Voting Rights

The Republican Attack on Voting Rights

GOP state legislators have introduced a raft of new bills aimed at restricting the fundamental right to vote.


The father of the Constitution wasn't having it.

On August 7, 1787, toward the end of what would become known as the Constitutional Convention, the delegates debated what powers state legislatures and the Congress would have when it came to federal election administration. Some delegates in Philadelphia wanted state legislatures to have complete control over the time, places, and manner of federal elections. They worried about centralized power, an overzealous and suffocating federal government.

But James Madison disagreed. He worried about state and local machinations. The diminutive Virginia slave master worried aloud that it was "impossible to foresee all the abuses that might be made of the discretionary power" to control election rules. He worried about corruption. "Whenever the State Legislatures had a favorite measure to carry," he said, "they would take care so to mould their regulations as to favor the candidates they wished to succeed."

Madison eventually would win the argument, and Congress would get its veto power. Under the Constitution's Elections Clause, state legislatures would be responsible for running federal elections, but "the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations."

Madison has proven prescient. Throughout American history, state legislatures have wielded their powers to determine which Americans were deemed worthy enough to cast a ballot and give their consent to be governed. Nowhere was this clearer than in the Jim Crow South, where legislatures, with malice and artifice, took away the voting rights that millions of black men gained after the Civil War.

But this history has not ended. In the aftermath of a divisive election marked by allegations of widespread voter fraud, which led to the storming of the Capitol to overturn a free and fair election, Republican state legislators across the country continue to prove Madison's distrust correct.

A National Trend

As of February 19, 2021, Republican legislators in at least 43 states had introduced more than 250 bills to suppress or constrain voting, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, where I work. That's a sevenfold increase over the same time last year. The proposed changes include crippling limits on mail-in voting, restrictions on early voting, and reduced voter registration opportunities. These efforts, led almost entirely by Republicans, are a direct reaction to then-President Donald Trump's claim that the 2020 election was "stolen from the voters in a massive fraud."

But there was no epidemic of fraud. State and local Republican election officials confirmed the integrity of the vote. Trump's legal team lost virtually every lawsuit it filed contesting the election results in multiple states, often in cases heard by Trump's own judicial appointees. Their rulings were littered with phrases like "without merit," "not credible," and "obviously lacking." Trump nominee Stephanos Bibas wrote a scathing opinion for a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, rejecting the Trump campaign's challenge to Joe Biden's victory in Pennsylvania. "Calling an election unfair does not make it so," Bibas noted. "Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."

Even former Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell, who spent the fall and winter accusing Dominion Voting Systems of participating in a massive fraud that supposedly denied Trump his rightful victory, recently said "no reasonable person" would have thought her wild allegations "were truly statements of fact." In response to a defamation lawsuit filed by Dominion, Powell did not even attempt to prove the truth of her claims.

None of that stopped Republican legislators from rushing to remedy the mythical problem described by Trump and his allies. "I think what we're seeing is the most serious attempt across the country to restrict the rights of certain Americans to vote since the days of Jim Crow," said Rep. Colin Allred (D–Texas), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Ohio State University law professor Edward Foley sees the legislation as an attempt to undermine the achievements of the "Second Reconstruction," when Congress passed the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1964, and 1968 as well as the Voting Rights Act of 1965. "It's not exactly the same as the end of the first Reconstruction, and one has to hope that it won't be," Foley told The Washington Post. "But there are enough parallels to be nerve-racking."

The days of barring prospective Southern black voters by requiring them to count the kernels of corn in a jar or the seeds in a watermelon are thankfully over. But the spirit of those practices lives on in the recent surge of enacted and proposed restrictions on voting. Policies such as requiring a government-issued ID to vote or cutting back on early voting are facially neutral, but they disproportionately affect voters of color—who, not incidentally, overwhelmingly favor Democratic candidates.

In the past, many of the jurisdictions that are making it harder to vote would have had to clear their changes with the Justice Department or a federal court under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. That requirement applied to jurisdictions, mostly in the South, with a history of voting discrimination. But in 2013, the Supreme Court invalidated a key provision of the law, eliminating what is known as "preclearance" and ushering in a wave of voter suppression in once-covered jurisdictions that will only get worse if states pass more restrictive measures this legislative session.

Arguments about these restrictive measures often get bogged down in the question of whether particular legislators are personally motivated by racism or are merely seeking to maximize their party's share of the vote. These aren't either/or propositions, and it's hard to disentangle the two motives during these tribal times. But when legislation disproportionately erects barriers to the ballot box for certain communities—especially those that have been historically deprived of their civil rights—the lawmakers responsible for it make a mockery of the promised equality of "one person, one vote."

In states where Democrats control the legislature, these bills likely will die in committee or be voted down on the floor. But in the 19 states where Republicans control both the legislature and the governor's office, severe voting restrictions almost certainly will be enacted.

Republican legislators in these states claim they are concerned only with "election integrity" and restoring confidence in the electoral process. But a closer look at some of the legislation in Georgia, Texas, and Arizona exposes a disturbing bid to suppress the votes of people who vote blue more often than red, particularly blacks and Latinos.  


Proposed legislation in Georgia provides the most striking case study. As of February 19, according to the Brennan Center's state voting bills tracker, the state's Republican-controlled legislature was considering at least 22 bills that would selectively limit access to voting. A few caused a public firestorm because of their apparent racial bias. 

Two bills sought to end no-excuse mail voting, except for older voters. That policy, which allows people to vote by mail without any special justification, was established with Republican support in 2005.

S.B. 241, which passed the Georgia Senate on March 8 but died in the House, would have allowed only voters 65 or older and those with disabilities to vote by mail. S.B. 71, which also failed, would have raised the age cutoff to 75.

These bills may seem neutral until you dig a little deeper into voter behavior in the 2020 general election. The pandemic made voting by mail an extremely popular option for all racial groups, but new patterns emerged, as my Brennan Center colleague Kevin Morris has shown.

In 2016, white voters accounted for 67 percent of the vote-by-mail electorate in Georgia. In 2020, that dropped to 54 percent, perhaps partly due to Trump's denunciations of this voting method. Black voters, meanwhile, flocked to voting by mail. They represented 31 percent of mail voters in 2020, up from 23 percent in 2016.

Last year in Georgia, about 30 percent of black voters used mail-in ballots, while only 24 percent of white voters did. White voters, however, are considerably older than black voters in Georgia. This means that, despite using mail ballots less frequently, white voters made up a clear majority of mail voters 65 years and older. By allowing elderly voters to continue to vote by mail, Republican legislators privileged their likely voters in these bills.

While allowing elderly voters to vote by mail without an excuse may look neutral at first glance, Georgia's H.B. 531 does not. The bill, which passed the House on March 1, would have eliminated Sunday voting. During election season, black churches use the day to get their parishioners to vote, a tradition known as "Souls to the Polls." The bill, which caused a public backlash locally and nationally, was recently revised. The modified measure gives local election officials the option of adding two Sundays to early voting but requires two Saturdays of early voting in the lead-up to Election Day.

The original intent was not subtle, especially when you consider that Georgia narrowly flipped blue in 2020, when President Biden won the state and two Senate races led to runoffs won by Democrats Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff. An analysis by The Washington Post's Philip Bump shows why that happened. During Georgia's early voting period, black voters accounted for 26 percent of the vote. But during the four weekend days, black voters cast 32 percent to 44 percent of the ballots. "Lock out 100,000 Democratic votes," Bump notes, "and Georgia switches from slightly blue back to slightly red."

Georgia Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan (R), breaking ranks with his party, said he understood why reasonable people would conclude that targeting weekend voting meant targeting black voters. "There is [sic] a lot of solutions in search of a problem," he told Chuck Todd on Meet the Press.

Georgia also has a history of some of the longest wait times to vote in the nation, especially in black neighborhoods. During early voting in last year's primary, voters in largely black areas waited up to seven hours to vote and drone footage showed shockingly long lines. During the general election, voters in Atlanta, which is 51 percent black, waited up to 11 hours. In response to the excruciating wait times, nonpartisan groups and good Samaritans handed out food and water to keep people in line.

This, however, is now illegal. On Friday, Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed an omnibus voting bill that criminalized this very practice for everyone on top of other provisions that would make it harder to vote. Under previous law, the ban only applied to representatives of political organizations.  

"We've had some very hot days," Savannah Mayor Van Johnson told a local news station. "So I'm supposed to watch somebody pass out and not offer them water? Or offer them food if they're diabetic or if they have some type of health challenges? Because state law says I can't help them?"


As of February 19, Texas Republican legislators had proposed at least 10 measures likely to restrict voting, according to the Brennan Center tracker. Gov. Greg Abbott has encouraged the legislation by making "election integrity" an emergency priority, even though he admitted there is no evidence yet that widespread fraud occurred in the state's 2020 election. "Republicans, of course, have run Texas for almost two decades," Christopher Hooks observed in Texas Monthly. "If there's widespread fraud in Texas elections, one would think they'd have found it by now—and fixed it."

Texas Republicans nevertheless want to make voting harder in a state already known for policies such as strict voter ID laws and cuts to polling places in rapidly expanding black and Latino communities. The state, even in the midst of a pandemic, refused to allow no-excuse voting by mail.

Harris County, which includes Houston, the state's largest city, has been a special focus of this legislative ire. The diverse city has one of the country's biggest Hispanic/Latino populations, a majority of which votes Democrat. In the run-up to the election, Harris County tried to make it easier to vote during the pandemic. Officials kept polling locations open for 24 hours to give voters more options and to limit the number of people waiting to vote. They opened drive-through voting locations, which they then almost entirely shut down on Election Day due to Republican legal challenges. And they tried to send voters mail-ballot applications but were stopped by the Texas Supreme Court.

