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
- Thread starter
- #127
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Offline
If (and this is no “if” because the lines to vote in minority districts have been very long and were so even during the pandemic with unrestricted vote by mail) the lines exceed one hour during an election, they are supposed to fix it for the next election. They don’t even have to really fix it, they just have to make a half-hearted attempt to increase the number of polling places and say they fixed it. That doesn’t do anything to stop the suppression during the actual election that is taking place.
They don’t even address the amount of time before voting in that snippet of the law you quote, they simply address the amount of time to wait to check in. So if they put the check in table way down the line, and you have to wait six hours to vote after you check in, that wouldn’t even be considered a problem. Does that seem like a good faith effort to fix the issue of long lines? Keep in mind that long lines are really only an issue in minority districts.
Did you read the bill? You admonish me, but it seems you didn’t even read the snippets you posted.
They don’t even address the amount of time before voting in that snippet of the law you quote, they simply address the amount of time to wait to check in. So if they put the check in table way down the line, and you have to wait six hours to vote after you check in, that wouldn’t even be considered a problem. Does that seem like a good faith effort to fix the issue of long lines? Keep in mind that long lines are really only an issue in minority districts.
Did you read the bill? You admonish me, but it seems you didn’t even read the snippets you posted.
- Thread starter
- #128
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Offline
SFL, they did restrict early voting. They have changed Sunday voting from required to “permitted”. It’s up to each location, and they can decide to close on Sundays.
They did originally cut down the hours for early voting, it’s in the actual parts you quoted where they changed it back to somewhat longer hours, you can see the edit. Biden was talking about the first version of the bill, there was so much criticism that they backed off. Even then, they are stopping early voting at 5 PM every day except Saturday.
Here’s a pretty good rundown from a neutral POV, unlike your sketchy Twitter guy:
www.npr.org
They did originally cut down the hours for early voting, it’s in the actual parts you quoted where they changed it back to somewhat longer hours, you can see the edit. Biden was talking about the first version of the bill, there was so much criticism that they backed off. Even then, they are stopping early voting at 5 PM every day except Saturday.
Here’s a pretty good rundown from a neutral POV, unlike your sketchy Twitter guy:
Georgia Governor Signs Election Overhaul, Including Changes To Absentee Voting
The law will make dramatic alterations to Georgia's absentee voting rules, adding new identification requirements, moving back the request deadline and other changes.
www.npr.org- Banned
- #129
SaintForLife
Well-known member
Offline
I read the parts of the bill that have come up in discussions. I posted them. Where you are getting your information from? Stacey Abrams?If (and this is no “if” because the lines to vote in minority districts have been very long and were so even during the pandemic with unrestricted vote by mail) the lines exceed one hour during an election, they are supposed to fix it for the next election. They don’t even have to really fix it, they just have to make a half-hearted attempt to increase the number of polling places and say they fixed it. That doesn’t do anything to stop the suppression during the actual election that is taking place.
They don’t even address the amount of time before voting in that snippet of the law you quote, they simply address the amount of time to wait to check in. So if they put the check in table way down the line, and you have to wait six hours to vote after you check in, that wouldn’t even be considered a problem. Does that seem like a good faith effort to fix the issue of long lines? Keep in mind that long lines are really only an issue in minority districts.
Did you read the bill? You admonish me, but it seems you didn’t even read the snippets you posted.
Another change that was proposed last year and is now law would require large polling places with long lines to take action if wait times surpass an hour at certain times during the day. Those massive polls with more than 2,000 voters and wait times longer than an hour would have to hire more staff, add more workers or split up the precinct after that election. More than 1,500 of Georgia's precincts have over 2,000 voters.
What Does Georgia's New Voting Law SB 202 Do?
Georgia has a new slate of voting laws after Gov. Brian Kemp signed a 98-page bill Thursday. From absentee restrictions to more flexibility with voting equipment, here's a look at all the changes.
That's from the Georgia Public Broadcasting which the Washington Post said was a good source about the new law. Those changes about expanding voting would happen in the next elections.
CoolBrees
Well-known member
Offline
@SaintForLife -
Erick Erickson (awful source btw - he’s a poor man’s Limbaugh- just not as dead and decomposed) made a small but hardly surprising omission.
