The “Interstate Crosscheck” program is far, far more likely to find millions of false matches than it is to actually combat voter fraud. Of course, to Republicans interested in suppressing Democratic votes and voters by any means necessary, that’s a good thing. To people who actually care about democracy, it’s a horrific thing.
|By: DSWright Thursday October 23, 2014 12:25 pm|
Just in case it was not clear how the GOP plans to win elections despite having a shrinking demographic, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie decided to remove any doubt – rigging the vote. In an amazingly honest speech to the US Chamber of Commerce Governor Christie said that the GOP had to control the voting process if they were to succeed in 2016.
|By: patrick devlin Friday October 10, 2014 4:51 pm|
Voter suppression actions are as old as democracy itself, having the effect of instilling apathy in electorates – we live in a democracy where less than half of eligible voters choose to use their voices when we select our leaders.
|By: cocktailhag Thursday June 27, 2013 8:00 pm|
Probably the most infuriating, if entirely predictable, outcome of the Supreme Court’s fusillade of 5-4′s this week was the MSM’s dewy-eyed credulity that accompanied it. Now, I’m not implying that say, Adam Liptak of the NYT is a clueless ninth grader, but his reporting would have been considerably more respectable if he were. Pretending to parse the hastily concocted legal reasoning du jour behind decisions that were already made twenty years ago by the Court’s right wing not only makes boring reading, but it insults the intelligence of anyone capable of tying one’s own shoes.
|By: Attaturk Wednesday June 26, 2013 1:30 am|
As the Robert’s Court five-conservative majority pretty much guaranteed a future of Voting ID and a new incentive (they needed one?) for the GOP to have absolutely no minority outreach at all…one surprising voice called out
|By: cocktailhag Thursday June 6, 2013 8:00 pm|
While it’s certainly no surprise to find that the government has turned to yet another corrupt monopoly to carry out its dirty work against ordinary citizens, I seriously question the quality of their co-conspirator, Verizon. If we are going to have a lawless corporate behemoth shoveling our personal data, or rather, in the parlance du jour, “meta” data, into the insatiable maw of the new police state, wouldn’t it be nicer if the company were also capable of performing its core function adequately?
|By: Attaturk Tuesday February 26, 2013 1:30 am|
I suppose it is only natural that within the effort to gut the Voting Rights Act — one of the most successful pieces of legislation in history — there is an agenda to eliminate voting rights entirely — well for one type of voter.
|By: Attaturk Tuesday November 20, 2012 1:30 am|
I’m just an old guy, but I remember when high voter turnout was something that a state was proud of.
|By: David Dayen Thursday November 15, 2012 2:53 pm|
What’s happening in Arizona right now, relatively under the radar in the traditional media (with a few notable exceptions), approaches the kind of thing you’d expect out of a banana republic. The short version is that Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio didn’t want to lose re-election, so he and his colleagues tried to make sure that nobody of the Latino persuasion would be allowed to vote. And they used a variety of tactics to ensure that result. That’s pretty much what’s going on.
|By: David Dayen Friday November 9, 2012 3:20 pm|
Part of the success in beating back efforts to limit election participation in a number of Republican-led states came from the work of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, which used its pre-clearance authority under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to block measures that could have disenfranchised minorities, like district-level maps in Texas and a stringent voter ID law in South Carolina. Nine states and several localities with a history of discrimination are subject to pre-clearance rules that force them to get approval from DoJ for any voting law changes. And now, the Supreme Court will hear a challenge to Section 5.