US voting rights

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas house passes sweeping voting restrictions bill

      by

      TexasTexas house passes sweeping voting restrictions billBill comes amid nationwide Republican effort to restrict votingDemocrats attempted to block bill by walking out last month Sam Levine in New YorkFri 27 Aug 2021 00.34 EDTLast modified on Fri 27 Aug 2021 00.36 EDTThe Texas house of representatives has passed a sweeping elections bill that would prohibit 24-hour and drive-through voting, block election officials from sending out absentee ballot applications, impose new identification requirements on mail-in ballots, and give more leeway to partisan poll watchers at voting sites.The bill – which passed on a 79-37 mostly party-line vote – now moves to the Texas senate, which has already passed a similar version. The senate can either concur with the house legislation or produce a final version using a conference committee. After that, it will go to the desk of Texas governor Greg Abbott, who is likely to swiftly approve it.The legislation comes amid a nationwide effort by Republicans, who control state government in Texas, to enact legislation that imposes new restrictions on voting access. The Texas bill exploded into the national spotlight after Democrats in the state legislature repeatedly blocked it by walking out of the state legislature, denying Republicans the ability to move forward with legislative business. The standoff, which lasted a little over a month, ended last week when enough Democrats returned to the state capitol to allow the process to move forward.Texas Democrats return to state capitol, ending 38-day effort to block voting billRead moreMany of the provisions in the Texas bill are aimed at Harris county, Texas’ most populous county, and home of Houston, a Democratic stronghold. Harris County election officials took several steps to make voting amid the pandemic easier. Those measures included adopting drive-through and 24-hour voting. The majority of voters who used both processes in 2020 were either Black, Hispanic or Asian, according to an estimate by the Texas Civil Rights Project. About 127,000 people used the process.Andrew Murr, the bill’s sponsor, said the measure would prevent fraud, increase voting access, and help prevent ballot secrecy. But he was unable to say how many instances of fraud there were in the 2020 election and couldn’t name any voters who had complained about the secrecy of their ballot during drive-through voting.Rafael Anchía, a Dallas Democrat, said the little evidence of actual fraud presented was clear evidence the states justifications for the bill were a “pretext”.“This is all about furtherance of the Big Lie,” Anchía said.The lengthy debate on the bill and proposed amendments was mostly cordial on Thursday afternoon, but it was clear that tension lingered in the chamber, where Republicans recently authorized the arrest of House members who refused to come to the capitol, none were ultimately arrested.“The chair would appreciate members not using the word ‘racism’ this afternoon,” said House speaker Dade Phelan, a Republican.Murr and other Republicans have defended the legislation by arguing that it increases the minimum hours polls are required to be open during early voting. But state representative John Bucy III, a Democrat from Austin, noted that the bill for the first time would set a maximum cap on the amount of early voting hours a county could choose to offer.The data proves it: 2020 US election was a remarkable success | The Fight to VoteRead moreThe new restrictions would make it harder to cast a ballot in a state that already has some of the strictest voting rules, and the lowest turnout in the country. Texas is only one of a handful of states that only allows a select group of people – those who are age 65 and older, disabled or out of town – to vote by mail. The state also does not have online voter registration and ranked among the bottom of US states in 2020.The Democrats in the state house of representatives spent much of the last six weeks in Washington, where they were lobbying federal lawmakers to pass two measures that would implement significant voting rights protections.One of those measures cleared the house on Tuesday and would require states with a recent history of voting discrimination, including Texas, to get any voting changes approved by the federal government before they go into effect. The measure faces an uphill path in the US senate, where it needs the votes of 10 Republican senators to overcome the filibuster and pass.TopicsTexasUS politicsUS voting rightsnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US House passes voting rights bill, restoring critical provision of landmark law