His red highlight left out the important phrase-
“or other documentation”
that distinction is the whole discussion.
In Oregon we have the exact same clause in our elections - which are 100% mail in balloting and we have had for it 12 years. I totally agree with you on this and I doubt you will find many who disagree. A utility bill is acceptable as a form of “or other documentation.” Same with a library card, bus pass, or school ID. None of which require a government issued ID or have a photo.
I just wanted to say that I am glad you agree with these as acceptable forms of ID. Now why are you guys fighting against it again?
Erick Erickson (awful source btw - he’s a poor man’s Limbaugh- just not as dead and decomposed) made a small but hardly surprising omission.
His red highlight left out the important phrase-
“or other documentation”
that distinction is the whole discussion.
In Oregon we have the exact same clause in our elections - which are 100% mail in balloting and we have had for it 12 years. I totally agree with you on this and I doubt you will find many who disagree. A utility bill is acceptable as a form of “or other documentation.” Same with a library card, bus pass, or school ID. None of which require a government issued ID or have a photo.
I just wanted to say that I am glad you agree with these as acceptable forms of ID. Now why are you guys fighting against it again?
- Thread starter
- #131
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Offline
SFL, that was my point exactly. They know the lines in minority precincts are extremely long, hours and hours. It doesn’t require them to fix anything in advance, though, until it happens again, and then they just have to fix it for the next election. They have in the meantime shortened the window for vote by mail and outlawed Fulton County’s two mobile voting buses that they used during the early voting period to make it more convenient for voters. It won’t do anything about the long lines for the next election. They know it’s a problem, but they aren’t really fixing it because the lines are long where they want them to be long, IMO. Not a good faith effort here.
They have also decided that if you go to another precinct other than your home one, like maybe in an attempt to go somewhere where the lines aren’t as long, your provisional ballot will no longer be counted (unless it is after five and you sign that you don’t have time to get to your own precinct).
They could fix the electioneering issue easily without making it a crime to give someone food and water in a long voting line. Nobody else does that. Just make it a crime to hand out water bottles with a candidate or party name on them. Or make it a crime to discuss the election with a voter in the line. That way if a church or a restaurant wants to help the people stuck in those long lines, they can still do that in a nonpartisan way. This way it is just punitive, and IMO that’s by design too.
Also, the worst of the measures were removed because of complaints by people who realized that this bill in its original form made GA look very bad. That’s why several large GA-based corporations opposed the original bill.
All of this is fixing something that isn’t a problem, and the absolute worst are the changes so that an election is easier to overturn by the legislature. The bill is still a problem, although it’s not as bad as it was at first.
They have also decided that if you go to another precinct other than your home one, like maybe in an attempt to go somewhere where the lines aren’t as long, your provisional ballot will no longer be counted (unless it is after five and you sign that you don’t have time to get to your own precinct).
They could fix the electioneering issue easily without making it a crime to give someone food and water in a long voting line. Nobody else does that. Just make it a crime to hand out water bottles with a candidate or party name on them. Or make it a crime to discuss the election with a voter in the line. That way if a church or a restaurant wants to help the people stuck in those long lines, they can still do that in a nonpartisan way. This way it is just punitive, and IMO that’s by design too.
Also, the worst of the measures were removed because of complaints by people who realized that this bill in its original form made GA look very bad. That’s why several large GA-based corporations opposed the original bill.
All of this is fixing something that isn’t a problem, and the absolute worst are the changes so that an election is easier to overturn by the legislature. The bill is still a problem, although it’s not as bad as it was at first.
- Banned
- #132
SaintForLife
Well-known member
Offline
Changes to early votingSFL, they did restrict early voting. They have changed Sunday voting from required to “permitted”. It’s up to each location, and they can decide to close on Sundays.
They did originally cut down the hours for early voting, it’s in the actual parts you quoted where they changed it back to somewhat longer hours, you can see the edit. Biden was talking about the first version of the bill, there was so much criticism that they backed off. Even then, they are stopping early voting at 5 PM every day except Saturday.
Here’s a pretty good rundown from a neutral POV, unlike your sketchy Twitter guy:
Georgia Governor Signs Election Overhaul, Including Changes To Absentee Voting
The law will make dramatic alterations to Georgia's absentee voting rules, adding new identification requirements, moving back the request deadline and other changes.
