by Sara Mullen, Associate Director, ACLU of Pennsylvania
The eleventh day of the voter ID trial proved to be an interesting mixture of boredom and drama. After a long trial, everyone involved was looking forward to closing arguments today. Instead, Judge McGinley once again closed the courtroom to everyone but attorneys in the case, leaving the dozen or so journalists and other observers to hang out in the lobby for almost two hours as the two sides continued to tangle over the Department of State (DOS) ID “exception spreadsheet.” The debate is a critical one to the case, as it gets to the issue of whether or not these IDs are actually easily accessible for voters.
The DOS exception spreadsheet is a list produced by the Dept. of State of roughly 600 voters who applied for the DOS ID – the ID the commonwealth claims is easily available to all – at PennDOT but who left without the ID in their possession. The debate between the two sides has been whether those individuals did ultimately receive the ID, how long it took, and why there was a delay in processing them. Opposing counsel fought over discussing the issue in open court, claiming that confidential PennDOT information might be revealed. Petitioners provided abundant assurances that no confidential information would be made public and believe that the real reason for the request for a closed courtroom is to keep the problems with the DOS ID system, which has the potential to disenfranchise voters if the law goes into effect, from being discussed publicly.
The morning began with the cross examination by the commonwealth of Bryan Niederberger from BLDS. Mr. Niederberger was a rebuttal witness put on the stand yesterday over the objections of the commonwealth. He produced a report analyzing multiple documents produced by opposing counsel during discovery and the trial. He examined the data multiple ways, including versions that took into account the commonwealth’s disputed claims (they claim that 144 individuals on the list of 600+ names were erroneously included on the exception spreadsheet because they have another form of PennDOT ID). Even assuming the commonwealth’s claims are correct, the bottom line is that out of 2,530 people who applied for a DOS ID on or after September 25 (the date the new “streamlined” DOS ID procedure went into effect), at least 56 validly registered voters who went to PennDOT before the November 2012 election did not receive their DOS ID in time for the election. Seven of the 56 never received the ID. (See page 2 of the report.) If the voter ID law had been in effect in November, these voters would have been disenfranchised.
Lawyers for the two sides retreated to their respective conference rooms to plan next steps. A clerk for the judge attempted to do some shuttle diplomacy, visiting each side to try to reach an agreement about the data. For a while it looked like the commonwealth was going to call rebuttal witnesses to rebut the petitioners’ rebuttal witness.
Journalists and other observers were finally able to enter the courtroom around 11:15 a.m. The commonwealth said it would not call any more witnesses but did file a motion asking the judge to dismiss the case, claiming the petitioners did not have standing. (The motion was not unexpected and is a fairly standard practice.)
In a surprise move, Judge McGinley announced that closing arguments would be tomorrow, August 1, at 10 a.m. rather than this afternoon. The trial has already lasted several days longer than expected.
Later in the afternoon, the judge issued a scheduling order pushing back the date of his ruling on petitioners’ request that the court block enforcement of the voter ID law until a final ruling has been made on the law. Originally due August 9, Judge McGinley will now issue an order on extending the preliminary injunction by August 19, 2013.
Voter ID Trial Day 11: Closing Arguments Delayed as Dispute over Data Continued
Is junk food getting in the way of your wellness goals? These 3 healthy alternatives could help you on your way to better health.
1. Are you always craving ice-cream?
You've probably heard that bananas are full of vitamins and minerals. They are packed with vitamin B6, vitamin C, manganese, and potassium. They also contain magnesium, vitamin A, protein, copper, phosphorus, riboflavin, folate, fiber, and iron—all for about 110 calories per banana.
How about some Banana Ice-cream?
Here is how it’s done:
Cut up and freeze a few ripe bananas. Place the frozen bananas in a blender and blend away. At first the bananas will spin around and stay icy. Keep stopping the machine and use a wooden spoon to loosen the mixture if it stops moving. At some point, the bananas will suddenly turn creamy, like soft-serve ice cream. If they do not, add a little milk and blend again. Serve right away or freeze in a lidded container. For the adventurous, add nutmeg or cinnamon immediately before serving.