      by

      US voting rightsUS House passes voting rights bill, restoring critical provision of landmark lawBill that requires places with history of discrimination to be under federal supervision passes 219-212 – but could fail in the Senate Sam Levine in New YorkTue 24 Aug 2021 19.25 EDTLast modified on Tue 24 Aug 2021 22.25 EDTThe US House of Representatives has passed an update to the 1965 Voting Rights Act, restoring a critical provision of the landmark civil rights law that requires places with a history of voting discrimination to be under federal supervision.The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act passed 219-212 on a party-line vote.Kamala Harris Vietnam trip delayed after two US officials report Havana syndromeRead moreThe bill now faces an uncertain future in the US Senate, where it needs the support of 10 Republican Senators to overcome the filibuster and pass. While Senator Joe Manchin, a key Democratic swing vote, supports the bill, just one Republican, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, has indicated that she does.The House passed a similar version of the legislation in 2019, gaining just one GOP vote, but it never passed the Senate, which was then under GOP control.The legislation is one of two pillars of congressional Democrats’ push to protect voting rights. It sets a 25-year look-back period for assessing voting rights in jurisdictions. If courts have documented at least 15 voting rights violations in a state over that period, the state will have to get any change in voting rules approved by the federal government before it goes into effect (if the violation is committed by the state as a whole only 10 violations are required to trigger federal oversight).The updated formula comes eight years after the US supreme court said the formula in the law that determined which states were subject to pre-clearance was outdated and struck it down. Voting advocates have said that ruling, in a case called Shelby County v Holder, has offered states a green light to discriminate against Black voters.“Old battles have indeed become new again. While literacy tests and poll taxes no longer exist, certain states and local jurisdictions have passed laws that are modern day barriers to voting,” Terri Sewell, an Alabama Democrat who represents Selma in Congress, said on the floor of the House Tuesday.The states that would have to get election changes approved are Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas, Peyton McCrary, a former Justice Department historian, testified earlier this month. Several large counties in the US, including Los Angeles county in California, Cook county in Illinois, Westchester county in New York, Cuyahoga County in Ohio, and Northampton County in Virginia could also be covered, according to McCrary.The law also outlines several procedures that would be subject to federal pre-clearance everywhere in the country, including changes to voter ID laws, reductions in polling locations and changes in policies that determine who gets removed from the voter rolls.Republicans decried the measure as unnecessary, saying it gives the federal government too much power to oversee elections.“If you vote for this legislation, you are voting for a federal takeover of elections,” said congressman Rodney Davis, an Illinois Republican. “I hope my colleagues and the American people will see this bill for what it is, a partisan power-grab.”During debate on the bill, Democrats scoffed at the notion that the bill was not needed. They noted it came as Republican lawmakers across the country have taken up hundreds of bills to enact voting restrictions. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described it as “the worst voter suppression campaign in America since Jim Crow”.While federal pre-clearance is the most touted portion of the bill, the legislation also includes several other new provisions to protect voting rights. It essentially undoes a supreme court decision from earlier this year that makes it extremely difficult to bring challenges to voting laws under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. It also strengthens protections under the Voting Rights Act for minority voters during the redistricting process.The legislation would also address two issues that emerged in the unprecedented slew of litigation during the 2020 election. First, courts could not simply decline to strike down a law because an election is close – something that several courts did in 2020. Second, courts would have to offer an explanation for their reasoning in voting rights cases, a provision designed to take aim at the supreme court’s practice of not issuing explanations in emergency cases on its “shadow docket.”Beyond the John Lewis bill, Democrats are also trying to pass the For The People Act, sweeping legislation that would outlaw severe partisan gerrymandering, set minimum requirements for early voting and require automatic, same-day and online voter registration, among other measures. Voting rights experts say both measures are needed to fully protect voting rights, though Democrats have not unveiled a plan to get either around the filibuster.TopicsUS voting rightsUS politicsDemocratsUS CongressRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      The census shows how the US is diversifying – will it lead to political power?

