HR 1 ‘For the People Act ’’ Passed In the House: Read It For Yourself

Andrew Donaldson

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonder and Home.

Related Post Roulette

19 Responses

  1. Avatar Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    My local congress critter of the Trumatarian variety has pitched this in the social media sphere as an unconstitutional bordering on immoral power grab by federal authorities to federalize elections. As if federalism is no longer a thing.

    https://twitter.com/CongPalazzo/status/1367192975441354758?s=20Report

  2. Avatar Michael Cain
    Ignored
    says:

    I have said all along, and continue to say, even ignoring the question of the filibuster, there aren’t 50 votes in the Senate for this bill as written. Too many blue Senators are from states that will have to make too many changes in their election systems to conform.Report

  3. Avatar North
    Ignored
    says:

    What really is shocking to me is how starkly even GOP attorneys are talking about this new wave of voter restriction laws. They’re not even trying to pretend that it’s about fraud anymore. Asked why they have an interest in these new restrictions the GOP attorney just shrugged:
    ““Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats. Politics is a zero-sum game. It’s the difference between winning an election . . . and losing.”

    Mind blowing.Report

  4. Avatar Greginak
    Ignored
    says:

    There was a lot of talk during the covid relief bill about negotiating with senators and what was being given up. Now we are getting down to it. This bill is a bigger pull for the Ds. We will find out if there was some dealing on covid relief to get a vote on this. This will be a struggle for some sens but that where negotiating will come in. Ds have to do something to fight gerrymandering and Ra voter restrictions.Report

    • Avatar North in reply to Greginak
      Ignored
      says:

      Yeah, agreed, if I were Biden this is the bill I’d go to the matt over.Report

      • Avatar Philip H in reply to North
        Ignored
        says:

        and the one to tank the filibuster for if you are SchumerReport

        • Avatar North in reply to Philip H
          Ignored
          says:

          If you are Manchin and Sinema you mean. Sinema they -might- be able to pressure or threaten but Manchin would just laugh in their face (if they were stupid enough to try and threaten him which, thankfully, they’re not). He could switch to the GOP and have that seat guaranteed for life and we’d be saying “Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell” through gritted teeth for the next two years minimum.

          But if you can’t persuade Manchin on this then it won’t proceed. I’m past expecting any Republican Senators to have even a spark of integrity on the matter.Report

          • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to North
            Ignored
            says:

            That assumes that Schumer has 50 votes for the bill. Lots of people say, “Oh, it’s just Manchin and Sinema.” There’s a ton of Democratic Senators from Virginia to New England that have to get on board with telling their state legislatures that they don’t get to do redistricting any more. Senators from states that favor vote by mail and will have to substantially beef up their in-person voting arrangements. And vice versa.

            Perhaps because of my time on state legislative staff, I believe there are a number of states with Democratic Senators that are simply not going to roll over and go along.Report

  5. Avatar Kolohe
    Ignored
    says:

    And if people are still up now, they can here the Senate version being read aloud in its entirety on the Senate floor.Report

  6. Avatar InMD
    Ignored
    says:

    I expect this has no chance which is really unfortunate. I have my quibbles with some of the measures but the case for standardizing federal elections and eliminating state control over districting is strong on its own merits. In a more functional democracy there would be a bargain on the table.

    The larger issue is one where I think the GOP has gotten way too high on its own supply. If they weren’t all bought in on this narrative of ballots being stuffed in the hood they’d realize turn out, including among some surprising demographics, was a great mitigator for them. Trading the gerrymander for standardization of security for example might be a long term win. But of course their brains are way too fried on OANN or whatever they watch now.

    This is also where Michael’s point above comes in. The GOP is the king of gerrymandering in a more systemic way but plenty of individual Democrats are sufficiently self-interested in their districts being safe to oppose competitive elections, plus of course there are a handful of states they have gerrymandered themselves. The loser as usual is the American people.Report

  7. Avatar Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    As if we needed more reasons to do this nationally, consider this quote from a Republican state Senator in Arizona:

    Rep. John Kavanagh, a Fountain Hills Republican who chairs the Government and Elections Committee that advanced Ugenti-Rita’s measure on a party-line vote Wednesday, said GOP lawmakers are concerned about what happens to ballots automatically sent to people who have moved or have died.

    He acknowledged that the concerns about those ballots being cast fraudulently are “anecdotal, because obviously if nobody’s there and they throw it away, you wouldn’t know. And if nobody’s there and they vote it and do a good duplicate of the signature, you wouldn’t know.”

    “There’s a fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans,” Kavanagh said. “Democrats value as many people as possible voting, and they’re willing to risk fraud. Republicans are more concerned about fraud, so we don’t mind putting security measures in that won’t let everybody vote — but everybody shouldn’t be voting.

    He pointed to Democrats’ emphasis on registering voters and pursuing those who have not returned ballots — tactics that Republicans have successfully implemented in other swing states — and said doing so means that “you can greatly influence the outcome of the election if one side pays people to actively and aggressively go out and retrieve those ballots.”

    “Not everybody wants to vote, and if somebody is uninterested in voting, that probably means that they’re totally uninformed on the issues,” Kavanagh said. “Quantity is important, but we have to look at the quality of votes, as well.

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/11/politics/arizona-republicans-voter-suppression-bills/index.html

    I can’t even begin to contain much less describe my rage at how undemocratic and discriminatory that stance is. But its all sorts of abusive to voters. For whom he allegedly works.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *