Apple's Tim Cook Says Voting 'Ought To Be Easier Than Ever' (axios.com) 351
Apple CEO Tim Cook, an Alabama native with a lifelong interest in civil rights, joins condemnations of Georgia's new voting law. From a report: "The right to vote is fundamental in a democracy. American history is the story of expanding the right to vote to all citizens, and Black people, in particular, have had to march, struggle and even give their lives for more than a century to defend that right."
"Apple believes that, thanks in part to the power of technology, it ought to be easier than ever for every eligible citizen to exercise their right to vote," Cook continues. "We support efforts to ensure that our democracy's future is more hopeful and inclusive than its past." The floodgates are open, as Axios' Courtenay Brown wrote on Wednesday. Almost a week after a bill that curbs voting access in Georgia became law -- and nearly one month after it passed the state's House -- a slew of corporations have come out against voter suppression.
"Apple believes that, thanks in part to the power of technology, it ought to be easier than ever for every eligible citizen to exercise their right to vote," Cook continues. "We support efforts to ensure that our democracy's future is more hopeful and inclusive than its past." The floodgates are open, as Axios' Courtenay Brown wrote on Wednesday. Almost a week after a bill that curbs voting access in Georgia became law -- and nearly one month after it passed the state's House -- a slew of corporations have come out against voter suppression.
Bad assumption. (Score:2)
He's assuming they want the government to represent the whole population.
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:5, Insightful)
The voters should represent the legal citizens of the country who are eligible to vote, not everyone. That is the difference.
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:3)
Umm NO! The government should represent everyone within the country. In turn, the citizens should care for everyone in the country.
This is the US and that has been a very long tradition since its founding. You don't like it, you are in the wrong country.
Just because they are illegal, fugitive, convict, ex-con, or pedo doesn't mean they are below human. They still retain their rights enshrined in the Bill and Constitution.
It wasn't that long ago that people said blacks, women, Chinese, Japanese, Irish, etc
Re: (Score:3)
Just because they are illegal, fugitive, convict, ex-con, or pedo doesn't mean they are below human. They still retain their rights enshrined in the Bill and Constitution.
False. When imprisoned (and for some of these rights, even after they are released) they lose the right to vote, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to freedom of association, and also the only people it's still legal to enslave in this country (as in, explicitly legal) are prisoners. So in fact we do treat them as below human, by denying them rights "enshrined in the Bill and Constitution".
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I came up with an interesting idea.
Instead of Congressional representation being based on all people, it also counts illegals, it should only use people who voted in the last presidential election.
That way states will want to make registration and even voting more accessible.
If representation counted legal people, citizens or not, then many states, TX and CA included, would have less people in the House.
Re: (Score:2)
I like your idea.
Re: (Score:2)
"The person that controls how the votes are counted controls the outcome of the election"
see also: gerrymandering
We seriously need some FEDERAL voting laws. Leaving it up to the legislature of individual states clearly isn't working out.
Right, becuse there is no Federal corruption (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In what way? Have you read the law?
FYI, the law increases the time allowed to vote, which is already quite long by number of days, and hours per day. It also codifies ballot drop boxes, that were illegal previously.
You should also read the Washington Post fact check that gave our fine president four Pinocchios on everything he has said about this law.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They are making absentee ballots more difficult. They shrunk the time frame for applying for an absentee ballot and reduced the lead time to get them mailed out. They made it ILLEGAL to give someone food or water while they are in line to vote. They SHARPLY REDUCED the number and location of absentee ballot boxes.
That after a Republican Secretary of State and a Republican governor stated that there were no significant issues with the previous election.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The law states clearly:
nor shall any person give, offer to give, or participate in the giving of any money or gifts, including, but not limited to, food and drink, to an elector,
ANY PERSON. Not any person working for a campaign.
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:2)
Like voter ID, most of the world already has similar rules.
In my country it is illegal to systematically approach people who are going to vote. Much more sweeping than what Georgia did here.
It is curious to me that relatively left-wing rules in the rest of the world are considered right-wing when introduced to the US.
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:4, Informative)
Like voter ID, most of the world already has similar rules.
In my country it is illegal to systematically approach people who are going to vote.
[Citation Required] I've lived and voted in several countries with strict voter ID laws. One of them not only does not make it illegal to to talk in line or hand out or sell thing, but rather the democracy sausage is a national institution and I would be rather pissed if I had to vote and *not* get a hotdog in the process.
But you fundamentally missed the point. Most countries with voter ID laws the process for voting gets counted in minutes and seconds, not hours. I can 100% confidently say that in every country I've lived, every house in those countries, I've never spent more than 30min voting, and 20min that includes *walking* to the polling station.
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:5, Interesting)
Difficult how? Probably 200,000 Georgians lack sufficient identification to register and vote, and that is an entirely solvable problem. Even in less than two years.
Identification is a problem to solve. If it is cost, or ability, or whatever, it's a de facto poll tax. Eliminate it. None should be allowed to be graduated from high school, nor reach the age of 18, without having sufficient identification to register to vote. And to have been registered.
If it's cost, everyone should be entitled to the documents, usually birth certificate, free of charge. At least once. And for the purposes of registering to vote, free on each request.
Is it access? States and counties can figure out how to send mobile registration offices - ready to resolve every issue, be it papers or whatever.
Inexcusable. Make it so.
