Top Philly elections official says voter ID bill is 'hogwash'
Incoming Philly elections official opposes voter ID bill
Top Philly elections official says voter ID bill is 'hogwash'
Miriam Hill
Don't look for incoming City Commissioner Stephanie Singer to back away from controversy.
On Thursday, she called the voter ID bill being considered in Harrisburg "hogwash from top to bottom." Actually, she first called it that on Tuesday when she called in to WHYY's Radio Times with Marty Moss-Coane. The show's guest was Carol Aichele, the Republican Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, who backs the bill.
Singer, who as City Commissioner will oversee Philadelphia's elections, said poll workers already verify voters' signatures. Requiring ID, she added, would only cause many people not to vote.
Aichele countered that many poll workers are not trained to analyze handwriting.
Singer is a Democrat. We wondered what Al Schmidt, her Republican counterpart on the incoming City Commission would think, but we have not heard back from him yet.
Heard in the Hall is simply happy to hear any politician use the word hogwash. It's down right folksy for someone with a Yale degree.
Click here for Philly.com's politics page.
Comments (78)
Well, that was a cute putdown, Miriam, of a legitimate and pressing concern expressed by Singer that goes to the heart of our democracy. I heard Aichele and what she said was, indeed, hogwash, although any number of other harsher derogatory terms could have been used. How about some coverage of the topic, not the descriptive word? Again, it's merely our democracy that's at stake.
Aichele was asked what's the evidence of the voter fraud that the ID bill is allegedly aimed at stopping. Her answer was that the fraudsters are very, very clever, so they've hid the evidence. Therefore, we must pass a bill that might keep thousands of legitimate voters from voting without any evidence. That's kind of like saying, well, ghosts are very clever and that's why you can't see them. But since from some mysterious reasoning process we know they're in the house somewhere, let's burn down a room. The room this bill is burning down contains the right to vote. That's no laughing matter.— Stan Shapiro- You are absolutely right Stan! Just think about those 20,000 dead people who won't be able to vote any more in Philadelphia if they don't show ID. Afterall it's pretty hard to get a good picture when you are in the afterlife.
One thing you did get correct is this does represent the heart of democracy, giving people the right to vote who actually have the right to vote (and only once by the way).— cb54 - 20,000, cd? Name one. But here's a name for you" Paul Summers. ONly person to be convicted of voter fraud in PA in a long time, just this past year. Guess what? He's a Republican, who filed fraudulent petitions with fake names, etc. Giving people the right to approve candidates without they're knowing it. And withotr photo ID. You are such a tool.BTW, stil waiting for yuou to name one. — mike l
Comment removed.- What are you talking about, drooler? — glennsfb
ID. I live here. And can prove it. Should be required for everyone. What is the problem?— Ben Fan- What is the reason? It's nice Ben Fran that you can prove it, but thousands of poor, old and disabled Pennsylvanians can't prove it with voter ID. However, they also live here and should have the right to vote. The right to vote has been held to be fundamental, without which other rights fail to exist. But that right disappears for totally eligible people under this law because it attempts to solve a problem that no one has evidence exists. That's just an attack on democracy not on voter fraud.— Stan Shapiro
- People do HAVE evidence, benny: bills, mail, bank statements, all with their names and addresses that match their SS cards.BTW, the governmor is crying poor mouth and has to cut millions from education, health, road work, etc., right? So, just where is he getting the millions it is going to cost, by his estimate, to produce photo IDs for everyone who wants them? — mike l
- Throw away all IDs: driver's licenses, work IDs, school IDs, Police IDs, Postal Inspectors IDs, FBI and pilot's licenses, IDs for medical personnel, travel documents like passports and visas, etc. If voting is the right and duty of all concerned citizens; then everyone must make the minimal effort required to show proof of who you are. It will be for free for sure. Do we owe our country and our fellow citizens any less? Or should we take a page from the Democratic political handbook ala Chicago: "Vote early and vote often."?— joedog
- Not everybody has a driver's license, passport, or credit card. My 84-year-old mom doesn't. Many older and poorer people don't. This bill is a Greed and Oil Party ploy to keep as many old and poor people out of the voting booths as possible because they tend to recognize GOP garbage from the stench a mile away and they also tend to vote Democrat. If they can't get out the vote, the GOP losers will simply keep it out, any way they can.— bbk713
- Are you sayingk's mom is an illegal? Your brain sounds illegal. — mike l
- Are you saying bbk's mom is an illegal? SS cards are legal. Birth certificates are legal. Your brain sounds illegal. — mike l
- Does your Mom go to the doctors or have any kind of medical treatment? They also ask for photo ID now. — gemini48
- Boohoo. Your mom should not be allowed to vote. — glennsfb
- Voting fraud is a fact of life. Anyone remember stinson/marks http://articles.philly.com/1994-02-19/news/25859559_1_absentee-ballots-absentee-votes-cast-elections-board or the FBI probe that removed/purged thousands of "ghost" voters from the election rolls.
