Skip to main content

Voter buttons
It was a spectacular week in the War on Voting, with the resistance winning back-to-back battles in Florida, Texas and Ohio. Everything is subject to appeal but, for the moment, American citizens came out on top.

Let's start in the Sunshine State:

Judge Robert L. Hinkle of Federal District Court in Tallahassee is tossing out pernicious curbs on third-party voter registration organizations. Last year, in addition to other changes, Florida Gov. Rick Scott approved a law requiring such organizations to turn in all completed registration forms within 48 hours after completion. Consequently, several key volunteer voter-registration organizations, including Rock the Vote and the League of Women Voters, closed up shop in Florida. Groups previously had 10 days to submit the forms.

Deirdre Macnab, the president of the League of Women Voters of Florida, told The New York Times she was happy about this week's ruling. But she added there is a tough row to hoe since the registration deadline for the November election is just five weeks away:

“We have so far now to catch up in making sure that everyday Florida voices are going to be heard in a very important election with very important decisions to be made,” Ms. Macnab said.
The change matters a great deal. For the 13 months beginning July 1 the year before elections in 2004 and 2008, registered Democrats increased by an average of 209,425 voters. But from last summer up to July 1, 2012, only 11,365. And one county, Duval, registered some 13,000 new Democrats. Which means the rest of Florida lost Democratic voters. Over the same 13 months, registered Republicans rose by 128,039 statewide, well above the average of 103,555 during 2004 and 2008.

(Continue reading below the fold.)

In other news

  • In the Lone Star State: The United States District Court for the District of Columbia, ruled that the new voter-ID law in Texas violates the Voting Rights Act because it imposes “strict, unforgiving burdens” on poor minority voters. Under Section 5 of the act, Texas and several other Southern states as well as counties elsewhere in the country, get special scrutiny because of their decades-long employment of "Jim Crow" laws to keep African Americans and American Indians from voting. These states must get major voting procedures "pre-cleared" by the federal government.

    The court ruled that costs associated with the voter-ID law would harm minorities  because “a disproportionately high percentage of African Americans and Hispanics in Texas live in poverty.”

    Although voter-ID laws vary state to state, the Texas law reflects a pattern of Republican governors and GOP-dominated legislatures working to suppress voter turnout. In its unanimous ruling, however, the court stuck to a narrow interpretation, taking care not to tread on Indiana case of Crawford v. Marion County Election Board in which the Supreme Court ruled that a photo-ID law passed muster:

    After all, Texas argues, if Indiana can implement a photo ID law to protect against voter fraud, why can’t Texas do the same?

    By contrast, the United States argues that Crawford is largely irrelevant to this litigation. It points out that Crawford involved a First and Fourteenth Amendment facial challenge to a voter ID law enacted by a state not covered by section 5. As such, the Crawford plaintiffs, who sought to have the law invalidated, bore a “heavy burden of persuasion,” requiring them to show that the law was invalid “in all its applications.” Crawford, 553 U.S. at 200 (emphasis added). Here, however, Texas bears the burden of proving that SB 14 lacks discriminatory purpose and retrogressive effect. Georgia, 411 U.S. at 538. Thus, the United States concludes, Crawford is essentially inapplicable to the issues before us.

    Rick Hasen at Election Law Blog praised what he called a "careful" ruling by the court. He noted, among other things, that the judges chose to discount a deluge of social science evidence presented by both sides to show that the voter-ID law would or would not have a negative impact on minority voters. They chose instead to note straightforwardly that the law would be tough on poor voters and that Latino voters are more likely to be poor than white voters and would, therefore, be discriminated against by the requirement. He also wrote:
    Texas is likely to appeal this case to the Supreme Court, and I would expect to see an application for an emergency injunction allowing Texas to use its voter id law during the upcoming election. If this happens, this will be a major question for the Roberts Court, and it would have to be decided in short order. Given the closeness to the election, it is not clear to me that even if the Supreme Court disagrees on some of the analysis with the district court that it would grant such emergency relief. This is a big unknown.
    Ari Berman of The Nation has an as-always-excellent analysis of the ruling here. He says Texas officials plan to amend their case when they take it to the Supreme Court and challenge the constitutionality of Section 5. Alabama is already doing that. Texas has signed on to that case with an amicus brief. According to Berman, Texas has lost more Section 5 cases than any other state.
  • In the Buckeye State: There was one small victory and a larger one in Ohio this week.