And, to be clear, it is the Democratic Party that has passed Motor Voter initiatives in many states, so drivers have few excuses, For those that do not drive, often in the inner city, well, the reality is that the system fails them SO HARD that they graduate from high school (more like are expelled from it as the end of their terms) without the understanding or skills to fill out the forms. In many cities, the public school system graduates students that are functionally illiterate, inexcusable.
Registration cannot be allowed to be the hurdle.
From there, they will not perish in line at the polls, the Georgia law specifically exempts self-service water from prohibitions on gifts or items of value. Go read up, and stop repeating a plain lie.
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:4, Informative)
Is it access? States and counties can figure out how to send mobile registration offices - ready to resolve every issue, be it papers or whatever.
But it doesn't happen in Ga..
Allowed but not required self service water. So If I see an elderly lady (for example) in line who clearly needs water to combat dehydration, I am forbidden to hand her my water bottle.
It is worth noting that the original bill was far worse. While that did not pass ion that form, it was a bit of a dead giveaway for intent.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
snip...
From there, they will not perish in line at the polls, the Georgia law specifically exempts self-service water from prohibitions on gifts or items of value. Go read up, and stop repeating a plain lie.
This is borderline disingenuous; perhaps you believed Josh Holmes on Fox, but he was incredibly misleading at best. The fact remains, if anyone hands a bottle of water to someone standing in line to vote in Georgia, that person is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by up 1 year in jail, and a $1000 fine. See: https://www.politifact.com/fac... [politifact.com]
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:3)
Why is that relevant? Why should it even be given to chance to vote? Why isn't this considered a discouragement of your or those you want to encourage to exercise their right to vote?
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:2, Insightful)
If all that stands between you and your vote is a bottle of water, bring one. Anyone so helpless they can't manage that are in serious trouble.
Re: (Score:3)
Unless perhaps you weren't expecting the long line. You expected a reasonable wait, but had to spend hours in line. Or you did bring water, just not *enough* water for the wait, because the sun came out and there's no shade in the part of the line where you're stuck.
"It's your own damned fault if you didn't plan..." No. That's completely wrong. Voting shouldn't be an endurance test. If it's so difficult to vote that you need to plan like a wilderness expedition, something is seriously wrong. And when la
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:2)
It's false. Unless you are working for a voting/political organization or are otherwise attempting to solicit votes, it is perfectly legal to pass put water/food. But any organization that falls under various election laws is prohibited from doing so, and even then only within 150 ft of a polling place.
Re: (Score:3)
Probably 200,000 Georgians lack sufficient identification to register and vote, and that is an entirely solvable problem
That is not correct. There are 200,000 Georgians that are eligible to vote who do not have a Driver's License or Georgia ID.
Many people who do not have a driver's license are active voters.
In Georgia, the state provides voter ID cards for free.
For some reason people seem to think a driver's license or photo ID is required register or to to vote in person or absentee. This is not true.
Here's the mail-in form to register. You use the same info to vote once registered.
https://sos.ga.gov/admin/files... [ga.gov]
You can a
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:2, Troll)
Oh. So the excuses of the Left are, once again, invalid, false, and moot.
Re: (Score:2)
And Georgia will let you vote even if you are homeless.
https://www.wabe.org/how-to-re... [wabe.org]
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:3, Insightful)
It is your responsibility as a citizen to register to vote and to show up and do so. If the requirements to do so are onerous, that's one thing, but getting an identification document is not onerous. I have three in my wallet (driver's license, firearms license, passport card) and two more in my safe.
Having id is too hard. Showing up in person is too hard. Next they'll be bleeting and braying that having to decide who too vote for is too hard and that it should be legal to have Democrat party workers fill o
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:2)
Citations, please.
Re: Bad assumption. (Score:2)
Try asking those who proclaim that this law is the beginning of Jim Crow 2.0. They claim that. Read most any media outlet. Or ask some Atlanta based corporate CEO.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And the Georgia voting laws seem tailor made to make voting difficult for a significant number of natural born citizens.
Where? Show us the relevant sections and text. Begging your pardon, but I'm not going to take your word for it. SHOW US where this law will make it more difficult to vote.
Re: (Score:2)
Really, one box per county and never more than 1 per 100,000 electors? Not open after hours? In our shiny new era where a letter that used to take 3 days max may now randomly take 2 weeks? Constant surveillance? Has to be at an advance voting location or the registrar's office?
1172 (c)(1) A board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk shall establish at least one drop box 1173 as a means for absentee by mail electors to deliver their ballots to the board of registrars 1174 or absentee ballot clerk. A board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk may establish 1175 additional drop boxes, subject to the limitations of this Code section, but may only 1176 establish additional drop boxes totaling the lesser of either one drop box for every 1177 100,000 active registered voters in the county or the number of advance voting locations 1178 in the county. Any additional drop boxes shall be evenly geographically distributed by 1179 population in the county. Drop boxes established pursuant to this Code section shall be 1180 established at the office of the board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk or inside 1181 locations at which advance voting, as set forth in subsection (d) of Code 1182 Section 21-2-385, is conducted in the applicable primary, election, or runoff and may be 1183 open during the hours of advance voting at that location. Such drop boxes shall be closed 1184 when advance voting is not being conducted at that location. All drop boxes shall be 1185 closed when the advance voting period ends, as set forth in subsection (d) of Code 1186 Section 21-2-385. The drop box location shall have adequate lighting and be under 1187 constant surveillance by an election official or his or her designee, law enforcement 1188 official, or licensed security guard. During an emergency declared by the Governor 1189 pursuant to Code Section 38-3-51, drop boxes may be located outside the office of the 1190 board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk or outside of locations at which advance voting 1191 is taking place, subject to the other limitations of this Code section.
The last election proved that absentee ballots with many convenient 24 hour drop boxes can work well, but the GOP lost so that has to go!
Now add this:
1199 (3) The board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk shall arrange for the collecting and 1200 return of ballots deposited at each drop box at the conclusion of each day where advance 1201 voting takes place. Collection of ballots from a drop box shall be made by a team of at 1202 least two people. Any person collectingballotsfrom a drop box shallhavesworn an oath 1203 in the same form as the oath for pollofficers set forth in Code Section 21-2-95. The 1204 collection team shallcompleteand sign a ballot transfer form upon removingthe ballots 1205 from the drop box which shall include the date, time, location, number of ballots, 1206 confirmation that the drop box was locked after the removal of the ballots, and the 1207 identity of each person collecting the ballots. The collection team shallthen immediately 1208 transfer the ballots to the board of registrars or absentee ballotclerk, who shall process 1209 and store the ballots in the same manner as absentee ballots returned by mail are 1210 processed and stored. The board of registrars,absenteeballot clerk, or a designee of the 1211 board of registrars or absenteeballotclerk shallsign the ballottransfer formupon receipt 1212 of the ballots from the collection team. Such form shall be considered a public record 1213 pursuant to Code Section 50-18-70. 1214 (4) At the beginning of voting at each advancelocation where a drop box is present, the 1215 manager of the advance voting location shall open the drop box and confirm on the 1216 reconciliation form for that advance voting location that the drop box is empty. If the 1217 drop box is not empty, the manager shall secure the contents of the drop box and 1218 immediately inform the election superintendent, board of registrars, or absentee ballot 1219 clerk, who shall informthe Secretary of State."
So the ballots are to be collected nightly, and the ballot box must be certified empty each morning. So then, other than making it expensive to maintain ballot boxes, why do they need to be guarded overnight? Alternately, if they must be guarded 24/7, why is it a problem if someone on an odd work schedule wants to drop a ballot off at midnight or 4 AM?
1872 "(a) No person shall solicit votes in any manner or by any means or method, nor shall any 1873 person distribute or display any campaign material,nor shall any person give, offer to give, 1874 or participate in the giving of any money or gifts, including, but not limited to, food and 1875 drink, to an elector, nor shall any person solicit signatures for any petition, nor shall any 1876 person, other than election officials discharging their duties, establish or set up any tables
Most of this makes sense and has been the law for a long time, but why is it a misdemeanor if I am in line to vote and choose to give a bottle of water to someone else in line that obviously needs it more than I do? If someone goes hypoglycemic, wouldn't it be best if I give them a hard candy?
And yet nothing about awkward calls to the Secretary of State demanding that he "find" 11,000 votes for the losing candidate?
That's not how percentages work, though. Carter (Score:3)
You don't win an election by getting a certain number of votes.
You win by getting the highest PERCENTAGE. So "more voters" benefits nobody.
The Commission on Federal Election Reform, led Democrat Jimmy Carter, and it's predecessor (also led by a Democrat) studied how to make US elections more fair and reduce fraud. They came up with several recommendations, including:
Elections shouldn't be run by the elected secretary of state. That's a conflict of interest.
Voters should show ID
Stating that "Absentee ballots
Re: (Score:2)
Stating that "Absentee ballots remain the largest source of voter fraud", the commission led by Jimmy Carter said states should try to control fraud in absentee ballots by
Was there evidence presented for that?
Re: (Score:3)
Yep. If you want to read it, it's 113 pages of evidence and analysis.
https://www.legislationline.or... [legislationline.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Nice.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. If you want to read it, it's 113 pages of evidence and analysis.
https://www.legislationline.or... [legislationline.org]
Funny, I don't see anywhere in that document where the Commission recommends "Elections shouldn't be run by the elected secretary of state". I am also unable to find the statement "Absentee ballots remain the largest source of voter fraud".
I do see the statement "Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud". That one word changes the meaning of the statement significantly, and I only see anecdotal evidence supporting it.
The most comprehensive database of voter fraud that I'm awar
Re: (Score:3)
> Funny, I don't see anywhere in that document where the Commission recommends "Elections shouldn't be run by the elected secretary of state".
Pages numbered 50-51. (Or click on the magnifying glass icon to search): ...
--
transferring the authority for conducting elections from the secretary of state to a chief election officer, who would serve as a nonpartisan official.
States could select a nonpartisan chief elections officer by having the individual subject to approval by a super-majority
--
> I also t
Re: (Score:2)
Making it illegal for others, such as campaign volunteers, to hand out and collect absentee ballots
Agreed. In Georgia you get your ballot in the mail direct from the registrar.
Checking signatures carefully
Georgia already did that.
Making it illegal to pay people for each voter they register or each absentee ballot they collect
Agreed. In Georgia, absentee ballots are either mailed in or placed in a drop box by the voter or a family member.
In other words, all of those criteria were met under existing law. That leaves:
Elections shouldn't be run by the elected secretary of state. That's a conflict of interest.
The new law pushed through by the Republican legislature increases rather than eliminates the secretary of state's control over the election process.
So the new law adds hoops to jump through, limits absentee ballot bo
Re: (Score:2)
FYI, September 2005 was not in fact 40 years ago.
Nor was it "the seventies".
> we can do it in a way that ensures that fraud cannot be committed on any type of scale that would influence an election and those who commit fraud will be caught and prosecuted.
Yep, and there is a 113-page plan in exactly how to do that.
Put together by a leading Democrat. That's also the 113 pages that informs Democrats of precisely all of things they've decided to oppose. Whatever would reduce voting fraud, they oppose. You c
Re: (Score:3)
The gaslighting is on your part. The suits were dismissed because when it came time to swear under oath that the allegations were true, the complaints magically became content free.
Even judges appointed by Trump agreed. You cannot have a trial if the prosecution doesn't allege anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Good point. Follow the money.
I'll spare y'all the solution approaches. But much as I admire the American Constitution, I'm willing to consider the idea of a page-one rewrite...
No shit, Sherlock (Score:3)
Apple should absolutely have the right to vote. We're the story of expanding civil rights for all citizens. Corporations have long been oppressed and denied their right to the franchise.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does vote - they use employees and shareholders/investors as proxies.
I'll bet Tim Cook (Score:3)
Would be more than happy to have iPhones be that voting tech with an app. Or develop balloting. I can tell you the last thing we need is one of the tech companies to be involved in voting in any way.
Re: (Score:2)
Easy to say after the vote. (Score:2, Insightful)
Do notice that despite a large amount of time to comment on this beforehand that all these CEOs have only chosen to speak out after when it became apparent that opposing this law was popular. They released mealy-mouthed statements beforehand but now that people are upset about it, they suddenly view themselves as righteous representatives of the people's will.
As far as I'm concerned, these fair-weather warriors can all go to hell.
Re:Easy to say after the vote. (Score:5, Insightful)
The law was rushed through. There was little time to actually see the provisions in the law before hand. And what was announced in the media beforehand was a greatly abbreviated version of what's in there. I suspect many who approve of and defend the law don't even know everything that is in there. For instance, that the secretary of state (who disagreed with Trump) had much of his power removed while the legislators (who kissed Trump's ass) gave themselves new election powers. If you think this is just about voter IDs, then you're not paying much attention.
Easiness (Score:2)
As my high school history teacher liked to say, during the American civil war, troops in Virginia *walked* back to Ohio to vote, then walked back to Virginia to continue fighting.
I would say, nowadays, voting is relatively easy, even if you have to do it in person.
Re:Easiness (Score:5, Informative)
If one of the voters targeted by this bill left her housekeeping job to stand in line for five hours to vote, when she got back she'd be told to not come back. And if she's lucky she *might* get her last paycheck, because she doesn't have the means to fight the employer at the local or state level to get her back pay.
Of course, that assumes that she has a state ID. The state office issuing state IDs (separate from a drivers license) is open six days a week between 9 and 5. She works seven days a week, about ten hours a day including travel (public transportation), split between three different employers. And no, none of her employers give paid leave because she doesn't work enough hours with that employer. Taking a half-day off isn't an option; it's the difference being being able to pay the bills for the month and not.
Even if she could get paid leave to get the ID, she doesn't have the documents she needs. She was never given an original birth certificate from her parents. Or it was lost in a move years ago. Damaged when a water pipe burst in the apartment and it was in a box on the floor. Regardless, getting a new certificate costs money she doesn't have. And she has to visit a different office which costs time plus transportation expenses, neither of which she can afford.
Even if she could get a birth certificate, she still doesn't have the documents she needs. Her landlord pays the utility bills so she can't show an electric or water bill in her name. Her cell phone is prepaid, so no mailed bill. She doesn't have a bank account -- not that it would have much money in it anyway -- so no bank statements in the mail. And her landlord is illegally renting the place, so there's no rental agreement or rent receipts for her to establish residency with.
Voting is relatively easy today if you're privileged. For the disenfranchised, it can easily be a choice between voting or having a job; voting or putting food on the table; voting or having a roof over your head. For them, voting is not easy.
Racist laws!! (Score:4, Informative)
Damn racist state Georgia, what with them passing these new racist election laws. Have you seen this law yet? You can't even hand out a bottle of water! Read the law and then I'll look at what this means further below.
Section 17-140 Furnishing money or entertainment to induce attendance at polls
Furnishing money or entertainment to induce attendance at polls. Any person who directly or indirectly by himself or through any other person in connection with or in respect of any election during the hours of voting on a day of a general, special or primary election gives or provides, or causes to be given or provided, or shall pay, wholly or in part, for any meat, drink, tobacco, refreshment or provision to or for any person, other than persons who are official representatives of the board of elections or political parties and committees and persons who are engaged as watchers, party representatives or workers assisting the candidate, except any such meat, drink, tobacco, refreshment or provision having a retail value of less than one dollar, which is given or provided to any person in a polling place without any identification of the person or entity supplying such provisions, is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
Oh wait, silly me. That's the New York state election law that DOES THE SAME THING!
I've read the new law, and unless you're a racist who thinks black people are somehow incapable of having an approved ID or unable register to vote 78 days before an election, there's nothing it does that is anything close to "Jim Eagle" (WTH does that even mean?).
