The Republican American of Waterbury (Conn.), on voter ID ruling in Pennsylvania, from Aug. 17, 2012:
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson has declined to overturn Pennsylvania's photo-ID law, so would-be voters will have to come up with something to meet this requirement - typically, a driver's license, but other free or low-cost ID cards are readily available - between now and Nov. 6.
"The photo ID requirement ... is a reasonable, non-discriminatory, non-severe burden when viewed in the broader context of the widespread use of photo ID in daily life," Judge Simpson wrote. "The Commonwealth's asserted interest in protecting public confidence in elections is a relevant and legitimate state interest sufficiently weighty to justify the burden."
Some burden.
People who want to vote will have to rouse themselves to secure an ID card sometime during the next 11 weeks. You'd think Judge Simpson was insisting they build an ark or a perpetual-motion machine, to hear the left screech about disenfranchisement. Yes, such requirements have potential to suppress vote counts for Democratic candidates - but the lack of the requirements has potential to enable voter fraud by those same Democrats, as authors John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky described in their new book "Who's Counting."
Wouldn't it be refreshing if Democrats and their support groups actually hit the streets and educated eligible voters on their ID obligations and civic duty, rather than hiring lawyers to obstruct reasonable efforts to curb election fraud?
Online: