Voting overhaul package passes Pa. House
Only GOP support moved bill to Senate
A state House bill that would make significant changes to Pennsylvania’s election process moved through committee Tuesday with Republican support only, setting the stage for an interbranch struggle with Gov. Tom Wolf’s administration — and an interparty conflict with the Legislature’s Democratic minority — over its intricacies.
Having now passed the State Government Committee and on its way to consideration by the full chamber, the bill — called the Pennsylvania Voting Rights Protection Act — makes changes to how elections are administered in Pennsylvania across numerous subject areas.
Along with moving the voter registration deadline back to 30 days before the election and pushing the mail-in ballot application deadline to 15 days out, it allows counties to start pre-canvassing mail-in ballots five days before the election and authorizes early inperson voting starting in 2025.
It also mandates that all people who vote in person show identification and sets limits on the use of drop boxes for mail-in ballot return — provisions that Democrats oppose and likely would give Mr. Wolf reason to consider a veto, among others.
Committee chairman Sen. Seth Grove, R-York, said he expects the bill to reach the full House next week. Republican caucuses in the House and Senate are communicating and Mr. Grove has said he’s “semi-confident” the other chamber will take it up if it passes.
On display before the committee vote was about as accurate a representation of the two parties’ views on the legislation as one could get. One after the other, Republican members identified specific provisions in the bill that they said would make voting more accessible and secure.
“It perfectly weighs the balance of access and security to ensure
every legal voter can and has access to voting, while it ensures bad actors — which include foreign governments, international syndicates or even individuals who make bad decisions — cannot manipulate our election system,” Mr. Grove said.
Democrats, meanwhile, labeled it an attack on democracy and an attempt by the GOP to settle scores after former President Donald Trump’s election loss in November.
“If there is a lack of trust in our voting, it is because of you and the lies that you told about the election,” said Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta, who is running for the U.S. Senate in the Democratic primary. “If there is a lack of faith in the process, it is because of you and the lies you repeated from your twice-impeached, one-term loser of a former president.”
Mr. Wolf has indicated he is opposed to the bill in its current form. His press secretary, Lyndsay Kensinger, called it an “extremist proposal” that installs new barriers against voting and politicizes ballot access, according to The Associated Press.
With a potential veto looming at the end of the legislative process, some Republicans have floated the idea of skirting Mr. Wolf’s pen through constitutional amendment, leaving the potential of voter ID expansion up to voters. Mr. Grove said it was an interesting concept but insisted that for now, he wants to compromise with the Wolf administration.
The County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania, which represents the interests of the state’s counties and — by extension — their election operations, is monitoring the bill and hoping to have more discussions with leadership on its language, executive director Lisa Schaefer said.
Ms. Schaefer said the legislation succeeds in giving counties their two big priorities — expanding the precanvassing period and moving back the deadline to apply for a mail-in ballot — but has a “lot of other stuff” in it that requires further review. She said the association has sent numerous questions and comments to House and Senate leaders about the language in the bill.
“There’s a long way to go in this negotiation process yet,” Ms. Schaefer said. “We just want counties to be at the table as we develop that language again to make sure wherever we end up, we end up with a good bill that won’t leave us in the same place as Act 77 — that we’ve gone through the language, provided the resources and given counties something they can implement that hopefully includes our top two priorities.”