Quote:House Republicans are refusing to provide additional funding for state election security grants in a spending bill despite the move upsetting Democrats pointing at Russia's election interference.


Democrats want to continue funding the grants program to help states boost security for their voting systems, The Washington Post reportedThursday.

Republicans, however, argue that the program, which is overseen by the federal Election Assistance Commission, is fully funded and does not need the additional allocations.

The floor debate on Wednesday came shortly after President Trumprefused to denounce Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election, sparking backlash from both sides of the aisle. The president later sought to clarify his support of American intelligence agencies findings of Russian interference.

Democrats accused Republicans of enabling Trump's rhetoric and not standing up to the president on the Russian interference issue. 

“The American people should be very worried about the commitment of this president and his Republican allies in Congress to securing our elections,” Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) said. “This is a party that has worked with this administration to undermine and minimize the investigation surrounding Russian interference in our presidential election.”

House Rules Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Texas) fired back by calling Democratic opposition a “shrewd political shenanigan that has no merit to it,” the Post reported.

States still have money left over from the $380 million in appropriations given to the election assistance grants earlier this year, Sessions said.

Sessions also argued that the programs do not need additional funding ahead of the November midterms, because Congress has spent $3.5 billion on the grants over the years.

That number may increase depending on the outcome of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian election meddling and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, Sessions added.

“Maybe the special counsel will announce something in two weeks: ‘Oh, here’s what the Russian indictments really are.’ If we learn something, authorizing committees will come right back to it and we’ll go to it,” Sessions said. “But there is no new data or information, it’s at the end of $3.5 billion dollars, and there are no requests.”

Republicans also turned down a Democratic request to add $380 million the 2019 spending bill, the Post reported.

“History is going to look back on the inaction of this Congress with great shame,” Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said.

Republicans, however, held firm.

“There is no crisis. There are funds available,” Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) said.

(07-19-2018, 10:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Dems: “Non-Citizens have a right to vote in elections.”

(07-20-2018, 01:19 AM)Benton Wrote: Honestly curious, where does this come from? It’s a statement I’ve heard before but when I ask people they respond with “they all say it” which I generally have brushed off as meaning “nobody.”

(07-20-2018, 01:19 AM)Benton Wrote: Honestly curious, where does this come from? It’s a statement I’ve heard before but when I ask people they respond with “they all say it” which I generally have brushed off as meaning “nobody.”

(07-20-2018, 02:21 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article215095600.html

"It's "Only" school elections" I'm sure you'll say but it sets a very dangerous precedent that so many Democrats are screaming about right now how Kavanaugh will not follow precedent. If you allow non citizens to vote in school elections, shouldn't they be allowed to vote in presidential elections since they pay taxes or some stupid crap like that.

(07-20-2018, 09:46 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I have an issue with allowing undocumented immigrants the right to vote, but I think that legal permanent residents should be able to register to vote. There are a lot of people who have been living here legally for many years that are disenfranchised. My brother-in-law for instance is a UK citizen. He would have to give up benefits to become a US citizen (and pay a ton of money), so he hasn't done that. He's been living here for decades at this point. Because of this, he is unable to vote in UK elections and in US elections. He is essentially a stateless person because he has no voice in any country.

Like I said above, I have seen arguments for it, and even though it isn't a mainstream idea I see value in it. I'm all for looking at ways we can become a more democratic society and this is one of them.

(07-20-2018, 01:19 AM)Benton Wrote: Honestly curious, where does this come from? It’s a statement I’ve heard before but when I ask people they respond with “they all say it” which I generally have brushed off as meaning “nobody.”

Quote:In recent years, a concerted effort has been gathering force to allow new immigrants to the United States to vote without becoming citizens. It is being mounted by an alliance of liberal (or progressive, if you prefer) academics and law professors, local and state political leaders most often associated with the Democratic Party or other progressive parties like the Greens, and community and immigration activists. They are working in tandem to decouple the legal standing to vote from American citizenship.

