This is, IMO, going to be a big topic in the coming year. Republicans have stated their aim to make voting more restrictive in just about every state where they have the means to do so. Democrats would like to pass the Voting Rights Bill named after John Lewis. I’m going to go look up the map of all the states which have pending legislation to restrict voting. Now that we have the election in the rear view, I thought we could try to make this a general discussion thread, where people who have concerns about voting abuses can post as well and we can discuss it from both sides. Please keep memes out of this thread and put them in the boards where we go to talk about the other side, lol.
Voting Law Proposals and Voting Rights Efforts (1 Viewer)
- Thread starterMT15
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Users who are viewing this thread
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
WASHINGTON (AP) — During the presidential election four years ago, the Equal Ground Education Fund hired over 100 people to go door-to-door and attend festivals, college homecomings and other events to help register voters across Florida. Their efforts for this year’s elections look much different.
A state law passed last year forced them to stop in-person voter registration, cut staff and led to a significant drop in funding. Organizers aren’t sure how robust their operations will be in the fall.
Genesis Robinson, the group’s interim executive director, said the law has had a “tremendous impact” on its ability to host events and get into communities to engage directly with potential voters.
“Prior to all of these changes, we were able to operate in a space where we were taking action and prepare our communities and make sure they were registered to vote — and help if they weren’t,” he said.
Florida is one of several states, including Kansas, Missouri and Texas, where Republicans have enacted voting restrictions since 2021 that created or enhanced criminal penalties and fines for those who assist voters. The laws have forced some voter outreach groups to cease operations, while others have greatly altered or reduced their activities.
The Florida law, signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis last May, imposed a $50,000 fine on third-party voter registration organizations if the staff or volunteers who handle or collect the forms have been convicted of a felony or are not U.S. citizens. It also raised the fines the groups could face, from $1,000 to $250,000, and reduced the amount of time they are able to return registration applications from 14 days to 10 days.…….
apnews.com
A state law passed last year forced them to stop in-person voter registration, cut staff and led to a significant drop in funding. Organizers aren’t sure how robust their operations will be in the fall.
Genesis Robinson, the group’s interim executive director, said the law has had a “tremendous impact” on its ability to host events and get into communities to engage directly with potential voters.
“Prior to all of these changes, we were able to operate in a space where we were taking action and prepare our communities and make sure they were registered to vote — and help if they weren’t,” he said.
Florida is one of several states, including Kansas, Missouri and Texas, where Republicans have enacted voting restrictions since 2021 that created or enhanced criminal penalties and fines for those who assist voters. The laws have forced some voter outreach groups to cease operations, while others have greatly altered or reduced their activities.
The Florida law, signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis last May, imposed a $50,000 fine on third-party voter registration organizations if the staff or volunteers who handle or collect the forms have been convicted of a felony or are not U.S. citizens. It also raised the fines the groups could face, from $1,000 to $250,000, and reduced the amount of time they are able to return registration applications from 14 days to 10 days.…….
Voter outreach groups targeted by new laws in several GOP-led states are struggling to do their work
Laws passed in several Republican-controlled states after the 2020 presidential election have criminalized much of the work done by voter outreach groups.
apnews.com- Thread starter
- #1,046
FullMonte
Well-known member
Offline
LOLOLOLOL.....
SFL says: "Democrats fighting voter ID bills whenever possible."
SFL Provides: example of a bill that eliminates the ability to verify a voter's identity through means OUTSIDE OF PHOTO IDENTIFICATION.
Yeah...the bill says, directly, that PHOTO IDENTIFICATION can be used to verify identity. What it does, is prohibit someone from preventing a person from voting by claiming their ID is fake and demanding they provide more identification. It also says that a voter can ONLY use a photo ID in order to verify their identity to vote.
From the article linked in that tweet:
"Under the status quo, if a voter doesn’t have a valid form of photo identification, but an election official or town/city clerk can verify that person’s identity, then they can cast a ballot."
