Republicans have been passing—or trying to pass—voter suppression laws with stunning frequency over the past few months. Most of the press attention has been focused on the simple stuff that restricts where and when people can vote, but most of these provisions aren't really that important. The evidence suggests that even when you add them all up they aren't likely to have a large effect on turnout.
What might have a large effect is the Republican effort to undermine the administration of elections. Donald Trump was hellbent on getting election administrators to recount the 2020 vote until they could figure out a way to declare him the winner, but they unanimously refused to do it. Now, Republicans are working to make sure that they can eject future election administrators who don't play ball.
Yesterday's letter from a hundred political scientists is clear about what's happening:
Statutory changes in large key electoral battleground states are dangerously politicizing the process of electoral administration, with Republican-controlled legislatures giving themselves the power to override electoral outcomes on unproven allegations should Democrats win more votes.
Ron Brownstein writes that the Biden team agrees. They feel that they can overcome minor rules changes here and there without too much trouble, but not wholesale corruption in election administration:
The White House does see a risk in the possibility that Republicans—whether local election officials, GOP-controlled state legislatures, or a potential Republican majority in the U.S. House or Senate—will refuse to certify clear Democratic wins in the 2022 and 2024 elections. The senior Democrat told me, “Given how things have developed since January 6, if the situation is not brought under some control and this isn’t countered effectively, then I think there is a significant risk” that “Republican officials, unlike the ones we saw standing up to pressure in 2020, are going to decline to certify Democratic victories.” If Republicans hold the House, Senate, or both after the 2024 election, that could allow Congress to try to install a GOP president even if clear evidence exists that the Democrat won.
Democrats need to focus all their attention on this. Lots of people hear about the water bottle stuff or the voter ID rules and just shrug. It doesn't strike them as all that big a deal. But they don't know about the movement to allow Republican legislatures to remove election administrators and replace them with faithful party operatives. When they do hear about it, even many conservatives are outraged at the idea.
So forget all the other stuff. This is the real threat to democracy, and the public needs to be aware of it clearly.
No worries. Joe Manchin and the filibuster will protect us.
I totally agree with Kevin. (And I'm a republican.)
Well, they keep pushing on that Overton window....
The bizarre claims of fraud now will serve as the basis for their specious claims next time...
Good on the Texas state Democrats refusing to play along with this crap, and simply walking out to stall the vote. Other Democrats in state governments trying this should do the same, if possible.
The Republican politicians doing this stuff are really playing with fire here. What exactly do they think the popular reaction will be in terms of protesting and riots if they openly try to steal the election like this?
What exactly do they think the popular reaction will be in terms of protesting and riots if they openly try to steal the election like this?
They. Don't. Care.
They'll send in troops without a moment's hesitation. I mean, c'mon, man!
4,000 dead in Olathe.
Besides Jasper's point, rioting is never that popular with petit bourgeois.
People who agree that elections shouldn't be stolen, even by their own party, will not countenance rioting to defend free and fair elections.
We’ve seen over the past few years that the police forces in our major cities have been turned into what are functionally armed auxiliaries of the Republican Party. We saw that dissent and protests have been violently crushed by the police and people killed by both the police and other armed groups associated with the Republicans.
The reality is that our democracy will die do that the filibuster can live. I don’t think that’s there is much we can do except hope that there’s a massive reaction and that 2022 leaves Democrats in “control” of the Congress to at least forestall the inevitable. After that, who knows? The Democrats are simply useless so it’s probably just a matter of when democracy dies rather whether it will survive.
LOL. They are all run by Democrats, usually black Democrats.
The figurehead chiefs may sometimes be black but the union officials who actually run police departments are white Republicans. We all saw that and that’s why it’s so important for people in big cities and blue states to take over control of our law enforcement agencies.
That's Q level conspiracy theorying.
I disagree. It’s exactly what was on display in every major city during the protests last year and it’s always been true about the LAPD which treats the citizenry like an occupied country. Police enjoyed total total impunity and we saw that constantly; just as we saw that the real power was in the hands of the unions and the chiefs were basically administering the department on behalf of the union.
Thanks for the racist input.
Yeah, and the Washington Generals could just steal the ball when the Globetrotter center is standing there just spinning it on his finger.