2. Are cookies you weakness?
An apple a day keeps the doctor away, right? I'm not talking about putting down the cookies and picking up an apple, I'm talking about a Frankenstein hybrid of the two—lets combine the best of both worlds. Take the vitamins found in apples (vitamin A, C, B1, B2, B6, folate, niacin, etc...), add the American greatness of a cookie, and you have a great product!
The applesauce substitute!
Here is how it's done:
This is a perfect sleight of hand trick that you can do to replace butter with applesauce. The ratio of applesauce to butter is one to one: if a recipe calls for 1/2 cup of butter, simply substitute with 1/2 cup of applesauce. You can also replace a large egg with ¼ cup of applesauce.
3. Are chips crunching your style?
Do you find yourself craving salty, deep-fried potato chips? If you open a bag, you’ll likely devour half! Chips contain a lot of calories and fat—about 150 calories per ounce.
Try air-popped popcorn! Popcorn is crunchy, salty, and awesome! If you go light on the butter (try substituting with lime juice) and salt, air-popped popcorn can be a very healthy alternative with only 30 calories per cup.
Sources:
http://vitamins.lovetoknow.com/What_Vitamins_and_Minerals_Are_in_Bananas
http://www.fitsugar.com/How-Substitute-Applesauce-Butter-Eggs-25207483
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/10/07/healthy-food-substitutes/
http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/food-dining/2013/05/21/recipe-for-one-ingredient-banana-ice-cream/Ncl8QvvRWu5PPmkqAhVRDP/story.html
Healthy Alternatives For Junk Food Cravings
by Sara Mullen, Associate Director, ACLU of Pennsylvania
The tenth day of the voter ID trial kicked off with a frequent flier on the witness stand, Jonathan Marks, the Department of State’s Commissioner for the Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislations, who has testified on four of the 10 days of trial so far. Mr. Walczak, legal director for the ACLU of Pennsylvania and an attorney for the petitioners, picked up the cross-examination of Mr. Marks that began last Thursday.
Mr. Marks’s testimony under cross examination summed up many of the arguments petitioners had made throughout the trial. He testified that the nine counties that have no PennDOT driver’s license centers have anywhere from 9 to 32 polling locations each. The point was brought home when Mr. Marks testified that his current polling place is one city block from his home in Perry County – which does not have a single PennDOT driver’s license center. The nearest PennDOT driver’s license center to Mr. Marks is over 34 miles away.
Mr. Marks also admitted that several larger colleges still do not student IDs that are valid for voting because they lack an expiration date and do not provide stickers, including Duquesne in Pittsburgh and Haverford, Villanova, and Widener in the southeastern part of the state.
Mr. Marks also testified that many counties struggle to keep up with the rush of voter registrations at the registration deadline. In fact, he said, Philadelphia specifically has a backlog and is usually still processing them literally days before the election. This fact is particularly important for the DOS ID process, as the Dept. of State holds on to DOS IDs until a voter shows up on the voter rolls and then sends the ID by two or three day UPS to the voter. (DOS IDs are only available to verified registered voters.)
The second witness of the day was Megan Sweeney, Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Commonwealth. She spearheaded the Department of State’s education efforts about the voter ID law. She testified about the department’s outreach to state agencies, counties, and others organizations about the law. She worked with Bravo group to produce the state’s educational materials and attended 40-50 events. She also did outreach to organizations that worked with nursing homes and similar facilities eligible to print their own voter IDs on regular printer paper. Under cross examination, Ms. Sweeney admitted no one at the Dept. of State tracked how many nursing homes, personal care homes, or assisted living facilities actually produce IDs that can be used for voting.
After Ms. Sweeney’s testimony, the controversy over the DOS ID exceptions sheet erupted again. The debate stems from a spreadsheet of 615 names on the “exceptions spreadsheet,” which is a document created by the Department of State from the Sharepoint database to track any voter who attempted to get a DOS ID and left PennDOT without one.