      by

      The fight to voteCensusThe census shows how the US is diversifying – will it lead to political power?The once-a-decade redistricting process is set to unfold over the next few months, but Republicans will draw district lines in most places The fight to vote is supported byAbout this contentSam Levine in New YorkTue 17 Aug 2021 06.00 EDTLast modified on Tue 17 Aug 2021 06.14 EDTSign up for the Guardian’s Fight to Vote newsletterThe data the Census Bureau released last week offered a remarkably clear picture of how the United States is becoming more diverse. For the first time ever, America’s white population declined, while people of color accounted for almost all of the population growth over the last decade in the country.For Arturo Vargas, CEO of the Naleo Educational Fund, a Latino advocacy group, the steady growth among the nation’s Latino population – it increased by 23%, or about 12 million people, over the last decade – sends a clear message to policymakers that they need to consider how their decisions will affect Latinos across the country. In state capitols across the US, the overwhelming majority of state lawmakers are white, according to a 2020 survey by the National Conference of State Legislatures.The census proves the US is diversifying. Here’s how – in five chartsRead more“You can’t just make a policy, whether it’s on education or health, or even infrastructure, without considering how this is reaching and affecting your Latino constituents, given that they’re such a large share of the US population,” Vargas said.But the once-a-decade redistricting process, set to unfold over the next few months, will determine whether the population growth among Latinos and other minorities translates into meaningful political power. Republicans, who control most state legislatures, will draw district lines in most places. They could use their line-drawing power to blunt the effects of that significant population growth and make it more difficult for minority voters, who tend to support Democrats, to elect candidates of their choosing (Trump made inroads with Hispanic voters in Texas and elsewhere in 2020.)Thomas Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (Maldef), said he was “very concerned” lawmakers across the country would draw districts that deprived Latinos of political power. His group is one of several that will be closely monitoring the redistricting process and is preparing to quickly challenge district plans that appear discriminatory.“Extraordinary growth of the Latino population, everywhere in the country, means that there should be new opportunities to create Latino-majority districts,” he said. “In general, no one voluntarily cedes power. So wherever you have elected officials drawing their own lines, which is still the prevalent practice nationwide, they are not going to naturally be inclined to create new seats for a growing community like the Latino community.”Of particular concern to Saenz and Vargas is Texas, where the Hispanic population now nearly equals the white population, the new numbers show.The state has a long history of discriminating against Latinos during redistricting. In 2011, Republican lawmakers carved up the state’s districts in such a way to increase the voting power of white citizens over Latinos. In one state house district, for example, Republicans replaced Hispanic voters who were likely to vote with ones who were not likely to do so. On paper, they made it look like Latinos had political power, when they did not.A federal court would later rule Republicans used a “deliberate, race-conscious method” to manipulate the Hispanic and Democratic vote.“I can almost guarantee we will wind up in litigation in Texas,” Saenz said. “[The] history of redistricting in Texas is that despite dramatic growth in the Latino population, particularly in comparison to non-Latino folks in Texas, the legislature never recognizes that growth by appropriately creating majority looking seats.”This will also be the first redistricting cycle in decades without some of the strongest federal protections to prevent discrimination against minority groups. Until 2013, places with a history of voting discrimination had to get their maps pre-approved by either the justice department or a three-judge panel in Washington before they went into effect. The US supreme court gutted that requirement in 2013. Now, civil rights groups can challenge maps, but they will probably go into effect while litigation, which can last years, is proceeding.Kristen Clarke, the head of the justice department’s civil rights division, which is responsible for enforcing the Voting Rights Act and other federal voting laws, told Congress on Monday that the agency could not adequately protect voting rights using case-by-case litigation to challenge maps.Vargas said the lack of federal oversight meant his group would have to step up its vigilance and monitoring of the redistricting process.“We know certain jurisdictions are notorious for racially gerrymandering Latinos out of political representation. Texas being exhibit A in that regard,” he said. “This really forces us to step up our advocacy and our vigilance of some of these jurisdictions who are going to ignore these population changes and draw lines that benefit them politically and in partisan ways.”TopicsCensusThe fight to voteUS voting rightsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Senate Democrats poised for voting rights push to counter Republican restrictions