How about the "Vans" that pick up eleigable voters and cart them to numerous places to vote, and then return them home with a little cash in hand for their efforts.
Philly voter fraud, street money, ward leaders, committte men, union togoons, all contribute to the "chicago" style elections we have.
Ms. Singer please.....
'Chicago" style election we have here.— STEPHEN1988 - I'll ask the same question I've asked before and that you, cd and benny won't answer" where is the massive voter fraud? Where are these "vans" going from poll to poll? What Chicgo elections do we have here or even in Chicago. Show us all, please this massive voter fraud which had been completely debunked throughout the country except in your small minds. You and Goebbels: tell a lie long enough and some people may believe it. Obviously, you guys already have. Again, names please, dates, please. We'll wait. Until then, zip it with the lies. — mike l
- This law would be unfair to the deceased who vote every year in Philly.— hey buddy
- What is the big deal about getting ID? Really?...If it's that big of a problem, make it easier for folks to obtain it...partnership programs,whatever...Everyone should have it. Period.— bearsfriend
- The Stinson fraud was all about absentee ballots, and WAS ALREADY A VIOLATION OF STATE LAW. How will requiring those who show up at the polls to display voter ID do anything to stop absentee ballot fraud?
And, yes, there were ghost registered voters for awhile in Philly because the rolls weren't purged. But that doesn't mean those ghosts got to vote. Where's that evidence? And if they did get to vote, it's only because there were corrupt officials in or out of the polls who made it happen. If it happened in any numbers, it was because of an organized conspiracy. How will that kind of fraud be deterred by voter ID rules, if the guilty parties are the ones in charge of validating voters' identity? This law is a classic case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, except it doesn't even get at the bathwater.
We did the best thing possible to combat fraud in the last election. We elected an honest City Commission.
— Stan Shapiro - Comment removed.
- Hey, cleanup, Corbett says the state will pay for the photo IDs. How do you like millions of your tax dollars going to people you don't want to vote? — mike l
- @CleanupPhilly
You're either naive or malicious.
Naive if you cannot imagine a whole class of people without
credit cards, or bank accounts. Naive if you believe people live in this country without owning homes or cashing checks. Naive if you believe the only place you can buy liquor is the state store. Naive if you deny people live in this country legally without state issued ID.
Or you are malicious and realize those people vote and vote one way. Malicious because you want to strip them of their rights because you don't agree with their politics.
