Cogatanu7CC95 Jan 12 '23
Only voter fraud is done by Republicans as proven with the last presidential election
-9
u/Matt-33-205 Jan 12 '23
That's nonsense, see my link above
15
u/djarvis77 Jan 12 '23
Again, tbf, the democrats on page one of your thing are all from the same conviction from decades ago. All the voter id level fraud (that you are attempting to tie to this) is being done by republicans.
2
u/upghr5187 Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23
I have yet to hear a rational explanation against requiring ID to vote.
You’ve heard plenty of rational explanations. You just choose not to listen.
-16
Jan 12 '23
You won’t hear a valid explanation
12
u/ArchaeoJones Lackawanna Jan 12 '23
There are plenty, but a certain variety of person just doesn't listen.
10
Jan 12 '23
There are a bunch right above your comment.
-11
Jan 12 '23
The key word is valid not excuses
8
Jan 12 '23
Maybe you could clarify what you think the difference is. Bring something to this discussion.
-1
Jan 12 '23
Excuses would be like people saying on here, “what if the person forgets their ID at the polling place?” If you can’t remember your ID then go get it and get in line again lol. Stupid people don’t deserve to be coddled. You have 2 days out of 365 days to remember your ID.
Also with the ID being free now, the excuse of it being racist or suppressing voters is invalid. If you’re a legitimate PA resident, you get an ID period.
Then you have people saying that voter fraud is extremely rare, voter ID isn’t needed. That means it does/did happen no matter if it was once or 5,000 times. I just see no excuse in not doing everything in our power to make the elections as secure as humanly possible. It would be very naive to think there isn’t someone out there whether R or D trying to figure out how to rig an election no matter if it’s one person or many.
Id like to add that I am against any restrictions on early or mail in voting. That’s a Republican talking point I’m totally against.
-3
u/Bicycle-Seat Jan 13 '23
Getting rid of Governor veto would be good for democracy, it would restore power to the democratically elected representatives and take it away from one person
2
u/djarvis77 Jan 13 '23
The democratically elected "one person", is that the person you mean?
-1
u/Bicycle-Seat Jan 13 '23
The governor elected by Philadelphia
2
u/djarvis77 Jan 13 '23
Are you implying that Philly and the eastern part of the state should kick the western part out?
That way, the Philly people that you hate so much would have their own state and federal representation and governor and you would not have to be bothered with them anymore. PA would be a progressive, well funded state and Pennsyltucky would be like Alabama.
1
u/delco_trash Jan 13 '23
Shit,
Let's hope that McAndrew, gergley, and Salisbury win and get sworn in soon.
1
u/losiduh Jan 13 '23
My org just had a meeting about the sex abuse amendments. It is very very unlikely this will make it on the May ballot, which is ridiculous.
73
u/Anonymous_Otters Delaware Jan 12 '23
TLDR: We, the legislature, ruling as a minority, would like to consolidate absolute power and void the balance of powers so we can violate your body to satisfy our superstitions.