.

Local Politicians React to Voter ID Law Injunction

Initial comments from Marple Newtown politicians on Tuesday's Voter ID decision.

Following the delayed implementation of the Voter ID Law's key provision—requiring voters to produce photo identification at the ballot—both Marple Newtown democratic and republican politicians.

Many democrats showed favor for the postponed implementation of the law, including Tony Campisi, chairman of the Marple Newtown Democratic Party.

"This is a victory for fairness and common sense," said Campisi. "The law was clearly rushed into effect to have an impact on the presidential contest. The House Republican Leader admitted as much. So to have it put on hold for this election so it does not  disenfranchise thousands of voters and randomly take away a fundamental right of citizenship was the right thing to do for the voters."

While republicans, including Leonard Altieri III, second vice chair of the Newtown Township Republican Committee, shared his disappointment with the ruling but stayed positive.

"While I am upset with Judge Simpson's ruling to postpone the full implementation of this commonsense law, myself and others involved in local politics will continue to educate and familiarize voters for when the law goes into effect in 2013," said Altieri.

He continued, "Though this is a setback in ensuring our electoral process is protected from fraud, court case after court case has continually ruled that Pennsylvania’s Voter ID Law is constitutional. In closing, despite the rhetoric that opponents of the Voter ID Law spew, polling has shown over and over again that individuals on both side of the political isle support this commonsense reform.”

Who do you agree with? Tell us in the comments.

For the initial Patch Voter ID story, click here.

For the analysis of Judge Robert Simpson's opinion, click here.

Sam Fran Scavuzzo contributed to this report.

Bradford J. Crompton October 03, 2012 at 03:29 PM
The voter ID law initiated in every state solely by Republican "lawmakers" and I use the term loosely was a clear move to restrict the voting rights of minorities and the elderly in an attempt to rig the election and swing it to Romney. The Republicans will dig up names of the deceased and cast votes to win at any cost. Their concern for fairness is not genuine.
L. Ferguson October 03, 2012 at 05:08 PM
I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH IDENTIFICATION BUT THE SPEED IN WHICH THIS LAW WAS PASSED MUST HAVE BROKEN A 'RECORD'. I AM NOT CONVINCED THAT THIS IS NOT A REPUBLICAN SNEAKY MOVE TO INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
Dannytheman October 03, 2012 at 06:18 PM
well, the law was not deemed to be unconstitutional, so while we the people who want our one vote protected and secured will get our chosen law next year and from then forward. For me it was about the law, not about the timing.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something