    On Monday, a federal judge granted an injunction against a 2006 law that stated provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct can be thrown out, even when the voter has been directed to that precinct by poll-workers.

    The outcome of the big deal case, however, was announced Friday when a federal court judge restored the three days of early voting right before the election that the state legislature had dropped. Unless Ohio wins on appeal, Ohio citizens will now be able to cast ballots on the weekend and Monday before the November 6 election.

    Those early-voting days were added in 2008 because, in the 2004 election, hideously long queues at Ohio polling stations in urban centers caused tens of thousands of voters   to go home without casting a ballot. Under heavy criticism, the state added early voting days to its calendar. The move worked, boosting voter turnout significantly. But it gave Ohio to Barack Obama and cost the Republicans two congressional seats they would otherwise have kept. Early voter turnout was especially high on the three days right before the election. Tens of thousands of voters cast ballots on Sunday, many of them African Americans on their way home from church.

    Ohio Republicans responded by cutting back the number of days available for early voting and eliminating the three days right before the election—except for Ohioans covered by the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.

    Rick Hasen of the Election Law Blog is uncertain how the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals might rule in the matter since the judges are deeply split on issues of voting rights.

  • The Land of 10,000 Lakes: The Minnesota Supreme Court approved the wording of a ballot measure on a proposed constitutional amendment requiring voter ID. The decision did not discuss the merits of the amendment.
    "If this passes, if this makes it into our Minnesota Constitution, I think we will have many years of litigation and possibly many lawsuits," said state Rep. Steve Simon, [a member of the Democratic/Farmer/Labor Party].

    Simon was a vocal opponent of the Republican-backed voter ID legislation that DFL Gov. Mark Dayton vetoed, and the subsequent constitutional amendment bill that allowed the GOP to bypass the governor and put the measure directly on the ballot. If it passes, Simon said there could be a series of lawsuits challenging the requirement before it would take effect in 2013.

    "A second series of lawsuits, I would suppose, would come along after implementation of the law. That is after an election has already taken place under the new regime," Simon said. "There would be, I suspect, lawsuits about that, about the sort of impacts of that on certain communities and certain populations."

    Scott Newman, a Republican lawmaker who was a chief sponsor of the original legislation, said he believes the voter-ID law will have no problems in the courts as long as it closely follows the Crawford case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that Indiana's voter-ID statute is constitutional. If the law in Minnesota ensures that the identification cards can be obtained free of charge, he thinks the amendment will stand, assuming voters approve it in the first place.
  • In the Centennial State: As part of a purge of supposedly ineligible voters, Scott Gessler. Secretary of State for Colorado sent out 3,903 letters asking recipients to confirm they are citizens. Gessler announced today that 16 people had voluntarily withdrawn their registrations but not a single person had been found who illegally voted. Democrats repeated their charges that Gessler was engaged in a witch hunt to suppress the votes of minorities. Letters questioning citizenship were sent to 1,566 Democrats, 1,794 unaffiliated voters and 486 to Republicans.
  • The Palmetto State: A South Carolina lawmaker admits he gave thumbs-up reply to racist email regarding new voter ID law: Testimony was heard this week on South Carolina's voter-ID law. The U.S. Department of Justice has rejected the law under the "pre-clearance" provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That act was specifically directed at states that had a history of denying voting rights to minorities, particularly African Americans and American Indians. South Carolina is contesting the rejection.

    In court on Tuesday, the author of the statute, state Rep. Alan Clemmons, a Republican, acknowledged that he might not have made the best choice in his reply to an email from someone named Ed Koziol. The email stated that if rewards were given for obtaining a government-issued photo ID, the response from African Americans "would be like a swarm of bees going after a watermelon." Clemmons had responded "Amen, Ed, thank you for your support." He told the Garrard Beeney, the attorney representing civil rights groups in the case, that this was a "poorly considered" response.

    Had it been a one-time matter, Clemmons might deserve a pass, but Beeney

    [...] asked Clemmons whether he remembered distributing packets of peanuts with cards that read “Stop Obama’s nutty agenda and support voter ID.”

    Clemmons said he did not, though Beeney said he had testified in June that he did.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:00 AM PDT.

Also republished by Good News.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Good news (6+ / 0-)

      Glad it's still a crime to take away someone's right to vote.

      In regards to the other GOP strategy against democracy, anyone know if Diebold machines will be used again in Ohio?