As usual, the 'voter suppression' and claims of corruption are a GOP *reaction* to the actions of Democratic officials at the local level. The mucky muck in charge of Harris county elections tried, illegally, to send out absentee ballots to the heavily Democratic area. Governor Newsome did the same thing. In Wisconsin the college town of Madison had a ''Democracy in the Park' event, again designed to increase turnout in a heavily blue area-- there were no similar events in conservative areas.
This ad hoc BS is why GOP legislatures are ensuring that uniform rules for elections are being implemented at the state level.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/texas-supreme-court-rules-harris-county-cannot-mail-out-ballot-applications-to-all-registered-voters/ar-BB19Nuki
"uniform rules for elections are being implemented at the state level."
Since when is putting partisan election officials in charge of administering state elections "uniform"?
The only reason Republicans are doing this is because the Orange Mussolini lost the election fair and square, and some Republican individuals in charge of elections in certain Republican stronghold States and counties decided to follow the rules and ignore his demands. That's it.
Republicans at large don't want the same thing to happen again and are thus making sure the party as a whole can decide how an election unfolds instead of leaving things in the hands of individual officials that may have a conscience feel compelled to do things fairly.
You may have noticed the massive changes in voting procedures in California, instituted by the Democratic legislature to benefit democrats (including the 'Jungle Primary', voting drop boxes, ballot harvesting, etc).
Of course, none of that actually led to efficient elections.
https://www.motherjones.com/2020-elections/2020/03/california-primary-lines-voting-machines/
The article linked referred to the March 2020 primary. New equipment and an all-new system had glitches. The general election went more smoothly. Going forward, it will get even better. Ballot harvesting and drop boxes are both ways to make it easier to cast ballots, and they work. Meanwhile, GOP-controlled state legislators are passing laws to discourage voting and subvert future election results, if they don't go the "right" way.
"In Wisconsin the college town of Madison had a ''Democracy in the Park' event, again designed to increase turnout in a heavily blue area" .
So ?
GOTV measures are completely legitimate and BEFORE the election even the Wisconsin GOP could not come up with a legal argument against it. If there were one the time to make the case is before the election, not some post-hoc nullifying of the election results by partisans.
https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime-and-courts/lawsuit-over-democracy-in-the-park-ends-with-no-decision/article_aaaf340a-42e7-5979-bbcb-8645f886a80a.html
Argue your case for why that's wrong but first let's talk about the post election GOP reaction to all this which is what Kevin's comments are about:
"Republican-controlled legislatures giving themselves the power to override electoral outcomes on unproven allegations should Democrats win more votes."
What about that is good ?
No, city officials sponsoring get out the vote efforts are not legitimate. If private organizations or political parties wish to do that, fine. But not city officials.
Frankly, I don't trust Kevin Drum's characterization of the legislation, nor that of '100 political science professors' .
The GOP did raise the Democracy in the Park issue before the election. Courts tend to rule things 'moot' after an event passes, esp. elections. However, at least one suit in California has succeeded against Newsome, though he is of course appealing it.
"Republican-controlled legislatures giving themselves the power to override electoral outcomes on unproven allegations should Democrats win more votes."
If you think that's inaccurate you need to spell out how.
Now, next, did Trump lose in November 2020 or not ? You need to answer this. Lots of vague handwaving and one off anecdotes from people claiming to have seen something is just irresponsible, indeed dangerous bs at this point. If you think there's really any serious question about this then I don't trust anything you say at this point.
Plus 1!
I think that Trump lost in a highly irregular election, and I don't just mean voting irregularities. I mean 9/10 of the media, including NPR, propagandizing against him. I mean massive corporate support for the Dems. I mean the covering up of stories negative to Dems. The list goes on and on.
Mitchell Young:
You can call it anything you want, but this can happen in a functioning democracy when the president is looting the Treasury, botching a response to a deadly pandemic, ignoring the rule of law, abrogating treaties and has apparently lost track of reality.
For some reason I can no longer reply to Mitchell Young.