Yes you can point to the individual. You can tell them to spend $40 and get an ID. You can judge the way they spend what little money they have. You can be their moral role model. But you must realize that in a city of millions and— JoeinSouthPhilly - @CleanupPhillyYou're either naive or malicious. Naive if you cannot imagine a whole class of people withoutcredit cards, or bank accounts. Naive if you believe people live in this country without owning homes or cashing checks. Naive if you believe the only place you can buy liquor is the state store. Naive if you deny people live in this country legally without state issued ID. Or you are malicious and realize those people vote and vote one way. Malicious because you want to strip them of their rights because you don't agree with their politics.Yes you can point to the individual. You can tell them to spend $40 and get an ID. You can judge the way they spend what little money they have. You can be their moral role model. But you must realize that in a city of millions, state of 12 million and country of 300 million +, some people , for reasons you nor I can fathom, are just not getting government issued Photo ID. (HTML deleted) — JoeinSouthPhilly
- There is plenty of vote fraud especially in big cities . Just because the press doesn't cover it doesn't mean it isn't happening . The 1986 Democrat candidate for the 170th State House District in Northeast Philadelphia against former Rep. George T. Kenney , was indicted by D.A. Ron Castille because she would cast two votes in elections - one in Philadelphia in the 58th Ward , and another in Lower Moreland in Montgomery County .
Had she not been a candidate and thus in the eye of the public , she probably would not have been caught .— jack susini - WOW! 1986! One voter, who probably had a photo ID. MASSIVE FRAUD! So, by those calculations, that means...25 cases in 25 years! The horror!!!!! — mike l
- welcome back ACORN ACTIVIST— goodsax
- It is very hard to take the GOP's claim as the caretakers of our democracy seriously after their gerrymandering of our congressional map. Very hard.— bobcitydoc
- The city requires anyone attending a zoning hearing to show ID and have their picture taken to get into the building. Why can't voters show ID to vote?— anti-tax
- WHAT'S THE PROBLEM--AFRAID YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO WIN AN HONEST ELECTION?— crystalrainbowspirit1
- S Shapiro ---anyone with a brain doesn't buy your thinking. It's not expensive to get state ID non driver's license. I know--my son had one for years before he drove---think it cost 20.00.— crystalrainbowspirit1
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- Strange people have a problem trying to get an ID when it comes to voting but they have no problem getting that access card, Medicare card, state issued insurance card. Will people ever get real over this issue? The political machines can spend money to drive/escort people to the polls with no problem why can't they get them to the proper agencies to get a real ID?— TomM
- Medicare cards and state medical insurance cards don't bear a photograph of the individual. — RealKennyPowers
- To apply for benefits you have to show your social security card... — bearsfriend
- Seriously? Neither Social Security cards nor Medicare cards bear photos. — RealKennyPowers
- Comment removed.
- Comment removed.
- bearsfriend - how do you propose that absentee balloters show id?— gb
- Comment removed.
- How will a voter ID requirement hurt poor people and old people who want to vote? Our tax money pays for them anyhow, (whether you like it or not), so simply add $5 ID card to the list. It will not discourage voters. It will discourage fraud, hence the objection from Corrupt Philly Democrats.— StevenG
- A $5 requirement is a poll tax and it's not lawful in the United States of America. We're not living in the Old Confederacy. — RealKennyPowers
- I've said it many times, there is simply no reason not to have to show some form of picture ID to vote. Ridiculous that this is even an issue.— Wiseman6
- Here's one very good reason, unwise: This is the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. The only thing the Constitution says is that any American from the age of 18 has the right to vote. Doesn't say ID required. — mike l
- Langx: You are blinded by your partisan obsession. Go Indy. Wall Street controls both parties. Obama kept all the Bush cronies, who were Clinton Cronies, before they were Bush cronies. See Larry Summer. Gietner,etc. One big fat party, my friend. Also, you ignored the fact that the NYT did a vote count in Florida which showed Bush won the contested counties (good thing or bad depending on one's party loyalty, but a fact nonetheless). Also, you skipped the evidence of voter fraud in Philly with Mayor Street. Van loads of homeless people in vans supplied by Johnny Doc at 7:30 pm on voting night with instructions to "pull the lever." American politics are corrupt top to bottom , so stop fooling yourself with your idealism.— StevenG