      Condemned to Repeat It blog

      •  unfortunately, not legally a crime the way states (5+ / 0-)

        are doing it.
        So far we've had some good rulings and a few bad (e.g., Pennsylvania). But if the Supreme Court reviews the cases, there's a pretty good chance they'll allow most of what the states are doing to continue.
        And it sounds like Texas and Alabama are going after the part of the Voting Rights Act that has provided protection for minority voters in many southern states for decades. If SCOTUS invalidates that, we're in big trouble.
        I hope we can get through this election with most of the voter suppression tactics stopped. If we win the House and keep the Senate, we need to enact a voter protection law that will stand no matter what the Supreme Court does to Section 5 of the VRA.

        We're not perfect, but they're nuts! -- Barney Frank

        by Tamar on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:11:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yep. A war is a war... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Judge Moonbox, Dave925

          ...and I wouldn't put it past the GOP to introduce their guns into the mix if they feel they can't get where they want to go by gaming the courts.

          If the election is close, I fully expect the GOP to try some Constititutional shenanigans with their House majority right after January 2013.  We could have a major crisis on our hands.

          "The best lack all conviction, while the worst
          Are full of passionate intensity." --W. B. Yeats

          by Pragmatus on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:29:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Some is still in use. (5+ / 0-)

        But Diebold no longer makes or has its hands in voting machinery. Why? It's not relevant.

        If you're still buying the myth that someone is flipping electronic votes on touchscreen, that doesn't pertain to much of Ohio. We're overwhelming on paper ballots (optical scan), including my county, Cuyahoga, the largest pool of Democratic votes in Ohio.

        Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07. http://www.ewaynepowell.com/

        by anastasia p on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:15:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I am disappointed that (7+ / 0-)

    Rock the Vote and the LWV closed up shop in FL.  Any continuing effort, even if scaled down, would have been better than none.  Now they have to reactivate on short notice.

  •  OH Attorney General DeWine Plans to Appeal (12+ / 0-)

    according to today's Cincinnati Enquirer.

    Why do republicans had democracy?

    Posthumously Baptized and Retroactively Retired. It’s 1950 If Romney Is Elected.

    by wild hair on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:09:51 AM PDT

  •  And the walls (9+ / 0-)

    And the walls come tumbling down.  

    Isn't it ironic that when the GOP tries to "legally" suppress the vote, the legal system slaps them in the face.  

    We win FL and OH and we win the election, period

    Once Texas goes blue, we win the future

    As accurate a political comment as I've ever seen.  
  •  Good news... (13+ / 0-)

    ...but some irrevocable damage has already been done with the absence of rock the vote and these other groups.

    They've already stolen a part of the vote in Florida because of this.

    An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t'Saoghail. (The truth against the world.) Is treasa tuath na tighearna. (The common people are mightier than the lords.)

    by OllieGarkey on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:13:31 AM PDT

    •  What I'd like to see. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tamar, Eric Nelson, davelf2, exNYinTX

      When Obama makes his acceptance speech, he should challenge the Republicans:

      If you think that photo IDs are essential, then You should make every effort to get the cards in the hands of every eligible voter. If you want to prove me a liar 20 million times, my ego can take it. If you don't make the effort, you're proving that you don't care if a million votes are suppressed for every in-person impersonation fraud that's prevented.

      Just how stupid does Mitt Romney think we are? -Paul Krugman

      by Judge Moonbox on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:10:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Have you got statistics to show that? n/t? (0+ / 0-)

      "Are you bluish? You don't look bluish," attributed to poet Roger Joseph McGough, for the Beatles' Yellow Submarine (1968).

      by BlueStateRedhead on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 01:04:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  My Comment is addressed to OllieGarkey n.t. (0+ / 0-)

        "Are you bluish? You don't look bluish," attributed to poet Roger Joseph McGough, for the Beatles' Yellow Submarine (1968).

        by BlueStateRedhead on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 01:05:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I missed this because I'm going a bit nuts over (0+ / 0-)

        here.

        I don't have the statistics to show that, but the first presidential election I was ever active in was the 2000 presidential election. That affects my opinion on voter suppression in a big way.

        In a state of millions it can come down to a few hundred votes. Every single vote is vital, and if there are some people who won't get registered, it can have a disastrous effect.

