Because people are concerned about election security. I understand, in most contexts pretty much anything you do will have a disproportionate impact on poor people. But no one is clamoring to end all election controls to ensure there is no impact. Some level of security is appropriate.
But things like limiting provisional ballots if you’re at the wrong precinct does exactly zero to help with that. You still have to show id, you still have to have signature validated. It doesn’t even make any sense at this point (where registrations can be instantly verified electronically) that you have to vote in a specific precinct.
What security is added by limiting provisional ballots, when there is the same verification that occurs for a non provisional ballot?
photo ID would be nice
Need it for beer 
1 Like
which is required in ga. so why limit the provisional ballots when at the wrong precinct? what security does it add?
1 Like
People are required to vote in a precinct near to where they are registered here in Taiwan, never heard anyone whining about it like it was a big deal.
Half your country already think your elections are rigged and instead of thinking up ways of shoring up voter confidence you are running in the opposite direction on an issue I would suggest very few have any concerns about.
Elections are the one time citizens are allowed to voice their opinion on who should govern them, it’s very important that they have confidence in the system and that their vote is being counted fairly, that there is no cheating, because when that confidence is lost you lose the consent of the governed which may lead to very bad things.
3 Likes
OK, there’s a discussion to be had about that. It does make sense to me that you would have to vote at the precinct you’re assigned to, otherwise (as you note) what’s the point of doing it at all? Maybe there are other ways of doing it, but if that is the system in place, it could make sense to enforce it. It might simply take an inordinate amount of time to handle such requests (and they might become very onerous if they were allowed without exception), thus leading to longer wait times and impacting other security efforts. I think I saw under the law they would be allowed after 5:00, by the way.
More to the point, I’m not seeing how that amounts to “JIM CROW!” which is the bar that has been set here. Maybe a more rational discussion could have helped to work some of these issues out. As @Mick notes people do have concerns about election security. This is not happening in a vacuum.
2 Likes
Do you think it’s an unfair reading or cognitive abilities assessment of some sort?
What securities? If you can’t find your voting place in time to vote, maybe you shouldn’t be voting?
What’s the security issue here?
The system was, if you showed up at other than your home precinct you could cast a provisional ballot at another precinct. But they changed that, and it has no rational tie to security as the same security precautions are in place.
That’s not been brought up as a reason. And it’s the same process,.except your ballot isn’t processed in the machine right away, so it actually takes less time.
Nope - security is (obviously) handled before they know you’re at the wrong precinct. When you’re at the wrong precinct, the poll workers know that you’re a registered voter in the wrong place, not that they don’t know if you’re registered.
Whatever label some put on it, and whether you disagree or not, there does definitely feel like a concerted effort to reduce turnout in ‘some’ communities in GA.
huh? Why are you asking that? I think it’s meant to make it more inconvenient for some who are at the wrong place, but otherwise have valid voter registrations. And has nothing to do with security.
Maybe. That still doesn’t have anything to do with security.
1 Like
Election security? Or safety security? I went to the wrong place for the primaries. They sent me to the right one with clear directions.
1 Like
it has nothing to do with either type of security.
So what are you going on about wrt security.
I’ve very explicitly said it’s not about security. Others are claiming it’s about security.
Ah.
Is it dementia or demented speechwriters?
I just think he’s an asshole. That was all Joe.
It’s as though he’s leading via a game of word association.
No way. Even the Natives are restless!
1 Like
Is this who’s driving Biden? Susan Rice via the VP?
Good to know FEMA isn’t having any of it.
1 Like
The vice president raised eyebrows last week when she said that “communities of color” should be first in line for hurricane relief.
“If we want people to be in an equal place, sometimes we need to take into account those disparities and do that work,” she said.
I was curious about the context of “communities of color” and found this
https://thenewamerican.com/harris-racist-remarks-on-hurricane-relief-draw-little-media-response/
“If we want people to be in an equal place sometimes we need to take into account those disparities and do that work,” Harris said, arguing that those with less before the hurricane should be given more and should be helped first. Because of this, “It is our lowest income communities and our communities of color that are most impacted by these extreme conditions and impacted by issues that are not of their own making.”
Lowest income communities–presumably disproportionately of color–I fully understand from an economically progressive viewpoint. If that’s what’s meant, and it may be since some related COVID policies were struck down by an appeals court, fine. It will be interesting to see how it works out. If they mean pushing some people out of line to favor others on the basis of their race, that’s reprehensible.
On the other hand, if this FEMA head, who formerly had positions under Obama and DeBlasio, is getting bent out of shape about it, there may be cause for concern.
https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/1576623269867831303?s=20&t=amONh6ttXpDlK6aYfeeb_Q
Harris is hilarious with the hand lol. I think not “cause for concern” here–she’s clarifying Harris’s comments and not calling her out. But, we’ll see.
Interesting you mention her, I was in favor of this talk.
Well, let’s see if his health/cognizance takes him that far.