It is important to know the DOS ID process in order to understand this controversy. PennDOT will only issue a DOS ID to registered voters. When a person applies for a DOS ID, PennDOT calls the Dept. of State to confirm the voter’s registration. If he or she does not show up on the rolls, PennDOT creates the photo ID anyway, fills out a paper voter registration form, and sends the ID and the voter registration form to the Dept. of State for processing. The voter registration information is sent on to the county, which is responsible for entering voter registrations into the system. The Dept. of State then keeps the DOS ID until the voter’s registration appears in the system, then they send it via regular UPS (not express) to the voter.
In December of 2012, Mr. Marks sent an email to PennDOT asking for information about the names of 194 people whose paper voter registration forms were sent along by PennDOT to the Dept. of State with no DOS ID attached. The PennDOT employee replied that 144 of those individuals had some other form of PennDOT ID. However, due to confidentiality issues, PennDOT would not tell Mr. Marks which of those 194 names were on the list of 144. These 194 names appear on the DOS exceptions spreadsheet of 615 names. These numbers may sound small, but given that only 3,830 DOS IDs have been issued in total, the way these DOS applications are handled is important evidence for understanding how well the DOS ID process – the card of supposed “liberal access” – is working.
Judge McGinley has asked repeatedly during the trial for the two sides to agree on how to classify what happened with the voters on the exceptions list, some of whom either did not ever receive PennDOT ID or received it long after they had applied. The commonwealth says it has confidentiality concerns about the information on the spreadsheet.
This afternoon, petitioners attempted to finally solve the mysteries around the exceptions spreadsheet by calling Bryan Niederberger from BLDS, who has access to the confidential data, to testify about the raw numbers of voters on the spreadsheet and the resolution of their applications for the DOS ID. However, the commonwealth objected and for the second time this trial, the judge agreed that the court session would be held “in camera,” which means it was closed to everyone except counsel in the case, the witness, and the judge and courtroom staff. Petitioners objected to closing the proceeding to the public but were overruled.
Mr. Niederberger’s cross will continue tomorrow morning, possibly still in camera. Closing arguments for both sides are also expected tomorrow.
Voter ID Trial Day 10: Controversy Continues as Courtroom Closed to Public
"First things first...We are truly blessed to have the means to set a pretty table and invite our friends to join us for good food and fellowship. I am mindful that many are not so fortunate. My daughter has a passion for the work of the Food Bank. As a singer-songwriter, she has written and recorded a song that is the anthem for the world wide Crop Hunger Walk project. Her song, "Raise Your Voice" is featured in their video. I've included a link in the side margin of my blog. I hope that it will encourage you to support projects in your community that contribute to the effort to overcome hunger.
*******************************************************************************
I'm guessing that the grand majority of us spent at least a modicum of time last week paying attention to all things British, in particular William, Cate, and Baby George. With that in mind, I was contemplating Jolly Olde England as I set about to design my contribution to Cuisine Kathleen's White Challenge for this week's Let's Dish. The image that kept invading my brain was of the formal gardens found in some of the great castles through Great Britain...Blenheim Palace and Hampton Court. They were known as Tudor Gardens, and they were the inspiration for my tablescape this week.
Bringing the outside inside...white with touches of green. I made the green tablecloth. Tip: I think that it's much easier and quicker to sew a fabric cording around the hem of the cloth than to hem a round cloth. Give it a try!
The creamy white matelasse cloth was an inexpensive eBay get. I often like to create a white-on-white color story. It adds movement to an all white table...and interest.
The centerpiece is highlighted by elements that reminded me of shapes that we might find in a formal English garden...
The Rosenthal Sansoucci tureen was reminiscent of lovely marble sculptures. To elevate the tureen, I used the Fenton Silver Crest cake pedestal...I was thinking fountain...or maybe birdbath. Both were eBay acquisitions.
My "go-to" Lenox white urns each held a topiary ball made of dried and lacquered Hypericum berries...both are classic forms suitable for a Tudor garden.
