In a bit of good news, Maryland and New Jersey just adopted automatic voter registration, states #12 and #13 to do so. New Jersey's new law is notable because isn't just a motor voter law, but also allows voter registration at other state facilities, such as welfare offices and parole boards.
Automatic registration is picking up fast. Remember that Oregon started it in 2015.
Good. Now they just need to work on felon disenfranchisement.
That's something they are working on in New Jersey. There were bills to allow people on parole to vote, and a couple were introduced to allow prisoners to vote too (like in Maine and Vermont), but they haven't gotten as far yet. Automatic voting is a bit politically easier to pass, of course.
In a bit of good news, Maryland and New Jersey just adopted automatic voter registration, states #12 and #13 to do so. New Jersey's new law is notable because isn't just a motor voter law, but also allows voter registration at other state facilities, such as welfare offices and parole boards.
Automatic registration is picking up fast. Remember that Oregon started it in 2015.
Good. Now they just need to work on felon disenfranchisement.
Also universal mail in ballots.
They both have no fault absentee vote by mail available. I'd prefer more States go the all mail voting approach too, but I'm still going to give them credit for practically being there. Especially when so many solid blue Northeast States are terrible at absentee voting.
People are lazy and by and large can't be arsed to go vote. If voting comes to you though, that's one less excuse.
Yeah, I agree. Hence my second sentence. But lookup election law for neighboring States. In DE, PA, NY, CT, and RI you just straight up can't vote absentee unless you meet a qualified excuse. You can't even vote early. At all.
In a bit of good news, Maryland and New Jersey just adopted automatic voter registration, states #12 and #13 to do so. New Jersey's new law is notable because isn't just a motor voter law, but also allows voter registration at other state facilities, such as welfare offices and parole boards.
Automatic registration is picking up fast. Remember that Oregon started it in 2015.
Good. Now they just need to work on felon disenfranchisement.
Also universal mail in ballots.
They both have no fault absentee vote by mail available. I'd prefer more States go the all mail voting approach too, but I'm still going to give them credit for practically being there. Especially when so many solid blue Northeast States are terrible at absentee voting.
People are lazy and by and large can't be arsed to go vote. If voting comes to you though, that's one less excuse.
Yeah, I agree. Hence my second sentence. But lookup election law for neighboring States. In DE, PA, NY, CT, and RI you just straight up can't vote absentee unless you meet a qualified excuse. You can't even vote early. At all.
That might change in PA soon. Tom Wolfs campaign is getting vocal about voter rights. If our new district maps help purge some red we may get early voting very soon
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
In a bit of good news, Maryland and New Jersey just adopted automatic voter registration, states #12 and #13 to do so. New Jersey's new law is notable because isn't just a motor voter law, but also allows voter registration at other state facilities, such as welfare offices and parole boards.
Automatic registration is picking up fast. Remember that Oregon started it in 2015.
Good. Now they just need to work on felon disenfranchisement.
Also universal mail in ballots.
They both have no fault absentee vote by mail available. I'd prefer more States go the all mail voting approach too, but I'm still going to give them credit for practically being there. Especially when so many solid blue Northeast States are terrible at absentee voting.
People are lazy and by and large can't be arsed to go vote. If voting comes to you though, that's one less excuse.
Yeah, I agree. Hence my second sentence. But lookup election law for neighboring States. In DE, PA, NY, CT, and RI you just straight up can't vote absentee unless you meet a qualified excuse. You can't even vote early. At all.
In NY at least that just involves signing an affidavit saying you won't be around. Which is still like 1000% more effort than it should be but it is pretty pro forma.
There was some talk about NY changing that stuff but Nixon seems to have scared Cuomo about opening up primaries and the Senate is fucked anyways because a Democrat won a special election and another one decided to caucus with the GOP to let them retain control of the chamber.
In a bit of good news, Maryland and New Jersey just adopted automatic voter registration, states #12 and #13 to do so. New Jersey's new law is notable because isn't just a motor voter law, but also allows voter registration at other state facilities, such as welfare offices and parole boards.
Automatic registration is picking up fast. Remember that Oregon started it in 2015.
Good. Now they just need to work on felon disenfranchisement.
Also universal mail in ballots.
