A Voter Restriction/Access Thread

[Dill]

   
Given the widespread legislative focus on election/voting laws following the 2020 election, I thought it might be useful to devote a thread to this phenomenon--the laws, their motivation, and their likely consequences. According to the Brennan center, 106 laws proposed in 28 states would restrict access to insure process "integrity," while 406 in 35 states would increase it in the name of voters "rights".

Lurking behind the integrity/rights labels are, of course, our old friends the "voter fraud" and "voter suppression" issues.

I detect some party alignment with these issues as well.
.......................................................................................................................................................................................
Voting Laws Roundup: January 2021: After historic turnout and increased mail voting in 2020, state lawmakers across the country are pulling in opposite directions by introducing restrictive and expansive voting legislation.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-january-2021

The 2021 legislative sessions have begun in all but six states, and state lawmakers have already introduced hundreds of bills aimed at election procedures and voter access — vastly exceeding the number of voting bills introduced by this time last year.

In a backlash to historic voter turnout in the 2020 general election, and grounded in a rash of baseless and racist allegations of voter fraud and election irregularities, legislators have introduced three times the number of bills to restrict voting access as compared to this time last year. Twenty-eight states have introduced, prefiled, or carried over 106 restrictive bills this year (as compared to 35 such bills in fifteen states on February 3, 2020).

Of course, other state lawmakers are seizing on an energized electorate and persistent interest in democracy reform (which is likewise reflected in Congress). To date, thirty-five states have introduced, prefiled, or carried over 406 bills to expand voting access (dwarfing the 188 expansive bills that were filed in twenty-nine states as of February 3, 2020). Notably 93 such bills were introduced in New York and New Jersey.

With unprecedented numbers of voters casting their ballots by mail in 2020, legislators across the country have shown particular interest in absentee voting reform, with more than a quarter of voting and election bills addressing absentee voting procedures. Only seven of the forty-one states that have introduced election bills have not proposed policies to alter absentee voting procedures in some way.

Also in reaction to 2020, four states have proposed legislation that would modify how presidential electors are allocated, and eleven states have introduced bills to adopt the national popular vote compact.

Overview of Restrictive Bills

Thus far this year, 28 states have introduced, prefiled, or carried over 106 bills to restrict voting access. These proposals primarily seek to: (1) limit mail voting access; (2) impose stricter voter ID requirements; (3) limit successful pro-voter registration policies; and (4) enable more aggressive voter roll purges. These bills are an unmistakable response to the unfounded and dangerous lies about fraud that followed the 2020 election.

Pennsylvania leads the nation in proposed voter suppression legislation in 2021, with 14 restrictive policy proposals. New Hampshire comes in second (11 bills), followed by Missouri (9 bills), and Mississippi, New Jersey, and Texas (8 bills each). Georgia lawmakers reportedly plan to introduce bills to require an excuse to cast an absentee ballot, mandate photo ID when returning an absentee ballot, and ban ballot drop boxes, among other harsh restrictions.

[Dill]

Thanks to the Heritage Foundation for providing a Voter/Election Fraud data base.

I found that there were over 24 voter fraud cases which have gone to court in PA since 1994.

Not surprisingly, Ohio has DOUBLE that since 2000.

The site documents 1,311 cases nationwide, but it is not clear what year the national count starts (different for different states). It appears to cover at least two decades, so that is 1,311 out of hundreds of millions of votes. Most cases appear to involve one person voting, in some cases though, there are more, like Rebecca Hammonds of East Liverpool,OH, who falsely registered 13 people, including some dead ones. In some cases the description, and therefore total extent of fraud, is unclear. E.g., in 2015 the Ward 2 vote in Lorraine, OH, which was overturned because invalid ballots were discovered.

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?state=PA

[*michaelsean*]

Two of the five with the most number of restrictive laws pending seem to be Democrat controlled.

[TheUberHuber]

I know the republican party has been increasingly saying the quiet parts out loud lately, so I am just curious when they will come out and say they just don't like democracy.

[*michaelsean*]

(03-11-2021, 02:36 PM)TheUberHuber Wrote: I know the republican party has been increasingly saying the quiet parts out loud lately, so I am just curious when they will come out and say they just don't like democracy.

Like I said, two of the top five have Democrat trifectas.

[Forever Spinning Vinyl]

(03-11-2021, 02:57 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Like I said, two of the top five have Democrat trifectas.

Are the Democrats pushing the bills?

[*michaelsean*]

(03-11-2021, 05:55 PM)Forever Spinning Vinyl Wrote: Are the Democrats pushing the bills?

That’s a good point. I didn’t think of that.

[fredtoast]

The huge point that will be missed in all the propaganda spun out to support these laws is that they won't really make any difference.

The Trumpnuts believe the election was stolen just by creating thousands of fake ballots, or typing new results into computers. None of these laws will stop any of that.

[Brownshoe]

I'm for voter ID laws 100%, but I'm also for giving free federal IDs to people who are eligible to vote that don't have a driver's license/state ID. Make it easy for people to be able to vote, but also secure the election up too (not saying any election was stolen, just saying why not make it a little more secure).

[NATI BENGALS]

You know you are doing some dirty deeds when you piss off Jimmy Carter.