Republicans in the statehouse want to put an end to any future experimentation with easier voting. S.B. 1115 requires all counties, regardless of size, to have the same early voting schedule. "Unless ordered by a court," the bill says, "voting time shall be not more than 12 hours in one day"—a provision that takes direct aim at Harris County.

Another Senate bill, S.B. 7, is even more restrictive. The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas summed it up in a tweet: "SB 7 would ban 24-hour voting, eliminate drive-thru voting, reduce early voting hours, and prevent counties from using stadiums and convention centers as polling places—for no reason other than keeping Texas away from the ballot box." And there's more: The bill also would require people with disabilities to provide documentation of them in return for a mail-in ballot application.

All this, Abbott says, is to ensure "trust and confidence in our elections." In December, the Houston Chronicle reported that the Texas Attorney General's Office spent 22,000 staff hours looking for voter fraud in 2020. It found just 16 incidents in which Harris County residents provided false addresses on their voter registration forms. In all these prosecutions, no one received jail time.

Also in December, an election security task force in Harris County released its report on the integrity of the November election. "Despite claims," it said, "our thorough investigations found no proof of any election tampering, ballot harvesting, voter suppression, intimidation or any other type of foul play that might have impacted the legitimate cast or count of a ballot."

Hooks' conclusion: "As with the chupacabra, voter fraud is greatly feared but rarely seen." 


Republican-controlled Arizona, whose voters broke for Biden by just 10,000 votes in November, is now also a hotbed of restrictive election legislation, including at least 22 bills according to the Brennan Center.

S.B. 1485, which recently passed the Arizona Senate, would change the rules governing the permanent early voting list, which allows the state's voters to sign up once and then receive a mail ballot for every election they're eligible to vote in going forward. The bill requires that residents on the list who did not vote in the last two election cycles be sent notices asking if they would like to continue receiving mail-in ballots. Recipients who do not respond yes would be dropped from the list, meaning that they would have to vote in person, according to the bill's sponsor.

Discussing the bill on CNN, one supporter, state Rep. John Kavanagh (R–Scottsdale), admitted that evidence of vote-by-mail fraud was "anecdotal" but argued that the legislation was necessary anyway. "Democrats value as many people as possible voting, and they're willing to risk fraud," Kavanagh said. "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 didn't stop there. "Not everybody wants to vote, and if somebody is uninterested in voting, that probably means that they're totally uninformed on the issues," Kavanagh added. "Quantity is important, but we have to look at the quality of votes as well."

Kavanagh's observation that not everyone wants to vote is correct, of course. Libertarians, for example, often sit out multiple elections in a row simply because we don't like either major-party candidate or platform. That does not make libertarians low-quality voters. But talking about the "quality of votes" and averring that "everybody shouldn't be voting" is so reminiscent of Jim Crow rhetoric that it's difficult to be charitable and chalk those remarks up to ignorance. 

Once again, the official rationale for restricting voting by mail is security. But Arizona has had no-excuse mail-in voting since 1992. Today, the vast majority of Arizonans vote by mail. During an Oval Office meeting with Trump last August, Republican Gov. Doug Ducey defended the state's vote-by-mail system. "It will be free and fair," he told Trump. "It will be difficult, if not impossible, to cheat. And it will be easy to vote." 

If Republican legislators get their way, Arizona's system will be less free and less fair, and voting will be much more difficult.

What Everyone Should Want

This eruption of legislation should worry anyone who believes that the ultimate authority in this nation rests with the people and not the politicians.

Members of Congress now have a choice. They can see what Republican state legislatures are doing and consider using their power under the Elections Clause to do something about it. Republican members can put principle over party, recognizing that it may harm their electoral chances in the short term.

In a democratic nation, the vote ensures that we engage in politics, not war. It gives us a voice: one vote to cast as we please, plus the right to speak freely and convince others to also cast their ballots for particular candidates or causes. It gives us the ability to privilege the ballot box over the cartridge box when things get real. The winner today may not be the winner next election. The self-corrective process of elections allows for the peaceful transfer of power—a historical miracle that, after the Capitol riot, we might not want to take for granted.

As the internecine bloodbath of the Civil War came to a close, Frederick Douglass addressed the annual meeting of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society in Boston. His speech, "What the Black Man Wants," is a reminder of the importance of the franchise to self-government and individual freedom.

"Without this, his liberty is a mockery," Douglass said. "Without this, you might as well almost retain the old name of slavery for his condition; for in fact, if he is not the slave of the individual master, he is the slave of society, and holds his liberty as a privilege, not as a right." 

The same truth holds today. Discriminatory laws and practices that create long lines and make casting a vote as difficult as possible deter people from voting. By doing so, they attack Americans' liberty and their equality before the law. A right made onerous is, in many respects, a right denied.

NEXT: Brickbat: Death Without Dignity

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “GOP state legislators have introduced a raft of new bills aimed at restricting the fundamental right to vote.”

    Because the GOP has studied the history of 1-party states, and thus KNOWS that we would ALL be better off, under a 1-party GOP state!

    Remember, children, our Dear Leader has taught us that ALL non-GOP votes are FRAUDULENT!

    1. Hey wk. Some stupid shit to say so early in the morning.

        A list of the times Trump has said he won’t accept the election results or leave office if he loses
        Essential heart and core of the LIE by Trump: “ANY election results not confirming MEEE as Your Emperor, MUST be fraudulent!”

        September 13 rally: “The Democrats are trying to rig this election because that’s the only way they’re going to win,” he said.

        I have the facts, JesseBahnFuhrer. All you have is your same, tired old lies and insults. And your adoration of the Great Whitish-Orangish Pumpkin-Father.

        1. I said too early for stupid shit. What didn’t you get wk? Your usual list of propaganda. Cnn, atlantic, wapo. Just save time and link to the DNC website.

          1. The White Knight wasn’t here, Mrs. Torrance. You were speaking to a different person who was not me.

            1. Yes you were sqrsly.

              1. Fuck off tulpa wannabe

                1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
                  on this page…..VISIT HERE

                2. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last DS month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
                  on this page…..VISIT HERE

            2. Commit suicide. No one could ever love you. You have nothing to live for.

        2. So JesseBahnFuhrer, can you name me ONE single case of a one-party state, that provided peace, prosperity, and individual freedom for a long-long time, for its citizens? Or do you not think that these three things are good things? If one-party oligarchies and dictatorships are better, WHY are they better?

          1. It’s “bannfuhrer” retard, otherwise you’re slur just means Jesse Railway Sargent.

            1. The White Knight II: The White Knight Rises!
              March.28.2021 at 2:17 pm
              And, by the way, JesseBahnFuhrer does not allow anyone to belong to a libertarian tribe, or belong to no tribe at all. If you are not a Trumpista, you are an enemy of the Trumpistas.

              1. Lol, I know.

                1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
                  on this page…..VISIT HERE

                2. [ JOIN PART TIME JOB ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
                  on this page…..READ MORE

            2. “bann german to english”
              Google it, pro-ignorance one! Result is “spell”. The NAZIs may have tried to pass storm-troopers off as spelling-bee leaders, but I won’t have any of that deception!

              Bahn = rail car, railroad, etc.
              Y’all are foisting yourselves off as mere spelling-bee leaders, while you want to RAILROAD us off into Trumptatorshit and worse! Y’all want to herd us onto your railroad cars to slave labor camps and worse! Oh, trust us, as we herd you onto your rail cars, we are mere spelling-bee leaders! Bullshit, liars!

          2. The Vatican.

      2. The White Knight wasn’t here, Mrs. Torrance.

        1. Yes you were sqrsly.

    2. Remember, children, our Dear Leader has taught us that ALL non-GOP votes are FRAUDULENT!

      Unless….Russian meme votes. These votes have a special dispensation from the Church or SQRLSY to be counted as Democratic votes, proving, once and for all the Dear Leader, The Real Leader, Lady of Democracy, The Ayatollah of Pantsuitollah, yes, it WAS her turn…you know who I mean…HRC. Our three letter gal that is miles above the rookie AOC.
      Bow Lizard People, to your better.

      1. He literally says that as Pelosi said last week it was her power to determine who won House races. wk is an idiot.

      2. Remember how the Democrats used three years up pursuing the idea that Trump was a Russian agent?
        If you need a state-issued ID to travel on a plane, buy liquor, drive a car, buy a house, get a credit card, open a bank account, or post-COVID go into a bar why not to vote? I have experience that only accounts for two votes, but I saw a ‘community activist’ register a homeless addict, ‘help’ him fill out his ballot, and give him $20 because he care so much. He did it to two people before he noticed me staring.
        If belief in the reliability of the system is so important, why is only one narrative – the poor voter refused the chance to express her will at the very last moment – considered important?

        1. If you need a state-issued ID to travel on a plane, buy liquor, drive a car, buy a house, get a credit card, open a bank account, or post-COVID go into a bar why not to vote?

          Other things poor minorities need ID for:
          Applying for food stamps, Applying for welfare, Applying for Medicaid/Social Security, Applying for unemployment or a job, Renting a house, Applying for a mortgage, Renting a car, Getting married, Purchasing a gun, Adopting a pet, Renting a hotel room, Applying for a hunting license, Applying for a fishing license, Buying a cell phone, Visiting a casino, Buying cigarettes, Picking up a prescription, Holding a rally or protest, Blood donations, Buying an “M” rated video game, Purchasing nail polish at CVS, Buying certain cold medicines.