      by

      US voting rightsSenate Democrats poised for voting rights push to counter Republican restrictionsSenate expected to reintroduce Democrats’ marquee election reform bill known as the For the People Act before summer recess Hugo Lowell in Washington DCTue 10 Aug 2021 13.46 EDTLast modified on Tue 10 Aug 2021 14.40 EDTTop Democrats in the Senate are poised to make another attempt to push through voting rights legislation before the chamber leaves Washington for a summer recess, in a sign of their determination to counter a wave of Republican-led ballot restrictions across the nation.The Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer is expected to reintroduce Democrats’ marquee election reform bill known as the For the People Act, with additional votes on one measure to end partisan gerrymandering and another measure to tighten campaign spending, sources said.None of the measures, for which Schumer hopes to schedule votes immediately after the Senate takes up the $3.5tn budget blueprint for infrastructure, is expected to garner any Republican support and will thus likely follow the demise of the For the People Act in June.The move by Senate Democrats will encourage voting rights activists, who have watched with alarm that the issue appeared to have taken a back seat as protracted negotiations over the $1tn bipartisan infrastructure package consumed the Senate.Yet in the face of united Republican opposition, the endgame for Democrats – even as they scramble to enact voting rights legislation to roll back a wave of GOP ballot restrictions in time for the 2022 midterm elections – remains unclear.The only conceivable path for Democrats to ensure passage of the voting rights bills would require reforming the Senate’s filibuster rule, an option not currently available to party leaders after holdouts last week reiterated their opposition.Senator Kyrsten Sinema on Friday told ABC that she continued to support the 60-vote requirement for the filibuster, days after senator Joe Manchin said anew that he would not acquiesce to carving out a voting rights exemption from the rule.Democrats face a time crunch as they prepare for the 2022 midterms, when they hope to mitigate Republican gains after House district lines are redrawn on the results of last year’s census.Democrats are particularly determined to curb partisan redistricting, which could allow Republicans to gain enough seats to reclaim the House majority and thwart their ambitions of enacting Joe Biden’s legislative agenda in the second half of his first term.And with some Republican-led states racing to redraw lines once the Census Bureau releases detailed population data on 12 August, advocates for stronger federal voting rights laws have warned that Congress needs to act before mid-September in order to affect 2022 balloting.To that end, a group of Democrats led by Senate rules chair Amy Klobuchar and Senator Jeff Merkley have continued to work on voting rights legislation in an attempt to keep up momentum against GOP ballot restrictions based on Trump’s lies about a stolen election.Some Democrats involved in the effort were optimistic that they could introduce this week a For the People Act version 2.0 that incorporated elements from a three-page, scaled-down version of the bill proposed by Manchin two months ago, the sources said.But the legislation was not complete as of Tuesday, and Democrats crafting the voting rights legislation now expect Schumer to try to again advance the For the People Act after the Senate completes a set of marathon rapid fire votes on the $3.5tn budget blueprint.The group, which also includes Senators Alex Padilla and Raphael Warnock, anticipate Schumer will then schedule votes on two measures from Manchin’s proposal: one that aims to counter partisan gerrymandering, and another to combat so-called dark money in politics.The stakes are significant both for Warnock, who is on the ballot next year, as well as for the Democratic caucus more widely, since the loss of his seat in the battleground state of Georgia could shunt the party back into the minority in the 50-50 Senate.And Warnock faces an uphill struggle in seeking re-election as he prepares to run in a state where Republicans have moved decisively to limit mail-in-ballots, curb early voting and shift electoral power towards the Republican-led state house.After Republicans blocked the For the People Act, the most far-reaching election reform legislation to come before Congress in a generation, the Senate majority leader vowed to redouble his efforts.“In the fight for voting rights, this vote was the starting gun, not the finish line,” Schumer said. “We will not let it go. We will not let it die. This voter suppression cannot stand.”But some Democrats have signalled skepticism about forcing an almost certainly futile votes measure now, in a rushed move they say could erode potential Republican support should they try to enact bipartisan voting rights bills in the future.Before the vote on S1, Democrats reached out across the aisle to encourage centrists such as Lisa Murkowski to back the legislation. In a sign of the pessimism about the passage of the two new bills, there has been no such effort this time, the sources said.TopicsUS voting rightsUS SenateUS politicsDemocratsBiden administrationnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Battle for the Soul: can Joe Biden beat Trump’s Republicans in the war of words?

