On the heels of Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard McGinley’s ruling that the state’s Voter ID law is unconstitutional, Congresswoman and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Allyson Schwartz revealed her plans to expand access to the ballot box.
“We must strengthen the health of our democracy by expanding and simplifying access to voting,” Schwartz said. “Governor Corbett has put in place an unacceptable, unnecessary voter ID law that is discriminatory and restricts access to voting. The Governor should drop any future appeals and accept that this law is unconstitutional and restricts voters’ access to the ballot box.”
The Democratic front-runner unveiled an ambitious plan to increase voter participation. In addition to pledging to work to repeal the voter ID law should it survive in the courts she also proposed a number of new measures designed to ensure more citizens have the opportunity to vote.
For example, Schwartz called for same-day registration which would allow voters to register to vote on Election Day. Currently, ten states and the District of Columbia have adopted this law. Also, Schwartz pledged to act on a bill that passed the state Senate that would allow secure, online voter registration. This system is in place or soon will be in eighteen states.
Most significantly, perhaps, the candidate stated that as Governor she will push for early voting, including weekend voting. The rationale being that extending the period of time that citizens can vote will allow more flexibility and opportunity to Pennsylvania’s voters. Early voting is allowed in 32 states and is the most successful voting reform movement in the country.
The most surprising reform that the Democratic front-runner called for, however, was to allow citizens to vote by mail. Postal voting is another way to increase access and may be the best option to save money. In fact two states, Oregon and Washington, only accept votes by mail.
Schwartz’s proposals are audacious and wide-ranging and speak to how popular the issue of expanding voter access is. It’s an unlikely that the candidate, or any front-runner, would propose so many reforms if they were not convinced that the electorate would support them.
It is highly probable, however, that the Republican legislature will oppose some if not all of these ideas. Generally, the impression among both Democrats and Republicans is that those citizens least likely to vote are most likely to vote Democratic and vice versa. Therefore, any attempt to expand the voter rolls would benefit Democrats.
Loading ...
6 Responses
No one’s attacking anyone, Isaac, but real journalists use something called sources or citations–and to argue that those who cannot be bothered to do so are margically “hard-working” because they shill for your preferred candidates is even more embarassing than the article itself.
What a “puff” piece on this candidate. Now that you have endorsed her, ask her to get serious and detailed about the issues. So far she has been reading notes at the “debates” and talking excessively in generalities. Now I know why Schwartz is a member of Third Way. Rhetorically liberal, but owned by the corporations. Just like Third Way.
How about the fact that early voting was successfully passed in 32 out of 50 states and the District of Columbia? I’d say that the early voting reform *movement* – as noted in the article – has been pretty successful when two-thirds of the states adopt its reforms and that is far more successful than other movements, such as postal voting, which only takes place in two out of 50 states, even though the latter has arguably had a larger positive effect on increased voter participation.
It seems prudent to ensure that one fully comprehends what one is reading before lashing out at the hard-working journalists on this site.
An even better idea would be to make elections like a reality TV show or something like “The Voice.” That would turn people out. It, along with all these proposals to “expand” voting opportunities, will not, however, generate better elected officials and will not make people appreciate or take their responsibility to vote more seriously.
Well that article reads like a press release for Schwatz. Who says it is the “most successful reform in history?” How does voting by mail save money if physcial polls are still going to be open and an additional layer of counting needs to be imposed.
It is not a good day for this site when you are posting articles that would not pass scrutiny at Wikipedia.
After the holiday hack of Target, I’m not sure how secure online voting would be.