          Things they don’t need ID for:
          Choosing a government.

          Apparently, picking your nation’s leaders is less important than buying smokes. According to Matthew Harwood it’s only voting that minorities are too stupid to provide ID for.

          1. You still need ID to register to vote.
            Does the mailman wait for you to show your ID before he puts mail in your unlocked mailbox?
            Study after study has shown that voter fraud is a vanishingly small percentage of all votes. So we are fixing a problem that for all practical purposes, doesn’t exist.

            As for how hard is it to get an ID. Lets say I was working my two jobs so I wasn’t on welfare, I have to make an appointment with the MVA. Oh, but first I need to gather my birth certificate, proof of address (hope I’m not renting a back room at a house) etc. Tell one of my super understanding bosses that I will be out for a few hours as I take the bus across town to the nearest MVA/records office etc. All for the privilege of voting once ever other year in which in all likelihood my vote won’t matter.
            Oh, but if I want to buy a gun… well that’s my right and I should be assumed worthy unless someone can prove that I’m not (which I actually agree with).
            If I want to vote, I’m assumed to be not worthy.

            1. Study after study has shown that voter fraud is a vanishingly small percentage of all votes

              No they don’t. Pulling “facts” out of your ass like that isn’t going to trick anyone.

              1. There is only one type of test that is valid and would prove that voter fraud is negligible: the election authority would proactively test with fake ballots and IDs. This would require, depending on the size of the voting population, 10s of thousands of fraudulent attempts by mail, dropbox, and walkin, by the elections authority. Colorado has had only mail-in and drop-box voting for years and claims it is fraud-free. It is not provable without the testing mentioned.

            2. Confused, even if it is vanishingly small normally, there have been multiple instances over the years where there had been massive fraud. Last year in the New Jersey primaries, it was so bad that they had to re-do the election. Even if it’s an uncommon problem, it is a problem.

              Saying that it’s vanishingly small is like complaining that car doors have locks, when only 1% of cars are robbed a year.

            3. This has got to be the most strained and exasperated argument I have ever heard in an attempt to show that simply getting an ID is horrendously difficult.

            4. LOL. Oh the horror of getting ID! Hell, if you’re not capable of getting an ID to vote then you’re not capable of voting. BTW, there’s a helluva lot more voting then once every two years. Though we know most people only vote every 4, if even that.

              1. All I know is, if our governments and the Big Two really were impartial about who votes, and they wanted the maximum turnout possible with maximum integrity, they would:
                1) require a picture ID to vote, but make that ID easily available and free of charge to avoid 24A troubles (or just put a picture ID on your voter registration card);
                2) implement no restrictions on polling hours or locations (and with ID requirements, there’s no reason to not have multiple voting days); and
                3) ensure that your vote counts if you’re in line by closing time.

                Any legislation contrary to these guidelines is immediately sus to me.

            5. If your vote doesn’t matter, what do you care?

              Put up or shut up–I’m done supporting a country where no one is expected to put up any effort for anything. I’m also done supporting a country where the indolent / homeless / etc get away with ignoring stuff the rest of us have to suffer through.

              You want to talk “vanishingly small percentage,” talk about the actual number of people who don’t drive or apply for food stamps / welfare / social security / etc—subtract all the people Mother’s Lament lists, and you have almost no one. Or as you suggest–for all practical purposes doesn’t exist.

            6. Study after study shows prosecutions are getting smaller, not vote fraud.

              1. Prosecutions of crimes by Socialist Democrats get fewer every year. Move along folks. No bias here.

            7. ‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.’ Jimmy Carter and the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform.
              We had unprecedented mail in ballots and unchecked ballot harvesting in 2020. The democrats want to make this federal law.

            8. The Dems say that black people can’t get ID.

              The Dems want everyone to show ID to get a gun.

              Thus, the Dems want to keep black people from getting guns, just like they did 100 years ago.

            9. Working two jobs and can’t cash the check because you have no ID? How did you get those jobs with no ID? Oh wait…………your an illegal alien, working under the table and paid in cash. I see what you mean. An ID would suppress your vote. That damn GOP.

            10. You do realize India requires ID to vote and they have much more grinding poverty than the US. They have no issue with people getting IDs.

            11. You can’t get a job without ID, you are required to fill out a I-9 form when you are hired. The I-9 requires you to have two different forms of ID, so you can’t have a job to take off from if you don’t already have an ID.

            12. So, what are the odds that someone is actually responsible enough to be working two jobs (to avoid being on welfare) and also have no driver’s license, which could be used at the voting location? Highly unlikely.

    3. One party rule is wrong, like in the 2016 election the US Senate general election pitted a Democrat against a Democrat. That is the sort of thong that should not happen, correct?

      1. Under our current rules, it sounds wrong to me. How often does that happen? And that was a single Senate seat.

        Pit that single occurrence against a POTUS saying that all votes against HIM must be fraudulent? And the trumpanzees gone apeshit, trying to replace democracy with mobocracy, as a result? At the POTUS level, not just a single Senate seat? Which sounds like a bigger threat to democracy, to you?

        1. A POTUS that claims all votes against him are fraudulent? Is that like Biden saying you ain’t black if you don’t vote for me? After all the propaganda is digested and the dust settles what President Trump actually said is only legal votes should be counted. Anyone that takes a close look at the 2020 election and the counties that gave Biden the win and has no doubt has lost the ability of rational thinking. The common thread in those counties is they all received millions from Zuckerberg, they all took longer to tally the ballots then other counties and they all had a sudden surge in ballots which were 80 to 90% for Biden in the early morning hours. They all had the laws changed in how they would accept ballots and which were legal because Democrats went to court in the Spring of 2020 changing laws to give an advantage to them. They also all had lawyers paid millions to block any audits and most reset the voting machines claiming they were getting ready for the next election. If I am a Democrat and someone is claiming fraud or irregularities and an audit would prove them wrong would I block it or encourage it to make them look like fools? Simple common sense considerations for those with common sense.

        2. Every time there’s a senatorial election in California you mouth breathing troglodyte.

      2. In Washington’s view of a party-free political world, that would be a typical setup if your state was liberal or conservative enough. Take away the party labels and it’s just two people running against each other with slightly differing positions on a few issues.

    4. Meanwhile, Trump and his crack team of legal geniuses, Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, Rudy Giuliani, the Pillow Guy, were working hard to undermine the confidence of Republican voters in Georgia — giving us effective one-party Democratic Party rule in Washington, D.C.

      Nice job, Trump and team!

      1. We really need to take you to the vet and have you put down.

  2. Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School

    Once I read the author worked here, I stopped reading. They’re budding progressive totalitarians.

    1. Really, reason? This is what you’ve sunk to?

      1. They’ve been wallowing here for five years.

    2. I think ‘Why, because I said so’ is a legitimate foundation for a journalistic endeavor.

      1. Also: “because, fuck you” and, “because, shut up”.

    3. I Stopped read when when the author described James Madison as “The diminutive Virginia slave master”, which told me this was not a serious or unbiased article.

      1. That was my stopping point, too. I only check in to the this site from time to time to see how much of a parody Reason has become.

        1. This article really does read like a parody.

      2. Me too.

        Also, can we really move on that asking for photo I.D. to vote isn’t Jim Crow?

        Does the Left also think the African Americans are incapable of legally driving a car? Flying on a plane? Opening a bank account? Buying a home? Applying for a job?

    4. “Once I read the author worked here, I stopped reading.”

      Good job. You can’t allow anything in that might cause you to doubt what you prefer to believe or that might make you rethink your positions. Must…maintain…ideological…purity!!!

    5. You’re just pissed off that no one supports your chose Jesus Christ figure, Trump. That’s why you support fascist voting bills that seek to disenfranchise democrats because you know that’s the only way your fascist Trump party succeeds.

  3. These are indeed shockingly racist proposals to restrict the right to vote, but do you realize how fucking racist European countries, South American countries, African countries, and Asian countries are? Many, if not most, countries in the world have even more racist voting laws than these proposals!

    1. I’m getting the distinct feeling that the Left’s ideas of voting reform or meant to disenfranchise rural whites.

      1. “I’m getting the distinct feeling that the Left’s ideas of voting reform or [sic] meant to disenfranchise rural whites.”

        Yep. If minorities, urban and suburban progressives, and other lefties have equal access to the ballot, then rural whites are being disenfranchised! Don’t they know that rural whites are supposed to have their votes count for more!?!

    2. All the other Western democracies in the world require government-issued ID to vote, which just goes to show that America is the least racist country ever.

      1. “All the other Western democracies in the world require government-issued ID to vote…”

        Is that so? Do you have a list handy of which countries require what forms of ID, or are you just “sure” that this is true? And how do citizens in those countries that do require an ID to vote obtain those IDs? What do you know about who has what kinds of ID in America and what obstacles to obtaining one some people have?

        The arguments most people make about IDs is based entirely on their own experiences getting one. They don’t make any adjustments to their thinking to account for the fact that some people live different lives than they do and might have more challenges doing something that they think should be easy.

    3. Lol now that’s a lot of whataboutism. The simple truth is that it should be ducking easy to vote and those R politicians haven’t shown a single sliver of eco fence there was significant voter fraud anywhere. Nothing but lies and speculation. Now they literally want to rekindle Jim Crow laws and the white R voters are eating it hook line and sinker because they fear brown people.