"House Bill 1569 would no longer allow this exemption to the state’s voter ID to exist. It would also no longer allow election officials to accept affidavits as proof of identity or citizenship"
So, to SFL, apparently, requiring a photo id AND ONLY A PHOTO ID as proof of identity is "fighting voter ID bills whenever possible."
- Thread starter
- #1,048
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Online
He never reads what he posts, ain’t nobody got time for all that, lol.
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
In a bizarre mixed ruling combining several challenges to a 2021 election law, Kansas’s supreme court has ruled that its residents have no right to vote enshrined in the state’s constitution.
The opinion centering on a ballot signature-verification measure elicited fiery dissent from three of the court’s seven justices. But the majority held that the court failed to identify a “fundamental right to vote” within the state.
The measure in question requires election officials to match the signatures on advance mail ballots to a person’s voter registration record. The state supreme court reversed a lower court’s dismissal of a lawsuit that challenged that. The majority of justices on the state supreme court then rejected arguments from voting rights groups that the measure violates state constitutional voting rights.
In fact, writing for the majority, Justice Caleb Stegall said that the dissenting justices wrongly accused the majority of ignoring past precedent, holding that the “fundamental right to vote” within the state constitution “simply is not there”.
That finding is contrary to the US constitution, which dedicates large portions of itself to the right to vote for citizens.
Justice Eric Rosen, one of the three who dissented, wrote: “It staggers my imagination to conclude Kansas citizens have no fundamental right to vote under their state constitution.
“I cannot and will not condone this betrayal of our constitutional duty to safeguard the foundational rights of Kansans.”……..
www.theguardian.com
The opinion centering on a ballot signature-verification measure elicited fiery dissent from three of the court’s seven justices. But the majority held that the court failed to identify a “fundamental right to vote” within the state.
The measure in question requires election officials to match the signatures on advance mail ballots to a person’s voter registration record. The state supreme court reversed a lower court’s dismissal of a lawsuit that challenged that. The majority of justices on the state supreme court then rejected arguments from voting rights groups that the measure violates state constitutional voting rights.
In fact, writing for the majority, Justice Caleb Stegall said that the dissenting justices wrongly accused the majority of ignoring past precedent, holding that the “fundamental right to vote” within the state constitution “simply is not there”.
That finding is contrary to the US constitution, which dedicates large portions of itself to the right to vote for citizens.
Justice Eric Rosen, one of the three who dissented, wrote: “It staggers my imagination to conclude Kansas citizens have no fundamental right to vote under their state constitution.
“I cannot and will not condone this betrayal of our constitutional duty to safeguard the foundational rights of Kansans.”……..
Kansas supreme court rules state constitution does not provide the right to vote
Narrow decision says lower court failed to identify ‘fundamental right to vote’, drawing fiery dissent from three of seven justices
- Thread starter
- #1,050
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Online
How can they ignore the US Constitution though? Wouldn’t citizens in Kansas have a right to vote because of it? How bonkers is it that this court is ruling like this?In a bizarre mixed ruling combining several challenges to a 2021 election law, Kansas’s supreme court has ruled that its residents have no right to vote enshrined in the state’s constitution.
The opinion centering on a ballot signature-verification measure elicited fiery dissent from three of the court’s seven justices. But the majority held that the court failed to identify a “fundamental right to vote” within the state.
The measure in question requires election officials to match the signatures on advance mail ballots to a person’s voter registration record. The state supreme court reversed a lower court’s dismissal of a lawsuit that challenged that. The majority of justices on the state supreme court then rejected arguments from voting rights groups that the measure violates state constitutional voting rights.
In fact, writing for the majority, Justice Caleb Stegall said that the dissenting justices wrongly accused the majority of ignoring past precedent, holding that the “fundamental right to vote” within the state constitution “simply is not there”.
That finding is contrary to the US constitution, which dedicates large portions of itself to the right to vote for citizens.
Justice Eric Rosen, one of the three who dissented, wrote: “It staggers my imagination to conclude Kansas citizens have no fundamental right to vote under their state constitution.
“I cannot and will not condone this betrayal of our constitutional duty to safeguard the foundational rights of Kansans.”……..
