Harrisburg – May 8, 2014 – State Senate Democratic Leader Sen. Jay Costa (D-Allegheny) released the following statement following the Corbett administration’s announcement that they would not appeal the court decision which struck down Pennsylvania’s controversial voter ID law:
“We should never have gotten to the point where the Corbett administration was deciding whether or not to appeal an unconstitutional law. The law, on its face, was inappropriate and it never should have been adopted.
“There was no question that the whole law was based in politics and that its goal was to disenfranchise voters and suppress voting. The case fell apart almost immediately because the court rightly saw there was no evidence of fraud.
“The Corbett administration wasted time and money in the pursuit of this law and the court actions that resulted from its passage. Taking away the right to vote is a very serious matter and that is what the court addressed. The right to vote deserves to be protected and participation should be preserved.”
The law would have had impacted Pennsylvania’s estimated 8.2 million voters. Trial testimony indicated that more than 750,000 voters do not have proper ID’s and would have been prevented from voting.
More than 9 percent of voters did not have proper PennDOT-issued voter ID’s. PennDOT driver’s licensing centers, where voters are supposed to pick up ID’s, do not exist in nine counties and have limited operations in 22 others.
-30-
Harrisburg – Jan. 17, 2013 – Senate Democratic Leader Jay Costa (D-Allegheny) issued the following reaction to Commonwealth Court’s rejection of the controversial voter ID law.
The law required all voters to produce approved photo identification prior to casting their votes in election.
“Senate Democrats have said clearly and repeatedly that the voter ID law was an overreach that would result in the disenfranchisement of hundreds of thousands of voters. It was a law that should have never been approved and we are very happy that the court turned aside the measure today.
“There has been too much upheaval and confusion about preserving the right to vote. Plus taxpayers have had to pay too much in trying to defend this ill-conceived law.
The measure was unconstitutional and political and could not stand legal scrutiny. Simply put, it was an effort by Republicans to deny citizens access and a voice in their government that should have been dismissed.
“Instead of trying to find ways to stop citizens from voting, we should be doing more to encourage all Pennsylvanians to participate in elections.”
-30-
HARRISBURG, October 2, 2012 – – Senate Democratic Leader Sen. Jay Costa (D-Allegheny) issued the following statement in reaction to today’s decision by Commonwealth Court on the controversial voter ID law:
“In my view, the court’s decision is the correct one in blocking the voter ID law from taking effect this November. The court is trying to deal with an ill-conceived and short-sighted law.
“There has been so much controversy about this law, I still believe that some voters will not come out to vote fearing that they do not have the proper ID and therefore be disenfranchised.
“At the very least, the ruling means that voters will not be prevented from casting their votes and having them counted.
“Eligible voters should go and exercise their right to vote on Election Day and not worry about whether they have a photo ID. The whole controversy is a product of a short-sighted partisan political calculation. By not voting, partisanship wins so voters should not let that happen.”
# # #
Harrisburg – September 18, 2012 — Senate Democratic Leader Sen. Jay Costa (D-Allegheny) today issued the following statement on the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to vacate the Commonwealth Court’s ruling on the state’s controversial voter ID law.
The court sent the case back to the Commonwealth Court to ascertain if the law is being implemented correctly and whether voters reasonably have access to voter ID cards:
“In vacating the decision, the court left it to the Commonwealth Court to determine if the photo ID law is being implemented properly and whether there is liberal access to voter ID cards in compliance with the legislative intent of the law.
“The facts of the case haven’t changed. There was ample and overwhelming evidence presented during the Commonwealth Court’s hearing of this case to conclude that there are multiple obstacles that voters must navigate in order to gain a valid voter ID that permits them to cast a vote that will be counted on Election Day.
“This case is about voter suppression and the partisan attempt to influence the General Election. The right to vote and a citizen’s access to the ballot box must be guaranteed. Unquestionably, there continues to be problems with the current, expedited implementation of the law.
“Given the short time line for Commonwealth Court to consider the case and determine the status of the law, it appears that the only decision is on issuing the injunction.”
-30-
Harrisburg – September 13, 2012 — State Sen. Jay Costa (D-Allegheny), the Senate Democratic leader, issued a statement concerning two issues that were before the state Supreme Court today.
The Court heard arguments today on the voter ID law that will require all voters to show a valid photo ID when they cast their vote in the General Election in November, as well as the challenges to the 2012 legislative reapportionment plan.
“Two exceptionally important cases were before the state Supreme Court today. Both cases involve the ability of citizens to cast votes and be guaranteed fair elections so they have a voice in their government.
“The voter ID case involves the ability of all citizens to cast their vote on Election Day. There is no evidence of voter fraud and obstacles to voting should not be permitted. The requirement that voters have photo ID before their vote is counted will cause immediate harm for seniors, the poor, students and others.
“As a plaintiff in the legislative reapportionment case, I asked the court to throw out the partisan political plan that was approved by the Legislative Reapportionment Commission so that a new, fair, and constitutional map can be drafted. This is the second time that a flawed plan has been before the court. The plan has too many county splits and is too skewed politically to pass constitutional muster.
“I am confident that the court will carefully consider each of these cases and make appropriate rulings that protect the ability of citizens to vote and be represented fairly.”
-30-