      1. Jim Crow must be all over the world, including India where they require voter ID. I bet you think dying people’s fingers like they do in Iraq is Jim Crow. Or just about every European country where they ban on demand mail in voting.

      2. It would be less of a concern if we just cleansed all the progs first. That’s the real problem.

      3. The primary purpose of any voting system is to ensure the integrity of the vote, so that the results will be believable, even to those who lose the election. Its primary purpose is not to ensure voter convenience.

  4. “Republicans in the statehouse want to put an end to any future experimentation with easier voting. S.B. 1115 requires all counties, regardless of size, to have the same early voting schedule. “Unless ordered by a court,” the bill says, “voting time shall be not more than 12 hours in one day”—a provision that takes direct aim at Harris County.”

    You’re actually objecting to the demand for uniform voting rules across a state???

    1. Blacks get confused by uniform rules, racist!

    2. Yes. I will object to uniform voting rules if those rules are set to favor a certain segment of the states population. If we use a rural county with 25K population as the norm to set standards for counties with populations that is greater 250K.

      How about we have uniform rules on length of time to vote. If people in urban centers have to wait an hour to vote then so do the suburbs and rural. Would you accept going to the polling place and being told to stand in a line for a hour, because we want uniformity?

      1. Yes, you support manipulating elections. We understand.

        1. Yes, Der JesseBahnFuhrer supports a 1-party GOP state. We understand. Because history shows just how WONDERFUL 1-party states are!

          1. Whenever you get on-point Jesse, the Sqrlsybot is deployed to shitpost and change the topic.

            1. Would Der JesseBahnFuhrer ***OR*** Der MammaBahnFuhrer PLEASE name me ONE single case of a one-party state, that provided peace, prosperity, and individual freedom for a long-long time, for its citizens?

              Because the demonstrable truth is, many GOP hyper-partisans are lusting for a 1-party GOP state, by hook or by crook! And THAT is ultimately why we must outlaw water bottles being passed out to voters! It is absurd and crazy, but so are hyper-partisans!

              1. What the hell are you babbling about?
                You guys just fixed an election, and are now busy legislating a permanent fiddle, and you’re accusing us of wanting a one-party state?
                You’re such an insane loser.

            2. “…deployed to shitpost

              Goddamnit, now you’ve got him excited again, Mother’s.

              Publishing this article should be really embarrassing for Reason, if they had the self-respect anymore to feel shame.

      2. Also I find it weird you say different loans should be able to set their own rules as you support nationalization of rules under HR1.

        You idiots don’t even try to stay consistent.

        1. I support HR1 only because it is a counter to what is happening at the state level. I think we could keep things as they were in 2020 and being doing very well. Could we agree no HR1 and no actions at the state level would be best?

          1. So you coming about uniform rules at a state level… but want to nationalize them.

            Yeah youre not an idiot.

            And I’m sure your just fine with the parts of hr1 like not being able to prosecute illegal immigrants for illegally voting? Or the parts where they mandate no ID rules when signing up to vote, just a check box? Or where voter rolls don’t ever have to be cleaned up?

            1. Ok, I took a look at the text of HR1.

              Found nothing to say you could not prosecute undocumented people for voting. Please point out where you found this.

              Found nothing about ID-less registration. Section 2 does cover automatic registration and that only obliges agencies collecting information that could be used for registration to provide that information. Seem reasonable. Again point out where it may say different.

              As for cleaning up voting rolls check section 8a. Again seem reasonable.

              I do like section 2401 calling for independent redistricting.

              1. Youre a liar. States like California auto enroll at the dmv with an error rate on citizenship at the low teens level.

                H.R.1 protects non citizens who vote of they were enrolled “by mistake” through these programs.

                So you lied.

                1. Where in the text does it say that. I checked and did not find anything about protecting a non citizen who voted.

                  You are correct that motor voter programs are having problems with some non residents being registered. That does not translate into these people voting. There are very large disincentives for a non resident to vote and be caught.

            2. Psst. Jesse. You might not have heard, but Sydney Powell called you and the rest of the cult dumb fucks for believing her Kraken story.

              Oh and Trump’s election fraud commission in 2016 found all of 4 fraudulent votes–all GOP. Oh, and NC just did a state level audit and found no fraud for 2020.

              Every time anyone looks for fraud, they find none. Every time someone says they have proof of fraud, they turn out to be lying.

              So how much longer are you going to let yourself be the mark in this obvious con job?

              1. There is a whole database on voter fraud convictions.

                There isn’t a database of you having served in the military sweetie.

                Why didn’t you complete the bet?

                1. Because you won’t take the bet, pussy. Why were you willing to let someone else fight on your behalf? Are you one of those fem-boy nazis I hear are so popular with the proud boys club?

                  And neither will anyone else. I set up an email for them to contact me and started planning the logistics, and all of your white knights vanished. Much like you do when I start linking all of your conflicting statements and cowardice.

                  Because misanthropic cultists are, shocker, all hat no cattle.

                  1. LOL, I was wondering what happened with the bet. I saw JesseAz and Mother’s crowing about how you had chickened out, but knew it was highly unlikely JesseAz was telling the truth about it.

                    1. I’ve been proposing this bet for over a year now. Jesse shirks it every fuckin’ time I comment here, but has the audacity to claim I’m chickening out? Not surprising from a guy who insists he is an expert in everything.

              2. Also… 2020 indictments are starting.


                Weird.. no fraud at all. Lol. God damn stolen Valor. Youre an idiot.

                1. “City Council Race”


                  And I’m not going to ask if this is the best you can do, because yes, it is the best you can do.

                2. And we’re all still waiting for that apology for calling anyone who questioned the Kraken story “retards”, and any of your other endlessly reused and unimaginative insults.

                  Wouldn’t Powell’s admission that she was conning you make you the “retard”? Hmmmmmmmmm?

          2. Of course you do. You’re more proof that it’s time to cull the progressive population.

            Without progressives, there can be no progressivism.

      3. At what point are local election officials going to be held to account for long lines and inadequate polling facilities? If people are standing in line for over an hour to vote, that means local election boards failed to ensure they had adequate facilities and equipment. Why is that evil white republicans trying to disenfranchise poor black voters, and not inept election boards disenfranchising poor black voters by sucking at their jobs?

        Of course, and easier, more straightforward question is, why are you such an intellectually dishonest piece of shit?

        1. It’s not like it’s a fucking mystery when elections are held. The schedule is fairly regular and predictable. There’s usually a couple of years between elections.

          To listen to democrats cry about it, this has been a problems literally forever, and yet democrat cities (where most of those problems occur) haven’t done shit to fix it.

          1. sort of like police brutality?

      4. It’s just common sense fraud prevention. Why are you so opposed to common sense?

      5. How about a uniform requirement of a set number of functional voting machines per 1,000 people in a precinct, if you want to tackle the long-line debacle. And immediate penalties if election officials deliberately cut those machines off from the voters.

      6. Well, I stood in line for 1.5 hours in my suburban district to early vote. Guess what, I didn’t see anyone complain. My wife and I talked with the older Vietnam Vet and his wife in front of us, and the young lady behind us. In the line was what looked like another veteran that had lost his leg. Nope, no stool to sit on, no water or food being handed out. It was a chilly windy day–no one offered us a blanket or jacket.
        I will have to say, if they bumped the way I signed the roll, it would have been rejected. They gave us a pencil to sign our names, I questioned it, then did as requested. However, using a pencil to sign isn’t the same as using a pen. Alas, I voted.

      7. “uniform voting rules if those rules are set to favor a certain segment”

        Then they aren’t uniform

      8. If urban voters are having to wait an inordinate amount of time, that is the fault of their city officials for not having enough voting centers. I live in a town of 25,000 and had to wait in line for an hour in 2020 – that’s just the price you pay to both exercise your right to vote and ensure election integrity. They did let anyone over 70 or with adverse health conditions go to the front of the line – I’m OK with that, as well.

    3. The brain-dead author is complaining that States such as Texas are doing what he wants the Congress to do, ostensibly to enforce uniformity of elections rules and conditions.

      He’s complaining that Arizona wants to implement a way to keep its mail-in voter list fresh, like that’s some crazy scheme that’s never been done before. But MOST States do that all the time for the standard voter list, implementing some mechanism to clear out inactive voters. And Arizona’s measure would not remove the voter from the rolls, just off the mail-in list. Maybe you could argue over how many skipped elections gets a voter scrubbed, but the concept of scrubbing is not in and of itself generally perceived as a “voter suppression” technique.

      Georgia is clearly an internal mess if it is so mismanaged as to require people to wait hours upon hours. One has to wonder if what is being reported is a one-time issue with a particular voting place/precinct, or if a statistical analysis was done that shows it is a widespread issue. If widespread, the voters have no one else to blame but themselves for voting in politicians who cannot find competent election administrators. Don’t make it my problem in Philadelphia if voting locations in Atlanta can’t get their shit together.

      1. I believe it’s county election boards that set the precincts for voting so if Fulton County has people waiting in line for hours, guess who’s fault that is? If you guessed it’s the Republicans who control Fulton County, you obviously don’t know Fulton County.

        1. I did the arithmetic with available figures.

          Assuming polls are open 7am to 8pm, on average, Fulton County voting divisions/precincts have to process 51 voters an hour at max turnout while Philadelphia voting divisions would have to process 48 voters and hour at max turnout. More or less comparable, I would say.

          What is it about voting in Fulton County that would cause lines of 6, 7, 8 hours?