(07-20-2018, 02:21 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/article215095600.html

"It's "Only" school elections" I'm sure you'll say but it sets a very dangerous precedent that so many Democrats are screaming about right now how Kavanaugh will not follow precedent. If you allow non citizens to vote in school elections, shouldn't they be allowed to vote in presidential elections since they pay taxes or some stupid crap like that.

(07-20-2018, 09:36 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I've actually read some research papers that laid out arguments for non-citizen permanent residents to be able to vote. It's not a mainstream idea, certainly not the viewpoint of anything close to a majority of people that identify as Democrats, but that doesn't stop people from misrepresenting things.

(07-20-2018, 09:54 AM)bfine32 Wrote: https://cis.org/Allowing-NonCitizens-Vote-United-States-Why-Not



I'll just take you at your word that you've never heard of suggesting non-citizens be allowed representation from other liberal sources.

As to the response; it was more in jest than anything else. It stuck me as ironic the left demand stricter voting measures.

Have you ever heard of a train of thought that proof of citizenship (Identification) should not be a requirement to vote?

(07-20-2018, 10:45 AM)Benton Wrote: I've had conversations with people where the nutshell idea is "if you pay income/property taxes, you deserve a voice." And it's an interesting angle, especially when you consider how much the founding of the country revolved around having a voice with how taxes were spent. 


You could've just said "nobody." That would've been far easier than digging up a decade old article from an anti-immigration propaganda agency often accused of having ties to white supremacy. 

As to the question, sure. And — I realize you aren't going to believe this — I've had conversations like the one mentioned above to Matt with people from both sides. From the left it tends to be more "if they're here contributing, they should have some say" and from the right it tends to be more "if they're paying taxes, they should have a say." But both are basically saying the same thing. And none of those conversations have been with a state or federal lawmaker (one was with a county official on our way to our kids soccer game, but not in any official capacity).  That's why I don't get it when someone says "Democrats just want illegals to vote." Because I've never really heard that as a party issue, or as a candidates platform.

(07-20-2018, 11:19 AM)michaelsean Wrote: So what will the extra money provide?  What will be bought with the money that they need and don't have?  "We need it"/"we don't need it" really doesn't give us much to arrive at an opinion.

(07-20-2018, 11:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: So now I am confused, you state you've heard of such measures and more so from left leaners, but you've never heard of it?

No 'digging up' was required I'm simply googled and linked the first article. As I said the reply was in jest. It is know progressives lean toward "open voting" (no ID, proof of citizenship, non-citizens, ect...) and I found it as ironic that the title of the OP was Left wants more voters security measures.

I understand that if you are not aware of this then you cannot see the irony in the OP, so simply disregard.

(07-20-2018, 11:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: So now I am confused, you state you've heard of such measures and more so from left leaners, but you've never heard of it?

No 'digging up' was required I'm simply googled and linked the first article. As I said the reply was in jest. It is know progressives lean toward "open voting" (no ID, proof of citizenship, non-citizens, ect...) and I found it as ironic that the title of the OP was Left wants more voters security measures.

I understand that if you are not aware of this then you cannot see the irony in the OP, so simply disregard.

(07-20-2018, 02:40 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't see the irony, though I can understand how those that construct a false dichotomy of voting rights/access would see irony. The left has long been about increasing the electorate and making voting for those that have the right easier and more accessible. Attempts to restrict access and decrease the voting populous, which has historically been more beneficial to the right-wing and therefore they have undertaken efforts to do just that, are things that the left fights against. The efforts of the left are not intended to decrease security, the desire is still for one person to have one vote and only those that are allowed to vote to do so, we just think that a higher number of those within the jurisdiction should play a part in the decisions. Creating a more democratic society, if you will.

(07-20-2018, 09:54 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Have you ever heard of a train of thought that proof of citizenship (Identification) should not be a requirement to vote?

(07-20-2018, 02:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: OK, no irony on the Left wanting to increase voting security.