Arizona State Representative Eddie Farnsworth (R-Gilbert) has introduced HB 2196. It repeals the 2013 omnibus election law bill, which had been HB 2305. Among other provisions, the 2013 law makes it extremely difficult for members of small qualified parties to get on their own party’s primary ballot. And it makes it literally impossible for minor party members to nominate write-in candidates in their own party’s primary. That move defies a U.S. District Court decision issued in 1980, won by the Socialist Workers Party. See this story.

The 2013 law had several other provisions, unrelated to minor parties, which seem designed to make it more difficult for voters to remain registered, and which made it more difficult for activists to help voters to vote absentee. These provisions were deemed so harmful to the Democratic Party and its allies that Democrats and associated groups gathered enough signatures to force a referendum vote on HB 2305. If the Farnsworth bill passes, presumably the 2014 popular vote on HG 2305 will be canceled. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.

On January 17, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard McGinley struck down that state’s photo voter-ID law. The case is Applewhite v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 330 M.D. 2012. Here is the 50-page ruling (there are an Appendix attached at the end which includes detailed findings of fact and which is another 55 pages).

The ruling relies on the Pennsylvania Constitution, which says elections shall be “free and equal.” The decision finds that hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvania registered voters, plus an unknown number of people who are eligible to register, lack the needed government photo-ID. The ruling also finds severe barriers for voters who lack the proper ID to obtain one. The decision acknowledges that Pennsylvania has two kinds of acceptable ID, the traditional ID’s issued by the Department of Transportation, and a new type that is supposed to be available for people who just need the ID in order to vote, and which is designed to be easier to obtain. However, the ruling finds that both types must be obtained at Department of Transportation offices. Yet there are no such offices in nine counties, and in another nine counties the offices are only open one day per week.

The opinion also finds the requirement that most acceptable ID’s must have expiration dates to be unreasonable. The decision says, “The photo on an expired ID would allow a poll worker to verify identification and ensure voters are who they say they are, so the expiration date seems obviously unnecessarily restrictive.” The decision also points out that many forms of government photo-ID don’t have expiration dates, making them useless. Examples are most student ID’s, retired military ID’s, veterans ID’s. The decision also criticizes the law for disallowing certain types of photo-ID, such as school employee ID’s, welfare cards, and bus cards, all of which contain photos.

The decision says that the state’s list of registered voters, the SURE database, is unreliable because it contains “inaccuracies, missing and outdated information.” This is relevant, because the ability to obtain a free government-ID depends on that applicant’s already being listed in the SURE database, yet many registered voters are not included in that database.