          1. Everyone’s staring at their phones and not moving up when the person in front of them does.

      2. I have, one solitary time, waited hours in line to vote. It was 1994, a rural precinct, and the line stretched several times around the building. You can get that happening if a particular election causes a dramatic increase in turnout.

        But if you’ve got it happening consistently, your election administration is incompetent.

      3. I am qualified to be a poll judge. I was in an urban setting at an elementary school in 2010 for the primary. We had paper rolls to search for names, not computers that they have now. We never had more than a 15 minute wait.
        We were instructed to ask which primary, D or R. If the looks I got could kill, I wouldn’t be here typing this.
        One lady asked, “Which party was JFK” (no not John F. Kerry-but same party). At least she took a sample ballot to look over before she voted. However, what can one learn from a sample ballot other than the names on the ballot? She had no clue who she was voting for. All to often, people go do their civic duty but really have no clue who/what they are voting for.

    4. Yes because ORANGE MAN BAD.

      That’s the sum of his arguments.

      Trump broke him.

    5. Make it 24 hours and I will have less of a problem with it.

      This isn’t about uniformity, this is about Harris County not going the way the state legislature wanted it to. You know, don’t pretend otherwise.

      1. You sure it wasn’t about them making up their own very lenient signature matching criteria? Or using corporate money to add boxes for collection only in very blue areas?

    6. Not every boss is understanding that you need to take time off from work to go vote. Yeah, they are supposed to let you…

      Why not make a law that says “voting time shall be not LESS than 12 hours in one day”

      That will also be “uniform” voting rules.

      The bottom line, Republicans don’t want more people voting. They are the minority and low turnout is beneficial to them.

      1. voting should be on Saturdays. or banned.

      2. then you could penalize people for not allowing their employees to vote.

        Of course my wife worked in a restaurant for years and never managed to have a problem getting to a polling place before or after her shift.

        But racist fucks like you think anyone who isn’t white can’t figure this shit out.

    7. they want national election rules, per HB1. so how can they be opposed to statewide rules that are the same for all counties?

  5. The country is basically split 50-50 regarding the Republican-Democrat divide when voting. Recent history for the last couple decades, the party that loses the presidential election tends to feel that the election was stolen. 2020 is not the exception.

    Some of the items that the GOP has put forth are common sense and some are trying to game the system to enhance their prospects of winning. On the flip side the Democrats are also attempting to game the system in their favor as will.

    Voter ID is common sense and should be required by every State. Making it easier to vote with more official polling places makes common sense. Ballot harvesting is like advertising for election fraud.

    Public financing of primary elections should be criminal and it should be incumbent of political parties to finance whom they nominate for the general election.

    Ballot access laws restricting third parties should be struck down or at least applied evenly instead of favoring the two major parties. Requirements for inclusion to the debates need to be applied evenly instead of neglecting third party candidates.

    1. I’d say neither party has clean hands. Some of what Georgia is doing is perfectly defensible, like mandating uniform standards, and putting the law back where the legislature originally put it, and barring hijinks like the judiciary and executive got up to last year. But there’s some gaming in there, though nothing facially racist, which is more than you can say about things the Democrats have been doing lately, such as explicitly racist farm relief.

      I’ve read HR 1 from end to end. (Took a while!) It’s a grab bag ranging from great ideas that should be uncontroversial, (Voter verified paper ballots.) to bad ideas that are regrettably constitutional, (Extensive use of the internet for things that need more security.) to really astoundingly bad ideas that have already been ruled unconstitutional. (Campaign censorshipfinance provisions.) I don’t doubt that they’d love to make the whole mess the law of the land, but I suspect that last bit is intended as Supreme court stomping bait to set up a pretext for Court packing.

    2. Voter ID is indeed common sense. But most Voter ID laws are NOT. That’s what so many Republicans don’t understand. Not all legal voters have the specified documents. I would be more in favor if the allowed from different documents. Drivers license OR passport OR birth certificate OR etc, etc. That’s common sense. But some of these laws are too narrow. They’re not designed to make things fair, they’re designed to RESTRICT the vote.

      Because not everyone has your specific form of ID. Not everyone drives. Not everyone travels with a passport. You may think it’s strange, but there are citizens who don’t have those documents. They still have the right to vote.

      Here’s my idea: Must present your Voter Registration Card. Period. (Allowances for provisional votes, yada, yada, yada). Everyone who has registered has one. Is it a legal form of ID? No, but then again there’s only one per voter, so it’s fair. Or this, simple: Allow ANY legal form of identification. ANY.

      1. Because not everyone has your specific form of ID. Not everyone drives. Not everyone travels with a passport. You may think it’s strange, but there are citizens who don’t have those documents.

        Quite trying to gaslight.

        Those people all have government-issued ID, even if they don’t drive, because they need it for applying for food stamps, applying for welfare, applying for Medicaid/Social Security, applying for unemployment, getting married, adopting a pet, renting a hotel room, applying for a hunting license, applying for a fishing license, buying a cell phone, visiting a casino, buying cigarettes, picking up a prescription, buying an “M” rated video game, purchasing nail polish at CVS and buying certain cold medicines.

        You may have lived a life of having your servants do all this for you, but all the regular and poor people have gotten ID to do so.

        1. fuck off tulpa. read his last sentence

      2. Brandybuck, let’s be honest. How many people, personally, do you know that have no identification and no means to get ID.

        If the number is greater than zero, I would be shocked.
        There is only one group that has this to any meaningful percentage: the homeless, and even they typically have them (though often expired). Every other group has official identification because, as Mother said above, you need it to function in our society.

        Even for the small fraction of people who do not have ID, they almost universally have the ability to get some. This is why all voter ID laws include a no-fee ID card. Aside from the homeless and a few unusual outliers who have no identification at all (no birth certificate, driver’s license, or social security), this covers everyone.

        The claims of mass disenfranchisement with huge swaths of America becoming unable to vote because they have no identification is just not believable. The anecdotes used to support this are dubious and the statistics patently absurd.

        1. Agree with you. Read a fascinating book about minorities consistently in trouble with the law (for even the minorest of minor reasons) and they get things you need ID for via a black market of sorts. It DOES take time to get a government issue ID and those who are not on the run from the law may have a hard time jumping through all the hoops, but it can be done. If they care about voting, ever, they’ll jump through the hoops at some point. IDs are valid for several years, many voting cycles both locally and nationally. One can also argue that people who “can’t” get an ID for whatever reason are similarly unmotivated to vote because they have far too many other things to worry about on their Hierarchy of Needs. All that said, someone who WANTS to vote is NOT barred from voting by any election law I’ve ever heard of.

          1. “All that said, someone who WANTS to vote is NOT barred from voting by any election law I’ve ever heard of.” Agree. I will crawl through glass to vote.

        2. Haven for Hope is a shelter for the homeless. They require an ID to stay there.

      3. Or require that picture IDs go directly on the Voter Registration Card. We have the cheap technology for that now. Problem solved.

        1. Thomas, you do realize that putting a picture on it would mean you will have to show up in person to get your voter registration, right?

          That’s the thing. All these voter ID provisions include the ability to get a free ID, typically from the DMV. This was decided in the first few rounds of ID requirement lawsuits under the Bush Adminstration.

          The Democrat argument is now saying that the requirement to show up at a location to get your ID renewed and picture taken every seven years is in itself such a burden that it’s effectively a poll tax. That’s the argument that Republicans are balking at and calling absurd.

      4. Most all states that require an ID to vote, offer a FREE ID. Oh wait, its too much trouble to get a FREE ID.
        College students that are from out of state, only in school temporarily, should NOT be allowed to vote in and affect that state/county/city election. When I was serving, I voted absentee, college students should too.

        1. “Most all states that require an ID to vote, offer a FREE ID. Oh wait, its too much trouble to get a FREE ID.”

          What documents are needed to obtain that ID? Where are the offices located and when are they open? And when you say “most states”, do you know which states you are talking about? Have you looked at lists of what states require what forms of ID so that you can be sure that you have your facts correct, or are you just assuming that you are correct or that what some pundit or commentator said is correct?

          1. I cannot say for detail everywhere. However, for Texas, you need some method of proving who you are (birth certificate, social security card, etc) and it’s available at any DMV. The ID is for all practical purposes a driver’s license that doesn’t allow you to drive. It also lasts seven years, if I recall correctly.

            And it’s all states. That was hashed out in the Bush era. It’s a requirement that the courts have placed on states in order to require identification.

            I’m sorry, but you have a balancing act. Requiring identification in order to get identification is the ONLY protection from rampant identity theft, which is an all-too common problem anyway. You are creating catch-22 after catch-22 in order to argue that any requirement for ID is impossible for some people, when the number of people who it affects are vanishingly small AND really do need this ID in order to function in society. There are charities dedicated to helping these people (typically, the homeless)

            I don’t understand how I have to present my ID to obtain employment, get insurance, get housing, purchase electricity, or open a bank account, but somehow there are swaths of people who function both without any ID and without the means to get any.

    3. “The country is basically split 50-50 regarding the Republican-Democrat divide when voting.”

      That “50-50” has significant error bars and a lot of variation between states and within states. Biden received several million more votes than Trump, Republican members of Congress represent millions fewer people than Democratic members of Congress, etc. Gerrymandering and the unequal representation of the Senate are allowing Republicans at the national level a big boost over the actual tally of votes. Besides, people that claim to be Democrats or Republicans plus those that are nominally independent but fairly reliably vote for one or the other don’t make up the whole electorate. Deep dives into survey data seems to show about 10% or so of voters that are more truly independent, meaning that a real 50-50 split would be impossible.