One of the biggest changes in the bill would expand early voting access for most counties, adding an additional mandatory Saturday and formally codifying Sunday voting hours as optional. Counties can have early voting open as long as 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., or 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at minimum. If you live in a larger metropolitan county, you might not notice a change. For most other counties, you will have an extra weekend day, and your weekday early voting hours will likely be longer.
What Does Georgia's New Voting Law SB 202 Do?
Georgia has a new slate of voting laws after Gov. Brian Kemp signed a 98-page bill Thursday. From absentee restrictions to more flexibility with voting equipment, here's a look at all the changes.
The bill enacts new limitations on mail-in voting, expands most voters' access to in-person early voting and caps a months-long battle over voting in a battleground state.
...Earlier law required three weeks of in-person early voting Monday through Friday, plus one Saturday, during "normal business hours. The new bill adds an extra Saturday, makes both Sundays optional for counties, and standardizes hours from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. or as long as 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
Georgia Governor Signs Election Overhaul, Including Changes To Absentee Voting
The law will make dramatic alterations to Georgia's absentee voting rules, adding new identification requirements, moving back the request deadline and other changes.
www.npr.orgYour neutral source left out the part about the Sunday times being optional. They didn't make Sundays optional.
It's rich that you are still complaining about what sources I post, but you recently posted a tweet from someone from the disgraced Lincoln Project.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #133
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Offline
No, it didn’t leave out the Sunday parts. They were originally forbidden, but such a stink was made that they made them “optional”. That is different, but not necessarily better, especially since they have made moves where the legislature can more easily control the local election boards.
Both your source and mine describe Sunday voting as optional, I don’t even understand what you’re trying to say.
I showed you a couple things your source got wrong in the first post I made replying to your huge post with multiple tweets. Your guy was not being honest about the changes, and I showed exactly what he left out.
Both your source and mine describe Sunday voting as optional, I don’t even understand what you’re trying to say.
I showed you a couple things your source got wrong in the first post I made replying to your huge post with multiple tweets. Your guy was not being honest about the changes, and I showed exactly what he left out.
cuddlemonkey
Well-known monkey
- Joined
- May 17, 2019
- Messages
- 4,410
- Reaction score
- 5,496
Offline
I haven't seen anything about this. Do you have links?
- Banned
- #135
SaintForLife
Well-known member
Offline
The Atlanta Journal Constitution had to make a big correction on their article about the Georgia voting bill. They probably shouldn't have gotten their information from left wing activists for the article. Biden is still lying about the bill.
www.ajc.com
Top film director says department of justice should stop voting law
The media mogul said he wants the Department of Justice to take action against the newly signed, ‘unconstitutional’ law.
- Banned
- #136
SaintForLife
Well-known member
Offline
Like I said before I'm not good at reading elections laws so it wasn't just the Sunday times that was changed. The bill did expand voting on the weekends by adding Saturdays
DOES THE BILL ELIMINATE SUNDAY VOTING?
Republicans had proposed at one time to limit early voting on weekends, a time when many Black churches conduct “souls to the polls” efforts to take congregants to vote. But Republicans reversed themselves, and the measure now expands weekend early voting. Previously, one day of weekend voting was required, with counties given the option of offering more. Now two Saturdays will be required, and counties can offer two Sunday voting days as well. Republicans point to this provision to argue they are actually expanding, rather than restricting, voting access.
EXPLAINER: What does Georgia's new GOP election law do?
ATLANTA (AP) — The sweeping rewrite of Georgia's election rules represents the first big set of changes since former President Donald Trump's repeated, baseless claims of fraud following his presidential loss to Joe Biden.
apnews.com- Thread starter
- #137
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Offline
They already had Saturday and Sunday voting, so the way these articles are worded is confusing.
My guess is that before this bill the weekend hours were left up to each county. I know in Atlanta they had both Saturday and Sunday hours for early voting. The first version of the bill specifically outlawed Sunday voting and restricted the Saturday hours, IIRC. They got such pushback that they changed it, but like I said it wasn’t what they really intended to do.
So two things, the confusion is due to the differences between the bill as proposed and the bill as finally passed. I think Biden just hasn’t been updated on the final version. And the Rs trying to take credit for expanding any voting times is really hypocritical. They intended to restrict the hours and were forced to change them.