Some of the things it is getting called out on are just wrong.
It EXTENDS early voting, rather than cuts it, providing 3 weeks of early-in-person voting and requiring 2 (vs previous 1) Saturday of early in-person voting. It EXTENDS permissible voting hours.
It PROVIDES ballot drop boxes. Georgia did not permit drop boxes at all, except that they were permitted under the COVID emergency. Now they're legal, provided they meet certain requirements, mostly being safely ensconced in a government building and observable. Generally, there will be one ballot drop box at each early-voting site. Drop boxes must be processed by two people.
It does away with signature matching for disallowing absentee votes (it replaces with matching the ID provided). THis should be a help for people who's signatures suffer due to medical issues (parkinsons, arthritis...).
It requires local election officials to monitor line lengths and duration of standing in line and requires changes to reduce both. Precincts with more than 2000 voters must hire additional staff or be split up. Also, at least one voting machine per 250 voters is required in each precinct. Metrics are going to be used used and the SecOfState is required to act (vs at discretion in old law).
It requires elections officials to send a registration card to anyone who requested an absentee ballot when not already registered. It requires provisional ballots in a number of circumstances when there were previously votes simply disallowed.
It sets up a hotline for people to report voter intimidation and other illegal election activities (like electioneering).
It allows elections officials to begin vetting ballots when they are received) but not counting them.
It requires precincts to post the number of ballots cast in person early and on election day) and absentee by 10PM on election day, providing the upper limit before counting votes begins. It also requires precincts to count non-stop and observable to monitors, with results required by 5PM the day after election day.
It DOES cut the absentee request from 180 days (6 months!) to 11 weeks (78 days). It DOES require an approved ID to request an absentee ballot. It DOES prohibit 3rd parties from printing and distributing absentee ballots and/or requests. It DOES require that absentee ballots be printed on security paper. It DOES prohibit local election boards from receiving "grants" from 3rd parties (except that such donations can now be made to the state and disbursed). It DOES shorten the runoff campaign period (when one is needed) from 9 weeks to 4 weeks.
Even the Washington Post gave Biden 4 pinnochios for his references to this law.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Oh wait, silly me. That's the New York state election law that DOES THE SAME THING!
This needs to be downvoted. It's not the same thing. The NY law has a clear cutout for anything with a retail value of less than one dollar as long as the supplier isn't openly identified. A group of neighbors handing out paper cups of water from tap-filled water pitchers in NY to voters in line would appear to be legal. In GA that same act would land them in jail.
They could stop this immediately (Score:2, Insightful)
McConnell will be happy to get on the VRA train when his party is facing zero cash.
Wake me when Tim Cook says he's pulling back on donations. Until then this is just posturing.
Do Democrats want to end voter registration? (Score:2)
It's a serious question. They appear to oppose any voter integrity restrictions. Even minor ones. Like, Mexico requires photo ID. I think we deserve an answer on what precisely they do and do not support, and why.
Re: (Score:2)
Provisional ballots.
It could have been worse (Score:2)
Despite the new voting restrictions in Georgia, hey didn't get rid of the no excuse mail voting, which probably was the main factor in achieving unprecedented voter turnout in 2020.
making it easy, does not mean no photo ID (Score:2)
So, I see no reason to NOT require a photoID to vote. BUT, it needs to be easy to obtain a photo ID (such as requiring USPS to offer up state IDs at state expense), as well as being easy to submit the ballot.
Here's an idea... (Score:2)
Our democracy also needs to be secure (Score:2)
Would this be the same Tim Cook who... (Score:2)
Helped the Communist party of mainland China suppress [qz.com] the political actions of pro-democracy activists [vox.com] in Hong Kong? The same Tim Cook who helped the mainland Chinese government "silence pro-democracy news sources [cnbc.com]?
Is this the same Apple that told US Senators it slavishly obeys the Chinese Communist party and refuses to be critical of it because "we follow the law where ever we do business" [senate.gov]? Apparently they only oppose the laws where they do business in the United States of America
If you are for freedom and
Re:Crocodile tears. (Score:5, Insightful)
Many people did object, of course. This sort of criticism that people should not complain after the fact is rather silly. "You should have said 'stop' he was killed!"
Re:Crocodile tears. (Score:5, Informative)
Why didn't these wealthy businesses and businessmen condemn the law before it was passed and signed into law?
Because it was rushed through the committee and onto the floor for a vote. Then the governor signed it the same day.
There were few prior objections because the process was designed to thwart prior objections.
Re: (Score:2)
Why didn't these wealthy businesses and businessmen condemn the law before it was passed and signed into law?
Opposition takes time to organize.
And "crocodile tears" usually refer to fake tears where the person doesn't actually care or even likes the outcome they profess to be crying about. Do you have some reason to suspect Tim Cook secretly supports the GOP voting restrictions?
Re: (Score:2)
Even now, what's missing is Tim Cook saying something like: "we are not going to donate to any Republican campaign in Georgia or donate to any PAC that supports Republicans in Georgia while this law remains on the books."
Does Tim Cook or Apple donate to any Republican campaigns in Georgia or any PAC that supports Republicans in Georgia? What threat is it if he says "I'm not going to do what I don't currently do now, and wouldn't do in the future?" Or he could say "I will donate if you scrap that law" but that starts sounding like corruption and buying politicians, which comes across poorly.
