Republicans Rounding Up Democrats in Texas

[Diarcesia]

I think many people agree that voting needs to be secure. At the same time they recognize that the solutions that the Republicans propose seem too conveniently close to voter suppression territory.

[Ors Might]

I found it incredibly based when they fled in Oregon and I find it even more based here. If protecting the will and/or rights of your people requires a bit of rules lawyering, so be it.

[Fahran]

Well, this tactic should be hard and have consequences, lest it become abused like the filibuster. If it’s important it’s worth the eventual cost.

I don't think the cost will be altogether serious so long as nobody commits any crimes. If caught, the Dems'll be dragged back to the Capitol to vote on legislation. They're operating within the legislative process by fleeing the state and the Reps are doing the same by trying to drag them back to make quorum. It's a bit ridiculous and amusing, but it's not a complete disaster at the moment. If voters object, we can always vote people out of office next time we get the chance.

[Fahran]

I think many people agree that voting needs to be secure. At the same time they recognize that the solutions that the Republicans propose seem too conveniently close to voter suppression territory.

Eh, I think we should just hand out free IDs to all citizens at this point and have voting holidays. Then nobody has an excuse for not being able to both get to the booths and show an ID. Still, I think the OP is more about pointing out the legislative tactics than the actual bill.

[Kowani]

Well, this tactic should be hard and have consequences, lest it become abused like the filibuster. If it’s important it’s worth the eventual cost.

it can't
the number of states where it works is very small

I think many people agree that voting needs to be secure. At the same time they recognize that the solutions that the Republicans propose seem too conveniently close to voter suppression territory.

Eh, I think we should just hand out free IDs to all citizens at this point and have voting holidays. Then nobody has an excuse for not being able to both get to the booths and show an ID.

there are...other obstacles in the way but this would definitely help

[Lexicor]

Hey, Republicans are just trying to end the filibuster in the Texas State Senate! I thought Democrats would be happy about that!

[Diarcesia]

I think many people agree that voting needs to be secure. At the same time they recognize that the solutions that the Republicans propose seem too conveniently close to voter suppression territory.

Eh, I think we should just hand out free IDs to all citizens at this point and have voting holidays. Then nobody has an excuse for not being able to both get to the booths and show an ID. Still, I think the OP is more about pointing out the legislative tactics than the actual bill.

Something like that I imagine if the Republicans defer the enforcement to something majority-Democratic.

[San Lumen]

I think many people agree that voting needs to be secure. At the same time they recognize that the solutions that the Republicans propose seem too conveniently close to voter suppression territory.

Eh, I think we should just hand out free IDs to all citizens at this point and have voting holidays. Then nobody has an excuse for not being able to both get to the booths and show an ID. Still, I think the OP is more about pointing out the legislative tactics than the actual bill.

The bill is more than just voter ID. It would prevent poll watchers from being kicked out for violating election law, it limits mail voting and makes it harder for people in certain counties to vote.

[Fahran]

Hey, Republicans are just trying to end the filibuster in the Texas State Senate! I thought Democrats would be happy about that!

But the filibuster is unfathomably based at all times.

[Ghost Land]

Deploying law enforcement to round up political opponents is draconian and totalitarian, regardless of which political party does it.

Agreed 100%. Though I also believe these legislators were elected to do a job, and that is to vote on the bills that come forth, not just run away when something comes up that they don't like.

Regarding Myrensis: Snipping other content as a lot of it has already been counter-argued or rebutted in my replies to other posters.

Though the only thing noteworthy about what's happening now is the scope and brazenness. Wailing about voter fraud, failing to produce any evidence, then passing legislation that coincidentally makes it harder for non-Republican leaning groups to vote anyway has been standard GOP practice for decades, because "election integrity" and "Voter ID" have never been anything other than their preferred fig leaf for voter suppression...I mean "common sense".

Okay...so why should people be allowed to vote without an ID? If we're not checking that people are who they say they are, that's a very easy and obvious opportunity for fraud.

[Ors Might]

Well, this tactic should be hard and have consequences, lest it become abused like the filibuster. If it’s important it’s worth the eventual cost.

it can't
the number of states where it works is very small

Eh, I think we should just hand out free IDs to all citizens at this point and have voting holidays. Then nobody has an excuse for not being able to both get to the booths and show an ID.

there are...other obstacles in the way but this would definitely help

Its kinda funny that there are state legislatures where straight up booking it is a valid strategy.