My guess is that before this bill the weekend hours were left up to each county. I know in Atlanta they had both Saturday and Sunday hours for early voting. The first version of the bill specifically outlawed Sunday voting and restricted the Saturday hours, IIRC. They got such pushback that they changed it, but like I said it wasn’t what they really intended to do.
So two things, the confusion is due to the differences between the bill as proposed and the bill as finally passed. I think Biden just hasn’t been updated on the final version. And the Rs trying to take credit for expanding any voting times is really hypocritical. They intended to restrict the hours and were forced to change them.
DaveXA
Well-known member
Online
I haven't really been keeping up, but where are you seeing 2 different versions of the bill? I haven't really seen or noticed much reporting on that.
V Chip
Truth Addict
Offline
Exactly. Most counties already had multiple Saturday (and Sunday) voting so claiming that it is expanding voting is misleading — it’s just required now for 2 Saturdays (which is a good thing) but most places already did that. I live in rural Bartow county and we already had multiple early voting Saturdays and at least one Sunday.
Additionally, the original version that passed the Senate removed no excuse absentee balloting, but the pushback on that caused that to be removed in the final version. Republicans are touting that as a benefit of the bill, butno excuse absentee balloting has been the law since 2005and it wouldn’t be anymore if they had their original bill signed into law.
Overall the bill is more restrictive. That’s fact — yeah, some counties that didn’t offer two Saturdays of early voting now have to, or that had no drop boxes at all will now be required to have at least one, but for most Georgians it is more restrictive full stop.
- Thread starter
- #140
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Offline
The absolute worst is the way it sets up for any future claims of ‘voter fraud’. If the Rs in the legislature ‘suspect’ voter fraud, they can just throw out the vote and replace the local election boards. I also read where they can even suspend the count if they choose.
With the powers of the SOS stripped away, and the power to replace the local election officials on a whim, there isn’t much doubt that under this law they would have thrown the past election to Trump, as well as the two senate seats. It’s basically an all out power grab; it will allow them to steal elections if they so choose.
How can anyone trust these R state legislators when they repeat the Big Lie about the past election?
With the powers of the SOS stripped away, and the power to replace the local election officials on a whim, there isn’t much doubt that under this law they would have thrown the past election to Trump, as well as the two senate seats. It’s basically an all out power grab; it will allow them to steal elections if they so choose.
How can anyone trust these R state legislators when they repeat the Big Lie about the past election?
SaulGoodmanEsq
Well-known member
Offline
Well... this one went unanswered. Oh well. I don't think anyone questions the utility of requiring identification and other fairly neutral changes but... again... you consistently ignore the motivations behind this legislation and the fact that it takes control away from local county officials and into the hands of -- surprise surprise -- a new State Election Board appointed by the legislature (GOP majority). Oh, and the Secretary of State is a non-voting member of this board which can't be read as anything other than direct retaliation to Brad Raffensperger.
Also, this Board may suspend county/municipal superintendents and replace them with temporary appointees of their choosing. So, basically, the GOP controlled Board can suspend the superintendents for large Democrat-filled counties (e.g. Fulton). Sort of sinks the narrative that this legislation is non-partisan. I'm surprised the nominal 'libertarians' among us are heartily endorsing the politicizing of the voting process. That's where this country crosses the Rubicon. You're no longer living in anything resembling a Democratic Republic, rather, an autocracy where you don't mind living because you agree with most of the social policies of what is effectively the minority.
And people wonder why some of us are not necessarily 'proud' to be Americans.
Last edited:
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
from the New York Times
====================
Go page by page through Georgia’s new voting law, and one takeaway stands above all others: The Republican legislature and governor have made a breathtaking assertion of partisan power in elections, making absentee voting harder and creating restrictions and complications in the wake of narrow losses to Democrats.
The New York Times has examined and annotated the law, identifying 16 provisions that hamper the right to vote for some Georgians or strip power from state and local elections officials and give it to legislators........
Here are the most significant changes to voting in the state, as written into the new law:
====================
Go page by page through Georgia’s new voting law, and one takeaway stands above all others: The Republican legislature and governor have made a breathtaking assertion of partisan power in elections, making absentee voting harder and creating restrictions and complications in the wake of narrow losses to Democrats.