- The only recent comprehensive study on voter fraud was issued by the Brennan Center for Justice and it concludes with the support of overwhelming evidence that there is little if any voter fraud by voter impersonation and photo ID requirements would do virtually nothing to combat alleged fraud. A requirement for photo ID would keep millions of Americans out of the voting booth, thus denying them the fundamental right to vote, but it wouldn't stop any fraud. There are real Constitutional issues with a photo ID requirement in that it restricts a fundamental right, but it does not use the least restrictive means to do so. There are provisions already in place to protect against voter impersonation, including a signature requirement and requirements that permit judges of election to ask for other forms of documentary evidence to verify the identity.— RealKennyPowers
- It is only "hogwash" for those who are not legally qualified to vote. otherwise, it is a wonderful idea. No doubt that the legislation would face an argument in a city so grossly entrenched with corruption...like Philly!— kelprod2
- This isn't a Philly argument. The Brennan Center report was national and proved there is no such thing as massive, or even somewhat minimal voter fraud. So, your comment is hogwash. You want to talk about corruption, tell me how legitimate the new congressional redistricting, drawn up by the Republicans, is. Now that is truly voter fraud and they even have photo IDs. — mike l
- its patently ridiculous to offer the opinion that requiring basic ID is burdensome. or racist, or problematic. Grownups are held to certain minimum standards and having identification is as bare minimum as one could get.— zen
- For the life of me I don't understand what the opposition is to showing ID to vote ? we all are against fraud heck you need to show ID everytime you make a purchase with a credit card...or by a plane ticket..or pay a bill on line or by phone ...I thought singer was a good government democrat? very disappointed at her and she is suppose to ensure fair elections?...I just don't get it— phillysmart
- In none of the statements defending voter ID have I heard one word about how it would counter any of the supposed instances of actual fraud that have occurred. Aside from most of them being pure conjecture and rumor, they all, even if totally true, involve massive conspiracies of election officials. Voter ID will accomplish one thing and one thing only, massive disenfranchisement of poor, elderly, and nonwhite voters. Honest Republicans have admitted that's what they want. It would be refreshing if some of the posters here did the same. Come on folks, you know you think you're being robbed blind by these folks. You don't want them to vote do you?— Stan Shapiro
- it seems these old people and poor people can find an id to get all the free programs out there— RichH
- If the purveyors of this legislation could actually produce evidence of a voter fraud due to voter impersonation and they could also prove that the fraud could be stopped by requiring photo ID, they might have a better argument than "why don't old people and really poor people have photo IDs?" Given the fact voter fraud doesn't really occur in this fashion you might as well enact laws to deal with the huge martian problem in the United States ---- another "problem" that does not exist.— RealKennyPowers
- I have been a registered voter in Philadelphia for more than 11 years. Every time I have voted, they ask for my photo ID, I sign the book, they compare my signature, and I'm admitted to the booth. Am I the ONLY person that has had this experience? I even know the voting attendants. They are my neighbours, and they still ask for my photo ID.— tjinphilly
- I wasn't asked for ID but my boyfriend was. — gemini48
- Comment removed.
- if valid ID's are available for all, let the commonwealth provide them for free. after all, it would probably cost state senators their meal money for a few weeks of the year.— joegrink
- @ Mike I- Uh, check the Constitution. NOWHERE in the document does it explicitly ensure the right to vote. The Constitution only details the manners in which you CANNOT be prevented from voting such as paying poll taxes, or because of your race or gender. Aside from these basic items the qualifications to vote are expressly left to the STATES to determine. It is the 26th amendment that states that those 18 and older be allowed to vote. Again, no one is standing in the way of ANYONE that can produce an ID from voting.
As long as the ID required by the state is provided free of charge, there is no way it can even be construed as a "poll tax". So sorry, before you quote rights afforded by the Constitution, you may want to see what's in it first....