FWIW Mitchell, there's a reason that the majority of the media other than Fox and some of the conservative newspaper chains and networks reported a lot of negative stories about Trump. They also had mostly negative coverage of George Wallace and for that matter Charles Manson. Does that make it propaganda ? In fairness to George and Charles they are both 100 times more honest than Trump. I would hope our media would cover the most dishonest disreputable man to ever get near the White House as tough as possible. That will superficially seem - SEEM - unfair only if you don't look at the particulars of the man. Yes they did not cover John McCain or Mitt Romney or George W. Bush or for that matter Joe Biden, all flawed men, nearly as "tough" . You Trump cultists just can't seem to get it through your head what a uniquely awful man Trump is. Which is kind of astounding because it's right in from of your face, How many thousand of lies and bullshit assertions does he have to make before you recognize him as a flim flam man ?
If you "don't trust Kevin Drum's characterization of the legislation" why don't you just take a long hike off the wing of an airplane.
Your claim about Gavin Newsom is obviously false. California has vote-by-mail, so absentee ballots aren't, in fact, a thing at all.
So, your claim about Harris County is deeply suspect as a result.
Furthermore, it's subject to the actions of the courts. Trump had his day in court. It went nowhere. We are a nation of laws. You are specifically advocatiing that "if the courts don't rule in my favor, ignore them".
That makes you an enemy of rule of law, of democracy, and of the United States.
I’m trying to understand why you believe the perfectly legal actions of various election officials are troubling to you.
My impression is that what's troubling you is not that people who are not legally entitled to vote will have ballots records but rather that it bothers you that people who are entitled to vote will have an easier time doing so. If that’s the case, your position is morally repugnant and yourpolitical philosophy is anti-Americans.
They aren't legal, and if they are they shouldn't be, which is what the GOP is correcting.
Everything you’ve described is completely legal and upheld by the courts. Now the question is why should these things be illegal?
They haven't been upheld by the courts. In fact Harris county was stopped from attempting to mail out absentee ballots to all voters there, and Newsome has a court ruling against him -- though he is appealing. There was a 'no decision' in the Madison case.
If you don't see the problem with involvement of city officials in get out the vote, then you are blind. The political organs should have no roll but facilitating votes on the appointed day (or months, like we seem to have now).
The Republicans ultimately lost on appeal:
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/texas-republicans-ask-appeals-court-to-bar-drive-through-voting
Same result in California: https://www.courthousenews.com/appeals-court-rules-newsoms-use-of-emergency-powers-was-constitutional/
But none of this explains why you are opposed to making it easier for people who are entitled to vote to do so.
The 'drive thru' voting case is different than the absentee ballot case. But yes, Newsom did 'win' his appeal, in a heavily Democrat state I would expect that.
You can't have 'drive thru' voting in one heavily Democratic county and not in other state areas...that obviously is putting the finger on the scale for Democrats...which is exactly the intent.
But yes, there should be some effort involved in voting; it raises the quality of the average voter. In person voting also ensures that heavily political people within a household aren't influencing, or maybe even filling out, ballots for other more apathetic household members. It also avoids 'granny farming'.
Although, interestingly, the confusion created by Newsom's illegal move (the first court was correct) caused enough concern on the part of the GOP that they drug out Pete Wilson to make the radio talk show rounds to tell (older esp) voters they could still vote in person.
There’s nothing stopping Republicans from having drive through voting in their sparsely populated parts of Texas and, realistically, I don’t see what’s unfair about drive through voting even as an abstract concept. It simply makes it easier for people to vote. What’s wrong with that?
I don't see what's wrong with going to your precinct, getting out of the car, being checked in by the poll worker, and voting in the booth. Did that for years in California.
Nothing wrong with that. It’s my preference as well. But in a democracy voting ought to be as easy as possible. Impediments to voting should be strictly scrutinized.
"The mucky muck in charge of Harris county elections tried, illegally, to send out absentee ballots to the heavily Democratic area. Governor Newsome did the same thing. "
my gawd. how appalling. people having access to the ballot. people voting. democracy.
Again, rules should be uniform and well understood by the voting public.
One, heavily blue, county deciding unilaterally to send out un-asked for absentee ballots skews results. Newsom's sending out absentee ballots to those who didn't ask for them caused real confusion particularly among older voters.
Fuck off troll.
This is the only legitimate response to this racist piece of trash. Why folks try to engage dishonest hacks like this clown is beyond me.