"We must not lose the progress we have made. We must not promote confidence among one segment of the electorate by restricting the participation of others. Our goal always should be to increase, not decrease, voter participation."

[Belsnickel]

(03-11-2021, 02:36 PM)TheUberHuber Wrote: I know the republican party has been increasingly saying the quiet parts out loud lately, so I am just curious when they will come out and say they just don't like democracy.

Well, they've flat out said that the more people that vote the worse their chances are.

[BigPapaKain]

The GoP has a lawyer whose entire case was "if everyone can vote, you'll never see a Conservative voted into office again". So instead of changing their platform (read: actually adopting a platform that isn't fearmongering and thinly veiled racism), they're gonna tear that thin veil away and just rig the game.

So classy.

[Dill]

(03-11-2021, 09:38 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: I'm for voter ID laws 100%, but I'm also for giving free federal IDs to people who are eligible to vote that don't have a driver's license/state ID. Make it easy for people to be able to vote, but also secure the election up too (not saying any election was stolen, just saying why not make it a little more secure).

In your view, what are the primary threats to election integrity?

[BigPapaKain]

(03-12-2021, 08:22 PM)Dill Wrote: In your view, what are the primary threats to election integrity?

You didn't ask me, but I'd say the head of the Executive branch spreading falsehoods about said integrity for years prior to an election he's even involved in.

But that's just me.

[Vas Deferens]

I appreciate brownshoe’s comments. In that same vein, making ‘mail in’ voting more secure seems like the next logical step. But I don’t think that’s on the table.


This topic reminds me of a moment I had with my father 30+ yrs ago, where he essentially explained to me that we, as what I assumed was a “middle class” family were not far removed from what I had somehow associated with the “poor”. He’s was a deeply malprogramed republican at this point, so it’s even more poignant upon reflection. Bottom line, the vast majority of the population is on the same side, the ‘have nots’. I can’t imagine anyone here is really in a position to significantly benefit from the voter oppression of others.

[Belsnickel]

(03-12-2021, 09:48 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: I appreciate brownshoe’s comments. In that same vein, making ‘mail in’ voting more secure seems like the next logical step. But I don’t think that’s on the table.


This topic reminds me of a moment I had with my father 30+ yrs ago, where he essentially explained to me that we, as what I assumed was a “middle class” family were not far removed from what I had somehow associated with the “poor”. He’s was a deeply malprogramed republican at this point, so it’s even more poignant upon reflection. Bottom line, the vast majority of the population is on the same side, the ‘have nots’. I can’t imagine anyone here is really in a position to significantly benefit from the voter oppression of others.

I think everyone should be mailed a ballot and then they have the option to return it in person or by mail.

As to the second part, my favorite comedians touched on this during their podcast this week. One of them was discussing how some of his conservative friends refuse to believe that they have more in common with a homeless person than they do with Trump. The idea that Trump, and by extension the GOP, give two shits about the middle and working classes is the most laughable thing.

[Brownshoe]

(03-12-2021, 08:22 PM)Dill Wrote: In your view, what are the primary threats to election integrity?

I feel like voting someone in the most powerful position in the world should at least require the proof of identification that it takes to access a bank account. I don't care about mail in voting as long as you can prove it's you. I think everyone should be able to get any identification they need to vote for free, so it's easy for everyone to vote.

To your question I don't know what the biggest threat to election integrity is. I just don't see a problem with improving security, and providing everyone with the means to prove it's them so there's no voter suppression. Like I said I just think it would be a pretty simple ask to provide enough proof of who you are to be able to access your bank account AND have the government give you the means to do that for FREE so there's no excuse not to be able to vote.

[Vas Deferens]

(03-12-2021, 10:39 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I think everyone should be mailed a ballot and then they have the option to return it in person or by mail.

As to the second part, my favorite comedians touched on this during their podcast this week. One of them was discussing how some of his conservative friends refuse to believe that they have more in common with a homeless person than they do with Trump. The idea that Trump, and by extension the GOP, give two shits about the middle and working classes is the most laughable thing.

It’s crazy. I’ve been reflecting on a lot of father son moments as my father passed last week. This keeps coming back into focus for several reasons. Related, the amount of Trump mailers I disposed of from his hospice room was obscene, let alone the deceptive positioning of including a pseudo ‘check’ the recipient cannot deposit.

I’d love to know the podcast. Thanks.

[Brownshoe]

(03-13-2021, 12:03 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: It’s crazy.   I’ve been reflecting on a lot of father son moments as my father passed last week.   This keeps coming back into focus for several reasons.  Related, the amount of Trump mailers I disposed of from his hospice room was obscene, let alone the deceptive positioning of including a pseudo ‘check’ the recipient cannot deposit.  

I’d love to know the podcast.   Thanks.

Sorry about your loss. Losing someone in your family is hard, and it's even harder when it's someone as close to you as a father is. Hope everything is going ok for you.

[Vas Deferens]

(03-13-2021, 12:06 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Sorry about your loss. Losing someone in your family is hard, and it's even harder when it's someone as close to you as a father is. Hope everything is going ok for you.

Thank you. Wasn’t trying to derail the conversation, just giving my current perspective. But you’re spot on.

Be well bud. I’ll start a separate thread, but as I’ve told everyone I know, get a living will in place. Not for you, for your loved ones.