        An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t'Saoghail. (The truth against the world.) Is treasa tuath na tighearna. (The common people are mightier than the lords.)

        by OllieGarkey on Mon Sep 03, 2012 at 11:33:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The Supreme Court has no place to hide (14+ / 0-)

    if they take on this one.

    Texas is likely to appeal this case to the Supreme Court
    How can the Supreme Court sanction the suppression of Democratic Party voters and still maintain the fiction of being  above politics?

    If cats could blog, they wouldn't

    by crystal eyes on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:13:43 AM PDT

    •  See Bush v. Gore (11+ / 0-)

      that's how.

      Resist much, obey little. ~~Edward Abbey, via Walt Whitman

      by willyr on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:39:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Easy. they don't care. (7+ / 0-)

      How much they don't care about politics over duty was made clear when Kennedy doubled down this year on CU.  Buying of elections, the porousness of foreign money, the squelching of the voices of those without money -- corporations must have 'freedom of speech'.  Disclosure not even necessary.  

      If 'corporations are people' is now the  law of the land, then BP and those mining CEO's should be on trial for murder.  They should not get the benefits of individual citizenship, and keep the corporate benefits of no personal liability. Evidence of what this SC is all about.    

      they are evil and if we don't crawl over broken glass to vote in November, they will undo the United States of America for at least the next half century.  

      I expect horrific things from the SC concerning voting rights, if not a full dismantlement of the Voting Rights Act.  

      And yet Chris Hayes spends yet another part of his show saying that PBO didn't do enough, instead of actually helping to drive these extremists out of the land.  

    •  They have not maintained the fiction of (4+ / 0-)

      being above politics since 2000. That's gone.

      "Southern nights have you ever felt a southern night?" Allen Toussaint ~~Remember the Gulf of Mexico~~

      by rubyr on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:49:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We should point out difference with Indiana ruling (4+ / 0-)

      The first time the Supreme Court ruled on photo IDs, then-Associate Justice John Paul Stevens wrote an opinion that the danger was hypothetical. We should say that in the 4 years since, there have been plenty of actual cases of people being unable to get the photo IDs. We should supply a fair-sized sampling of the names.

      The danger of vote suppression is not hypothetical, and it's up to us to point out the real problem.

      Just how stupid does Mitt Romney think we are? -Paul Krugman

      by Judge Moonbox on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:19:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Isn't the Texas ruling directly appealable to (4+ / 0-)

    SCOTUS since it came from a three-judge panel?  If so, is that what Texas is expected to do, directly appeal and bypass the Circuit Court?

    Ultimately, the only thing that matters with respect to preserving choice is who will be nominating the next Supreme Court Justices.

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:17:44 AM PDT

  •  Thank God for the court system in a democracy! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Onomastic

    And for litigants who can bear the cost and advocates who can frame the cases with clear arguments and compelling proof. And judges who are willing to put "politics" aside and let eligible voters qualify to vote.

    (As for purging ineligible voters, many states send out notices in the months before an election, even when there's been no change in the offices being voted on, the precinct number or the polling place. And some may use mailings returned from such exercises to question eligibility to vote. On its face, that practice is not unreasonable, given that very few people who move think to take the trouble to notify registrars at their old location at that they have done so. But even this practice becomes unreasonable if there is not flexibility on election day for officials to deal with the surprised prospective voter who doesn't carry other ID, especially if state law requires a hard-to-get ID.)

    Obama and strong Democratic majorities in 2012!

    by TRPChicago on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:22:45 AM PDT

  •  These laws accomplish their purpose even if (14+ / 0-)

    found unconstitutional.  The point is to discourage voters and voter registration.  The Florida law basically destroyed voter registration drives in that state.  So what if it's found unconstitutional now -- the horse is already out of the barn.

    The people who passed these laws don't care about whether they're unconstitutional.  They want power and the only way we can keep them from doing this is win elections and also get in their face with frequent and vigorous lawsuits.

    You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

    by Cartoon Peril on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:31:32 AM PDT

  •  Which ones will stand up to higher appeals? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson

    Two months out from the election it would seem like the next appeal decision would be the deciding one for this election.

    An OFA Campaign Web Ad is the new Reid "sternly worded letter".

    by Jacoby Jonze on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:48:39 AM PDT

  •  Dems have to double-down on getting (5+ / 0-)

    voters registered, even in the attenuated time frame. We just have to do it!!

