While many countries do require photo ID to vote, and there's nothing wrong with the basic idea if that's what we, as a country, decide to do, the rush is the problem. If we decide to impose this law, then give the citizens several years, perhaps more than one election cycle to get the proper ID for free. And spend a few $ to advertise it and explain properly what proof is needed and provide help to get it.

Why is this such a burden? You most definitely should be required to show ID to vote. It's easy to get a photo ID at any DOT driver's license center (i.e. Dublin). I know people who have done it. If you are elderly or disabled and you can't get to the DOT center, you can easily get a absentee ballot sent to you by providing your name and the last four digits of your social security number. I've confirmed this with a simple phone call to the board of elections.

You will never convince me that there is no voter fraud going on. Go to:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2012/02/millions-of-voter-records-flawed-nearly-2-mil-dead-registered/
http://www.judicialwatch.org/about/
"Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law."
Their 2011 list of the 10 most corrupt politicians includes 4 Republicans and 6 Democrats.

No one ever said that freedom is free. You've got to work at it. It's not a lot to ask and keeping the integrity of the vote is vital. Even one vote can affect the outcome of an election.

This bill was also passed years ago when Ed Rendell was Governor and vetoed by him. There is no rush to get only real voters to the polls but we should be concerned that only real voters get to vote.

While may be easy for many of us to produce photo ID, there are groups of people, mostly elderly and poor, who, while they may have the right to vote, have no photo ID. If they were born in another state, or country, it may be difficult and/or expensive to get proof of birth needed to get photo ID. That's why we need a period of time for the law to be effective.

I wish the politicians were more concerned with getting everyone out to vote instead of disenfranchising a potentially large group of voters solely for political gain.

If the spirit of this law was genuine, it would not be a rush job. I have no problem with photo voter ID, but the intent of this law is voter suppression in the upcoming 2012 election.

If the intent were genuine: 1) the law would be effective in the 2016 election. 2) An effective and massive media education would take place (not run by a GOP partisan); 3) rotating places where photos and IDs can be issued would be identified such as libraries, schools and colleges, DMV, courthouses. You can have your passport photo taken at drugstores!; 4) proof of citizenship would include means of proof in addition to birth certificates, which many do not have, especially the elderly.

How embarrassing that the State had to stipulate that it could not present ONE case of voter fraud. That should tell you everything. For the person who quotes the right wing "Judicial Watch" here's a site for you: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/judicial-watch

Requiring photo Id is similar to treating an illness that doesn't exist. There is no proof that large numbers of unregistered voters or "dead" voters come out to vote. The purpose of the law is to disenfranchise certain groups of people in order to influence an election. The web site referenced above, Judicial Watch, is extremely biased. It only "appears" unbiased if you see things thier way.

This entire thing was concocted by ALEC, an out of state group of extreme right-wing billionaires and corporate CEO's in order to steal the next election. Period. Both sides in the court case stipulated in writing that there were no--0--cases of in person voter fraud on record and none likely in November. To take away the most precious right of a citizen from hundreds of thousands of voters is the most shameful thing I have seen coming out of this Republican dominated state legislature and that is saying something.

I agree with Linda. If this has been on the books since Ed Rendell was Govenor I certainly have never heard of it and it has most certainly not been enforced. I vote i every single election, even the tiniest, and I have never been asked for my ID. It seems odd to suddenly pull it out of the hat just before this most important election. I can only assume that there are many who have a vested interest in denying the poorest and most disenfranchised their equal right to vote. I also believe there needs to be more lead time and energy invested in getting the information to these individuals who do not possess a photo ID.

Wow ToolFoole, you appear to be very angry.

WHen I go to a new bank and open an account I must show 2 or 3 forms of ID to establish myself as a customer. When I purchase a new firearm, a right established under the 2nd ammendment and various case law, I must show 2 forms of ID (in PA).

If showing ID for voting is of such an issue, then let the opponents be consistent and demand that opening a n account at a new bank and purchasing a firearm should NOT required ID. NUFF SAID! Be consistent people.

Don: I agree, consistency is best where it makes sense. However, I understand there are people who do not have a bank account and have no need of a firearm, but would still like to vote in this election as they have done for perhaps many elections in the past. I just believe we should try to include everyone and not put up NEW obstacles in such a hurry.

I agree Kate and Linda. Well said!

As the saying goes, "the best democrats are the dead ones, they are the votes that carry an election". A picture id solves only half the problem. We made the voters in Iraq have a purple thumb when the voted. I am in favor of that also as that measure would cause a drastic decline in voter fraud.

It seems that the conservatives have the momentum and are in the driver’s seat. But they will do what they always do…….hit the wall at full speed

Every one should have to put there finger in the ink well like foreign countries then we know you all ready voted, and you can't do it again. Nothing wrong with ID.