All the fraud issues aside, what's wrong with being better able to show that elections are legitimate? Its like many areas in life where the appearance and perception is just as important as the facts themselves. If you can reduce any doubt as to the legitimacy of an election, why wouldn't you unless illegitimacy is what you were after in the first place?
Go ahead. Check the Constitution. I'll wait...— Wiseman6 - Singer has allready become just another elected democrat like the rest of them. She said two weeks ago in the public record that her giving up her ward leader job will only increase her chances of getting re elected . The whole campaign she talked and wrote about doing away with that elected office her and Al Schmidt both said they would do away with that office but now the hogwash starts coming out of thier mouths— matthews
- Mike I...please read the story before you comment. Stephanie Singer is an incoming commissioner in the city of Philadelphia. The story was about her/ Philadelphia.
If a citizen who is legally permitted to vote does not have photo ID and is unwilling to make the tiny effort to get that ID...well then, clearly, their right to vote must not really mean too much to them, huh??
What is "hogwash" is those who oppose this simple step. Those legal voters unwilling to get photo ID are not "victims", they are just lazy.— kelprod2 - Must be something to the big outburst not to require ID when voting. Obama (national) Rendell (state & local) and Nutter (local) got elected. People can't be that stupid are they?— Borkey
- Comment removed.
- Where did Mike I go? I assume he is looking for a copy of the Constitution to read....— Wiseman6
- Amazing. Some much BS presented as fact in here by both sides of the agrument. Factys are: Sen Salvatore claimed he lost because 5,000 dead people voted in his district. Whgen pressed bhy Inky he gave them 5, YES five names and when the Inky checked the registration and election documents it concluded that none of the five votes were cast by deceased persons. In 1994 - Inky sent 3 reporters to review registration and election records and also go door to door to interview and investigate 94 cases where they thought a dead person cast a ballot. Results of their work? They found that NONE, not one of the 94 cases represented a vote cast by a deceased individual. Two individuals actually died on election day after having voted, one by gunshot. Many were cases of a son or daughter signing in the wrong reord in pollbooks, the record of their recently deceased father or mother with the same name. Problem is NOT with votes by deased individual. The problem is with the claims of brain-DEAD wingnuts who don't have a clue, don't know the facts, never checked documents and proved their allegations yet they continue to spread the same old urban legend partisan BS. And What FBI action that purged voters - when was that - not in the last 30 years so it's more of the BS. The City has always purged it's files in accordance with the Federal and State law. Like I saw BS by Shapiro on the left and BS by the Wingnuts on the right.— ElecFact
- I love the chutzpah of liberal Dems. For decades they have cheated and used fraud in voting in many urban areas. In the old days of Tammany to the fraud in India, Wash. state, Minn., Fla., NY, Ill. the Dems have had registrars use , lose, find ballots just ....when the Dem candidate needs or doesn't need them. They vote illegals, felons, and use Motor Voter, same day voting to defraud the system. We need a national voter ID card that cannot be forged by some Chicago thug. We need it before the 2012 election when ACORN-SEOI-CAIR-NAACP will be using every trick to spur our Socialist Chief and other Dem minions to victory.— Koons
- Another amazing xomment. Here we have a poster calling the Prez a socialist at the same time as saying we need a national ID card. A natinal ID card - wasn't that what they had in the Socialist Soviet Union; or more like the show me your papers in Nazi Germany. Sure doesn't sound like a conservative or libertarian position. Then again - thye Govt and those corporate "job creators" that the right loves already have etensive access to evryone personal and financial info in massive databases. Even tract everyone's movement with the cell phone use. Koons - Gonna have a metalic strip on that national ID card you want that also contains everything about a person too huh? Some great free society.— ElecFact
