- Dec 5, 2010
- Reaction score
what a farce. Another in the long line of questionable, undemocratic practices that shows why voting rights, access, and procedures must be standardized across the nation.And here comes Texas. They have no shame.
Voters in Harris County (Houston) get targeted. Shocking.
But those hours will still prohibit the day of 24-hour voting Harris County offered last November. The legislation would also outlaw the drive-thru voting set up at 10 polling places in the county for the general election.
While questioning Hughes, Democratic state Sen. Carol Alvarado of Houston referenced an analysis by Harris County’s election office that estimated that Black and Hispanic voters cast more than half of the votes counted both at drive-thru sites and during extended hours.
“Knowing that, who are you really targeting?” Alvarado asked.
“There’s nothing in this bill that has to do with targeting specific groups. The rules apply across the board,” Hughes replied.
In defending the portions of the bill that target Harris County’s
initiatives, Hughes in part pointed to the limitations he claimed drive-thru and overnight voting presented for poll watchers’ oversight, characterizing them as the “eyes and ears of the public.” Poll watchers are not public watchdogs but instead inherently partisan figures, appointed by candidates and political parties to serve at polling places. And poll watchers did have access to observe drive-thru and 24-hour voting last year.
If passed into law, the legislation would broaden poll watchers’ access at polling places, even giving them power to video record voters receiving assistance in filling out their ballots if the poll watcher “reasonably believes” the help is unlawful. That provision has drawn particular concerns about possible intimidation of voters who speak languages other than English, as well as voters with intellectual or developmental disabilities who may require assistance through prompting or questioning that could be misconstrued as coercion.
The collection of civil rights organizations that have warned the bill could lead to disenfranchisement of voters of color and voters with disabilities did see one of their most prominent concerns addressed in the version of the bill passed by the Senate.
Texas Republicans’ attempt to prevent a repeated of that echoes efforts in other states, including Georgia, where Republican lawmakers recently passed a similar prohibition. After voters of color helped flip key states into the Democrats’ column during the presidential election, Republicans have channeled their myth that the election was stolen into legislative pushback in state capitols across the U.S.
But Democrats pointed to the focus on increased voting regulations in diverse, urban areas. Beyond the restrictions targeting Harris County, the legislation would also set specific rules for the distribution of polling places in only the handful of counties with a population of at least 1 million — most of which are either under Democratic control or won by Democrats in recent national and statewide elections.
They have a back-up plan in case voter suppression doesn't work: If the Dems STILL manage to win, they will change the law so that the Texas EC votes will go to whoever wins the most Texas State Senate districts. An EC within an EC. So even if Dems win, they still lose! MAGA!what a farce. Another in the long line of questionable, undemocratic practices that shows why voting rights, access, and procedures must be standardized across the nation.
howie, here’s what your Georgia Republican hero for standing up to Trump had to say about ”Jim Crow on steroids”, the new Georgia election law, and voter suppression:
Praising an R for doing his job, which is only praiseworthy in the era of the Trumpist QOP, doesn't mean he's "our hero." I'm glad he had enough courage to be the rare R to stand up to Trump. His opinion that this voter suppression BS is all fine means exactly nothing.howie, here’s what your Georgia Republican hero for standing up to Trump had to say about ”Jim Crow on steroids”, the new Georgia election law, and voter suppression:
...Sterling, a Republican, gained nationwide attention in December when he pleaded with Trump to stop his false claims of election fraud, saying that the baseless assertions were “inspiring people to commit potential acts of violence. Someone is going to get hurt, someone is going to get shot, someone is going to get killed.”
But more recently, Sterling has ruffled Democratic feathers by defending Georgia’s controversial new election law, saying on the “Skullduggery” podcast that criticism that the new measures are equivalent to segregationist Jim Crow measures — or, as President Biden said, “Jim Crow on steroids” — is “ridiculous.”
“Jim Crow was a systematic system of highly oppressive laws that were literally ripping people off of the rolls, setting up impossible hurdles for people to meet. And it was obviously directed at African Americans because they had the grandfather clauses in there to let older poor white folks get onto the things,” he said.
Sterling argued that, in contrast, the new Georgia law expands weekend voting and codifies for the first time the provision of drop boxes for the casting of absentee ballots. Citing one of the most publicized parts of the new law — barring political partisans from supplying food and water to people waiting in line to vote — Sterling said this is a reasonable measure to prevent partisans from seeking to influence how someone casts their ballot. “These are simple things that people are spinning up into stuff that’s just lies, and it’s just become more and more frustrating,” he said.
He compared Democrats’ fundraising off the new law to Trump allies raising money by claiming that last year’s election was stolen. But there is, says Sterling, one difference. Stacey Abrams’s cries of voter suppression have the effect of motivating more African Americans to vote, but Trump’s cries of a rigged election have the opposite effect: discouraging his supporters to vote. The result, said Sterling, was that Republicans lost both Senate seats in January’s special election.
“Absolutely,” he said when asked whether he thought the GOP defeat was Trump’s fault. “One hundred percent, foursquare, on his shoulders, on his back. It should be on his epitaph and on a gravestone at the end: ‘Yes. It’s Donald J. Trump’s fault that the Republicans lost control of the United States Senate.’”
I’m sure you’ll agree with this brave Republican now b/c you’re not a hypocrite, right?
Yep, he was doing his job. Still is...by legitimately countering unfounded BS voter suppression claims about the Georgia ”Jim Crow” law as “ridiculous“.Praising an R for doing his job, which is only praiseworthy in the era of the Trumpist QOP, doesn't mean he's "our hero." I'm glad he had enough courage to be the rare R to stand up to Trump. His opinion that this voter suppression BS is all fine means exactly nothing.
QOP SOS defends QOP Voter Suppression Laws isn't the home run you think it is.
Assuming what you have here is true, that would be incredibly disturbing, and yet another reason for the metro areas of Texas to break out into their own city states, and let rural Texas rot itself into the ground of its own fascism.They have a back-up plan in case voter suppression doesn't work: If the Dems STILL manage to win, they will change the law so that the Texas EC votes will go to whoever wins the most Texas State Senate districts. An EC within an EC. So even if Dems win, they still lose! MAGA!
It was put into the Texas QOP party platform last year I believe. I have zero reason to doubt they would pass it as legislation at the first sign they are going to lose. Everyone knows if the QOP'er lose Texas, it's ballgame for them. They will do whatever they have to.Assuming what you have here is true, that would be incredibly disturbing, and yet another reason for the metro areas of Texas to break out into their own city states, and let rural Texas rot itself into the ground of its own fascism.
Really? Two different states and state jurisdictions. Two different circumstances. Two different criminal records.
There is very little voter fraud which you know. When it does happen, people should be punished. Interesting that you see no issue with the disparities in the punishments here though.Really? Two different states and state jurisdictions. Two different circumstances. Two different criminal records.
But wait howie, I thought that there wasn’t any voter fraud. I thought voter fraud isn’t a problem.
You know what may have prevented or deterred them from violating legal voting laws? More stringent verification of IDs.
But really, you think that EVERY ruling turns out the same, even for almost identical violations of the law, and that there aren’t different rulings in cases EVERYDAY in America regardless of race?
Lefties always love anecdotes. It’s scientific and methodical analysis!
There is very little voter fraud which you know. When it does happen, people should be punished. Interesting that you see no issue with the disparities in the punishments here though.