Beleaguered State Rep. Responds to Voter ID Ruling
Republican House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, who created a rallying cry for Voter ID opponents when he said the bill was going to "allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania," responds to the voter ID development.
Photos
Republican House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, who made headlines in June after telling a group of fellow GOP supporters that Pennsylvania's Voter ID bill will "allow Governor Romney to win the State of Pennsylvania," released a statement on today's decision to delay the implementation of the law until after the presidential election.
Turzai's June statement, made to members of the Republican State Committee, was spun by critics as a Republican admission that the Voter ID bill was created to suppress Democratic turnout, not prevent voter fraud.
The Allegheny County representative admitted to poor phrasing, but his gaffe was featured on The Colbert Report and The Daily Show with John Stewart, as well as several other national media outlets.
Below is Turzai's Statement:
“Today’s decision by the Commonwealth Court upholds Act 18, and voter identification, and that is good.
“Voter Identification is about ensuring the integrity of our elections and preserving the principle of the ‘One person, One vote’ doctrine.
“When votes are diluted through fraud, the system starts to break down. Voter identification has always been about creating a level playing field where every Pennsylvanian’s vote represents an equal opportunity to have a voice in government.
“The fact is, the election integrity provisions that have passed the House have been to preserve the right of every citizen who is entitled to vote to be able to vote, and every citizen who votes should be sure that his or her vote has not been diluted by somebody else’s fraud.”
Douglas Hines
6:34 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Gee, but they found no cases of voter fraud. How, then, would that cause a change in Romney's ability to win. The only way this new law would change the outcome of the election is the way the it was currently affecting the election; disfranchisement or voter suppression was only desired effect.
And it was working too. Until those darn lawyers made them prove voter fraud and disprove suppression. Finally, a judge was forced by the state Supreme Court to make the only just decision he could make for those profoundly affected by the ridiculous law.
Finally, his statement wasn't a gaffe and it wasn't poorly phrased. He said what he meant. It was simple. With this law Romney could win. Without it, he doesn't have a chance. Let's see how much time Romney spends in Pennsylvania now that the vote has been given back to everyone.
Jaycee
6:42 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
There was nothing noble about Turzai's effort to ensure "preserving the principle of the ‘One person, One vote’ doctrine." It was the cure for which there was no known disease.
jxjipper
7:14 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
I guess that means that all things that cannot be proved to not exist. Brilliant! How did life start, I guess it never did because you can't prove where and when it happened. Everybody knows those tea party people spit on those representatives right? Was it ever proven no? Physical Evidence? No. But it "must have happened" because someone said so. Grow up. If you don't get caught cheating on your taxes i guess it didn't happen.
dennis smith
6:58 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Just another attempt to supress people. The ID is only part of the law its the part that makes it nearly impossbile to sign up new voters you have to be registered etc..and can face stiff fines if the registraton is not completed correctly google it.
Mohandus Frieri
7:31 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Hi Mike, Mohandus Frieri here. I'm one of those guys you didn't want to vote.
See, we have this thing called a constitution, I know you're not aware of it. But this constitution guarantees citizens the right to vote.
This country is different from others. You see, you don't have to be white and wealthy to vote, you know, your constituency.
If you felt worthy of re-election based upon the merit of your ideas and the fruit of your hard work, you wouldn't have to worry about suppressing the votes of the disenfranchised.
However, you merely rubber stamped ALEC legislation and otherwised obstructed the business of your state, failing to do your job. You should be voted out of office and hopefully you will be.
So from the bottom of my heart and the heart of Pennsylvanians, screw you!
Milt Romney can zing away tonight but he'll never be more than the white trash you are and he is.
R Jacobs
7:46 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
As a FORMER Republican CommitteeMember here in Florida our Govenor Rick The D*** as they call him has tried the same thing. Rick Paid $76 Million of his own money to be elected. The Republicans are now calling for the REMOVAL of our SUPREME COURT Judges because of there rulings. The Republicans are NAZIS in DRAG.....
WilDeA
9:24 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
It is not unreasonable to require identification before a real person exercises their Constitutional Right to vote.
It is unreasonable to require hard to obtain or rarely used documents as the only acceptable proof that the person meets the minimum standards for residency, This is especially when a matching signature was the acceptable proof of voter registration prior to this onerous law, when no voter fraud was ever shown in the Commonwealth.
Pat Shane
12:41 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
There is nothing wrong with requiring an ID to vote.
HOWEVER
There IS something wrong with implementing this new law 9 months before a presidential election. If voter fraud was so rampant in the last election, why didn't the GOP rush to pass this law immediately after the 2008 election? Wait until the 2016 election to impose this, that way it will give people 4 years to get their act together, and THEN you can give them the 'you have no excuse' treatment.
Watch the video and sign the petition to end Voter Suppression.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9TjVsQa57c
jxjipper
7:09 pm on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
He's only 2,500 more gaffes away to catch up with Joe (Gaffe Duck) Bidet.