The whitewashed carved finials reminded me of the sculpted evergreen trees found in a formal garden. Of course, come autumn, I'll probably tell you that they look like pinecones. I bought them from a local antiques store. I like the texture and organic feel that they add to the design.
A pair of lovely blossoms for my garden... the Vietri optical acid green goblet was paired with the Rosenthal Iris goblet, one of the patterns from my wedding crystal.
Finishing touches...the green hemstitch napkin was caught in the Coalport Countryware napkin ring. The gold bamboo flatware was a garage sale find....maker and pattern unknown. The butterpat is also Haviland Ranson.
Spot on, I say. Just right for a proper English tea.
I wish that you could be here to join me. We could discuss all things royal! Cheerio!
This week I'll be joining:
Susan @ Between Naps on the Porch for Tablescape Thursday
Lunch in a Tudor Garden
by Molly Tack-Hooper, Staff Attorney, ACLU of Pennsylvania
Day 9 of the voter ID trial was occupied mostly with a heated debate about the efforts of plaintiffs’ statistical expert (Dr. Siskin, who testified on day 2 of the trial) to quantify the number of Pennsylvania voters who lack adequate photo ID, and whether a more precise count is possible.
Previously, Dr. Siskin had calculated that 511,415 registered voters listed in the official SURE voter database would lack an ID valid for voting under the voter ID law from PennDOT or the Department of State (DOS). Today, the commonwealth offered the testimony of Dr. William Wecker in a weak attempt to demonstrate that Dr. Siskin’s analysis was so imprecise as to be unreliable. The theme of Wecker’s critique of Dr. Siskin’s statistical analysis was that Dr. Siskin could and should have accounted for additional circumstances that might reduce the total number of disenfranchised voters.
On cross examination, plaintiffs’ counsel (Mike Rubin, of Arnold & Porter) systematically dismantled each of Wecker’s suggested methods of generating a more “reliable” count of voters who lack ID.
One of Wecker’s more significant criticisms of Dr. Siskin was that Siskin did not measure and account for voters who lack a state-issued ID but do have a student ID that meets the voter ID requirements. Wecker argued that such a measurement would have significantly reduced Siskin’s tally of voters without ID, and he attempted to demonstrate that such a calculation is possible by using geo-coded data to determine the number of voters aged 18-28 who lived within a 1-mile radius of each of Pennsylvania’s colleges and universities. Using this method, Wecker concluded that there were 48,046 people who likely had access to a student ID that could be used for voting and should thus have been excluded from Siskin’s list.
As Rubin walked Wecker through this calculation, nearly every assumption underlying Wecker’s analysis fell apart, revealing that Wecker’s calculation dramatically overstated the number of registered voters who could rely on a student ID to vote.
First, Wecker admitted that he had arrived at the conclusion that there were 48,000 voters with student ID by counting every Pennsylvania college or university that was eligibleto issue student IDs that could be used to vote, including the schools that had elected not to issue such IDs. Wecker conceded that he had not attempted to determine which schools on his list actually issued valid voter IDs. Although defendants possessed this information and produced it in discovery, they did not provide it to Wecker, and he did not ask them for it.
Next, Rubin demonstrated to the Court that Wecker’s method of determining how many registered PA voters attended each school by drawing 1-mile-radius circles around the school bordered on the absurd when applied to non-rural schools. Rubin showed the Court a map illustrating Wecker’s “catchment areas” for the Philadelphia schools that issue valid student voting IDs, which covered huge swaths of Philadelphia’s Center City and several other neighborhoods. When this map was expanded to include the schools that Wecker had counted that were merely eligible to start issuing such IDs, the catchment areas swept in breathtaking expanses of Philadelphia’s densely populated urban centers. Rubin performed the same exercise with a map of Pittsburgh that showed only the schools there that Wecker had counted that were not issuing valid student IDs, which virtually blanketed all of Pittsburgh and accounted for thousands of people whom Wecker incorrectly assumed had access to appropriate student ID.