      Everyone that has a partisan axe to grind regarding how elections are run has an incentive to engage in motivated reasoning. It is up to each person to question what they think even harder than what the other side would do. Free, fair, and open elections are far more important than any policy our side would want to implement or any policy that the other side proposes that we would want to block. If people won’t put Democratic processes ahead of partisanship and policy preferences, then dysfunction and division will only increase.

  6. Are churches forbidden from rounding up parishioners to go vote on a day that is not Sunday?

    1. As long as these efforts are not funded by the government, they shouldn’t be.

  7. “the fundamental right to vote” is leftist BS. What about the fundamental right to have your vote count only once or be counted at all. When you say that the mere act of voting is some magical right, but you don’t give two shits about transparency, then you’re really saying that the government has a fundamental right to go full Stalin on us.

    1. It’s typical tyrannical election theatre straight out of a dictators playbook.

      Make a huge show about how every body should vote and that every vote is important, and then treat the actual ballots like used toilet paper because the fix is already in.

    2. Full transparency means that your vote is public. Let’s have Big Brother there in the booth with you broadcasting your vote for the entire world to see.

      1. That’s not what full transparency means at all, are you deliberately being retarded?

        Full transparency means that the public can witness the vote count and observe the acceptance and rejection of ballots and on what criteria.

        1. Yes he is. The narrative has been set. Any integrity means taking votes away.

    3. True, it’s not fundamental. It’s a state construct to do statey things. Like, who will be your Master and how much will your Master let you keep.

    4. The fundamental right to vote is not anyone’s BS. It is core to the American Founding principle that legitimate government power is derived from the “consent of the governed”.

      The right is oh so worried about “transparency” and “security” of elections, but they are the ones that don’t give two shits about whether people believe that that have equal access to the ballot. You can’t have one without the other. The infamous saying that goes that it does not matter who votes but who counts the votes is bullshit. Fake democracies don’t just engage in fraud by manipulating the count, but by manipulating who gets to run for office in the first place and who gets to cast votes. If Republicans and their supporters really care about election “integrity” then they will want to be sure that elections are secure AND that all eligible voters are able to vote in the most convenient way possible.

      Think of how courts balance government priorities with other rights held by the people. “Strict scrutiny” is applied to any government restriction or action that would impact a person’s fundamental rights. Is the government’s policy serving a “compelling government interest” in the “least restrictive” way possible? Voting is a fundamental right of all adult citizens in this country (though the states at the Founding often restricted it to property owners, and almost always just white men), just like the right to Free Speech, Free Exercise of Religion, protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, etc. It is on the government to show that anything that makes exercising the right to vote more burdensome is both serving a compelling government interest and that it is the least restrictive means of serving that interest.

  8. according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, where I work.


  9. “The bill requires that residents on the list who did not vote in the last two election cycles be sent notices asking if they would like to continue receiving mail-in ballots. Recipients who do not respond yes would be dropped from the list, meaning that they would have to vote in person, according to the bill’s sponsor.”

    This is racist? wtf kind of far left stupidity is Harwood regurgitating?

    1. These people really do believe in white savior mentality. They think minorities need paternalistic actions to save them. Their attitudes haven’t changed since their days in the KKK.

      1. You say that as if you think they LEFT the KKK.

    2. Poor minorities are too stupid to read their mail.

      1. Or, seemingly, read?

        1. Reading is white supremacy.

  10. Yes, its so horrible that Republicans want people to present ID to vote. How dare they!

  11. How about requiring a vaccine passport in order to vote?

    1. they’ll probably make that determination based on how many Republicans they can disenfranchise

    2. Don’t give them any ideas….Well, they probably have that in their quiver.

  12. We just had a election with a massive turnout. An election that was secure. An election that was examined multiple ways and shown to be fair. Why the need to change the rules? Because it did not produce the outcome some people wanted. These new laws are not needed for election integrity, that leaves the only conclusion that they are to advantage their party in future elections.

    1. Or conversely, if there aren’t any integrity issues in the first place as you believe, then these new laws won’t have any real effect then, one way or the other.

      1. I have flexible hours, liberal vacation policies etc. I can get whatever documents, I can apply for whatever ID, and I can vote with a .00001% chance that I will loose my job (or even a single penny of pay) for taking care of all this.

        Georgia, if you give your employer notice, you can have 2hrs, unpaid to vote. Which means you have to get home, get to the polls, stand in line, get back to work etc. within 2hrs…. Hope the bus schedule is working…. Assuming your boss follows the rules.

        1. “Which means you have to get home, get to the polls,….” Why do you have to go home first?
          Why is it that democrats don’t believe poor people can’t make it to the polls? Most states (not all) have at least 2 weeks of early voting. Vote before or after work.

          1. Because confuse is a racist.

          2. ““Which means you have to get home, get to the polls,….” Why do you have to go home first?
            Why is it that democrats don’t believe poor people can’t make it to the polls? Most states (not all) have at least 2 weeks of early voting. Vote before or after work.”

            Why is it that you don’t pay attention to anything that doesn’t fit your argument? Did you miss in the article and everywhere else where people are saying that voting lines can sometimes be several hours long, especially in low-income, minority-heavy urban areas? Why should people in suburban areas be able to walk in and vote without waiting in line at all, while people in low-income areas wait for hours? Maybe you should shut up about how easy it is for poor people to vote unless you also have to wait for hours where you live.

    2. Lol. Just last week you said minorities were too dumb to get ID.

    3. When a state recounts votes – especially mail in votes – what are they validating? Are they only verifying that the count is correct? Do they verify that the person who cast the ballot is real, alive and registered to vote? Do they verify the address is valid and matches the name of the person who cast the ballot? How many mail in ballots were mailed out and how many were received? I do not understand why having a form of ID – be it a drivers license, utility bill, or some other proof they the person casting a vote is who they say they are is such a huge obstacle. Do most POC’s lack a basic form of ID? If so why?

      1. The recounts don’t even recount mailed in ballots, they recounted the post adjudicated ballots. So there is no determination if the vote is correct.

      2. I have never opposed IDs only suggesting that the ID match the need and that it be readily available. As you noted a utility bill can in many cases serve the need.

        Regarding the recount.
        The recount is performed for a number of reasons. First it checks that the tabulators are functioning properly. They are giving a correct count and rejecting samples that are expected to be rejected (usually marking two candidates for a single race). It gives the review board an opportunity to look at rejected ballots and maybe decide they can be included.
        As for the issue of should we accept a mail in ballot for inclusion that is based on a set of criteria. In the same way that an in person voter meets certain criteria. The pollworker checks the ID but the major criteria here is to see the person has one and there is some resemblance between the picture and the person. The voter typically put the ID away ad signs the book. The pollworker does not really do any handwriting analysis. We don’t really do a TSA type screening at the polls.

        1. In Pennsylvania, the local election board (what most other places call poll workers) are the lowest office specified in the State Constitution and are elected for a four year term.

          They are supposed to verify every voter’s identity by matching the signature on file in the poll book with the signature written into the book by the individual presenting to be that person. Depending upon certain circumstances, a particular voter’s record in the poll book may indicate additional ID is required, such as in the case of a voter who is voting in that division (precinct) for the first time, and so on. The additional ID can be any of the following:
          PA Driver’s License or ID card issued by PennDOT
          • ID issued by U.S. Government
          • ID issued by any Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Agency
          • U.S. Passport
          • U.S. Armed Forces ID
          • Student ID
          • Employee ID
          • Voter Registration Card issued by the Voter Registration Office
          • Non-Photo ID issued by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
          • Non-Photo ID issued by the U.S. Government
          • Current bank statement
          • Current utility bill
          • Current paycheck
          • Government check
          • Firearm permit

          1. Poll workers are generally not elected but are recruited by the municipal clerk to work at the polls. They maybe paid or volunteer. They do take oaths of service. None are hand writing experts and able to distinguish a true from a false signature.

            As I noted a number of times, signature are things of the past. My kids (and my doctor’s) signature are awful. Kids use PIN and the polling sites should use these also.

            1. I did the job for 8 years. It’s amazing how consistent some people’s signatures are, but OTOH, it’s also remarkable how different they can be, my own included. Even when the signature does not match like a photocopy, there are certain letters and strokes that still match perfectly. It’s one of those “I know it when I see it” kind of things.

              In my 8 years I only turned away one person for a signature mismatch. It was so obvious that it was literally like night and day. From what we could gather (he only spoke a little English), campaign workers canvassed his residence and told him they would register him to vote, so likely the campaign workers forged his signature on the registration application. At the time there were no provisional ballots, so per procedure at the time we sent the person to the local police station, where Municipal Court judges were on station to hear cases. I don’t remember if he came back with a court order to allow him to vote.

              1. Thanks for taking the time to work the polls. People like you make elections possible.

        2. A utility bill cannot serve the need. Legal Aliens, international students, and illegal immigrants can all have a utility bill in their name.

          1. Any individual wanting to vote must be registered. So the ID is only there to show that the person showing up is the person in the book. Document or undocumented citizens could not be registered and so not be in the poll book.

            1. Lol. Go research the dmv auto enrollment systems and get back to us on only allowed people being registered.

        3. Requiring a utility bill is actually more onerous if you are squatting, homeless, or renting where utility bills are covered in your rent (the bill isn’t in your name).

          Is it possible to live somewhere with no utility bills? I think it is.

    4. We just had a election with a massive turnout. An election that was secure. An election that was examined multiple ways and shown to be fair.

      Repeat the big lie often enough and it becomes true.

    5. “An election that was examined multiple ways and shown to be fair”

      By who?

