GOP lawmakers want to amend the Pennsylvania Constitution to include a voter ID requirement. The Pennsylvania Capitol in Harrisburg is seen here in January.
Mark Makela/Getty Images
Facing a veto on their sweeping plan to overhaul state election laws, Pennsylvania Republicans have set in motion a plan to circumvent the Democratic governor and create a mandatory voter ID requirement.
They aim to do it via an amendment to the state constitution — a process that requires approval from the Legislature and subsequent victory on a statewide ballot measure.
Critics say it's a technique that Republicans appear increasingly willing to use as they clash with Gov. Tom Wolf over highly politicized issues such as voting and the pandemic.
"The Republicans don't want to go through the legislative process for their far-right wacky ideas because they know the governor will veto it," Democratic state Sen. Vincent Hughes said. "So now they're just going to change the constitution."
Sponsor MessageBut GOP supporters of the tactic argue that approval by a majority of Pennsylvania voters would signal that an idea has merit.
"If that's a veto no matter what, that's why we have a constitutional amendment, to let the voters decide," said Republican Jake Corman, the Senate president pro tempore. "And they will ultimately make the final decision on whether there should be voter ID in Pennsylvania."
Still, Democrats see political gamesmanship. Hughes, who voted against the amendment when it passed the state Senate last week on near party lines, has served in the Legislature for decades. He said he has seen a lot of procedural tricks during his time in Harrisburg, but this one strikes him as a new development.
Constitutional amendments are relatively rare in Pennsylvania, in large part because passing them is time-consuming. They have to be approved in identical form by the Legislature in two consecutive two-year sessions, then go to voters for a referendum.
This year, though, the GOP has found success with this strategy. Last month, voters approved two Republican-sponsored amendments that gave lawmakers more authority and led to the end of Wolf's coronavirus emergency orders.
"It's clearly a pattern that has developed in the last year," Hughes said. "And where does it stop? If you take it to its end, is it: 'We want to name some roads and bridges and we're going to pass a constitutional amendment to call I-76 Joe Schmo's Highway'?"
Sponsor MessageFollowing the 2020 election, and in the wake of baseless claims of fraud by former President Donald Trump and his Republican allies, many GOP-controlled state legislatures have moved to enact new voter restrictions.
But in states such as Pennsylvania — with Republican-led legislatures and Democratic governors — the process has often been more combative.
In Michigan, for instance, Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said she would veto any Republican proposal that included voting restrictions. In response, GOP leaders raised the possibility of initiating a voter petition drive to evade a veto.
In Pennsylvania, unfounded election fraud claims and top lawmakers' willingness to entertain them led to months of hearings — none of which proved there was widespread fraud — and resulted in a sweeping bill that would overhaul many aspects of the state's elections.
The measure includes bipartisan provisions, such as in-person early voting, but also others that Democrats maintain would disenfranchise voters, such as tighter deadlines for absentee ballot applications and a requirement that all voters present a form of ID. Wolf has promised to veto the bill, should it pass the Legislature.
So that has Republicans looking toward the constitutional amendment plan.
Republican Jake Corman, the state Senate president pro tempore, says recent polls appear to show that voters are on the same page as Republicans when it comes to voter ID. Matt Rourke/AP hide caption
toggle caption Matt Rourke/APThe proposal's sponsors include top GOP caucus officials and more hard-line conservative members of the party, such as Sen. Doug Mastriano, one of Pennsylvania's loudest voices in favor of baselessly rejecting the 2020 presidential election results.
Corman, the highest-ranking lawmaker in the chamber and a key player in quietly shepherding the voter ID amendment to Senate approval, has his own connections to baseless election fraud claims. He signed a letter that his caucus sent to Congress just before the Jan. 6 election certification, urging a delay until Pennsylvania's vote could be further investigated.
Months later, sitting in his Harrisburg office as the amendment moved toward final Senate passage, he tried to distance himself from speculation about fraud without saying whether he believed there had been any in the 2020 election.
Sponsor Message"Obviously you can't have a democracy if people don't believe in the integrity of the vote, and whether the last election was — you know, we can argue that forever and I'm not taking a side on that — my point is moving forward, we should put all the security in it," he said.
Corman added he believes that if a poll were taken, "You would get a percentage of people who didn't believe the last election came off the way it should. And whether that's accurate or not, having that large of a population not believe it is a problem."
The Senate's amendment is much more targeted than the larger election overhaul bill, concerning only the implementation of voter ID.
But on that issue, it's actually more restrictive. While the omnibus bill would allow several ID options beyond a state-issued driver's license or ID card, the amendment would only permit "valid government-issued identification" or, if a voter isn't casting a ballot in person, "proof" of that identification.
Corman noted that recent polls have appeared to show that voters are on the same page as Republicans when it comes to voter ID. This month, Franklin and Marshall College found that 74% of voters who answered a survey said they support photo identification at the polls.
"It's very popular in Pennsylvania," Corman said.
If both chambers agree to move the amendment and it makes it through all its legislative hurdles, the soonest it could go to voters for a referendum would be 2023.