    "Southern nights have you ever felt a southern night?" Allen Toussaint ~~Remember the Gulf of Mexico~~

    by rubyr on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:51:35 AM PDT

  •  Mann and Ornstein in their (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rubyr, Tamar, Judge Moonbox, Eric Nelson

    book say the th US is the only developed country that places the burden of registration on the voter.  Elsewhere, the government does it.  

    I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

    by Satya1 on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:53:51 AM PDT

  •  believe me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Judge Moonbox, Eric Nelson

    these attempts at voter suppression aren't the only ways the gop has of stopping people from voting for dems, police intimidation, fewer booths to vote in minority communities, sending out bogus info about when and where to vote, and others, this used to be america now it is fascist gop america right in drag, the enemy is within our borders and it needs to be cured just as cancer needs to be cured.

    •  For example, the dirty trick by Michael Steele (4+ / 0-)

      (former RNC Chair) and Bob Ehrlich when they were running for re-election in Maryland (Ehrlich was governor, Steele was lieutenant governor) in 2006.
      They bused homeless African Americans from Philadelphia to mainly African-American polling places in Maryland and had them giving out fliers that purposely misidentified Ehrlich and Steele as Democrats.
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      This is the kind of thing I think is real election fraud, as compared to the fake "voter fraud" accusations from the Republicans. I think anyone who uses tactics like that deserves a jail sentence.

      We're not perfect, but they're nuts! -- Barney Frank

      by Tamar on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:26:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Most of those likely in Ohio (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eric Nelson

      Done before, will happen again.

      Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07. http://www.ewaynepowell.com/

      by anastasia p on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:20:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks MB (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hulibow, JamieG from Md, Eric Nelson

    The radical Republican party is the party of oppression, fear, loathing and above all more money and power for the people who robbed us.

    by a2nite on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:58:23 AM PDT

  •  The ID can't be free (5+ / 0-)

    In MN. To obtain an ID the voter would need a copy of their birth certificate. In MN that costs about 26 dollars.A poll tax is still a poll tax.  

    Unless the legislature specifically waives the fee (which would harm the counties) this is a poll tax. I am still hopeful that this AMDT will go down to defeat. (Although I think a future dem legislature can efffectively neutralize the andt if a statute is passed that says pictures taken for electronic poll books are equivalent to photo id.)

    •  Haven't courts consistently found (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BlueStateRedhead

      that ID HAS to be paid for by the state? I recall looking at numbers when it was proposed in Ohio (not passed) and saw that it had cost states like Indiana a lot of money — to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Like millions of taxpayer dollars. Especially if that includes paying for copies of naturalization papers for 80-year-old Polish ladies who misplaced theirs half a century ago.

      That reminds me of something I learned at a voter suppression forum just last week — an outrage that Ohio Republicans tried to perpetrate that was quickly slapped down as unconstitutional and papers here NEVER reported on. When they passed Ohio's first-ever voter ID law in 2006 (not state-issued photo ID, which still isn't required here), it also contained a provision under which, if a poll worker thought you looked "foreign," they could ask if you were a U.S citizen and if you said yes (which you most likely would), if you were native-born or naturalized. If you said naturalized, they could ask you to produce your naturalization papers which of course you would not have with you. Maybe you would go home and get them, but maybe you had no idea where they were or had long since lost them, which meant you lost the right to vote in that election. (I also have to wonder what an ill-informed pollworker might have done with the answer "I was born in Puerto Rico," the most common answer you're going to get from a Hispanic here.)

      A furious judge — and I think it was a Bush appointee — struck this down, pointing out that the U.S. Constitution distinguished between native-born and naturalized citizens in only ONE case — eligibility to run for President. So this never took effect.

      Like I've said repeatedly, they will stop at NOTHING. And brown faces scare them more than anything.

      Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07. http://www.ewaynepowell.com/

      by anastasia p on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:29:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Best part of the story (6+ / 0-)

    I would say the whole plan is backfiring when the main stream media reports start with "Republican efforts to restrict voting rights were thwarted this week..."
    Ha! Hoisted by their own petard.

  •  What was Florida's stated reasoning (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Judge Moonbox, Tamar, Eric Nelson

    For the short window to turn in voter registration forms?

    I've never seen even a veneer of justification for that.

    •  No reason was stated. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Meteor Blades, Eric Nelson, themank

      The GOP has learned (as did the Fascists before them) that justification only invites argument.

      Their policy is to hit hard, then before everybody stops reeling, hit hard again somewhere else.