      Because you guys were all crowing recently about how all the courts refused to review the cases, and all the investigations are just getting underway.

      I know it’s not peeing Russian hookers, but don’t you think that perhaps allegations should actually be investigated before being dismissed.

      1. “”but don’t you think that perhaps allegations should actually be investigated before being dismissed.””

        The party only approves of investigations of it’s enemy.

      2. Over a dozen have already been won by the “election had issues” people.

    6. OK, that’s funny. Sounds great and all but your conclusion relies on some pretty hefty assumptions. Is this sarcasm?

    7. Between 2016 and 2020 the population increased by about 9 million, and roughly 40% of the population usually vote.
      The simple fact that this election garnered 21 million more voters than the last one, should make someone raise their eyebrows in concern.
      The massive number of these that were of a type, that many countries ban as being too susceptible to fraud – mailed-in – is another reason why skepticism is rampant.
      M4E is just happy with what the “result” was and sees no reason to change, but the anomalies, that were not explained and never seriously investigated, make the possibility that this election wasn’t on the up-and-up a real thing.

  13. Imagine what WHITE GENOCIDE would be like.

    You would have to flood EVERY & ONLY White countries with millions of non-Whites.

    Then you would have to demoralize ALL Whites by screaming the R-Word! at them if they objected.

    Then you would have to pass laws to FORCE integrate all those non-Whites into every facet of White society.

    Then you would have to…Oh wait. This is already happening!

    They say it’s “anti-racist” but it’s simply anti-White.

    Anti-racist is just a code word for anti-White.

    1. Piss off with your astroturfing, Jeff. We know what you’re trying to do here with these kinds of posts.
      You’re not fooling anyone.

    2. Fuck off, Stormtaint.

    3. Flagged

  14. Isn’t it the well funded cabal of powerful people that’s disenfranchising the voters?

  15. So, Republicans are threatening the sanctity of voting, reacting to a largely imagined (but at least minimally present) fear of voting fraud.

    Now, what are Democrats threatening, based on equally imaginary fears?

    Let’s see. Free speech, gun rights, market economics, private property, presumption of innocence, internal combustion…

    1. Progressives will let everyone vote, they just won’t let you vote to protect things like free speech, gun rights, market economics, private property, presumption of innocence, internal combustion engines, etc…

      1. The end goal is to make voting simple, easy, and completely pointless as well funded cabals of powerful people decide what the proper outcome is to be.

    2. Yeah, Reason never complains about Democrats attacking “Free speech, gun rights, market economics, private property, presumption of innocence, internal combustion…” [/eye-roll jerk-off emoji here]

      1. No, not like this they do not.

        They pretty much accept whatever it is that the progressives aree doing as a fait accompli. See Toosilly’s latest on Vaccine passports for a recent example.

        Democrats may do a “bad” thing, and the thing will be criticized. But that’s about as far as it goes.

        When it comes to Republicans it’s the antithesis (there is a reference in there, if you are learned enough to recognize it) where it is the actors are themselves who have ill motives.

  16. Powell now claims ” no reasonable person” would have thought her wild allegations “were truly statements of fact”, but if you remember she wasnt just spreading lies on TV. She was attempting to use those lies in a scheme with Trump to use martial law to seize ballots and prevent state certifications. That sounds like sedition.

    1. Actually, that’s not what her counsel, (Not her!) said. You really have to watch out for paraphrases in news accounts, especially if they make somebody out to be saying something really stupid or self-incriminating.

      1. Strazole knows Powell didn’t say that, but since when have our resident fifty-centers not lied to us. It’s his job to try and gaslight.

    2. The short form is that the claims were conclusions and rhetoric in support of her client, not independent facts.

      This is why I’m not trusting the media on this. What we can independently verify is being reported almost obscenely wrong, even when the documents and videos are right there for anyone to view. So, how can I trust them on the topics that I cannot verify?

  17. So Repubs requiring every voter to show a government-issued ID to vote is in the same spirit as Dems requiring Blacks to count the kernels of corn in a jar before being allowed to vote?

    How do we confirm this? By quoting Dem politicians of course.

    Do libertarians, like Dems, long for the days when they were free to own other persons? Are you still mad at Lincoln the tyrant for taking away your property?

    1. keep stackin’ those strawmen, the truck ain’t full yet

    2. Early leader for dumbest comment of the year.

  18. Dear Mr. Harwood,

    Your piece lacks fairness and balance, at least in part because it assumes that Republican legislators are motivated by animus or a corrupt attraction to power and Democrat legislators are not. Human nature doesn’t split so neatly along ideological lines.

    Democrats want the franchise to broad and porous with few safeguards and no enforcement. To be sure evidence of fraud which resulted in different national candidate outcomes is hard to find but evidence of fraud isn’t and even a few dozen votes can mean the difference between one-party control of a borough council, county committee, state legislature, or, dare we note, a U.S. House seat. Democrats control all major metropolitan areas and are intent on keeping an iron fist on their unchallenged power. They care about broadening the franchise and weakening the controls because, through it, they attain power.

    I don’t know how much the Brennan Center for Justice actually cares about justice, but I assure you that your elected Democrats do not. They are not fundamentally different than their Republican counterparts. They are, at heart, substantially the same. Only their aims and methods are different.

    For Republicans, a broad franchise that includes those who are not legally entitled to vote is disadvantageous. Happy to have People of Color and women and other minorities vote in districts they control, their impulse isn’t any more to animus than Democrats, but their interests are in a narrower, more tightly controlled voting franchise. Their bills are in line with that party interest.

    Perhaps the better and more justice-oriented question is why so many millions of us are disenfranchised through election rules:
    Why are there “safe districts” like mine in which my U.S. Representative, State Senator, and State Representative have no reason to bother with me since they will never face a viable challenger?
    Why does it take hundreds of nomination signatures for third party candidates but just ten for candidates of the Republican and Democrat parties?
    Why does the State run primary elections at all since the parties are, in essence, private clubs?
    Why are projections published while the polls are open and why aren’t recounts automatic? Is there any good reason for insisting on results the same evening and into the next day rather than waiting until a full second count and certification is made?
    Why did my votes when I was in active service not get counted at all unless the margin of victory was small?

    There are many areas of actual disenfranchisement for your think tank to tackle but, for my part, I believe that every person who votes should have to show photo identification and that everyone who votes should have to demonstrate that they are entitled to do so.

    Those are the federal rules for working in the United States and I don’t think voting should be treated with any less importance than serving fries in a fast-food restaurant.



    1. The usual excuse given for state running of primaries, and supervision of some other party functions, is to keep the parties honest.

      1. I get the argument but I think it falls flat. Most local elections are uncontested on Primary ballots and parties go to great lengths to squash any unendorsed candidates. What happens in back rooms is far more influential than the primary votes. At a fundamental level, I’m not sure endorsing primaries as fair and valid is in the State’s interest anyway. There isn’t much Democracy on display in most primaries and I’m not sure we should care whether the party selects their candidates via vote of a central committee, on-line, or through any other means. I should rather all candidates have to obtain the same number of signatures to appear on the general ballot and call it a day. If Dems or Republicans win, as they most certainly will in most contests, even without any help from the State, fine. Giving them a leg up on the competition, such as it is, isn’t doing great things for our Republic.

        1. Indeed, the Republicrats have usurped our government. One could almost say we already have one party rule with a couple of internal factions that squabble a lot. Let’s just hope the purges don’t get too brutal.

          1. Wait… Perhaps you mispoke. If not, I don’t understand. Dems control the U.S. House and Senate as well as the Presidency. Demographically, Dems are ascendant and control all major metro areas as well as an increasing number of suburban counties. If there is one-party rule, surely it is the party in power… the Dems. I don’t personally think this is true either. Every six years or so, the media declares one party or the other “dead” and suggests that there will be a major splinter and “decades in the wilderness.” They’re terrible prognosticators since none of that ever happens. We the People are, at present, something akin to wrestlers joined at the wrists. We cannot extricate ourselves and are exhausting ourselves in by fighting between us while the elite stand around cheering and enriching themselves on the fight.

    2. Well said.

      1. Thanks.

  19. “This eruption of legislation should worry anyone who believes that the ultimate authority in this nation rests with the people and not the politicians.”

    Yet not a word about HR1/S1 which is orders of magnitude worse, and likely unconstitutional.

    1. It is a somewhat odd construction to describe how a federal representative republic makes rules governing itself. Like it completely ignores who actually makes the rules.

  20. So Reason has gone all in with their progressive overlords.

    Wow, who knew?

    1. That’s what Charles Koch and his new friend Soros, pays them for.

  21. “the fundamental right to vote.”

    A right so fundamental it never appears in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.

    1. And the 15th, 19th, 24th & 26th amendments are just chopped liver?

      1. If it was a “fundamental” right, we wouldn’t have needed those amendments to broaden the eligible voting population.
        And two of those were to “correct” restrictions delineated in the 14th – “male citizens twenty-one years of age”.
        So, even 79 years after its ratification, the Constitution was spelling out restrictions on who should vote.
        That doesn’t sound like something that is “fundamental”.

  22. “n the run-up to the election, Harris County tried to make it easier to vote during the pandemic. Officials kept polling locations open for 24 hours to give voters more options and to limit the number of people waiting to vote. They opened drive-through voting locations, which they then almost entirely shut down on Election Day due to Republican legal challenges. And they tried to send voters mail-ballot applications but were stopped by the Texas Supreme Court.