Kansas supreme court rules state constitution does not provide the right to vote
Narrow decision says lower court failed to identify ‘fundamental right to vote’, drawing fiery dissent from three of seven justices
- Moderator
- #1,051
Offline
They lied - Wonder what SFL will think about this
It is literally on their front page salemnewschannel.com
It is literally on their front page salemnewschannel.com
- Thread starter
- #1,052
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Online
They lied - Wonder what SFL will think about this
It is literally on their front page salemnewschannel.com
Yes, the whole thing was just made up. Pretty sure they got sued and part of the settlement is they have to pull the movie and publicly admit it was a lie and apologize.
Bigdaddysaints
Well-known member
Offline
They lied - Wonder what SFL will think about this
It is literally on their front page salemnewschannel.com
he'll have to wait and see what someone on twitter tells him to say..
DaveXA
Well-known member
Offline
They lied - Wonder what SFL will think about this
It is literally on their front page salemnewschannel.com
Awesome, and SFL will pretend this didn't happen.
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
They lied - Wonder what SFL will think about this
It is literally on their front page salemnewschannel.com
“‘Totally invented out of thin air’ AKA First Amendment Freedom of Speech!!!!! Nice try snowflakes!”
Last edited:
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
A Republican on the Fulton county election board who refused to certify the May primary election is a member of an election denial activist network founded by Cleta Mitchell, a Trump ally who aided his efforts to overturn the election in Georgia and elsewhere.
Julie Adams, who was appointed to the board in February, abstained from certifying the results of the May primary last month. Each of the other four board members, including the other Republican appointee Michael Heekin, voted for certification. No allegation of error or misconduct has been raised about the 21 May primary.
Adams is the regional coordinator for southeastern states in the Election Integrity Network (EIN), a national group that has recruited election deniers to target local election offices. She helped start the Georgia Election Integrity Coalition after attending an EIN summit on election integrity in 2022, according to a publicly-posted biography.
She has also been affiliated with Tea Party Patriots, another election denialist group.
“Julie Adams’ role on the Fulton county election board makes as much sense as inviting a fox to a seat in the henhouse,” said Stephanie Jackson Ali, policy director at the New Georgia Project Action Fund, a left-leaning group focused on voting rights.
“Ms Adams has made clear – in her private work for the Election Integrity Network, in her recent lawsuit against the county board, and in refusing to certify the May elections – that she is not working to make elections stronger or build voter confidence. Instead, Ms Adams is beating the dead horse of fictitious stolen elections.”
She added: “We are concerned that Ms Adams and her cohorts will continue to push this narrative in November.”
Adams has been involved in efforts to promote the use of EagleAI, a software activists are using to challenge voters in Georgia and across the country. Election officials and voting rights groups have raised alarm about the software, which is also linked to Mitchell, saying it is not reliable.
During a July 2023 call reviewed by the Guardian, Rick Richards, the software’s creator, said Adams would be one of the people leading the efforts to use the software in Georgia, “coordinating who does what”.……
www.theguardian.com
Julie Adams, who was appointed to the board in February, abstained from certifying the results of the May primary last month. Each of the other four board members, including the other Republican appointee Michael Heekin, voted for certification. No allegation of error or misconduct has been raised about the 21 May primary.
Adams is the regional coordinator for southeastern states in the Election Integrity Network (EIN), a national group that has recruited election deniers to target local election offices. She helped start the Georgia Election Integrity Coalition after attending an EIN summit on election integrity in 2022, according to a publicly-posted biography.
She has also been affiliated with Tea Party Patriots, another election denialist group.
“Julie Adams’ role on the Fulton county election board makes as much sense as inviting a fox to a seat in the henhouse,” said Stephanie Jackson Ali, policy director at the New Georgia Project Action Fund, a left-leaning group focused on voting rights.
“Ms Adams has made clear – in her private work for the Election Integrity Network, in her recent lawsuit against the county board, and in refusing to certify the May elections – that she is not working to make elections stronger or build voter confidence. Instead, Ms Adams is beating the dead horse of fictitious stolen elections.”