They both have no fault absentee vote by mail available. I'd prefer more States go the all mail voting approach too, but I'm still going to give them credit for practically being there. Especially when so many solid blue Northeast States are terrible at absentee voting.
People are lazy and by and large can't be arsed to go vote. If voting comes to you though, that's one less excuse.
Yeah, I agree. Hence my second sentence. But lookup election law for neighboring States. In DE, PA, NY, CN, RI you just straight up can't vote absentee unless you have a stated reason. You can't even vote early.
In a bit of good news, Maryland and New Jersey just adopted automatic voter registration, states #12 and #13 to do so. New Jersey's new law is notable because isn't just a motor voter law, but also allows voter registration at other state facilities, such as welfare offices and parole boards.
Automatic registration is picking up fast. Remember that Oregon started it in 2015.
Good. Now they just need to work on felon disenfranchisement.
Also universal mail in ballots.
They both have no fault absentee vote by mail available. I'd prefer more States go the all mail voting approach too, but I'm still going to give them credit for practically being there. Especially when so many solid blue Northeast States are terrible at absentee voting.
People are lazy and by and large can't be arsed to go vote. If voting comes to you though, that's one less excuse.
Yeah, I agree. Hence my second sentence. But lookup election law for neighboring States. In DE, PA, NY, CT, and RI you just straight up can't vote absentee unless you meet a qualified excuse. You can't even vote early. At all.
In NY at least that just involves signing an affidavit saying you won't be around. Which is still like 1000% more effort than it should be but it is pretty pro forma.
There was some talk about NY changing that stuff but Nixon seems to have scared Cuomo about opening up primaries and the Senate is fucked anyways because a Democrat won a special election and another one decided to caucus with the GOP to let them retain control of the chamber.
Right, but what if you are around? Lying on an official form doesn't seem like the best approach to expanded voting. All I have to do in Illinois is say that I want to vote by mail on the board of elections website, and then I vote by mail after it arrives. All we really need is a permanent absentee list and/or move to all postal voting.
Honestly, give the amount of fuck ups we have in the criminal justice system. The only cases where we permanently take the right to vote way should be if they get convicted of illegally messing with the vote or treason.
Honestly, give the amount of fuck ups we have in the criminal justice system. The only cases where we permanently take the right to vote way should be if they get convicted of illegally messing with the vote or treason.
I'd disagree even on that. We shouldn't be punishing people who do something illegitimately by taking away the ability for them to ever do it legitimately.
edit: For things that require trust, sure, but voting doesn't really require trust or have any direct means for abuse.
There's no reason ever to take away the right to vote. Convicts aren't usually a big enough voting bloc in most areas to make a huge difference, and in areas where they are numerous enough to make a difference, voting is doubly important as the areas are clearly disaster zones.
The one caveat being that prisoners should vote in the place they were last registered to vote before being imprisoned, as otherwise the voting patterns of rural prison towns could become very unbalanced! And they probably have a lot more interest in the politics of their real home, the place they are likely to go back to when freed.
Ohio overwhelmingly passed a weird redestricting reform last night during their primary elections. Had the support of both parties, I'm not sure how I feel about it. Looks kinda like some of the proposed filibuster reforms I've seen. Vox has an explainer.
Basic summary is this: there is now a cascading threshold for redistricting votes.
Initially they need 3/5 of both state houses, plus a majority of each party in those houses, plus the governor. If that fails, the 7 member existing redistricting commission gets to draw the map, but they need two minority party members to sign on. If that fails, it goes back to the full legislature, but now they only need 1/3 of the minority. And finally if that fails a simple majority can still pass whatever, but now it expires in four years instead of the next census.
Seems to me like this means Ohio gets bitterly partisan gerrymanders every four years or whenever the same party controls the legislature and the governor's mansion.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Ohio overwhelmingly passed a weird redestricting reform last night during their primary elections. Had the support of both parties, I'm not sure how I feel about it. Looks kinda like some of the proposed filibuster reforms I've seen. Vox has an explainer.
Basic summary is this: there is now a cascading threshold for redistricting votes.
Initially they need 3/5 of both state houses, plus a majority of each party in those houses, plus the governor. If that fails, the 7 member existing redistricting commission gets to draw the map, but they need two minority party members to sign on. If that fails, it goes back to the full legislature, but now they only need 1/3 of the minority. And finally if that fails a simple majority can still pass whatever, but now it expires in four years instead of the next census.