- One thing that is continuosly ignored in this argument is the fact that many voters are already required to provide some ID before voting on the machines. PA law requires, and systems facilitate, that poll officials check ID of first-time voters. Any person who is voting in a voting district for the first time must show id. There's 1,687 voting districts in Philly. New voters and those who move from one district to another, sometimes even across the street or just blocks away have to show ID the first time they vote in the new district, even if the first vote is years after registering. In recent elections there have been as many as 225,000 records marked ID required. And as far as Motor Voter - that law provides substantial info regarding change of addresses. Since '95 Philly have transferred more than 500,000 records to new addresses within the Citry and more than 130,000 records to new addresses in another PA cpounty. Change your address on your driver's license? PennDOT notifies the county within a week and your record is updated to the new address after a ten day waiting period. Most timely, and efficient address change info ever used for voters records.— ElecFact
- One final fact for those wingnuts that just love Philly - Obama's PA margin of victory was 620,478. Obama's margin of victory in Philly was almost 458,000. Even if every Philly voter stayed home Obama would have won PA by 162,478, OR even if all of the votes cast Obama in Philly were not counted and the 113,315 votes cast for McCain in Philly were counted (as method I'm certain many of you would like) - Obama still would have carried PA 49,000. Now examine the current field of opposition candidates for 2012. No wonder you want a more restricted voting process - Not only in PA but in many states across the nation.— ElecFact
- Another libtard who thinks she can create her own laws? Shocker.— Kaiser Sosa
- @ElectFact- You make the point that the driving force behind this ID requirement is NOT to change the outcome of the election. Therefore the driving force behnd those that want the ID must be to remove most (if not all doubts) as the legitimacy of those votes counted. Also, just because the outcome doesn't change, does not mean that some (even if one) legitimate vote was canceled out by an illegitimate one.
The question you should be asking is how many more people WOULD vote (especially in say Philly) if there wasn't the assumption that the Dem machine had it in the bag? People can't be that stupid as to voluntarily elect Democrat rule for 60 years in the mess that is Philly, now can they? How else can you explain it?— Wiseman6 - Comment removed.
- Wiseman6 - One thing you'd learn real quick is that the "machine", wheteher D or R, does NOT control or have any influence over the outcome of elections at the top of the ballot - offices like President, Governor or Mayor. Stand outside a polling place and try to convince a voter to vote for someone they hadn't intended on voting for in any of these offices. Almost every voter knows who they are going to vote for from their personal opinion of the candidates or their party postions and what they read or watch on TV and the party operatives cannot change that. Obviously when a viable, moderate opposition candidate is on the ballot (Mayor - Rizzo 87; Katz 99) the contest can be competitive. The value R or D machine politics in urban centers is in getting registered voters of their parties out to vote, and even that doesn't happen given turnout numbers and nor can they dictate how they vote once their inside those machines. As far as being stupid - seems like Philly's voters were smart enough in 2000 & 2004 with more than 80% voting against Bush, Cheney and his neocons.— ElecFact
- Wiseman6 - Guess you would also say the same about the City's voters from 1867 thru 1950 regarduing the Republican machine rule. Here's a book - "When Bosses Ruled Philadelphia: The Emergence of the Republican Machine, 1867-1933"— ElecFact
1
Popular Posts
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- A smoke Filled Room
- Addytood
- American Debate
- Casino Free Philadelphia
- Changing Skyline
- Citizen Hunter
- Citizen Mom
- City Paper
- Daily News
- Evening bulletin
- Fight for Room 215
- Great Expectations
- Hallwatch
- Inquirer
- Judges on Merit
- Keystone Politics
- Legal Intelligencer
- Metro
- Metropolis
- Neighborhood Networks
- PA Clean Sweep
- Phawker
- Philadelphia Business Journal
- Philadelphia Forward
- Philadelphia Weekly
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philadelphians for Ethical Leadership
- Philebrity
- Philly Blog
- Philly Confidential
- Philly for Change
- Philly Future
- Philly Skyline
- Phillyist
- PICA
- Plan Philly
- Politics PA
- Public Record
- Sunday Sun
- The clog
- The Field Negro
- The Illadelphia
- The Next Mayor
- Trash Me
- Tribune
- Young Philly Politics
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: