Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson hopes to issue a ruling on the state’s new voter ID law next week. He’ll be doing state voters — and election officials across the state — a favor if he delays implementation of the law until next spring’s primary balloting.

That will give voters more time to obtain a state driver’s license, non-driver ID or any of several alternatives that will be necessary under the law — if they don’t already have one.

Delaying the implementation until next spring would apply the learning process tied to the ID law to the less-critical of the 2013 elections and not complicate the 2012 general election.

Implementation of the law for this year’s general election could create serious problems — since, with the presidency on the line, it is likely that the voter turnout will be heavier than during a non-presidential-election year.

And, with Pennsylvania considered a key state in the presidential vote, it would be unfortunate if the Keystone State’s balloting outcome ended up stalling declaration of a winner because of confusion caused by the ID law.

Voters who show up at the polls without a valid ID will be allowed to cast a provisional ballot but will have to provide proper ID to local election officials within six days for their votes to count.

It’s conceivable that some of those voters wouldn’t follow through with obtaining the needed ID in time, while others might simply refuse to vote, despite being allowed to cast a provisional ballot.

About the possibility of a close election: Few envisioned the Florida election fiasco in the 2000 presidential balloting.

An election should be voter friendly. The new voter ID law has the potential to meet that goal, but it’s unlikely that it will be able to accomplish that in time for Nov. 6.

Simpson should acknowledge that reality by way of his ruling.

There have been charges that the law, passed by Republicans without any Democrats’ support, was designed to benefit presumed GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. Because of that, implementation of the new law before the November election will be associated with political sleaziness.

Over the past decade, there’s been an inordinate amount of state government sleaziness and wrongdoing, some of which has resulted in prison sentences for numerous elected officials.

The 2012 presidential balloting will be clean if the ID law is out of the picture. Voter fraud never has been a problem of any significance in this state, and there is no reason that, with the ID law on the sidelines, the November balloting will be any different.

Meanwhile, no voter should be discouraged from going to the polls by the prospect of long lines, short tempers or an incomplete understanding of the ID law.

This would not be the first time that implementation of a law would be delayed. In fact, laws routinely are passed on the state and federal levels that establish implementation dates long after the laws’ signings.

Likewise, concern is logical when one party or special interests appear overly eager about putting something into effect “now” — as the GOP is in this instance.

Simpson initially holds the key to preventing the Nov. 6 balloting in Pennsylvania from evolving into chaos. Beyond his bench, the state Supreme Court will be in control, since whichever side loses by Simpson’s ruling plans to appeal to the high court.

But it’s Simpson who will set the tone for what happens beyond next week. Hopefully he’ll set the right tone with a decision to delay implementation.