this isn't about HR1, it's about state legislators oppressing voters. Looks like Floriduh is pulling a Georgia.
I have lots of questions, but for starters - about this whole additional voter ID requirement for mail-in ballots. Am I guessing correctly that they will want us to make copies of our driver's licenses and mail them in with the ballots? After what happened with Gaetz's friend and the surrendered, expired DLs, I can see all kinds of problems with this. Who will be in charge of seeing these millions of IDs will be properly destroyed?
The bill, known as S.B. 90, had significantly been revised last week by Dennis K. Baxley, the Republican state senator who introduced it, to roll back some of the more strident restrictions in the original bill, like banning drop boxes. It passed the Senate Rules Committee on Tuesday along a mostly party-line vote, with one Republican member of the committee, Jeff Brandes, voting against it.
The measure also bars outside groups from giving water to voters within 150 feet of a voting location; adds more identification requirements for absentee ballots; requires voters to request an absentee ballot every election rather than be on an absentee voting list; limits who can collect and drop off ballots; and empowers partisan observers during the ballot tabulating process.
Also too, WTF does "empowers partisan observers" mean?
Also too, I know Mark Elias has filed lawsuits against the new oppression laws in GA but I don't know the details. What, if any, are the chances the courts will agree these are bridges too far.
Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Mon Apr 26, 2021 1:24 pm
this isn't about HR1, it's about state legislators oppressing voters. Looks like Floriduh is pulling a Georgia.
Usually when one state here in the south comes up with a stupid law, the others follow suit....I call it the "Siren's Call of Stupidity"...
Zibit A: Stand Your Ground laws....
"He sewed his eyes shut because he is afraid to see, He tries to tell me what I put inside of me
He's got the answers to ease my curiosity, He dreamed a god up and called it Christianity"
Texas Tribune
@TexasTribune
In the biggest pushback so far by business against the GOP's efforts to ratchet up Texas' already restrictive voting rules, Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft, Unilever, Patagonia and two dozen other companies urged lawmakers not to pass new restrictions. #TXlege
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
no linky cuz I was in the car but heard about an hour ago a story out of NC. Not sure if it was a county in NC or the state lege,* but they were was so pissed at Coca Cola over their statement against GA's new voter oppression laws they thought they'd teach Coke a lesson. They voted to remove all "Coke" vending machines from state, or maybe it's county, office buildings.
Only Coca Cola doesn't own those machines, a local fellow did, and losing that lease is going to put him and his 37 local employees out of work. So he's making a plea to reconsider.
Stay tuned.
*will try to find a link in a bit.
Update: It was one county and they relented after pushback.
The headline reads:
‘You are a moron.’ North Carolina county ends Coke vending machine ban after pushback
362 views
Judd Legum Profile picture
Judd Legum
Twitter logo
11h, 6 tweets, 2 min read
1. On May 31, Texas Republicans were fully prepared to pass a sweeping voter suppression bill
But the bill failed because House Democrats walked out, denying the GOP a quorum
The GOP will take the bill up again in a special session
But something EXTRAORDINARY is happening
2. Republicans are COMPLETELY UNPREPARED to defend the substance of the bill and are abandoning major provisions.
First, the GOP claimed the ban on Sunday voting before 1PM was a typo
This isn't credible because they defended the ban as the bill was debated
But its OUT
3. Now Republicans are scrapping a provision to allow Texas judges to void an election based on thin evidence of fraud (w/o regard to whether the alleged fraud changed the result)
A chief House sponsor of the bill now calls the provision "horrendous"!
Texas Republicans say lowering the bar for overturning elections is bad policy. So why did they try?
One of the top authors of the bill now denounces the measures related to overturning... https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politi ... 240218.php
4. Keep in mind THESE PROVISIONS PASSED THE TEXAS SENATE AND WOULD BE TEXAS LAW HAD DEMOCRATS NOT WALKED OUT
Now Republicans are saying the bill was full of "typos" and "horrendous" provisions
WTF!
5. The Texas House Speaker tried to convince Democrats not to walk out, arguing that passage of the bill was inevitable and it could get worse in a special session
Good thing Democrats did not listen to him
6. There may not be a special session until the Fall. How many more "typos" or horrendous provisions will be found before then?
When defending the indefensible, time is not on your side
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
Almost started a new Voting Rights Lawsuits topic, but changed the topic name to highlight it instead. So proud we have a DOJ that protects Americans instead of being a candy jar for the Executive branch.
Today, Merrick Garland and the DOJ fired the starting gun with a lawsuit against Georgias SB202.