The New York Times has examined and annotated the law, identifying 16 provisions that hamper the right to vote for some Georgians or strip power from state and local elections officials and give it to legislators........
Here are the most significant changes to voting in the state, as written into the new law:
- Voters will now have less time to request absentee ballots.
- There are strict new ID requirements for absentee ballots.
- It’s now illegal for election officials to mail out absentee ballot applications to all voters.
- Drop boxes still exist … but barely.
- Mobile voting centers (think an R.V. where you can vote) are essentially banned.
- Early voting is expanded in a lot of small counties, but probably not in more populous ones.
- Offering food or water to voters waiting in line now risks misdemeanor charges.
- If you go to the wrong polling place, it will be (even) harder to vote.
- If election problems arise, a common occurrence, it is now more difficult to extend voting hours.
- With a mix of changes to vote-counting, high-turnout elections will probably mean a long wait for results.
- Election officials can no longer accept third-party funding (a measure that nods to right-wing conspiracy theories).
- With an eye toward voter fraud, the state attorney general will manage an election hotline.
- The Republican-controlled legislature has more control over the State Election Board.
- The secretary of state is removed as a voting member of the State Election Board.
- The G.O.P.-led legislature is empowered to suspend county election officials.
- Runoff elections will happen faster — and could become harder to manage.
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Online
on GOP reaction to companies reaction the Georgia voting law
=========================================
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is second to none in protecting First Amendment rights of corporations — at least when the subject is money. McConnell, a longtime opponent of limits on campaign donations as a form of speech, has often defended unlimited dark money in lofty terms.
In 2012, The Post reported on a speech he gave to the American Enterprise Institute:
But when it comes to actual speech from corporations — specifically, speech denouncing Republicans’ voter suppression efforts — McConnell becomes irate.
McConnell, in a written statement on Monday, deemed the exercise of such First Amendment rights as “bullying.” “It’s jaw-dropping to see powerful American institutions not just permit themselves to be bullied, but join in the bullying themselves. … Our private sector must stop taking cues from the Outrage-Industrial Complex. Americans do not need or want big business to amplify disinformation or react to every manufactured controversy with frantic left-wing signaling.”
He is dismayed by consistent advocacy plainly protected by the First Amendment: “From election law to environmentalism to radical social agendas to the Second Amendment, parts of the private sector keep dabbling in behaving like a woke parallel government.” Worse, he threatens retribution: “Corporations will invite serious consequences if they become a vehicle for far-left mobs to hijack our country from outside the constitutional order.”............
Opinion | Republicans defend corporate speech — unless it supports voting rights - The Washington Post
=========================================
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is second to none in protecting First Amendment rights of corporations — at least when the subject is money. McConnell, a longtime opponent of limits on campaign donations as a form of speech, has often defended unlimited dark money in lofty terms.
In 2012, The Post reported on a speech he gave to the American Enterprise Institute:
McConnell has even filed multiple amicus curiae briefs in campaign cases insisting the rights of free speech and association implicit in corporate campaign donations are “fundamental” and “of central importance.”
But when it comes to actual speech from corporations — specifically, speech denouncing Republicans’ voter suppression efforts — McConnell becomes irate.
McConnell, in a written statement on Monday, deemed the exercise of such First Amendment rights as “bullying.” “It’s jaw-dropping to see powerful American institutions not just permit themselves to be bullied, but join in the bullying themselves. … Our private sector must stop taking cues from the Outrage-Industrial Complex. Americans do not need or want big business to amplify disinformation or react to every manufactured controversy with frantic left-wing signaling.”
He is dismayed by consistent advocacy plainly protected by the First Amendment: “From election law to environmentalism to radical social agendas to the Second Amendment, parts of the private sector keep dabbling in behaving like a woke parallel government.” Worse, he threatens retribution: “Corporations will invite serious consequences if they become a vehicle for far-left mobs to hijack our country from outside the constitutional order.”............
Opinion | Republicans defend corporate speech — unless it supports voting rights - The Washington Post
SaulGoodmanEsq
Well-known member
Offline
If corporations like Coca Cola are embracing the ideology then it probably isn't overly 'woke' or radical.
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.