      "The best lack all conviction, while the worst
      Are full of passionate intensity." --W. B. Yeats

      by Pragmatus on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:38:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Reason: to make voter reg impossible (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BlueStateRedhead, themank

      Let's say I went to an event to register voters on a Saturday. The BoE is closed Sunday. Unfortunately Monday is my deadline day, and many times I cannot leave the office. I get into work early before the BoE opens. So it's likely that the soonest I could get there is after work Monday — assuming I don't work late — and that's after the 48-hour window.

      I don't know what you would do with a Labor Day holiday intervening.

      Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07. http://www.ewaynepowell.com/

      by anastasia p on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:32:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Inching our way towards real democracy (0+ / 0-)

    one eligible voter at a time.

    "Political ends as sad remains will die." - YES 'And You and I' ; -8.88, -9.54

    by US Blues on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:45:25 AM PDT

  •  When (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Penny Century, Eric Nelson

    I posted a link to the Ohio news yesterday on facebook, and called it good news, a friend quoted the section of the article which mentioned that those three days of early voting really drove up the turnout in urban areas, and really helped Obama, and asked me if it would still be good news if it helped the "other side."

    I replied (and all of my dem friends also chimed in) that of course, the more people that voted, the better; we should be making it easier for people to vote, not putting obstacles in their path.

    She then replied that she also agreed it was good news. Oh really? Then why on earth did you bring it up??

    But seriously--I really wanted to say that I have never heard of any democratic efforts to restrict voting. It's always the republicans trying to take the vote away from the people.

    •  In fact, in Ohio, the county election boards... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eric Nelson, BlueStateRedhead

      ...are four members, always two Democrats and two Republicans. In the counties that are heavily Republican, the Republicans AND Democrats voted for more early voting hours. In the countries that are heavily Democratic, the Democrats voted for more early voting, but the Republicans voted against, backed up by the Secretary of State's tie-breaking vote. After he issued a directive setting fewer hours in all 88 counties, he even fired two Democrats who voted for more hours in one county even though their vote was clearly symbolic since they knew the hours wouldn't be approved. In the South, it used to be the (white) Democrats who imposed barriers to voting by African Americans. For the past 40 year, there and elsewhere, it's been the Republicans. And they will never stop looking for new ways to curtail voting until we have a nationwide system that makes it government responsibility to make sure that everyone wants to vote gets ample opportunity to do so.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 12:26:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Ryan is pathological liar (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson

    For Ryan lying is a way of life. Look how high he has climbed in republican circles. They treasure their liars. They reward their liars. This lie is only symptomatic of Ryan's consistent lying on substantive matters. Ryan's whole budget is based on a series of calculated lies. From Medicare to defense, Ryan lies. He lies with selfish purpose.This is not the failure to execute a political promise common kind of lie. No this is cunning deception that's meant to be destructive for most Americans and of benefit to a marginal elite.This small lie is emblematic of a dishonest way of life. Ryan even lied about Ayn Rand when he dissed her. He had it right the first time she was a huge influence and mentor for his selfish, narcissistic way of life.

  •  Stealing elections (0+ / 0-)

    Voter ID laws are a way for Republicans to steal elections, pure and simple. Don't mince words.

    Censorship is rogue government.

    by scott5js on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:32:12 AM PDT

  •  I am so glad that this issue (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson, BlueStateRedhead

    is being followed diligently on DKos. Excellent work Meteor Blades. It could very well make all the difference.

    "Here's another nice mess you've gotten me into." - Oliver Hardy

    by native on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 11:58:08 AM PDT

  •  Clarence Thomas being hoisted by Rep. petard? (0+ / 0-)

    This is from memory.
    Last time it came before SCOTUS, in 2009, Clarence voted for declaring Section 5 unconstitutional, citing Obama's election as evidence.

    Thomas has written that Section 5 should be invalidated because there is no IIRC immediate evidence that the kind of discrimination it was meant to prevent still occurs.

    Can we hope that thanks to the Texas legislature, to the author of the SC ID bill email, and to the figures from Florida that show the drop in registration during the time when the state restrictions impeded registration, there is plenty of immediate evidence.

    Would Roberts who upheld the ACA let Thomas take down the VRA and the first elected AA president?

    Scotus experts, please help

    "Are you bluish? You don't look bluish," attributed to poet Roger Joseph McGough, for the Beatles' Yellow Submarine (1968).

    by BlueStateRedhead on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 01:26:37 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site