Here's the pretty brief press conference announcing it:
Reuters:
June 25, 2021 11:40 AM EDT Last Updated 6 minutes ago
U.S. says Georgia voting law targets Black voters, sues to block it
Sarah N. Lynch
WASHINGTON, June 25 (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department will file a lawsuit on Friday challenging a Georgia election law that imposes new limits on voting, saying that it infringes on the rights of Black voters, Attorney General Merrick Garland said. The Georgia law, which also bans the distribution of water or food to people waiting on long lines at polling places, is one of a wave of new measures passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures this year, fueled by former President Donald Trump's false claims that his November election defeat was the result of widespread fraud. "This lawsuit is the first of many steps we are taking to ensure that all eligible voters can cast a vote," Garland told a news conference. "We are scrutinizing new laws that seek to curb voter access and when we see violations of federal law, we will act."
The lawsuit is the first of many actions the department plans to protect Americans' right to vote, Garland said. It will also be offering new guidance on post-election audits, following a wave of challenges to the results of the 2020 supporters by Trump supporters, and issue the FBI and federal prosecutors new directions to prosecute threats to election workers. After a sweeping Democratic-sponsored bill aimed at protecting access to the ballot died on a party-line vote in the Senate this week, President Joe Biden vowed to take other steps to protect voting rights.
The Republican governors of Arizona, Florida and Iowa have also signed new voting restrictions this year, while state legislatures in Pennsylvania and Texas are trying to advance similar measures. The Georgia law, signed by Governor Brian Kemp on March 25, tightened absentee ballot identification requirements, restricted ballot drop-box use and allowed a Republican-controlled state agency to take over local voting operations. The state was a key battleground in the 2020 presidential election. President Joe Biden, who became the first Democratic presidential candidate in three decades to win Georgia, has staunchly criticized Georgia's new law, calling it an "atrocity." Trump repeatedly sought to pressure election officials in Georgia after losing the state to Biden. In a phone call to the secretary of state, Trump asked him to "find" the votes that would be needed to overturn his election loss. He also pressured the Justice Department to oust the U.S. Attorney in the Atlanta region. His actions are now under investigation by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.
Haven't seen the lawsuit posted yet, didn't see it on the DOJ page yet but it'll be up shortly.
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
Did not know this. And this is 2010 census data. No wonder they are panicked.
15. In the past three decades, Georgia’s Black population has grown in size and in its proportion of Georgia’s total population. The number of Black residents increased 70.7 percent from 1990 to 2010 according to decennial Census counts, and Black residents’ share of Georgia’s total population increased from 26.8 percent of the population in 1990 to 30.6 percent in 2010. According to 2010 and 2019 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, the number and proportion of Black residents continued to grow in those nine years: Black population size increased by 13.9 percent and the Black proportion of Georgia’s population increased to 31.9 percent.
16. According to 2010 and 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 69 percent of the Black population growth in the past decade occurred
in the Atlanta region, where nine of the ten counties with the greatest increase in Black population are located.
17. Georgia’s four most populous counties are Fulton, Cobb, DeKalb, and Gwinnett Counties. They are located in the metro Atlanta area. These four
counties also contain the largest Black voting-age population.
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
Now, they are weaponizing the U.S. Department of Justice to carry out their far-left agenda that undermines election integrity and empowers federal government overreach in our democracy.
Hey Guvnuh: If this act is so perfect, you'll surely prevail in court - and thus have added to the public's confidence in it. What's the problem with that?
Everything in it is above-board and can withstand scrutiny, right?
tek wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:49 am
Hey Guvnuh: If this act is so perfect, you'll surely prevail in court - and thus have added to the public's confidence in it. What's the problem with that?
Everything in it is above-board and can withstand scrutiny, right?
Marc E. Elias @marceelias54m
I wrote this shortly before the November election, as we awaiting SCOTUS decisions that many were worried about. As we wait for tomorrow's VRA decision, I feel it more strongly than ever.
We must ignore the cynics and fight for democracy with every once of strength we have.
Marc E. Elias @marceelias 1h
The Supreme Court will release its BIG Voting Rights Act decision tomorrow morning. Follow @DemocracyDocket for breaking news and analysis.
Marc E. Elias @marceelias 3h
Tomorrow the US Supreme Court will decide the last two cases of this term--one involves the future of the Voting Rights Act; the other, donor disclosure.
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
BREAKING NEWS: In 6-3 ruling, SCOTUS upholds two Arizona voting provisions: a ban on so-called "ballot harvesting," and a policy that throws out an entire ballot if it was cast in the wrong precinct. Challengers argued that both provisions discriminate against minority voters2
Justice Alito writes the majority opinion joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.
Justice Kagan dissents joined by Breyer and Sotomayor.
BREAKING NEWS: In 6-3 ruling, SCOTUS upholds two Arizona voting provisions: a ban on so-called "ballot harvesting," and a policy that throws out an entire ballot if it was cast in the wrong precinct. Challengers argued that both provisions discriminate against minority voters.