Besides, isn't Tim Cook a far left woke hipster who would never vote for Republicans anyway?
Re: (Score:2)
And you people keep telling us that the U.S.A. isn't a third-world country?
Try and understand what actually makes a country struggle to be first world, before spouting ignorant bullshit.
When people don't have access to clean water and children are starving to death, voting tends to look like a first world problem real fucking quicklike. Nothing worse than an stupid first world inhabitant assuming about third world life.
Re: (Score:2)
[...]voting tends to look like a first world problem real fucking quicklike. Nothing worse than an stupid first world inhabitant assuming about third world life.
That last thing, was it about you looking in the mirror?
Looking into the mirror, I only find one of us who understands perspective.
"For most Americans, water does not get a second thought. It flows at the turn of a knob, at a cost that is all but negligible."
That does not describe the water situation in many other poor countries.
"The United States produces far more food than it needs for domestic consumption"
That is not the same problem other countries face when it comes to hunger.
The United States is far from perfect, but it is also far from true third world conditions. Corruption may be difficult to battle, but it's a hell of a lot easier problem to solve than Capacity. I also noticed that people aren't flooding the borders of actual third world countries, despe
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Votes are historically secret because you don't necessarily want Gestapo the poll watcher to come to your house afterward and break both your legs (or worse) because you voted for the wrong lizard.
Re: So much misinformation (Score:2)
What are you talking about?
Here in italy we have to show our id before we are allowed to vote, yet our vote is secret. Asking to prove you are a citizen before voting in no way violates your rights, it is just a common sense practice.
Re:So much misinformation (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So much misinformation (Score:5, Insightful)
It's disgusting how this law is being smeared as some sort of anti-black anti-poor measure.
Perhaps because the proponents hired consultants and built computer models to predict the effect of different restrictions, and chose those that minimized black and low-income turnout.
They Moneyballed racism.
Re:So much misinformation (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. Those who vote "wrong" (i.e., Biden) overwhelmingly voted by mail, while those who voted Trump stood in lineups. In white neighbourhoods, those lineups were around 5 minutes long. In black areas, they were around 3-5 hours.
Somehow, in there, they made it so if you were in the 5hour lineup, the voting place will no longer let you vote after hours even if you lined up before they closed. Just because.
GA voted wrong, that's the problem. Twice. For the wrong president and the wrong senators.
Re: (Score:3)
Since that's not to their advantage, I can only assume it is due to their rampant incompetence. Not my problem. Not my fault.
You identify a hole in your own logic, and then dismiss it as "democrats must be stupid, I don't care". This is such a classic case of cognitive dissonance and willful ignorance. Would you expect republicans to be in charge of majority-democrat districts? Here [npr.org] is the real reason for the long wait times.
Re:So much misinformation (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed, it's just a perfectly fair and innocent law targeting a practically nonexistent problem which, entirely unintended mind you, would just happen to make it disproportionately more difficult for black and poor people to vote. Why do people always assume the worst from the same people* who have been trying to keep black people away from the polls throughout American history? Sheesh.
*People, as in socially conservative and probably 100% white southern politicians allied with businesses profiting from exploited black labor, not necessarily party. Don't start the dumb history-ignoring game you're thinking about starting right now.
Re:So much misinformation (Score:4, Insightful)
Also if it's so easy, then logically one would have to show evidence of actual in-person voter fraud that there was indeed a problem that needs to be solved. The worry should be about a wholesale attack on the elections, not the alleged retail fraud that is trivial to catch.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:So much misinformation (Score:5, Interesting)
You have to authenticate yourself to function in society today, so why's there so much opposition to authenticating yourself to vote?
If only it were just about showing ID. I think you know there is more to the Georgia legislation than just a voter showing ID. The law...
- Further restricts absentee voting
- Creates confusion by establishing early voting procedures at the county level, creating inconsistency and confusion
- Curtails early voting drop box locations, limiting them to be inside specific sites and only available during in-person voting
- Seeks to end no-excuse absentee voting
- Strips the secretary of state (GA) has the char of the State Election Board (!)
- Shortens run-off election periods
All of this is about restricting citizens' ability to vote. For what reason? The bill says all of this is to "prevent fraud" -- which has not been proven to have occurred.
The bill's sponsor, GOP Rep. Barry Fleming, who chairs the House Special Committee on Election Integrity, said the 66-page measure "is designed to begin to bring back the confidence of our voters back into our election system" after Republicans lost confidence in the GOP-backed voting system following Democrats' victories in the November presidential contest and both of Georgia's U.S. Senate races.
So, to me that reads "we lost, change the rules".
Re: (Score:2)
For what reason? The bill says all of this is to "prevent fraud" -- which has not been proven to have occurred
Here is a database with 1,317 proven cases of voter fraud: https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud
By the way, we don't wait until there is rampant crime to pass laws. Very few people try to launder money, but there are laws against it on the books. We pass laws to prevent crime in the future (even if has rarely happened). And we pass laws to prevent voter fraud so that ALL American citizens can trust in the voting results.