[Fahran]

The bill is more than just voter ID. It would prevent poll watchers from being kicked out for violating election law, it limits mail voting and makes it harder for people in certain counties to vote.

Oh, I find most laws any elected official wants to pass in Texas exceedingly stupid with a few decent exceptions.

[San Lumen]

Deploying law enforcement to round up political opponents is draconian and totalitarian, regardless of which political party does it.

Agreed 100%. Though I also believe these legislators were elected to do a job, and that is to vote on the bills that come forth, not just run away when something comes up that they don't like.
Snipping other content as a lot of it has already been counter-argued or rebutted in my replies to other posters.

Though the only thing noteworthy about what's happening now is the scope and brazenness. Wailing about voter fraud, failing to produce any evidence, then passing legislation that coincidentally makes it harder for non-Republican leaning groups to vote anyway has been standard GOP practice for decades, because "election integrity" and "Voter ID" have never been anything other than their preferred fig leaf for voter suppression...I mean "common sense".

Okay...so why should people be allowed to vote without an ID? If we're not checking that people are who they say they are, that's a very easy and obvious opportunity for fraud.

And then poll workers will not be able to be kicked out for violating election law. Living in a city will means its harder to vote but that's ok to you?

Voter ID is a solution to a problem that does not exist. In person voter fraud does not occur.

[Fahran]

there are...other obstacles in the way but this would definitely help

I can think of some relating to age, illness, and infirm state, but, really, it's not the elderly who tend to have the toughest time voting. It's people in my age bracket on average, and most of them won't have good excuses once the process is simplified and made more easily accessible. To be honest, I actually wish people uneducated about platforms and policies would vote less. Or at least attend a mandatory class on civics and current politics to get up-to-date.

EDIT: Language barriers matter quite a bit in some areas too. But I blame Texan candidates who won't run quality Spanish ads for that.

[Kowani]

Hey, Republicans are just trying to end the filibuster in the Texas State Senate! I thought Democrats would be happy about that!

But the filibuster is unfathomably based at all times.

haha no
the filibuster was a literal mistake that does none of what it's propagandized to do and makes basic governance near-impossible
(it's also just bad democratic philosophy)

[Kowani]

there are...other obstacles in the way but this would definitely help

I can think of some relating to age, illness, and infirm state, but, really, it's not the elderly who tend to have the toughest time voting. It's people in my age bracket on average, and most of them won't have good excuses once the process is simplified and made more easily accessible. To be honest, I actually wish people uneducated about platforms and policies would vote less. Or at least attend a mandatory class on civics and current politics to get up-to-date.

...so that's 2 effort posts i'm making in this thread
okay then

[Fahran]

haha no
the filibuster was a literal mistake that does none of what it's propagandized to do and makes basic governance near-impossible
(it's also just bad democratic philosophy)

Is it not accomplishing what it set out to do here, namely block legislation from passing on behalf of voters in the minority?

[Washington Resistance Army]

I don’t trust any political party but federalism and is shit and already not an equal playing zone. I’m okay with only approving of this tactic for say voting and gun rights and not for blocking environmental reforms.

I feel like once you begin picking and choosing when this tactic is allowed you're putting your own ideological priorities over fairness and the legislative process. It should either be allowed in all cases, be disallowed in all cases, or be allowed/disallowed based on substantive and impartial concerns.

Pretty much this. Most of the objections to this seem awfully vapid, especially when people like Lumen supported the Dems rounding up the Republicans to force quorum in other states.

[Ghost Land]

Agreed 100%. Though I also believe these legislators were elected to do a job, and that is to vote on the bills that come forth, not just run away when something comes up that they don't like.
Snipping other content as a lot of it has already been counter-argued or rebutted in my replies to other posters.

Okay...so why should people be allowed to vote without an ID? If we're not checking that people are who they say they are, that's a very easy and obvious opportunity for fraud.

And then poll workers will not be able to be kicked out for violating election law. Living in a city will means its harder to vote but that's ok to you?

Voter ID is a solution to a problem that does not exist. In person voter fraud does not occur.

If poll workers blatantly violate established election laws, then damn right they should be sacked.

In-person voter fraud does not occur? You mean people never try to vote twice or other similar stunts?

A woman in Iowa was arrested this week on suspicion of voting twice in the general election, court and police records show.

