Shit like thus makes me glad I don’t live in america
I was debating my father in 2020 about voting and said we should make voting laws “better.” He countered that different parties might have different definitions of “better.” I said, “easier and more accessible.” He had no counter.
Regulate votes, not guns I see
If they put human skin on the ventriloquist dummy from goosebumps, let it age 50 years, had its human son monitor it’s web traffic for porn browsing… What would that dummy look like?
The rest of America should follow Oregon’s standards.
When Republicans walked out, Oregon said Bye Felicia.
Oregon high court says 10 GOP state senators who staged long walkout can’t run for reelection.
“Walkouts allow a relatively small number of lawmakers to nullify the will of the majority, and that is to the detriment of our democracy,” Alejandro Queral, executive director of the Oregon Center for Public Policy, said in an emailed statement.
There it is. Being a shithead should cost you.
100%. Also fine them for one months salary every time they play this “I just won’t do my job 🤷♂️” game. Dont wanna work, dont get paid.
Unfortunately they all live off corporate kickbacks more than salary but at least some of that can be returned to the coffers.
Johnson plans to pair a bill funding the government for six months with a Republican bill called the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act” or “SAVE Act,” that would require new voters to submit “documentary proof of United States citizenship,” such as a passport or a birth certificate, in order to register to vote.
That doesn’t seem like an outrageous ask but then access to such documents should also be safeguarded, that is if the actual reason was just to prevent voter fraud/illegally voting
What issue is it trying to solve? To my knowledge electoral fraud is so extremely rare in general (article cites figures in the double digits since 2000) let alone non-citizen voting, what this is though is anti-voter legislation, part of their election denial bullshit
Having such safeguards in place to make sure it doesn’t become an issue does seem alright to me. But they seem to be doing this as a form of voter suppression.
That’s the game, if dems were as unscrupulous they could do this too:
Election Security is our #1 priority. That’s why we’re creating secure polling stations located throughout every major city in every state. Rural polling stations will be closed as they are not secure enough to guarantee the integrity of our elections. Rural Americans frequently go into cities for sporting events and concerts so there will be no issue of disenfranchisement when their local polling stations close.
Republicans and Democrats going all out like this (or I guess Democrats retaliating in kind) would make for some interesting times for the US. Even more so than they are having now.
Hasn’t been an issue ever, statistically. This is the GOP trying to suppress voting
That’s… what I am saying. It’s like you think I’m in favour of their move or something.
What issue is it trying to solve?
Votes for Democrats. The Republicans have been using voter suppression tactics to get elected for decades. At this point it’s the only way they can cling onto power.
2016 GE poll worker, inspector. I watched an elderly couple look at the polling results from the machines then write down a different result on their submission to the county. Their problem was that they also needed my signature. When I refused they signed for me. When I objected to the Secretary of State nothing happened.
There’s all sorts of voter fraud. But, it’s not being effected by the voters.
Republicans wanting a bill to “protect voting rights” is some highly unsubtle Minitrue shit
This usually places undue burden on women, poor and generally anybody not a white dude.
Say you are a woman, okay you’ve got your a certified copy of your birth certificate $10-but wait the name doesn’t match because you got married.
Now you need a marriage certificate, thats another $10 and the trouble of contacting another municipal office.
Oh were you married twice? Thats tracking down another 2 municipal offices, another $10 marriage cert and now a certified judgement of divorce which will cost-ooh was your children’s custody agreement a part of that? $40. Did you not remember your divorce file number from 30 years ago? It’ll be an additional $5 per name per every 2 years searched.
I’ve seen women spend like $200 just on certified copies to get a realID driver’s license. Has a chilling effect on registering, to solve a problem of voter fraud that doesn’t really exist.
If the intention was to actually fight current or future voter fraud then they should really have an easy way of submitting that documentary proof. I don’t know what form that would take in the US and how expensive it would get, considering you’d want some stipulation that it shouldn’t have much cost to acquiring such documents, shouldn’t be too difficult and whatnot. Assuming you’d want to do that right. Not that I think that’s their genuine intention.
Where I live in Finland we don’t have voter registering. We do check IDs when you vote, that part just seems sensible, but there isn’t an actual ID requirement. You just need to be identified without a doubt, but the form isn’t set. In specific circumstances it could even be that the officials there know you and guarantee who you are. But if you don’t have a passport (rare not to have it here), you don’t have driver’s license or ID card, you can get a temporary ID for free from the police station just for voting. But then you need to be also somehow identified there, so sorta the same problem again, but at least you have more time there than in the voting place.
The intention is to make it hard to register to vote. Imagine if you are going through a hard time in your life and you forget to check your mail or forget to register, then you just can’t vote.
It’s hard for me to believe that there are a lot of illegal voters. If you illegally voted you will not be granted a citizenship so anyone with the intention to be a citizen will not vote illegally.
The solution is to auto-enroll citizens. The government can easily check my citizenship if they wanted to. They can send a ID letter stating take this to the voting booth if you don’t have an ID, but this bill is not going to get passed because the main intent is not to prevent fraud.