Seems to me like this means Ohio gets bitterly partisan gerrymanders every four years or whenever the same party controls the legislature and the governor's mansion.
I also believe there are some rules to what any of the districts can look like regardless of how it's finally passed. Districts have to be compact, only a fixed number of counties can be broken up, etc.
Obviously the best thing would be to take it out of the hand of legislators altogether, but I'm willing to see how it goes before denouncing it as a horrible idea.
Ohio overwhelmingly passed a weird redestricting reform last night during their primary elections. Had the support of both parties, I'm not sure how I feel about it. Looks kinda like some of the proposed filibuster reforms I've seen. Vox has an explainer.
Basic summary is this: there is now a cascading threshold for redistricting votes.
Initially they need 3/5 of both state houses, plus a majority of each party in those houses, plus the governor. If that fails, the 7 member existing redistricting commission gets to draw the map, but they need two minority party members to sign on. If that fails, it goes back to the full legislature, but now they only need 1/3 of the minority. And finally if that fails a simple majority can still pass whatever, but now it expires in four years instead of the next census.
Seems to me like this means Ohio gets bitterly partisan gerrymanders every four years or whenever the same party controls the legislature and the governor's mansion.
I also believe there are some rules to what any of the districts can look like regardless of how it's finally passed. Districts have to be compact, only a fixed number of counties can be broken up, etc.
Obviously the best thing would be to take it out of the hand of legislators altogether, but I'm willing to see how it goes before denouncing it as a horrible idea.
This is how it was sold to voters- a bipartisan commission would redraw instead of legislators. Whoops!
The party in power can just draw terrible maps to get to that fail state to just put through what they really want anyway...
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
California has had some problems with improper voter purges over the last ~2 years, partly due to inept attempts to clean up outdated records, but largely because state laws are often administered by relatively conservative county-level officials
San Diego, for example, is run by Republicans who led the charge in improperly purging lots of naturalized refugee citizens in 2016
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
They've literally openly admitted they want to suppress democratic voters. This is not a hill to try and die on.
There's a very simple way to update government records.
Whenever you interact with government in any ways, such as filling a tax return, you have a space in the form form "I moved, here's my new address, here's my old address, inform the relevant agencies."
There, problem solved.
Also, well before an election, have the relevant agency send a letter to all residential addresses, saying "here's a list of the registered person living there. If your name is missing, go to the local voter registration office with a piece of ID or a bill in your name."
It's not a hard problem, if you actually want to solve it.
The vital context to this case is the number of times Republicans have either been caught fucking with voting rights by the courts or admitted that they were passing laws to restrict the right to vote and that was how say, Trump won Wisconsin or how Romney was going to win Pennsylvania (whoops, but it worked out four years later!) means that they no longer get the benefit of the doubt. Anytime a policy is enacted that disproportionately impacts Democratic voters, which this policy did (think transient populations, which are disproportionately poor), they get no benefit of the doubt.
And the barrier to voting should be extremely low, if only because in this country there is a long history of using any barrier to fuck over minorities' right to vote. Even something as small as sending in a form is actually a sizable barrier for some people. Especially when the purpose is actually to disenfranchise Democrats and steal elections, because there's all kinds of chicanery you can do to have people not actually receive their notice.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
Don't be obtuse.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
I'm glad you've come around to opposing the GOP on this.
0
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Cleaning the database is not disenfranchisement. Removing people who should be in the database is.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Cleaning the database is not disenfranchisement. Removing people who should be in the database is.
Neither is disenfranchisement unless access and/or eligibility is impacted by deregistration.
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Cleaning the database is not disenfranchisement. Removing people who should be in the database is.
Neither is disenfranchisement unless access and/or eligibility is impacted by deregistration.
Do you think voter registration drives increase voting access? Because if they do the opposite must hold true.
Styrofoam Sammich on
+5
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Cleaning the database is not disenfranchisement. Removing people who should be in the database is.
Neither is disenfranchisement unless access and/or eligibility is impacted by deregistration.
Access to registration is already unfairly affected.
Did we not discuss the North Carolina GOP openly congratulating themselves on reducing black voter turnout?
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Cleaning the database is not disenfranchisement. Removing people who should be in the database is.
