Mailed fly­ers pro­vided false in­for­ma­tion

Glenside News - - OPINION -

To the ed­i­tor:

f have a se­ri­ous con­cern re­gard­ing vot­ing in­for­ma­tion that was re­cently sent to the res­i­dents of Abing­ton and throughout the state.

On Oct. 10, f got two pieces of mail. The first one was a tri­fold from my Abing­ton Town­ship tard 8 Com­mis­sioner Peggy jy­ers. fn ad­di­tion to some ba­sic in­for­ma­tion about flu shots and shredding events, the back and most prom­i­nent fold was a com­plete sec­tion on the voter fD law. ft says, “sot­ers will be re­quired to show an ac­cept­able photo fD on blec­tion Day” ft con­tin­ues to say, “All photo fDs must con­tain an ex­pi­ra­tion date.” ft has a small note at the bot­tom about pro­vi­sional bal­lots and hav­ing six days to pro­duce an fD.

The sec­ond one is a glossy post­card from the sec­re­tary of the com­mon­wealth in Harrisburg. On the back in big let­ters it says, “fF vOr tAkT TO sOTb SHOt fT,” with a pic­ture of a Penn­syl­va­nia driver’s li­cense. This card is even more mis­lead­ing be­cause it states that you have to have a photo fD to vote in kovem­ber, and it in­ti­mates that it has to be a driver’s li­cense.

On Oct. 2, the Penn­syl­va­nia courts ruled that photo fDs would not be needed for the kovem­ber elec­tions. kow both of these items could well have been printed be­fore this date, but these items were not mailed be­fore this date and the peo­ple send­ing them should have stopped the mail­ings and cor­rected the in­for­ma­tion be­fore they were sent out.

f sin­cerely hope that js. jy­ers is plan­ning on send­ing out an­other mail­ing to the tard 8 res­i­dents cor­rect­ing the bad in­for­ma­tion that was sent. f have also been in contact with my lo­cal state rep­re­sen­ta­tive to re­port the Harrisburg mail­ing to have her fol­low up on why the cur­rent oepub­li­can sec­re­tary of the com­mon­wealth in Harrisburg would al­low this type of in­cor­rect in­for­ma­tion to be mailed out. f have hopes that js. jy­ers and the sec­re­tary of the com­mon­wealth will do the right thing as well and cor­rect the mis­in­for­ma­tion that was dis­trib­uted.

f do not have a prob­lem with ask­ing for some type of fD to vote, but many peo­ple don’t drive and even fewer peo­ple have pass­ports. jaybe a So­cial Se­cu­rity card and a proof of res­i­dency with your voter’s reg­is­tra­tion card should be con­sid­ered enough to sat­isfy the fD re­quire­ment. ff you are older and gave up your li­cense, you could have is­sues with get­ting an orig­i­nal raised-seal birth cer­tifi­cate, or even have prob­lems get­ting some­one to drive you to the depart­ment of mo­tor ve­hi­cles to get the non-driv­ing Penn­syl­va­nia fDs. f was glad to see the courts giv­ing the vot­ers more time to meet the re­quire­ments.

ff even one per­son hes­i­tates to come to the polls be­cause of these con­fus­ing mail­ings it would be a shame. f am count­ing on these pub­lic of­fi­cials to do the right thing and send out a new mail­ing to cor­rect the mis­in­for­ma­tion that was mailed out be­fore the elec­tion is held in kovem­ber. bliz­a­beth Barn­hart


Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.