She added: “We are concerned that Ms Adams and her cohorts will continue to push this narrative in November.”
Adams has been involved in efforts to promote the use of EagleAI, a software activists are using to challenge voters in Georgia and across the country. Election officials and voting rights groups have raised alarm about the software, which is also linked to Mitchell, saying it is not reliable.
During a July 2023 call reviewed by the Guardian, Rick Richards, the software’s creator, said Adams would be one of the people leading the efforts to use the software in Georgia, “coordinating who does what”.……
Republican who refused to certify Georgia primary a member of election denialist group
Julie Adams, who abstained from certifying May results, belongs to Election Integrity Network, founded by Trump ally Cleta Mitchell
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
Three allies of Donald Trump were charged in Wisconsin Tuesday for their roles in advancing the fake electors plan, but the ten fake electors themselves have not yet been criminally charged.
That might be because the Wisconsin fake electors, like other fake electors across the country, have said in media interviews they were misled to believe their documents could only be used if court challenges went for the former president. Others have said they were following lawyers’ advice when they signed on.
Wisconsin attorney general Josh Kaul’s office has said it is still investigating and hasn’t ruled out charges against the individual electors, who have faced a civil suit they settled by agreeing not to serve as electors for Trump again.
In April, 18 people were charged in Arizona in that state’s inquiry into the fake elector scheme. Defense attorneys representing some of those charged in Arizona have used similar justifications, saying they were following lawyers’ advice when they signed on.
One told the Arizona Republic that his client, Jim Lamon, was relying on “lawyers from back east” who said the slates would only be used if the state’s results changed. Another told the paper that there wouldn’t be any evidence of their client’s intent to commit fraud or forgery because they got legal advice from Trump’s lawyers that led them to believe they weren’t doing anything wrong.
These claims pop up frequently by fake electors and those involved in the scheme to overthrow the 2020 election results, as do other defenses relying on historical precedent and changing election law. Defenders of the fake electors cite a 1960 election in Hawaii and changes to congressional procedure to count electoral votes among their justifications..
Some of the defenses have shown up in legal motions in Georgia, which is further along in its case against some fake electors there. But the justifications are largely happening online as the cases move more slowly than the internet, with rightwing influencers saying the scheme had a historical precedent and wasn’t illegal.
Edward Foley, an election law expert at Ohio State University, has started to see the false electors in two tiers: those who were clearly in “cahoots with Trump” and intended to subvert the election’s outcome, and others who were duped. Andy Craig, director of election policy at the Joseph H Rainey Center, has come around to this idea as well, saying it depends heavily on the facts in each fake elector’s case, but some of them did seem misled.
“I do think, to my mind, it’s fair to say that some of these fake electors are the victims of Trump’s fraud and [Rudy] Giuliani’s fraud,” Foley said. “They were relatively low-level political operatives who were trying to do something for the team and were doing it because the leader of their team was asking them to. That doesn’t justify what they did, but I’m not sure I would think criminal punishment would be appropriate for them because again, I think they’re the victims of the crime, not the perpetrators.”………
www.theguardian.com
That might be because the Wisconsin fake electors, like other fake electors across the country, have said in media interviews they were misled to believe their documents could only be used if court challenges went for the former president. Others have said they were following lawyers’ advice when they signed on.
Wisconsin attorney general Josh Kaul’s office has said it is still investigating and hasn’t ruled out charges against the individual electors, who have faced a civil suit they settled by agreeing not to serve as electors for Trump again.
In April, 18 people were charged in Arizona in that state’s inquiry into the fake elector scheme. Defense attorneys representing some of those charged in Arizona have used similar justifications, saying they were following lawyers’ advice when they signed on.
One told the Arizona Republic that his client, Jim Lamon, was relying on “lawyers from back east” who said the slates would only be used if the state’s results changed. Another told the paper that there wouldn’t be any evidence of their client’s intent to commit fraud or forgery because they got legal advice from Trump’s lawyers that led them to believe they weren’t doing anything wrong.