Justice Alito for the court, "[W]e think it prudent to make clear at the beginning that we decline in these cases to announce a test to govern all VRA §2 claims involving rules, like those at issue here, that specify the time, place, or manner for casting ballots."
Kagan says that today's ruling "undermines Section 2 and the right it provides" because it "gives a cramped reading to broad language" and then "uses that reading to uphold" the out-of-precinct policy and the ban on ballot harvesting.
The GQP doesn't care if democracy dies...just as long as they're the one's in power when it does.
"He sewed his eyes shut because he is afraid to see, He tries to tell me what I put inside of me
He's got the answers to ease my curiosity, He dreamed a god up and called it Christianity"
Kyle Griffin@kylegriffin1
Heads up: Wisconsin elections officials have removed more than 205,000 voters from the rolls.
174,307 voter registrations were deactivated simply because the voters hadn't cast a ballot in four years and didn't respond to a mailing.
Florida has a similar system. Voters get flagged 'inactive' if they don't vote over two general election cycles and fail to respond to the mail notice requesting an update. It's reasonable, IMHO.
Opinion: Merrick Garland: It is time for Congress to act again to protect the right to vote
Opinion by Merrick B. Garland
Yesterday at 6:09 p.m. EDT
Merrick B. Garland is attorney general of the United States.
Our society is shaped not only by the rights it declares but also by its willingness to protect and enforce those rights. Nowhere is this clearer than in the area of voting rights.
Fifty-six years ago Friday, the Voting Rights Act became law. At the signing ceremony, President Lyndon B. Johnson rightly called it “one of the most monumental laws in the entire history of American freedom.”
Prior attempts to protect voting rights informed his assessment. The 15th Amendment promised that no American citizen would be denied the right to vote on account of race. Yet for nearly a century following the amendment’s ratification, the right to vote remained illusory for far too many.
The Civil Rights Act of 1957 marked Congress’s first major civil rights legislation since Reconstruction. That law authorized the attorney general to sue to enjoin racially discriminatory denials of the right to vote. Although the Justice Department immediately put the law to use, it quickly learned that bringing case-by-case challenges was no match for systematic voter suppression.
Things would not have changed without the civil rights movement’s persistent call to action. By the time a 25-year-old John Lewis was beaten on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala., the Justice Department had been embroiled in voting rights litigation against the surrounding county for four years. Although the county had approximately 15,000 Black citizens of voting age, the number of Black registered voters had only risen from 156 to 383 during those years.
By 1965, it was clear that protecting the right to vote required stronger tools. The Voting Rights Act provided them. Central to the law was its “preclearance” provision, which prevented jurisdictions with a history of discriminatory voting practices from adopting new voting rules until they could show the Justice Department or a federal court that the change would have neither a racially discriminatory purpose nor a racially discriminatory result.
By any measure, the preclearance regime was enormously effective. While it was in place, the Justice Department blocked thousands of discriminatory voting changes that would have curtailed the voting rights of millions of citizens in jurisdictions large and small.
One thwarted change involved McComb, Miss. A large group of Black residents in the city had long voted at the Martin Luther King Jr. Community Center, which was close to their homes on the east side of railroad tracks that run through the city. In 1997, the city tried to move that group’s assigned polling place to the American Legion Hut on the west side of the tracks. To cross those tracks, Black voters on the east side — many of whom lacked transportation — would have had to travel substantial distances to find a safe crossing. Recognizing that difficulty, the Justice Department blocked the change.
While the Voting Rights Act gave the Justice Department robust authority, it also imposed checks on that power. Jurisdictions had the option to go to federal court to show that their voting changes were lawful. This ensured fairness and accountability, but without the inefficiencies and ineffectiveness that existed prior to 1965. It was a balance that worked and received broad support: Congressional reauthorizations of the act were signed into law by President Richard M. Nixon in 1970, President Gerald Ford in 1975, President Ronald Reagan in 1982 and President George W. Bush in 2006.
That invaluable framework was upended in 2013, when the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder effectively eliminated the act’s preclearance protections. Without that authority, the Justice Department has been unable to stop discriminatory practices before they occur. Instead, the Justice Department has been left with costly, time-consuming tools that have many of the shortcomings that plagued federal law prior to 1965.
Notwithstanding these setbacks, the Justice Department is using all its current legal authorities to combat a new wave of restrictive voting laws. But if the Voting Rights Act’s preclearance provision were still operative, many of those laws would likely not have taken effect in the first place.
In a column published after his death, Lewis recalled an important lesson taught by Martin Luther King Jr.: “Each of us has a moral obligation to stand up, speak up and speak out. When you see something that is not right, you must say something. You must do something.”
On this anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, we must say again that it is not right to erect barriers that make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to vote. And it is time for Congress to act again to protect that fundamental right.
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
x5
s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" 