Ah, but what CAN democrats do? That is where I'm at a loss because it's not like they can take over state legislatures very easily.
Modify the filibuster to allow voting rights and election integrity legislation, and use their bicameral majority to get a bill to Biden's desk. That's about all they can do, I reckon.
We have voting rights in this country.
and you're doing your best to eliminate them.
Being able to vote 6 months early is not a right. Being able to simply drop of a ballot with zero security as a drop box isn't lack of voting rights.
Being a hack straw-man stuffer is not a right, either, Mitch. In fact, it's a wrong.
Hmm, what are the specifics on election integrity legislation? I'd be interested in what's constitutional and what isn't. Also:
https://www.sinema.senate.gov/contact-kyrsten
https://www.manchin.senate.gov/contact-joe/email-joe
Amen.
So forget all the other stuff. This is the real threat to democracy, and the public needs to be aware of it clearly.
Yep. Election nullification is the huge threat.
Obviously we can't count on it, but does anyone think federal courts could step in in an emergency? I realize the Supreme Court has a Republican majority, but I wonder if high level jurists -- even right wing ones -- fancy the idea of living in an autocracy? Small "d" democratic governance and the rule of law protect all of us. Just ask Jack Ma. Also, it's not as if conservative political success has been lacking under plain vanilla democracy. Handing over the keys to the these MAGA nutters seems, kinda, I dunno, risky. (All the more so to people who do well under the status quo, and have a lot to lose).
The modern history of authoritarianism suggests that the members of the Supreme Court who are Republicans would be extremely likely to support election nullification if it benefits their party while the others would largely be accepting of creeping authoritarianism that comes packaged with the trappings of the legitimate political system and seemingly functions as a part of that system. This has been very consistent.
When the California Supreme Court invalidated Proposition 8, was that 'election nullification'?
No. See, Hollingsworth v. Perry, 558 U.S. 183(2010). Case decided on lack of plaintiffs standing not.
Wiki tells me the original case was decided by the Supreme Court of California. It is very strange that the Supreme Court of the US would think that Proposition sponsors don't have standing.
At any rate, the result is the same...the Left didn't like the results on an election and went to court to have it nullified.
From memory, the case has a complicated history. The California constitution has a number of requirements for propositions but the proposition was found to be constitutional in some ways and early on but unconstitutional in other ways. This was appealed to the 9th Circuit but ultimately the US Supreme Court kicked the appeal on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked standing.
There’s a long history of propositions being challenged in court. Mostly by business and conservatives.
I think it’s more likely* that corporations will step in to save us. It’s not good for many businesses for a country to go from freedom to authoritarianism, since that generally leads to fewer people having enough money to buy all the things and services corporations want to sell to us.
*Note that I didn’t say it was actually likely that corporations will save us, just that they’re more likely than the courts to save us. Most businesses are fine with authoritarianism until it’s too late to reverse or escape it and then they see their profits going down and their capital assets diminished in value or outright seized.
Right, and important! HR1 has to become law.
Seems like it should be pretty easy to "message" this. "The Republican Party is putting itself in charge of all local elections." You can even quote Donald Trump about our "sacred" election process and how it should be non-partisan.
It might be easy to message it but it’s hard to see what the Democrats can actually do about it as long as the nominally Democratic controlled Senate is blocking everything. The key thing to understand is that this isn’t about winning over voters but instead is about whether an authoritarian regime that supplants and disregards the voters wishes can be brought about by the Republicans.
The trappings and appearance of democracy is generally maintained by modern authoritarians but, as a practical matter, voting for out groups is either disregarded or impossible. An example would be the state legislatures in Michigan and Wisconsin which are so heavily gerrymandered that it’s nearly impossible for Democrats to gain control even though they receive the majority of votes.
If this is your apology for not taking the threats against democracy seriously enough, and chastising those who saw this rising tide against it, I'll take it.
Touche'.
The ones in Texas and Florida are going to backfire. But that is the Republicans problem. For totally different reasons. Florida will suppress the older white vote which has been coming in from the midwest and traditionally Republican. Just a dumb "law" that "doesn't get it". It will give under younger voters the advantage and that skews toward Democrats. Whoops.