Virtually every major country requires ID to vote. The socialist countries that Democ
Re: (Score:3)
1,317 cases of fraud going back 20 years out of over 1 billion (yes, billion) votes for persidential, senate and house (including mid-terms) elections. Oops, I forgot state elections. That's harder to get data for. 3 or so billion votes, at a guess? Wow, I can see why the Republicans are so upset, and why they have set up a site like heritage.org to support restrictions on black and poor people voting.
Re: (Score:3)
Proven voter fraud cases are low because it's very difficult to find. It becomes much more difficult to find if we remove existing ID requirements. As I said above, we don't wait until there is rampant crime to pass laws that are intended to prevent fraud.
HR-1 allows anyone to vote if they simply provide a signed note saying they are person XYZ. How would you propose to find a person who voted in your name using a signed note 2 weeks ago? It's not like they are going to put their real name next to the f
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Changing voting laws in an illegal manner is indeed subverting the election, yes.
Not if the voting laws were wrong (for the circumstances) and changing them improves election integrity. It may be illegal, but "subvert" implies some intention to deny the will of the voters, when in fact the changes were to ensure that the voters could express their will.
To be clear, I'm not arguing that changing the rules was the right thing to do, I'm arguing that the changes were well-intentioned, aimed at helping the voters, not favoring one candidate over the other. I'm arguing that those claiming
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's disgusting how this law is being smeared as some sort of anti-black anti-poor measure. You have to authenticate yourself to function in society today, so why's there so much opposition to authenticating yourself to vote?
Because voting is a right. We already authenticated when we registered to vote. The only open question is one of identification when we arrive at the polls.
And voting in the US is a state matter, so we have 50+ separate and different systems. Some are more open. In Montgomery County, MD for example, I can identify myself simply by arriving at the poll, stating my name, birth month and day, and street address. If an official poll watcher wishes to challenge, they may do so, and an election official may
Re: (Score:2)
Because voting is a right.
In Canada it is. The right to vote is protected under our charter of rights and freedoms. American's do not enjoy this right.
In Canada, you can vote if someone will vouch for your identity and address, or you can provide evidence of address and identity. Library or student card, or even personal cheque are acceptable forms of ID.
Penalty for fraud is up to $50,000 fine and up to five years in jail. That's generally enough to keep people honest.
There are many American citizens who are simply not eligible
Re: (Score:2)
Would you be happy if the same rules applied to buying a gun? You havd to bring certain forms of ID, there is only one place a long way from where you live, you line up for hours and it is illegal for anyone to give you water, even just the information on where to go and when is hidden and confusing...
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, the Republicans only target areas where their opponents are winning. If your county is Republican it's probably very easy to vote.
Re:So much misinformation (Score:5, Insightful)
It's disgusting how this law is being smeared as some sort of anti-black anti-poor measure. You have to authenticate yourself to function in society today, so why's there so much opposition to authenticating yourself to vote?
Why so much insistence on the need to add additional authentication mechanisms when the evidence of illegitimate voters as a problem is virtually nil?
The problems that do exist in the US is poor (and particularly black) people having greater difficulty voting than white people.
They have trouble getting the proper IDs, they have trouble getting and staying registered because of name and address mismatches, they have trouble casting their votes because of long voter lines, etc, etc.
The only problem this bill seemingly tries to address is long lines, though I have doubts as to how well the bill tries to fix that.
More importantly it removes Sundays as a consistent early voting option. This is very significant since black churches have a tradition of using early voting periods on Sundays to get their congregation out to the polls to vote.
This bill, like every other GOP voting bill, is aimed at reducing the number of Democrats who vote, and since African Americans are the largest solidly Democratic voting block the voting bills are generally aimed as disenfranchising black people.
It's become an ugly and very consistent pattern from the GOP.
Re: (Score:3)
Gosh, evidence of something we don't have a way to get evidence on is "virtually nill"? What a surprise! Democrats are actively trying to make it impossible to prevent or uncover cheating. Why?
What cheating?
Remember all those leaks from the Trump administration? The White House isn't that big, and they selected the employees themselves, but it still leaked.
Just like the Obama administration leaked, and the Biden administration, and Apple, and Hollywood, and everything else.
That's how we know about GOP efforts to reduce Democratic turnout by targeting blacks, because [businessinsider.com] they [miamiherald.com] leak [npr.org].
Now that we've seen that it's really hard to do something on even a small scale without leaking lets note the leaks we hav
Re:So much misinformation (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, it's Georgia. That state has a long history of voter suppression. Of course one must hold that state up to higher scrutiny than say Vermont. When Georgia or any other historically segregationist/Jim-Crow state passes changes in voter laws they must be examined carefully and with a dubious eye, because they have not yet proven themselves to be trustworthy or that they treat all voters equally.
The law is more than just authentication, it is doing things that have no valid reason other than to try and ensure the Republicans regain a majority. If Democrats had changed the law after losing a key election, you can bet your red white and blue ass that the Republicans would bitch about it.
If people are complaining loudly about a proposed law, then the obvious action would be to step back and examine it more closely, listen to the complaints, understand what the problems are. Instead Georgia sped things up, passing the law extremely quickly. Why do these sudden inexplicable bursts of government efficiencies only seem to happen with highly controversial laws?
If you wanted to write a law to ensure that fewer urban black citizens showed up at the polls, while also passing federal muster, and giving you a semi-plausible excuse to claim you're not racist, you would end up with a law that looks very very similar to what Georgia passed.