Neither is disenfranchisement unless access and/or eligibility is impacted by deregistration.
Do you think voter registration drives increase voting access? Because if they do the opposite must hold true.
No, I don't think they increase voting access. All the people who registered had access to vote beforehand. Voter registration drives are for getting the paperwork out of the way early so it's more convenient to vote on election day.
Also, of course, to wink wink nudge nudge vote [party] even though it's naughty to say so.
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Cleaning the database is not disenfranchisement. Removing people who should be in the database is.
Neither is disenfranchisement unless access and/or eligibility is impacted by deregistration.
Access to registration is already unfairly affected.
I'm talking access to a ballot. A voter registration roll purge does not render purged voters unable to vote. They are still fully in possession of their voting franchise.
0
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
If you are not registered, you do not have access to voting? At least, thats how I understood the system to work.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
You don't keep a database up to date using only DELETE statements. You have to use UPDATE and INSERT too.
If the goal is good records, then the focus should be on identifying who move, and update on both end. And it's not even hard.
I had to update my voting registration exactly once. Because I moved 1 month before the election.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
I haven't actually read the SCOTUS thread recently so I don't know if you were dog piled from this, which I absolutely don't meant o do if you were spool, but I'd like to address this because the more understanding we all have the better off we all will be.
It's not "fill out this form again plz" that is the barrier. The barrier is "I don't have the documents required to fill out the form right now because I didn't expect to fill out this form." That barrier will lead people to believe they are not able to vote, and due to unconscious (or worse, conscious) biases of the poll workers minority voters will be less likely to have this belief corrected before they leave the polling station, so they end up not voting. That barrier will lead to people filling out a provisional ballot, who will then have to work every moment that the court house is open because employers have to let you off to vote but not when it's just going to prove your right to vote after voting day, and minorities are more likely to be in one of those working situations leading to their vote not counting. That barrier will make people have to decide if they're vote is worth a 2 hour bus trip one way or the price of a cab they can't really afford, which tends to be a dilemma more for minorities than whites.
You crunch the numbers and it all leads to minorities either not voting or having their votes not counted more often than white people which statistically means democrats receive less votes than republicans. It's splitting really fine hairs, but those lost votes add up and, if you look at Virginia last year, it can make a huge difference.
Tbloxham is waving the panic flag and declaring that only a capital-p Purge can restore American Democracy. Dozens of postcards to every house! Disenfranchisement! Cats and dogs living together... mass hysteria!
Or, you can vote in one election out of every 4 and never worry. Or, you can just go here: https://olvr.sos.state.oh.us/ and register online. I don't even see what there is to fix legislatively. Of course you need to occasionally purge voter rolls, for lots of reasons:
- voter rolls full of garbage data are useless for other tasks like redistricting
- interstate agreements require cleanup
- databases become unwieldy if literally everyone who has ever existed is on the roll everywhere they ever have
This panic is perhaps overblown. Voter registration is trivial and doable from a library, in Ohio and Texas at least (the only ones I checked). This is not a edisenfranchisement so much as it's a reflection of reality - if you haven't voted in 8 years, you're certainly a citizen but you're not a voter. If you want to be a voter again, take 20 minutes online some evening and become one.
Now, I say with with the full understanding that gathering the documentation needed to prove you're a citizen and a resident can be challenging, and should be made easier, but we're talking about people who already did that part. So come on everyone, let's not predict the death of the republic over needing to fill out a form after 8 consecutive years of neglecting your civic duty.
The issue is there is no reason to make it harder for citizenry to vote, this does nothing but disenfranchise voters which is the current election strategy of a major party of the US backed by these very courts.
I guess I don't see "fill out this form again plz" as a barrier. Certainly not as a plot to destroy the Democratic voting base.
Either way, I think the assessment of the case itself is correct - it follows the law, Ohio legislature needs to fix it.
Wether you "see" it or not it very clearly is.
idk! Maybe this is a place where I'm being myopic. I feel like it's definitely true that if voting one time in eight years was too big an ask, filling out a form first is probably not going to be the thing that stops you from showing up in year 10. But maybe I'm missing some context here and lots of voters are being screwed out of their once-in-a-decade plan to vote in an election because they didn't do it at all in the eight previous years.