Texas Republicans are in trouble. It isn't a "mythical" minority wave against Republicans its white flight. Texas is heading to the next Oregon as the "obsession" for growth is draining rural areas and they are getting in Suburbs and those white voters are leaving the party. Why??? The infrastructure doesn't match the growth and thus is a major problem. Like they figured out why "older" growth areas like the I-95 Northeast or Cali has higher taxes.........it taint mythical "benefits" its because growth creates needs for infrastructure which costs money. Thus ancient Texas Dixiecrat white families are hitting the "D" ticket more. That law they passed does nothing to stop that, heck it will probably speed it up. Eventually you will see Democrats winning the state with a sea of Red and a few blue counties that blow away the rest.
There is a reason why Trump and his Secret Service goons were bothering white Oregon moms last summer despite that area having little to do with the "protests". Its a state where a sea of Red meets 1 county of Blue so vast in just white voters alone easily defeat them without one fig body vote.
Voter suppression in the face of change of demographics generally fails. Lets look at the post-war south when the urban/suburban anti-new dealers were growing in power and the rural/pro new dealers were fading. The Democratic party machine began to fall apart and Hill/Martin senate race in 62 represented a shocking arrival of a new era that took decades to sort out.
Wow, a sane post, with actual gleaning to facts and reality. Congratulations.
Officials in Democrat controlled cities and counties were literally making up the rules as they went along.
"Attorney General Ken Paxton Tuesday celebrated the Texas Supreme Court for temporarily preventing Harris County Clerk Chris Hollins from sending over two million unsolicited mail-in ballot applications to all registered voters in Harris County.
The court ordered that Hollins is to not send unsolicited mail-in ballot applications, pending the State's appeal to the 14th Court of Appeals. That's the date the court will hear the State's appeal of a lower court decision that favored Harris County."
Lets don't forget the Dixiecrats and "Mexican Texans" had a long relationship in gerrymandering after the Civil War. Not only is the light skinned Mexican American happy white voters are coming back(28% to 39% in just 8 years) to the Democratic party. It will help spur racism against their "dark skinned" compatriots in ways not possible under Republicans.
You two should get a room. Hard to decide who'll be on top, though.
"https://www.legalreader.com/california-judge-newsom-overstepped-authority-absentee-ballots/"
Judge says Newsom overstepped his authority.
Masters of projection, liberals are.
Well duh, all parties do voter suppression. You should have seen the 1865-1965 Democratic party in NYC or the "south".
Right. It's 1962 again, at least in your mouth breathing brain.
We turned a corner on Jan 6th. Passing a federal law might slow the bus down, but people keep forgetting the message - Democrats aren't legitimate partners in running the government. With every new outrage there is a moments hesitation among the Republican politicians and then it is full steam ahead onto the next outrage. There is no peaceful democratic off ramp for the Republican party. Authoritarian government is coming. How we confront that is what we should be preparing for. It's just wishful thinking to believe that there is some sort of legislative fix that will keep Republicans from becoming authoritarian.
Perhaps it’s time for Democrats to pass the same type of laws in Blue States. Fight fire with fire.
The intent wouldn’t be to actually steal an election but create a “balance” of cases that the Supreme Court would have to consider. It would be too easy for Republicans on the court to “defer” to local election officials if only Red states were trying to throw out the votes of Democrats, but if Democratic officials were to do the same to Republican voters in states they control then SCOTUS would have to step in and declare all such actions unconstitutional.
"Perhaps it’s time for Democrats to pass the same type of laws in Blue States. Fight fire with fire."
They have...look at California's drastic and horribly inefficient changes in elections in the last 8 years. In fact, much of the 'voter suppression' all around the country is just undoing the loosey goosey election rules that have been recently instituted by Dems or by cucked GOP officials like those in Georgia.
"cucked GOP officials".
Dude, this is Kevin Drum's blog. Keep that crap up and he'll kick you out.
Oh, and Go to Hell, you prancing narcissist. Go Directly to Hell; do not pass Purgatory.
And rot there forever.
"So forget all the other stuff. This is the real threat to democracy, and the public needs to be aware of it clearly."
Of course, but I find it hard to imagine that the people who would care haven't figured this out.