      by

      Joe BidenBattle for the Soul: can Joe Biden beat Trump’s Republicans in the war of words? The president appeals to the ‘civil religion’ of Washington and Kennedy. His opponents use weasel words and seek to limit democracy. The stakes could not be higherMichael CornfieldSun 8 Aug 2021 02.00 EDTLast modified on Sun 8 Aug 2021 02.01 EDTJoe Biden declared his third candidacy for president on 25 April 2019 in a three-and-a-half minute video. The format was new, but for Biden relied on an old-fashioned conception of masculinity.Want to make Jim Jordan sing about the Capitol attack? Ask Jefferson Davis | Sidney BlumenthalRead moreHe talked about the 12 August 2017 neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, about which Donald Trump (in)famously said there were “very fine people on both sides”. The incident provided Biden with a good vs evil story frame, which he entered as a sort of superhero.“At that moment,” Biden intoned, as viewers saw white supremacists marching with torches, “I knew the threat to this nation was unlike any I had seen in my lifetime.”
      I wrote at the time that we’re in the battle for the soul of this nation. Well, that’s even more true today. We are in the battle for the soul of this nation.
      If we give Donald Trump eight years in the White House, he will forever and fundamentally alter the character of this nation. Who we are. And I cannot stand by and watch that happen.
      The core values of this nation, our standing in the world, our very democracy, everything that has made America, America, is at stake.
      Captain America, out of retirement and to the rescue. The Charlottesville setting, adjacent to Thomas Jefferson’s home, Monticello, supplied Biden with a pretext to quote the Declaration of Independence. And the video displayed, in colonial cursive font, passages many Americans could recite from memory.The “battle for the soul of America” narrative frame served Biden well. It helped differentiate Biden’s criticism of Trump, as both personal and constitutional. It converted his age into a campaign asset: a man with historic consciousness would be a good choice for Democrats, a party that usually opted for youth. And it ennobled his call for unity as the solution to Trump’s divisiveness. A Biden victory would win the battle for the soul through an appeal to transcendent patriotic values.Two men, longtime adviser Mike Donilon and the historian Jon Meacham, have worked on Biden’s speeches and the “soul” verbiage. But regardless of the authorial division of labor, it has been Biden’s sign-off, delivery, and persona which give the phrase its public meaning.During the campaign, Biden repeated his theme in speeches on national holidays and historic anniversaries, often in Pennsylvania: at an 18 May 2019 campaign kick-off rally at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia; in a 2 June 2020 speech at Philadelphia City Hall (commenting on the eruption of protest for the George Floyd death and the president’s use of tear gas at Lafayette Square in Washington); and on 6 October 2020 at the Gettysburg battlefield:
      You and I are part of a covenant, a common story of divisions overcome and hope renewed. If we do our part, if we stand together, if we keep faith with the past and with each other, then the divisions of our time will give way to the dreams of a brighter, better future. This is our work. This is our pledge. This is our mission.
      Pennsylvania is both the state where Biden was born and a perennial swing state. As the city where America’s foundational documents were written and signed, Philadelphia stands out in the national imagination as the Jerusalem of what sociologist Robert Bellah termed the “civil religion”. In his 1966 analysis of inaugural addresses from Washington to Kennedy, Bellah noted that presidents up to the incumbent at that time, Lyndon Baines Johnson, enlarged and deepened their rhetoric by invoking God. It was neither the God of any particular denomination nor a perfunctory bow to the religiosity of the American people. Rather, such references to God legitimated political authority by “supplying moral consensus amidst continuous political change”. Invocations of the civil religion reassure and integrate the disparate members of a pluralistic capitalist society.Biden relied more on the word “soul” than “God” but the functionality was the same. “Soul” is also a word with extensive philosophical and religious lineage. It denotes the essence of a being (or nation, or people). It connotes reason, feeling, presence, expressivity, depth, the substance of a style. In running for president, Biden was embarked on a moral crusade. He was battling, as he put it in another frequently used phrase, for “hope over fear, unity over division, and truth over lies”.And “the idea of America” at the seat of the civil religion was not an empty notion. Jill Lepore’s 2018 one-volume history of the US identified “These Truths” as the nation’s core values: political equality, natural rights, popular sovereignty and the meta-truth that they are “self-evident”, Benjamin Franklin’s Enlightenment amendment to Jefferson’s “sacred and undeniable”.Like most campaign slogans, “battle for the soul of America” was an expedient coinage, tinged in this case with a touch of bravado. Yet it has become uncannily apt. Some Americans continue to resist “these truths” and others. And so Biden has justly continued to use the phrase as president.In his inaugural address two weeks after the assault on the Capitol and Congress he quoted Abraham Lincoln’s attestation that “my whole soul is in it” as he signed the Emancipation Proclamation, and reiterated his claim that national unity was essential “to restore the soul and to secure the future of America”. On Memorial Day, at Arlington National Cemetery:
