Here is Pennsylvania’s legal stipulation that there is no voter fraud. Voter I.D. laws are a huge issue that needs more attention, which is why I post the following repeatedly:
New voter registration laws could hurt President Obama. The people suffering the worst consequences of the Voter I.D. laws are most often low income voters, the elderly, the ill who can’t leave home, young voters, minorities, and of course, anyone without transportation (or to put it another way, lean Democratic).And to those who say, “Well, there are always absentee ballots,” some states are now requiring Voter I.D. to qualify for those, too.
Access (transportation) to Voter I.D. centers is one reason so many people are unable to get a new picture I.D. Another is that it costs money, including paying for a copy of a birth certificate or other documents one might need to acquire a new I.D. Hence, Attorney General Holder’s reference to a poll tax.
Remember: Voter fraud is rarer than getting struck by lightning.
All that said, here’s some positive news via TPM:
Closing arguments in the trial over Pennsylvania’s voter ID law wrapped up Thursday, and opponents of the controversial law are feeling pretty good about their odds of prevailing.
Penda D. Hair, co-director of the Advancement Project:
“The state really put up very little defense: hardly any witnesses. … We think this should be a slam dunk victory for plaintiffs which should result in a preliminary injunction.” [...]
Among the reasons they’re feeling confident (according to an Advancement Project press release): state officials admitted they underestimated the number of registered voters without acceptable photo ID, admitted the law will disenfranchise voters, admitted the law will hold different voters to different standards, admitted voters casting an absentee ballot will be able to vote without ID, Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State admitted she didn’t know details about the law’s requirements and Pennsylvania’s House majority leader made comments opponents of the law believe showed the law is politically motivated.
Not to mention the plaintiffs had extremely sympathetic witnesses with extremely credible and valid stories.
More on this story at TPM.