I'm trying not to be super snarky here but honestly I am just not seeing the monstrous nature of this. Just how many Democrats didn't show up to the polls a single time since 2006, but really wanted to vote Hillary in 2016?
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Cleaning the database is not disenfranchisement. Removing people who should be in the database is.
Neither is disenfranchisement unless access and/or eligibility is impacted by deregistration.
Do you think voter registration drives increase voting access? Because if they do the opposite must hold true.
No, I don't think they increase voting access. All the people who registered had access to vote beforehand. Voter registration drives are for getting the paperwork out of the way early so it's more convenient to vote on election day.
Also, of course, to wink wink nudge nudge vote [party] even though it's naughty to say so.
Comparing efforts to get people to the ballot box to efforts to make it so the wrong people can't vote at all is disgusting. I don't know what fantasy you're in, but intention isn't a mystery with these laws.
Posts
That's something they are working on in New Jersey. There were bills to allow people on parole to vote, and a couple were introduced to allow prisoners to vote too (like in Maine and Vermont), but they haven't gotten as far yet. Automatic voting is a bit politically easier to pass, of course.
Yeah, I agree. Hence my second sentence. But lookup election law for neighboring States. In DE, PA, NY, CT, and RI you just straight up can't vote absentee unless you meet a qualified excuse. You can't even vote early. At all.
That might change in PA soon. Tom Wolfs campaign is getting vocal about voter rights. If our new district maps help purge some red we may get early voting very soon
In NY at least that just involves signing an affidavit saying you won't be around. Which is still like 1000% more effort than it should be but it is pretty pro forma.
There was some talk about NY changing that stuff but Nixon seems to have scared Cuomo about opening up primaries and the Senate is fucked anyways because a Democrat won a special election and another one decided to caucus with the GOP to let them retain control of the chamber.
Yeah, I agree. Hence my second sentence. But lookup election law for neighboring States. In DE, PA, NY, CN, RI you just straight up can't vote absentee unless you have a stated reason. You can't even vote early.
Right, but what if you are around? Lying on an official form doesn't seem like the best approach to expanded voting. All I have to do in Illinois is say that I want to vote by mail on the board of elections website, and then I vote by mail after it arrives. All we really need is a permanent absentee list and/or move to all postal voting.
Has 74% support, supposedly.
I'd disagree even on that. We shouldn't be punishing people who do something illegitimately by taking away the ability for them to ever do it legitimately.
edit: For things that require trust, sure, but voting doesn't really require trust or have any direct means for abuse.
The one caveat being that prisoners should vote in the place they were last registered to vote before being imprisoned, as otherwise the voting patterns of rural prison towns could become very unbalanced! And they probably have a lot more interest in the politics of their real home, the place they are likely to go back to when freed.
Basic summary is this: there is now a cascading threshold for redistricting votes.
Initially they need 3/5 of both state houses, plus a majority of each party in those houses, plus the governor. If that fails, the 7 member existing redistricting commission gets to draw the map, but they need two minority party members to sign on. If that fails, it goes back to the full legislature, but now they only need 1/3 of the minority. And finally if that fails a simple majority can still pass whatever, but now it expires in four years instead of the next census.
Seems to me like this means Ohio gets bitterly partisan gerrymanders every four years or whenever the same party controls the legislature and the governor's mansion.
I also believe there are some rules to what any of the districts can look like regardless of how it's finally passed. Districts have to be compact, only a fixed number of counties can be broken up, etc.
Obviously the best thing would be to take it out of the hand of legislators altogether, but I'm willing to see how it goes before denouncing it as a horrible idea.
This is how it was sold to voters- a bipartisan commission would redraw instead of legislators. Whoops!
The party in power can just draw terrible maps to get to that fail state to just put through what they really want anyway...
http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/opinion-analysis-justices-rule-for-ohio-in-voter-registration-dispute/
If you want to have a more general discussion about voting rights, please go ahead and do so here.
FWIW, despite voting in every single primary and election since like 2006, I was purged from the CA voter rolls in 2016, and would have had to cast a provisional ballot if it weren't for someone else in these threads posting a warning about it a few weeks before the primary. What's weird is that the other, less regular voters, in my household weren't purged (though they're registered as independents)
That certainly runs counter to the "Republicans are doing this in red states to remove their political opposition" narrative, considering the makeup of the CA legislature.