You have a right to vote,this however is not yet a police state where you have to present papers when ordered by the authorities...yet,but republicans like Corbett are working on it.How can anyone possibly connect your right not to have citizen documents with your right to vote.You already identify yourself when you register...if they want to make the voter registration card a photo Id,I have no problem with that.But it should be mailed in with absentee ballots (where voter fraud actually occurs) and then returned after the election.Forcing people to get various state approved Id's places an undue and restrictive burden on citizens to practice their franchise.

I always thought it was very strange that I didn't have to show ID. Anybody could show up and vote for me! Sounds like an idea long overdue.

We are violating the rights of dead people to vote.

Dead people need to be able to vote for whatever democrat they want.

Of course this is not a "unreasonable burden" to voting, as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in upholding Indiana's photo ID law in 2008 by a 6-3 margin. (That's a bigger margin, by the way, by the same Court that upheld Obamacare!)

And voter ID laws have been in existence since 1990, so enough with the "rush to pass the bill". It was no more a rush than was the ACA.

The fact is Democrats want no restrictions because they don't care WHO votes, so long as they vote Democratic! Their real problem, which is WHY they whine so much about the photo ID law (Today The Philly Inquirer has not 1 but 2 articles about the "unbearable" requirements of the photo ID law!), is that as of July only about 2800 people in the entire state had sought the proper ID! Their constituency simply doesn't show the commitment needed to meet a very reasonable requirement for voter responsibility.

You can be sure if there was a photo ID requirement for receiving new ACA benefits or its expanded Medicare coverage, the lines at PENNDOT offices would be very long and suddenly so very easy to get to.

if people cannot get to a penndot center to get their FREE Id how do they get to the polls?Seems like they are perfect candidates to vote absentee!This issue is a red herring fostered by the democrats!

Of course! This would eliminate voters being paid to vote more than once, under someone else's identity. Wow, what a concept, something legal and legitimate!

For anyone that works at the polls, assuming this law stands, the upcoming election will be tough duty. ID confusion and angst, coupled with higher volume seen for a Presidential Election, will produce the longest lines ever. It will likely mean keeping the polls open in some cases 2 hours beyond 8 PM making what is already a 15 hour day (including count & certification) longer still. It will reduce per hour payment below $6/hour. Minimal compensation for tolerating ID or wait-time anger. I am dreading it. I would like to see a longer implementation period on the law to smooth out the confusion and remove the political stigma.

Unfortunately, this is now an absolute requirement to fair elections. Anyone who believes that voter fraud is not rampant is either totally naive or it simply doesn't fit with their politics. Ever notice how many dead people are still registered, and vote, in the Philadelphia Wards? As far as a photo ID being an unfair imposition, they are being offered free of charge.... those without would obtain one if voting was actually valued.

I'm really on board with the fingerprint idea. That way, everyone who wants to vote would be able, and no ID (like ID's can't be falsified) issue. Problem solved. I'd give my fingerprint in order to vote.

For all those posting about the supposed cheating in Phila and Pitts, why, oh why, did the state stipulate that they could not find ONE example of in person voter fraud. Not one.

Why weren't the Republicans able to find it if it exists?

I think it is great how many of the folks who state that having an ID does not create a hardship for the poor, the elderly and those with mental illness are donating their time and money to assist folks with paying for the supportive documentation needed to get the "free ID" as well as to take them to any locations they need to go to fill out the forms for the documentation. And the outpouring of offers to then take folks to the polls on election day, it is just so heartwarming to see that these folks are not trying to suppress the poor, the elderly and those with mental illness--they are truly dedicated to making certain everyone gets to vote! Rumor has it that ALEC is spending $30 million to hire ID coaches to assist those who need support, money and transportation to secure an ID! What a wonderful way to create jobs and make certain that the country continues to value everyone's vote...what is that sound? What? The damn alarm! Don't tell me it's time to wake up already! Well it was a nice dream while it lasted...

Wwaaaa, cry me a river! Save the drama for your Mama. How much of a hardship is it to call or write or email or use the votesPA website to get an absentee ballot? There is NO NEED to "go" anywhere! All they need to do is provide their name and the last 4 digits of their SS#. In the time it took you to write your post, you could have gone to the website to see for yourself all the myriad of ways for anyone in any situation to vote. But that doesn't make for good drama.
Here it is again, in case you're so inclined:
Home page:
http://www.votespa.com/portal/server.pt/community/home/13514
Photo ID page:
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt?open=514&objID=1174114&parentname=ObjMgr&parentid=4&mode=2

I've researching the PA Commonwealth Court Judge - Robert E. Simpson Jr. - whose will determine whether the PA Voter ID is LEGAL. From what I can find my evaluation is that he will find the PA Voter ID an infringement on the legal right to vote as written in the PA Constitution.
Here a link to more information about Judge Simpson Jr. http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20120813_Voter-ID_case_puts_spotlight_on_Pa__judge.ht