      The soul of America is animated by the perennial battle between our worst instincts – which we’ve seen of late – and our better angels. Between “Me first” and “We the People”. Between greed and generosity, cruelty and kindness, captivity and freedom.
      These Truths review: Jill Lepore’s Lincolnian American historyRead moreOn 13 July, back at the National Constitution Center, Biden zeroed in on the opposition:
      It’s no longer just about who gets to vote or making it easier for eligible voters to vote. It’s about who gets to count the vote – who gets to count whether or not your vote counted at all. It’s about moving from independent election administrators who work for the people to polarized state legislatures and partisan actors who work for political parties.
      To me, this is simple: This is election subversion. It’s the most dangerous threat to voting and the integrity of free and fair elections in our history …
      We have to ask: Are you on the side of truth or lies; fact or fiction; justice or injustice; democracy or autocracy? That’s what it’s coming down to …
      The Republicans on the other side peddle disinformation and bank on partisan polarization. They seek to negate the truth of the 2020 election results and tilt the certification process against a reoccurrence in 2024. Under the banners of a “stolen” and “rigged” election and a vastly exaggerated claim of election “fraud”, they are conducting feckless audits and enacting voter suppression laws in battleground states, including Pennsylvania. They blocked the establishment of an independent commission to investigate the riot on the day they voted to decertify the election. Biden also cited Jim Crow in view of the racial dimensions of the soul battle. The opposition has launched a coded attack on a misappropriated academic term, “Critical Race Theory”.The soul battle is distinct from the programmatic initiatives and negotiations being conducted under another Biden slogan, “Build Back Better”. In that political domain differences can be monetized and split without recourse to dire dichotomies. However, the emotions summoned over voting cannot be easily compartmentalized and hived off from the dollar figures.Wake review: a must-read graphic history of women-led slave revoltsRead moreThe soul battle also bears on the effort to persuade Americans to get vaccinated, both in Biden’s exhortations to get the shot which appeal to patriotic duty and the opposition’s efforts to brand resistance to vaccination as a stand for freedom against the government. Analyzing that argumentation requires an essay unto itself, although I note in passing that Biden’s rhetorical approach has eschewed the designation of a “czar” to coordinate the administration’s public appeals and briefings, which would put distance between the soul battle and the urgent project of pandemic mitigation. As it is, government messaging on Covid runs through the president and state governors. And it is certainly valid to see the battle against the virus as a test of the force of reason in politics.Occasions for more soul speechmaking dot the national calendar. A rally in Washington DC on 28 August will commemorate Dr Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” address, which the president will probably recognize but not attend. The 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks will necessarily reference the pullout of troops from Afghanistan, but Biden could also validate the House inquiry into the Capitol riot as being in the spirit of the 9/11 Commission. Thanksgiving is the quintessential holiday of the American civil religion. More occasions will crop up after congressional voting on the For the People and John Lewis Voting Rights Acts.But before any of those holidays or events surface on the civil religion calendar there is next Thursday, 12 August, the fourth anniversary of the battle that marked Biden’s starting point. He might do well to travel to Charlottesville and speak at the downtown spot vacated by the 10 July removal of the Robert E Lee statue that sparked the Unite the Right rally. It would be a sign that the mostly nonviolent but deeply conflicted war over the idea of America – for that is what a series of battles amounts to – is being won.TopicsJoe BidenBiden administrationUS politicsDemocratsRepublicansUS voting rightsProtestfeaturesReuse this content More