Only if you assume that all purges are either well run and intentioned or that they're all bad faith suppression efforts.
Ohio's legislative efforts have no bearing ok California being California.
It being used in one instance doesn't mean other times aren't abuse, and vice versa.
Edit: or maybe someone just hates Spoit.
They know what they did.
San Diego, for example, is run by Republicans who led the charge in improperly purging lots of naturalized refugee citizens in 2016
They've literally openly admitted they want to suppress democratic voters. This is not a hill to try and die on.
Whenever you interact with government in any ways, such as filling a tax return, you have a space in the form form "I moved, here's my new address, here's my old address, inform the relevant agencies."
There, problem solved.
Also, well before an election, have the relevant agency send a letter to all residential addresses, saying "here's a list of the registered person living there. If your name is missing, go to the local voter registration office with a piece of ID or a bill in your name."
It's not a hard problem, if you actually want to solve it.
And the barrier to voting should be extremely low, if only because in this country there is a long history of using any barrier to fuck over minorities' right to vote. Even something as small as sending in a form is actually a sizable barrier for some people. Especially when the purpose is actually to disenfranchise Democrats and steal elections, because there's all kinds of chicanery you can do to have people not actually receive their notice.
The GOP has worked for decades on systemic vote suppression. They should receive zero benefit of the doubt in these matters.
I thought the position from the other thread was that all purges are disenfranchisement and therefore bad, also probably nefarious.
My opinion is that having your ID database looking like a genealogy poster proving you're Charlemagne's ancestor is a bad thing from an IT perspective. Some cleanup and data validation is necessary from time to time. How we approach that process ought to be one that inconveniences voters as little as possible.
Don't be obtuse.
I'm glad you've come around to opposing the GOP on this.
Cleaning the database is not disenfranchisement. Removing people who should be in the database is.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
again, they have a history in these matters.
They just managed to find a rug juuust big enough to sweep it under that the Supreme Court could look the other way.
Rug doesn't have to be that big with John "Trying to Overturn VRA Since the 80s" Roberts as Chief Justice.
Neither is disenfranchisement unless access and/or eligibility is impacted by deregistration.
Do you think voter registration drives increase voting access? Because if they do the opposite must hold true.
Access to registration is already unfairly affected.
Did we not discuss the North Carolina GOP openly congratulating themselves on reducing black voter turnout?
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
No, I don't think they increase voting access. All the people who registered had access to vote beforehand. Voter registration drives are for getting the paperwork out of the way early so it's more convenient to vote on election day.
Also, of course, to wink wink nudge nudge vote [party] even though it's naughty to say so.
I'm talking access to a ballot. A voter registration roll purge does not render purged voters unable to vote. They are still fully in possession of their voting franchise.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
If the goal is good records, then the focus should be on identifying who move, and update on both end. And it's not even hard.
I had to update my voting registration exactly once. Because I moved 1 month before the election.
I haven't actually read the SCOTUS thread recently so I don't know if you were dog piled from this, which I absolutely don't meant o do if you were spool, but I'd like to address this because the more understanding we all have the better off we all will be.
It's not "fill out this form again plz" that is the barrier. The barrier is "I don't have the documents required to fill out the form right now because I didn't expect to fill out this form." That barrier will lead people to believe they are not able to vote, and due to unconscious (or worse, conscious) biases of the poll workers minority voters will be less likely to have this belief corrected before they leave the polling station, so they end up not voting. That barrier will lead to people filling out a provisional ballot, who will then have to work every moment that the court house is open because employers have to let you off to vote but not when it's just going to prove your right to vote after voting day, and minorities are more likely to be in one of those working situations leading to their vote not counting. That barrier will make people have to decide if they're vote is worth a 2 hour bus trip one way or the price of a cab they can't really afford, which tends to be a dilemma more for minorities than whites.
You crunch the numbers and it all leads to minorities either not voting or having their votes not counted more often than white people which statistically means democrats receive less votes than republicans. It's splitting really fine hairs, but those lost votes add up and, if you look at Virginia last year, it can make a huge difference.
Comparing efforts to get people to the ballot box to efforts to make it so the wrong people can't vote at all is disgusting. I don't know what fantasy you're in, but intention isn't a mystery with these laws.
You can vote provisionally, at the poll, and once the State determines that you're eligible, your vote is counted.
lol