Despite Wecker’s emphatic refrain that Dr. Siskin’s analysis was so limited as to be unreliable, Wecker conceded, over and over, that there were inherent limitations on the data available. Wecker stated at various times that it was a “fool’s errand” to try to come up with an actual count of voters without ID by comparing the SURE and PennDOT and DOS databases, and that he didn’t expect it could be done “perfectly” or that there was a “perfect” method or number available. “It’s just as hard for me as it is for [Dr. Siskin],” Wecker conceded, describing his own calculations as a “rough cut” and “not terribly refined.” Confronted repeatedly with the astounding shortcomings in his own methodology, Wecker ultimately suggested that his flawed calculations were nonetheless damning because they indicated there could be “some” people on Siskin’s list who should be excluded, and protested that he didn’t have “time, or a chance, or a need” to figure out whether there was a more reliable statistical method available to Dr. Siskin. Wecker was merely there to point out that there were possible limitations in Siskin’s process — a fact Siskin already pointed out himself.
Trial resumes on Tuesday, July 30, at 9:15 a.m. with testimony from Jonathan Marks, Commissioner of the Bureau of Commissions, Elections, and Legislation with the Pennsylvania Department of State.
Voter ID Trial Day 9: The Commonwealth’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Statistician
According to the American Academy of Dermatology, on an average day in the United States, more than a million people tan in indoor tanning facilities. Almost 70% of those people are Caucasian females ages 16 – 29. Additionally, many more people tan outdoors on a regular basis at the pool, in the park, or wherever they can catch those extra rays of sun.
With so many voices in the media and health world talking about tanning and how it’s good or bad, it’s important to know the truth. Here are five myths about tanning debunked!
Myth #1 – “I have to have a tan to look good.”
Although you may think your skin looks good now, overtime, tanning will age your skin prematurely. You can develop brown spots, cataracts, sagging skin, fine lines and wrinkles, and may even have a “leathery” look.
Myth #2 – “Only old people get skin cancer.”
More and more young people are getting skin cancer! The risk for melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, increases by 75% if you tan indoors before the age 35. Currently, skin cancer is the second most common form of cancer in women ages 20 – 29.
Myth #3 – “Having a ‘base’ tan will protect me from getting sunburned later on.”
Any tan is an indication of skin damage. Because of this, in reality, there is no such thing as a safe tan.
Myth #4 – “Tanning is the best way to get vitamin D.”
Although sunshine definitely activates the production of vitamin D in the body, it is not necessary to tan for long amounts of time to experience those benefits. Most people can get their daily dose of vitamin D from their normal outdoor activities, proper nutrition, and vitamin supplements.
Myth #5 – “Tanning indoors is safer than tanning outside.”
Both tanning indoors and outdoors can cause skin cancer. Sometimes people think that tanning indoors is safer because it’s “controlled.” However, this controlled amount of UV exposure is high and those who tan frequently will receive significantly more UV exposure over a year than they would from the sun.
You can learn more about protecting your skin from the sun in the previous blog post, “Protecting Your Skin from the Summer Sun.”
Sources:
"ASDS — American Society for Dermatologic Surgery." MYTH VS. FACT: The Real Truth about Tanning, Tanning Beds and Sun Protection. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.asds.net/_NewsPage.aspx?id=56>.
Doheny, Kathleen. "Tanning Myths: What's True, What's Hype?" WebMD. WebMD, n.d. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.webmd.com/beauty/sun/tanning-myths-whats-true-whats-hype?page=2>.
"Indoor Tanning." American Academy of Dermatology. American Academy of Dermatology, n.d. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.aad.org/media-resources/stats-and-facts/prevention-and-care/indoor-tanning#.UeluODdNp6Y>.
"Skin Cancer Myths vs. Facts." Skin Cancer Foundation. Skin Cancer Foundation, n.d. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.skincancer.org/skin-cancer-information/skin-cancer-facts/myths-vs-facts>.
"The Truth About Tanning” Infographic." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 03 July 2013. Web. 19 July 2013. <http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/skin/basic_info/infographic.htm>.