According to the article the sort of voter fraud this would prevent isn’t much of an issue at all.
The solution is to auto-enroll citizens. The government can easily check my citizenship if they wanted to. They can send a ID letter stating take this to the voting booth if you don’t have an ID, but this bill is not going to get passed because the main intent is not to prevent fraud.
I wonder if that would cause concern over how secure the mail is. I guess you could put in some additional safeguards on this, where you fill out a web form if you want to get such temporary ID so it’d be a lot harder to use those mailed IDs to cause widespread issues since not every needs it and they’d already know how many have ordered them and so on. But like said, lot of effort to solve, at least of now, a barely existing issue.
In the US, it isn’t about identification or fraud, its about hoops. The more hoops you have to jump through, the less likely “undesirables” (POC, poors, etc) are yo get it done. Like most things here, its a relic of Jim Crow and related policies. It flies so well even today because it all seems menial to somebody well off (you see it in these comments “Its only $10 what’s the problem”)
Here, the Department of Motor Vehicles tends to be your central point of anything ID related driver or not. My city’s used to be on the bus line, but they moved it to the county far from any public transit. So if you don’t drive, that $10 is now $10 + $20 taxi/uber there + $20 ride home and depending on what you’re doing/getting you may need to go back which is another $40. So really you’re looking at $50-100 to get whatever it is.
In my state at one time (I do think its changed here but assume its probably the same in other states) to get a birth certificate you had to go to the state capital (4 hour drive for me one way.) If you dont drive, sucks to suck. Pay someone to take you or hope you have greyhound where you live.
I could go on, but you get the point.
I would have to figure out how the NYC birth certificate system works and I live halfway across the country. It’s too close to the election to do that, and getting a passport can take months and hundreds of dollars.
It’s not very subtle to try and push these “safeguards” now, yeah
Yes. Lets shut down the government over this. The furloughed workers totally won’t vote democrat in protest.
It’s worked every other time Republicans have shut down the government. Why wouldn’t they get their way this time?
Our collective situation may have become so dire that We the People may realize we’ve far more power than what we express at the ballot box.
Probably not yet. But, possibly soon.
A little more than half* of We the People will have no problem with this.
* by land area
By numbers, one third will advocate. One third will do nothing. One third will object. About ten percent will sacrifice to lead the rest. We could argue with history. But, that’d be dumb.
When did they last get their way via shutdown? Usually it costs Republicans politically.
Could shutting down the government somehow be an election stealing tactic by Republicons? How would that impact the government’s ability to ensure fair elections.
The elections are run by the states, not the federal government. Congress keeps working during a shutdown. I can’t see how it would hinder the election.
It would have unpredictable effects on the election though, so I can’t imagine they really want to risk it.
Yeah, the elections get operated at the state level, but don’t you still need an employed VP to count/register them?
On January 6, yes, but they don’t stop working. The shutdown only affects the rank and file government employees that do things like run the government agencies, air traffic control*, Smithsonians, etc.
*Air traffic controllers would be considered an essential function, so they would actually get the joy of continuing to work without pay, until a budget is passed, then they would get back pay. (There’s also a possibility of some agencies having money, for various reasons, to continue to pay essential employees.)
Most will just work and wait for the pay, that’s what happened last time anyway.
Essential people will, but non-essential people will not work.
When the “government shuts down” the elected officials still all work.
Even some federal employees still work. There are core essential functions that have to continue or people may die, government property may be destroyed, etc. Those people all work–without any support staff.
They just won’t receive a paycheck until the shutdown is over.
The military continues to work. Federal law enforcement continues to work.
The reality of a government shutdown is that it’s actually very expensive and almost entirely performative (from the politicians perspective). Nothing good comes from it. It’s literally one of congress’s only jobs-- so they just look more incompetent than usual.
The federal agencies spend a lot of time and effort preparing for possible shutdowns that usually get averted at the 11th hour. When they don’t it’s incredibly expensive to deal with the impacts of delayed programs and contract issues, handling leave/time off during that timeframe etc.
Another impact is that it can drive top talent away from the government (potentially by design from certain political dispositions). Would you work somewhere that doesn’t pay you or delays paychecks?
That said, I don’t thing government employees have officially missed a pay check yet though. Like I said it’s all bullshit. They get to the brink then “figure it out”. The one a few years ago was the closest people got to missing paychecks. The solved it the day before the official pay date.
They threaten/shit down the government every other issue… Like a toddler having a tantrum.
shit down the government
I don’t know if this was a typo, but it’s rather appropriate either way.
Typo but I’m gonna keep it. Like you said it works
a toddler throws a tantrum when it thinks it can get something it wants from the adult and democrats have a history of giving these toddlers what they wanted when they tantrum-ed hard enough; their current party leader literally used to brag about doing so in his 2020 campaign.
Republicans choose conservatism over democracy, and they lose the more people vote.
I don’t think they are conservatives, although they call themselves that. Democrats are conservatives.