These claims pop up frequently by fake electors and those involved in the scheme to overthrow the 2020 election results, as do other defenses relying on historical precedent and changing election law. Defenders of the fake electors cite a 1960 election in Hawaii and changes to congressional procedure to count electoral votes among their justifications..
Some of the defenses have shown up in legal motions in Georgia, which is further along in its case against some fake electors there. But the justifications are largely happening online as the cases move more slowly than the internet, with rightwing influencers saying the scheme had a historical precedent and wasn’t illegal.
Edward Foley, an election law expert at Ohio State University, has started to see the false electors in two tiers: those who were clearly in “cahoots with Trump” and intended to subvert the election’s outcome, and others who were duped. Andy Craig, director of election policy at the Joseph H Rainey Center, has come around to this idea as well, saying it depends heavily on the facts in each fake elector’s case, but some of them did seem misled.
“I do think, to my mind, it’s fair to say that some of these fake electors are the victims of Trump’s fraud and [Rudy] Giuliani’s fraud,” Foley said. “They were relatively low-level political operatives who were trying to do something for the team and were doing it because the leader of their team was asking them to. That doesn’t justify what they did, but I’m not sure I would think criminal punishment would be appropriate for them because again, I think they’re the victims of the crime, not the perpetrators.”………
The fake elector defense: what Trump allies are saying to justify the 2020 scheme
Wisconsin’s fake electors are claiming, like many others across the US, that they were misled
DaveXA
Well-known member
Offline
The attorneys involved who advised these people should be charged. They knew better, or should have.Three allies of Donald Trump were charged in Wisconsin Tuesday for their roles in advancing the fake electors plan, but the ten fake electors themselves have not yet been criminally charged.
That might be because the Wisconsin fake electors, like other fake electors across the country, have said in media interviews they were misled to believe their documents could only be used if court challenges went for the former president. Others have said they were following lawyers’ advice when they signed on.
Wisconsin attorney general Josh Kaul’s office has said it is still investigating and hasn’t ruled out charges against the individual electors, who have faced a civil suit they settled by agreeing not to serve as electors for Trump again.
In April, 18 people were charged in Arizona in that state’s inquiry into the fake elector scheme. Defense attorneys representing some of those charged in Arizona have used similar justifications, saying they were following lawyers’ advice when they signed on.
One told the Arizona Republic that his client, Jim Lamon, was relying on “lawyers from back east” who said the slates would only be used if the state’s results changed. Another told the paper that there wouldn’t be any evidence of their client’s intent to commit fraud or forgery because they got legal advice from Trump’s lawyers that led them to believe they weren’t doing anything wrong.
These claims pop up frequently by fake electors and those involved in the scheme to overthrow the 2020 election results, as do other defenses relying on historical precedent and changing election law. Defenders of the fake electors cite a 1960 election in Hawaii and changes to congressional procedure to count electoral votes among their justifications..
Some of the defenses have shown up in legal motions in Georgia, which is further along in its case against some fake electors there. But the justifications are largely happening online as the cases move more slowly than the internet, with rightwing influencers saying the scheme had a historical precedent and wasn’t illegal.
Edward Foley, an election law expert at Ohio State University, has started to see the false electors in two tiers: those who were clearly in “cahoots with Trump” and intended to subvert the election’s outcome, and others who were duped. Andy Craig, director of election policy at the Joseph H Rainey Center, has come around to this idea as well, saying it depends heavily on the facts in each fake elector’s case, but some of them did seem misled.
“I do think, to my mind, it’s fair to say that some of these fake electors are the victims of Trump’s fraud and [Rudy] Giuliani’s fraud,” Foley said. “They were relatively low-level political operatives who were trying to do something for the team and were doing it because the leader of their team was asking them to. That doesn’t justify what they did, but I’m not sure I would think criminal punishment would be appropriate for them because again, I think they’re the victims of the crime, not the perpetrators.”………
The fake elector defense: what Trump allies are saying to justify the 2020 scheme
Wisconsin’s fake electors are claiming, like many others across the US, that they were misled
- Thread starter
- #1,059
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Online
Those were the Trump attorneys that were charged, I think. What I read said the fake electors haven’t been charged yet, unless I misread.