Myths About Tanning
By Sara Mullen, Associate Director, ACLU of Pennsylvania
The commonwealth’s other witness of the day was Kurt Myers, Deputy Secretary for Safety Administration, whose duties include overseeing driver and vehicle services. He testified that PennDOT has issued 12,981 free-for-voting non-driver’s photo IDs and an additional 3,830 DOS IDs since the law went into effect (the DOS ID wasn’t available until August 27, 2012). He noted that every photo of an individual taken for a PennDOT ID stays in their system indefinitely and that on rare occasions, such as someone being away on military duty, PennDOT could print a new valid ID using a photo on file.
Mr. Myers stated that under current protocol, PennDOT employees do not ask customers if they need a free ID for voting but instead ask them for what purpose they want an ID. If customers do not mention voting, they are not told of the option to obtain a free ID. He seemingly did not understand the difference between a PennDOT employee proactively asking an individual if he or she needs the ID for voting and the more open-ended question of “what do you need an ID for?” After prolonged questioning on the issue, Myers said if it would make things easier, he will “issue an edict tomorrow” requiring PennDOT employees to ask customers if they need an ID for voting.
Court resumes tomorrow at 9 a.m. and is tentatively scheduled to conclude for the day at 3 p.m. Witnesses include Jonathan Marks and Dr. William Wecker, an expert witness who will be critiquing the report submitted by the petitioners' expert witness, Dr. Bernard Siskin.
Voter ID Trial Day 8: The Commonwealth’s Case
"First things first...We are truly blessed to have the means to set a pretty table and invite our friends to join us for good food and fellowship. I am mindful that many are not so fortunate. My daughter has a passion for the work of the Food Bank. As a singer-songwriter, she has written and recorded a song that is the anthem for the world wide Crop Hunger Walk project. Her song, "Raise Your Voice" is featured in their video. I've included a link in the side margin of my blog. I hope that it will encourage you to support projects in your community that contribute to the effort to overcome hunger.
*********************************************************************************
It was a gorgeous late spring day, and we were gathering to celebrate my friend Cindy's birthday. Somedays Mr. Sunshine just seems to enjoy cooperating with my camera.
...Small group of five.....games table in the living room.
Green hydrangeas were placed in the Fenton pink ruffled coin dot bowls.
A single cluster of rhododendrons was slipped into an assortment of Waterford crystal posy vases next to each place setting. I occasionally find the vases at estate sales and antique stores, and if I can pick one up for a great deal, it comes home with me.
On any given day, the Coalport Exotic Bird, Z3137, is my favorite of all my patterns. I've been searching for it for ten years, and in that time, I've located 6 dinner plates. Just about the time that I give up on finding any more, one will pop up on eBay...so far for a very reasonable price.
The Oneida Modern Baroque flatware seemed an obvious choice for today. The Limoges open salt belonged to our Nana. I chose the apple green hemstitched napkin and the Coalport Countryware napkin ring just for fun and whimsy. Cindy loves pink and green.
For our wine...our sweet Nana's antique French cut crystal goblet. I've never been able to identify it, but antique dealers always tell me that it's French. For water or tea, the Waterford Simply Lilac goblet. I like the way that they add additional texture and reflective value to my design.
The antique Heisey cut crystal pitcher, found at a local antique store, was my birthday present for Cindy.
More gifts for the birthday girl...
Ready to go! It's going to be a wonderful day filled with blessed food, laughter, conversation, and fellowship. Passing my way? I'd love to set a table and share a meal with you!