Classic conservatives conserve: this is a mob who could not individually list one thing they want to keep from changing. They want as much change that makes them the most money
Preservation of an existing thing and conservative political ideology aren’t actually linked. No matter how much conservatives try to tell you they are. Classic Conservatism was just how 17th and 18th century political philosophers referred to monarchies and top down systems that impose order on the masses. This was in opposition to Classical Liberalism which was a bottom up imposition of order. I.e. by the people, for the people.
In many ways the South came out of the revolution still subscribed to classical conservatism. They favored a heavy class system, different rules for the elite and workers, and were loathe to expand voting beyond the elite. Even after the civil war they made the antebellum period their golden age. It wasn’t until the post world war 2 era offered Neo-Liberalism that they really gave up trying to go back to the antebellum period. There were even slave-like conditions called peonage right up to the mid 1940s.
One of the biggest differences in classical conservatism and liberalism was what they called, the state of nature. Liberals saw all men as inherently good, but taught to be evil by oppression and stressful environmental factors. Conservatives saw all men as inherently evil and in need of strong control. Their theories followed pretty well from those base assumptions. Although there was also a healthy dose of Divine Rule in conservatism.
I’m mentioning this because I hope everyone reading this can realize the Republicans of the cold war, as racist and hateful as they were, were still inside classical liberalism. They still believed in democracy, rule by the people, for the people. Since the end of Bush’s presidency though they’ve increasingly decided classical conservatism is more attractive.
I’m mentioning this because I hope everyone reading this can realize the Republicans of the cold war, as racist and hateful as they were, were still inside classical liberalism. They still believed in democracy, rule by the people, for the people.
Considering the war on drugs I question that. The war on drugs was just the new Jim Crow
Yup. But that was about minorities and leftists. As far as the general disposition of the working class, the Republicans were actually working for their votes. Nixon gave us OSHA as well as the war on drugs.
Another factor I didn’t mention above is that the Republican party fundamentally changes in the 1960’s because of the Dixie Flip. That’s when they really became the party of the South. Before that the parties were far more mixed around geographically. Which is why I go from talking about the South and conservatives to talking about the Republicans.
republicans are trying to conserve billionaires money, democrats are trying to conserve the larger federal system. Nobody is trying to fix the system atm.
Do it, yah fucking whinny-ass man-child.
Shut the fucking government down because you’re afraid of fucking democracy.
I think “fucking democracy” is their end goal here.
Pretty sure that’s how you catch liberty… and they think it’s an std
Sexually transmitted democracy eww 🤢
A much more exciting revolution, if we’re being honest.
Make love not war!
I get the sentiment, and am also so, so tired of this. But. It’s an election year and Biden is currently president. In other words, these freaks will absolutely shut down the government, actively harm the economy, and reduce our national security because they can then blame democrats and it will help elect Trump. Please vote, donate, and volunteer accordingly…
They would never. They can threaten all they want but what they are really risking is the dollar as the dominant currency. If it becomes commonplace or even somewhat likely that a shutdown can happen, the rest of the world sees that as instability. These fools don’t know what levers they are messing with and the second someone actually pulls it they will shit their pants crying because they made a booboo.
only idiots see that.
Everyone else sees that they’re actively fucking everyone over. there’s not enough idiots to sway, if everyone gets out to vote.
Mint the damn trillion-dollar coin
Dems need to draw a line in the sand here and do some of the campaigning on this
“They are so afraid that they would rather shut down government than allow votes”
I suspect the redhats would just interpret the votes being blocked were for “illegals” and that this was a good thing. Because they’ve been told this repeatedly.
The Republicans are trying to prevent college students from voting with this bill.
OK…?
That’s the counterpoint. The data shows that it was already illegal for “illegals” to vote and there are no reported cases of it. However, there are hundreds of cases of republicans using this law to prevent (your) college students from voting. If you have a son or daughter away at college, do they have their birth certificate with them so they can register to vote?
Why did you feel the need to make a counterpoint to me pointing out that they don’t care about counterpoints?
Because you didn’t point anything out??
pretty sure Republicans care about counterpoints if their counterpoint to “Republicans are shutting down the govt” is “them illegals!”. The correct reply is “your kids!”
You’re right. They don’t even care what their reps are trying to do. It’s all about feelings.
Cure this by actually voting. Fire these fuckers!
You can! NOW!
Voting is not the solution to this problem. The Democrats have had the majority in relatively recent years, and they’ve done nothing to deal with this threat.
How many times does it have to happen before Democrats will figure out how to handle it permanently? As soon as our Washington politicians find the motivation they will solve this problem.
They absolutely have.
You know how I know? Because they’re getting more and more insane while also less and less able to do anything meaningful about anything, they’re crazy and impotent, both politically and in their personal lives.
This is literally what winning looks like, finish strangling the serpent.
The Democrats have had the majority in relatively recent years
You mean the two years they controlled the executive and legislative branches, but not the judicial, under Obama?
I suppose that would be a good example, wouldn’t it.
It would if Obama didn’t have several members of his own party working against his agenda. But then I’m sure you knew that.
Sure did. But I’m sure you knew that.
They demand Dems give them something to campaign on by threatening to do something Dems could then use to campaign against them?