DaveXA
Well-known member
Offline
Sure. If they were deliberately misled, I wouldn't charge them. I don't think all of the lawyers were charged, only some of them. But I'm not really sure if there's more to the story.
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
She was sentenced to prison for voting. Her story is part of a Republican effort to intimidate others
Crystal Mason was convicted of voter fraud after the 2016 election, when she cast a ballot without realizing she was ineligible to vote
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
Could have gone in the 2024 thread also
==============================
Hey there, youthful voter.
Are you already over the presidential election?
Do the grandfathers leading the two major party tickets bring you down?
Do you feel that politics has nothing to do with your life?
A group of Democratic donors thinks it may have found a cure for what ails you — never mind the donors’ own freakout about the widespread youth malaise, given President Biden’s struggles in the polls.
They want to make politics look different in the seven or so states that will decide the presidency — like a dance party, a comedy show or a place to chill out. Sometimes there will be free beer, manicures, boot shines, a rent check sweepstakes, a handout of contraceptive pills or cooling towels.
All you have to do is show up, like it’s Super Bowl Sunday, and belong to something bigger. Oh, and someone might mention voting at some point.
“No one throws more simultaneous parties than we do,” Dmitri Mehlhorn, a donor adviser to billionaire Democrats like LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, said of Americans. “There are 2.2 million humans in those states under 45 who are just nonvoters, but they do all kinds of other civic stuff.”
The new push — funded with millions of dollars by Mehlhorn’s group, Investing in US, and others — is now being tested in swing states such as Pennsylvania and Arizona.
The target: younger voters in major metropolitan areas of a few key states who, if they do vote, tend to favor Democrats. Early polls suggest they are more disconnected from the political conversation in ways that could sink Democratic hopes of keeping the White House. The current pilot project results will determine funding for events this fall.
“Turning people out to cultural events is not a hard thing to do. The key thing is to make it fun and keep out the doom and gloom,” said Kevin Mack, the lead strategist for the Voter Project, which has been throwing parties this spring across Pennsylvania to test the theory, under the banner of Stand Up Strong ’24. “They will take actions automatically. It is not a big push.”…….
==============================
Hey there, youthful voter.
Are you already over the presidential election?
Do the grandfathers leading the two major party tickets bring you down?
Do you feel that politics has nothing to do with your life?
A group of Democratic donors thinks it may have found a cure for what ails you — never mind the donors’ own freakout about the widespread youth malaise, given President Biden’s struggles in the polls.
They want to make politics look different in the seven or so states that will decide the presidency — like a dance party, a comedy show or a place to chill out. Sometimes there will be free beer, manicures, boot shines, a rent check sweepstakes, a handout of contraceptive pills or cooling towels.
All you have to do is show up, like it’s Super Bowl Sunday, and belong to something bigger. Oh, and someone might mention voting at some point.
“No one throws more simultaneous parties than we do,” Dmitri Mehlhorn, a donor adviser to billionaire Democrats like LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, said of Americans. “There are 2.2 million humans in those states under 45 who are just nonvoters, but they do all kinds of other civic stuff.”
The new push — funded with millions of dollars by Mehlhorn’s group, Investing in US, and others — is now being tested in swing states such as Pennsylvania and Arizona.
The target: younger voters in major metropolitan areas of a few key states who, if they do vote, tend to favor Democrats. Early polls suggest they are more disconnected from the political conversation in ways that could sink Democratic hopes of keeping the White House. The current pilot project results will determine funding for events this fall.
“Turning people out to cultural events is not a hard thing to do. The key thing is to make it fun and keep out the doom and gloom,” said Kevin Mack, the lead strategist for the Voter Project, which has been throwing parties this spring across Pennsylvania to test the theory, under the banner of Stand Up Strong ’24. “They will take actions automatically. It is not a big push.”…….
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account on our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.