Parties I'll be joining this week:
Let's Dish @ Cuisine Kathleen
Tutorials, Tips, & Tidbits with Yvonne @ Stone Gable
Centerpiece Wednesday @ The Style Sisters
Tablescape Thursday with Susan @ Between Naps on the Porch
Seasonal Sundays @ The Tablescaper
Parties I'll be joining this week:
Let's Dish @ Cuisine Kathleen
Tutorials, Tips, & Tidbits with Yvonne @ Stone Gable
Centerpiece Wednesday @ The Style Sisters
Tablescape Thursday with Susan @ Between Naps on the Porch
Seasonal Sundays @ The Tablescaper
Birthday Luncheon for Cindy, 6.13
by Sara Mullen, Associate Director, ACLU of Pennsylvania
Attorneys for the plaintiffs concluded their case today with video depositions of three elderly long-time voters, two of whom do not have valid ID and face significant challenges to getting to PennDOT to obtain one, and a third who was forced to make three separate trips (each 2 hours round-trip) before finally securing a Dept. of State (DOS) for-voting-only ID. The videos paint a clear picture of the hurdles many senior voters face when trying to obtain an ID.
The first video was of Patricia Norton, a great-grandmother of five who lives in Berks County. Because she has pins and rods in her back, she uses a wheelchair or a walker to get around and is in pain most of the time. She spends most of her time lying down on the couch or in bed, as sitting is excruciating for her. She rarely leaves home except for doctor’s appointments, although she does vote in person every election at her polling place on the corner near her house.
A regular voter who believes “voting should be important to everyone” because “we all have a stake in what’s going on,” Ms. Norton attempted to get a PennDOT ID last fall after learning about the voter ID law. Friends took her to PennDOT driver’s license center in Shillington – a 45 minute trip by car. After the painful ride, Ms. Norton was informed by the PennDOT employee on duty (whom Ms. Norton described as “not a happy helper”) that she would have to pay $13.50, although she correctly told the clerk that the ID was supposed to be free. Ms. Norton was willing to pay to get the ID anyway, but to her dismay, PennDOT does not take cash – only checks or money orders. Discouraged and in pain, Ms. Norton returned home without the ID.
Ms. Norton criticized the voter ID educational ads on TV, saying they just “tell me that I need to get an ID to vote,” but they don’t “tell me how to do it or where to go.” (Ms. Norton’s video testimony is available online.)
The second video testimony came from Nadine Marsh, one of the original plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Ms. Marsh, an elderly resident of Hanover Township in Beaver County who has never had a driver’s license, described how her granddaughter repeatedly tried to contact the Dept. of State to make sure Ms. Marsh had the correct documents for obtaining an ID. After multiple attempts, the DOS finally responded. Ms. Marsh and her daughter took the hour-long trip, only to be told that while the PennDOT driver’s license center was indeed open, it does not produce photo IDs on Mondays.
The pair made a second attempt, but the PennDOT employees on duty had never heard of the Dept. of State (DOS) ID for voting and said they would have to contact Harrisburg and would be in touch. After spending an hour and a half at PennDOT plus two hours in the car, Ms. Marsh once again returned home empty-handed. On October 2, her third try, she finally succeeded in obtaining her DOS for-voting-only ID. (Ms. Marsh’s video testimony is available online.)
The final voter video featured Catherine Howell, a great-grandmother and resident of Morrisville (Bucks County) who cast her first vote for Harry Truman. She was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease four years ago and now mostly gets around using a scooter or a wheelchair. Her driver’s license expired last January. Ms. Howell’s polling place is only two blocks away at the local library. Like several other witnesses, Ms. Howell said the poll workers did not say anything about the voter ID law on Election Day. She had heard about the law, but didn’t know where to go to obtain an ID. She is unable to take the public bus to Bensalem and her children, who work full time, are often unable to drive her places. (Ms. Howell's video testimony is available online.)
Other witnesses today included Laverne Collins, director of the Bureau of Public Transportation, who testified about the Share Ride program, and Susan Carty, the president of the state League of Women Voters, one of the organizational plaintiffs in the case. Ms. Carty testified about “tremendous amount of confusion” about the voter ID law and the calls the League received about it.
The judge announced that there will be no court on Friday, July 26, or Monday, July 29.
The commonwealth begins putting on its case tomorrow. Their first witnesses are Kelly O’Donnell of the Department of Aging and Kurt Myers from PennDOT.
Voter ID Trial Day 7: Real Voters, Real Barriers
Langganan:
Postingan
(
Atom
)
