Voter ID measure would be too restrictive
I’ve just finished reading Tuesday’s editorial, in which you tout the “GOP’s sensible ID measure.” You ask, “How many poor people do you know who don’t possess at least one of the following?” (emphasis added).
While it’s true, in a rural area such as ours, with limited public transportation options, even most poor people have driver’s licenses, that is most certainly not true in major urban areas.
In seeking to debunk the objections of opponents (such as the non-partisan League of Women Voters) you raise the history of Fayette County’s personal care home scandal.
Yet this legislation would do nothing to combat a repeat of such a scheme. It only targets people who actually show up at their polling place.
You quote Republican leader Sam Smith with the commendation, “We know what he was talking about….” but neither you (nor he, to my knowledge) has offered any evidence. (“It’s far more likely….” doesn’t count as evidence – just a statement of your suspicion.)
Let me be clear: A genuine, non-partisan effort to deal with problems in the election system (such as our recent history) would be most welcome.
An election-year attempt to suppress urban votes is not.
As a registered Republican, I find the efforts of Republican election officials in other states to discourage poor and minority voters a major embarrassment.
May it not happen here in Pennsylvania.
L. Wesley Boots
Uniontown