Shortening early voting times - no reason for it. It makes voting harder, and voting is a RIGHT not a privilege. You want MORE people voting in a democracy, not fewer.
Criminalizing giving food or water to voters waiting in line - no reason for it, this is not a bribe, the food and drink do not come with campaign slogans and passed out by non-partisan League of Women Voters. If you're standing in line 4 hours because your district does not have enough poll workers or pollling sites, then you're going to want some water. Georgia has notoriously long lines, the real solution here is to open up more voting sites and have more election workers. This does target black voters because it is indeed those districts where the majority of voters are black that they have legendarily long lines, and the intent is clearly to reduce black voter participation.
Limiting placement of voting drop-off boxes. This is purely for inconvenience of voters in larger population counties (which tend to be more Democrat aligned). It hurts those who can't drive to voting sites, and not everyone drives; rural counties don't care since they drive everywhere instead of walking. It hurts those who need to drop off ballots after normal business hours. Saying that all districts get the same number of drop off boxes is silly give the districts do not have the same needs. The removal of mobile voting sites affects the ability of voters to cast their votes conveniently. These methods of voting were not shown to be insecure or unreliable.
Reducing mail-in voting or drop boxes is silly, we saw the absolute need for that last year given the pandemic. We need MORE of this and not less. We saw in Californian that *Republicans* were putting out additional drop boxes for their voters in Orange County, so eager were they to do this that they didn't even stop to get permission. Apparently the Republicans in Georgia are of the opposite mindset; probably because Republicans in Georgia are in the majority and don't need extra get-out-the-vote efforts while in California they are the minority and tried to make voting easier for those likely to side with them.
The time period to request an absentee ballot was cut nearly in half. No reason for this. It was done just to discourage absentee voting. Provisional ballot rules have been changed, limiting when you can request a provisional ballot when arriving at the wrong polling place; this is ridiculous because each and every provisional ballot is examined and inspected carefully, they are likely more secure than ballots cast normally. But the drawback is that it takes longer to count, and there is stuff in the law that seemingly
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Next you will claim that food and water is such a health hazard that banning it from long lines where people are waiting to vote is a noble thing to do.
Re: (Score:3)
Let me restate it clearer: Everyone, rich and poor and in-between, have to authenticate themselves in order to function in society. You're telling me that poor people are able get IDs to get government services and cash checks but they're too stupid or oppressed to use the same ID to register to vote.
Re: (Score:2)
Let me restate it clearer: Everyone, rich and poor and in-between, have to authenticate themselves in order to function in society. You're telling me that poor people are able get IDs to get government services and cash checks but they're too stupid or oppressed to use the same ID to register to vote.
What more than a social security card do you need in order to access government services? If you look above, Georgia specifically states that a social security card is not enough proof of ID to allow you to get a voter ID card.
Re: (Score:2)
The State of Georgia offers a free ID Card. An ID Card can be issued at any county registrar's office free of charge. To receive a voter identification card at the county registrar's office, the voter must provide:A photo identity document or approved non-photo identity document that includes full legal name and date of birth., Documentation showing the voter's date of birth, Evidence that the applicant is a registered voter, and Documentation showing the applicant's name and resid
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not poor, but I remember some extreme anxiety when younger about getting such documents. The social security card in particular, a flimsy piece of easily forged paper that I did not have. Also had to have the parents send my my birth certificate, it's not the sort of thing one carries around with them all the time. I got past that, but I put up with the hassle because I needed them to get money. If this headache was required merely to vote I might have been tempted to just put it off and not vote, a
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
A free ID is expensive if you also have to take a day off of work to take a bus to the DMV or county office to get your picture taken and process the application for an ID. If even 0.1% of people are discouraged from voting because of this, then the law has done it's job of restricting undesirable voters (ie, those not likely to vote for Republicans).
Re: (Score:2)
Why Voter ID is bad (Score:3, Interesting)
VoterID in concept is a good idea; however, in practice it opens up many attacks.
A free ID has to be provided; otherwise, it amounts to a poll tax... a classic attack on democracy.
An accessible ID: Access becomes a revisiting of classic democracy access attacks: exams, "IQ" tests, bureaucratic mazes, misdirection and confusion.
Guess how many jelly beans are in the jar in order to vote. That's a real example from history. The test's judge decides your guess is wrong based upon their whim...in this case, you
Re: (Score:2)
You want voting to be easy and secure?
The goal is to make sure that everyone can vote, so it's inclusive.
Re: (Score:2)
Right now any idiot can vote, and that's the problem. Voting needs to be harder to weed out the idiots. Honestly the dumbest thing this nation ever did was allow non-land-owners to vote, because now you get people with no attachment to a community allowed to vote in it before they flit off to some other part of the country.
I think the justification of voter rights to non-land-owners are because of modern wars. In world wars, men who may or may not be landowners serve in troops and fight for the country. Women who may or may not be landowners worked in factories for military supplies. Countries are no longer defended by a small proportion of people composed of nobles and knights. Everyone matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Online money transactions produce traceable record of who paid whom. So one trust them because fraudulent transactions will be caught.
Online / mail-in / absentee voting in political elections don't produce traceable record of who voted whom (or there will be hard-to-catch bribe / threat on whom to vote). So, no, those votes shouldn't be trusted.
Those online / mail-in / absentee voting process are not visible to independent observers in polling stations. Votes / ballots for candidate A can be swapped sy