Terri Lynn Rote, a 55-year-old Des Moines resident, was booked Thursday on a first-degree charge of election misconduct, according to Polk County Jail records. The charge is considered a Class D felony under Iowa state law.

Rote was released Friday after posting $5,000 bond. A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Nov. 7 [2016].

The Des Moines Register reported that Rote is a registered Republican who cast two ballots in the general election: an early-voting ballot at the Polk County Election Office and another at a county satellite voting location, according to police records.

[Fahran]

...so that's 2 effort posts i'm making in this thread
okay then

I know I've hit at least a few of the big ones. In frankness, I feel like the two measures I proposed do a lot to address the more concrete concerns expressed in the mainstream discourse.

[San Lumen]

And then poll workers will not be able to be kicked out for violating election law. Living in a city will means its harder to vote but that's ok to you?

Voter ID is a solution to a problem that does not exist. In person voter fraud does not occur.

If poll workers blatantly violate established election laws, then damn right they should be sacked.

In-person voter fraud does not occur? You mean people never try to vote twice or other similar stunts?

A woman in Iowa was arrested this week on suspicion of voting twice in the general election, court and police records show.

Terri Lynn Rote, a 55-year-old Des Moines resident, was booked Thursday on a first-degree charge of election misconduct, according to Polk County Jail records. The charge is considered a Class D felony under Iowa state law.

Rote was released Friday after posting $5,000 bond. A preliminary hearing is scheduled for Nov. 7 [2016].

The Des Moines Register reported that Rote is a registered Republican who cast two ballots in the general election: an early-voting ballot at the Polk County Election Office and another at a county satellite voting location, according to police records.

I meant to say poll watchers not poll workers.

That was one instance out of millions of votes. In person fraud does not occur on a scale even enough to affect the outcome of even a city council election.

[Myrensis]

Deploying law enforcement to round up political opponents is draconian and totalitarian, regardless of which political party does it.

Agreed 100%. Though I also believe these legislators were elected to do a job, and that is to vote on the bills that come forth, not just run away when something comes up that they don't like.

Regarding Myrensis: Snipping other content as a lot of it has already been counter-argued or rebutted in my replies to other posters.

Though the only thing noteworthy about what's happening now is the scope and brazenness. Wailing about voter fraud, failing to produce any evidence, then passing legislation that coincidentally makes it harder for non-Republican leaning groups to vote anyway has been standard GOP practice for decades, because "election integrity" and "Voter ID" have never been anything other than their preferred fig leaf for voter suppression...I mean "common sense".

Okay...so why should people be allowed to vote without an ID? If we're not checking that people are who they say they are, that's a very easy and obvious opportunity for fraud.

So Republicans keep saying, yet somehow they can never actually find any evidence of all this 'very easy and obvious' fraud going on. How curious.

Probably because in person voter fraud is the dumbest, riskiest, and least efficient way imaginable to try to swing an election. Since it requires you to either coordinate thousands or potentially hundreds of thousands of people (and ensure not a single solitary one of them gets caught, gets cold feet, or decides they can get a bigger paycheck from...any news outlet), or have a smaller group of people putting on a succession of cartoon disguises to vote hundreds or thousands of times.

Though given the current state of the GOP, it would not surprise me to learn that they really do believe there are millions of illegal immigrants out there changing out fake moustaches and trench coats and sunglasses to vote over and over again on their chinese bamboo ballots.

[Uiiop]

I feel like once you begin picking and choosing when this tactic is allowed you're putting your own ideological priorities over fairness and the legislative process. It should either be allowed in all cases, be disallowed in all cases, or be allowed/disallowed based on substantive and impartial concerns.

Pretty much this. Most of the objections to this seem awfully vapid, especially when people like Lumen supported the Dems rounding up the Republicans to force quorum in other states.

What about the rest then?

[New haven america]

It depends. Are they fighting for or against civil rights.

In Oregon's case they were fighting against civil rights and deserved to be tracked down, while Texas is currently trying to disenfranchise a decent chunk of its population, so they can stay away for as long as they please.

My question is: When will the GOP stop claiming that they're the party for personal freedoms and small government?

[Kowani]

haha no
the filibuster was a literal mistake that does none of what it's propagandized to do and makes basic governance near-impossible
(it's also just bad democratic philosophy)

Is it not accomplishing what it set out to do here, namely block legislation from passing on behalf of voters in the minority?

no???
the filibuster didn't set out to do anything
when i say "literal mistake" i mean "it was created by accident"