    Republicans in the statehouse want to put an end to any future experimentation with easier voting. S.B. 1115 requires all counties, regardless of size, to have the same early voting schedule.”

    So the Texas GOP is making it harder for Latinos to vote by requiring that a Latino (and therefore Democrat) dominated county NOT operate under looser rules for the when polls open and close from the rest of the state? I do not think that proves what the author thinks that it proves.

  23. at best african americans are 11% of the population. if you are charitable and allow that 40 percent will vote or whatever percentage mirrors the general voting population then the premise that this is promoting ‘voter suppression’ is laughable. simple math and analysis proves that the premise is a joke if applied nationwide. there are states where the non white populace is less than 10 percent in total. and if one needs ID to get a gun, or drive a car, or enter their place of work in many cases why is having an ID to vote in ANY way suppression or racist? if is not. and of course the narrative is a lie.

    1. at best african americans are 11% of the population.

      Have you been in a coma the past 40+ years? African-Americans have been over 11% of the US population since at least 1980 (11.5% in 1980 according to the US Census; never below that percentage subsequently).

  24. Democrats have enacted laws, and imposed rules that have encouraged and maintained millions of fraudulent votes to be cast every election just so they can win elections (as occurred last year).

    Thanks to left wing PA Democrat Gov Wolf (and to biased Democrats on PA’s Supreme Court who violated the PA and US Constitution in recent election rulings), votes in PA were counted for those who submitted mail in ballots without a matching signature, or without any signature at all.

    But a decade ago, my signature was rejected when I tried to voted in person (here in PA) because I signed my name Bill instead of William (the name I’m registered under). I had to resign my name using William in order to vote. Republicans in PA who vote at the polls are treated very different than folks who sent in multiple mail in ballots (without matching signatures) for Joe Biden.

    1. In 2020 in PA, EVERY mail in ballot was invalid because there is no such thing as a mail-in voter in the State Constitution. Article 7 uses the phrase “offer to vote” (meaning show up at your polling place in person) as the original and only way to vote. An amendment was passed in 1957 that allows absentee voting, but ONLY for the specific reasons listed in the passed amendment.

      Then came Act 77 of 2019 which created a new class of voter, a mail-in voter. Before someone says “semantics,” that same Act 77 plainly states that a mail-in voter is not an absentee voter. The problem is, how does a mere law add a new kind of voter when the last time they wanted to add a kind of voter, they needed a constitutional amendment to do it? And if that was not bad enough, well, they DID initiate the Amendment process, but that requires the proposed amendment be passed twice in a row by two consecutive Legislative sessions after which it goes out to the voters to be voted up or down. It hasn’t passed the Legislature for the second time yet, let alone get approved by the voters!

      And the friggin’ useless Dopes on the PA Supreme Court said that’s OK. A bigger collection of oxygen thieves you’ll never see.

  25. In France, we are required to prove identity before voting, since the beggining of voting.
    And we prohibited mail-in voting in the 50s due to the obvious risk of fraud. (When your national post service is controlled by a communist union, you better be careful)

    1. ours sort of is

  26. This isn’t about voters voting about who can vote. This is about political machines setting the rules to favor themselves. Both sides do it when they can. This is no great mystery. Republicans lost a very close national race, that essentially came down to voter turnout via mail-in ballots. So Republican states now want to restrict mail-in ballots. Funny thing is, not many years ago the Democrats didn’t like main-in ballots because they had a significant number of military and ex-pats, who tend to vote Republican.

    That the game has some political self-interest behind it does not make it any less a game. It’s the naked moralizing from the Right that is so stupid. In another decade it could have been the Left (greens stealing votes, hanging chands, etc). Madison was right, local political machines will “fix” the rules to give themselves an advantage in national races.

    Republicans getting rid of mail-in ballots because Democrat chose to utilize mail-in ballots during a global pandemic is such a naked display of political machination that I’m somewhat agog that so few people can see it. It’s the ballot equivalent of a two mile wide and hundred mile long spiraling Gerrymandered district. No one can possibly look at it and say with a straight face, “yes, that’s fair”.

    Yes of course there’s a tendency in democracies to restrict the vote. That doesn’t mean it should be celebrated and exercised.

    If you think the mail-in ballot procedures in your district were not solid, then come up with some procedures that are better. Don’t just gut the whole thing because your guy lost. It was your guy, after all, who explicitly encouraged his supporters to NOT use mail-in ballots. What the fuck did you expect?

    To be fair, I’ve voted absentee for the last twenty years. I travel a lot, so I can’t always guarantee that I will in my home precinct come election day. This isn’t about national elections, it’s about all the local ones too. It’s legal, it’s approved, it’s been tested by time. And the absentee ballot in my state has been shown to skew to the… Right. The GOP is an aging party. Make it harder for old people to vote and you’ll spiral down that much faster.

    If you want to make a difference, get off your fat ass and drive an old person to the polls. Or drive them to the ballot drop off box. Or walk precincts. Or man the phone banks. But sitting back and whining about how life is not fair because Orange Man did not win is beyond pathetic.

    1. Thanks Brandybuck for a thoughtful and well-written comment! Kudos!

      (It beat the snot out of the usual “My tribe good, your tribe bad” comments around here.)

      1. Of which you’re the leading purveyor.

      2. A pox on both the tribes. The commentariat is unable to see past the color of their team flag.

        1. And yet you never pox both sides… just one. Weird. Fake sanctimonious actions are the best ones.

          1. Brandybuck just poxed both houses, clearly!

            But in the “Special World” of “Der VERY Special One”, AKA Der JesseBahnFuhrer, ANYONE who does NOT suck the Great Orange Dick of the Great Orangish-Whitish Pumpkin-Father is TOTALLY biased and one-sided!

    2. “If you think the mail-in ballot procedures in your district were not solid, then come up with some procedures that are better.”

      Lol, oh wow.
      That’s what they are trying to do and that’s exactly what you crooked clowns are pretending is “racist”.

    3. or they observed how little care was taken to validate the mailed out ballots when they came back, and how easily they were harvested under poorly controlled conditions, and decided to try to at least make the Dems work at it next time

  27. Just make whatever ID they eventually require to purchase a firearm mandatory for voting.

    1. I can’t say about anywhere else but Texas polls take concealed handgun licenses.

  28. GOP state legislators have introduced a raft of new bills aimed at restricting the fundamental right to vote

    This is probably going to shock Hell out of a lot of you, but there is no such thing as a fundamental right to vote, nor even a natural right to vote.

    A fundamental right is a right that is a basis for all other rights. The only three fundamental rights are Life, Liberty, and Property, with all others being derivative rights. A right can only exist if it is non-contradictory of other rights and of the same-held rights of others and the only way a right can be contradicted or violated is by coercion or fraud

    Voting is an act of exercising coercive power over the Life, Liberty, and Property of other rational beings. Since there is no such thing as a “right” to violate the rights of others, it follows that voting not only is not a fundamental right, but is not a right at all. The one thing the Founding Fathers made clear above all else in The Declaration of Independence and other writings is that the exercise of power is not a right, whether the power is exercised by a King, a President, a Justice, a Representative Legislature, or a mob of rabble.

    Also noteworthy, an individual can exercise an actual right anytime, multiple times, 24/7/365, without let or hinderance from anyone else (within the bounds of the rights of others, of course.) This is clearly not how voting works, so, once again, voting is not a right.

    Fret not, though. Even if using the ballot box is not a fundamental right, using your computer box and (as a last resort) your cartridge box are your right and are most likely the more effective boxes to use. As the bumper sticker says: “If voting really changed things, it would be illegal.”

    1. +1

    2. “This is probably going to shock Hell out of a lot of you, but there is no such thing as a fundamental right to vote, nor even a natural right to vote.”

      The Declaration of Independence seems to disagree with you.

      We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed [Emphasis mine]

      The Founders did worry about ‘the mob’ and that the people could be overwhelmed by passions and the like, so they tempered their belief in democracy with institutions to moderate that. Hence a republic rather than a direct democracy, as libertarians and conservatives love to pedantically proclaim. They also limited voting in many ways at the time, such as to property owners, and, of course, mostly to white men. But the “consent of the governed” always meant that elections would be held where eligible citizens would vote for their leaders. Their original views evolved toward universal suffrage because it IS the fundamental right of all adult citizens to be a part of the electorate that gives its consent to be governed.

      1. Ah, but you see, people can only rightfully delegate powers that they rightfully possess themselves. If an individual has no right to violate the Life, Liberty, and Property of another, then they cannot delegate the “right” that they don’t possess to a government via a vote. So, once again, voting is not a right.

        And since a vote is only valid and and effective within a certain geographic jurisdiction and only at certain time frames every two, four, or six years, and only one per voter, and if candidates can contest an election, it is definitely not a universal right.

        And unlike legitimate natural individual rights, a vote is a human creation, not a phenomenon that pre-existed the formation of society.

        Since you mentioned it, I should hasten to add that all I say about voting holds true regardless of the economic class or inborn, immutable traits of the prospective voter. Opposing the notion that voting is a right does not equal supporting return to the Ancien Rėgime of Throne and Altar or racism and sexism.

        The Declaration of Independence did proclaim that humans have a right to “alter or abolish” governments that become destructive of individual rights, but only way a vote could possibly be construed to be a right is if it is a form of the right to self-defense against government predation of Life, Liberty, and Property.

        But, of course, defense of their individual rights is not how the bulk of voters use the vote, and since the timing and place for voting is limited, the vote is pretty lame as a self-defense weapon.

        It was a nice try, but voting is still not a right and it sure doesn’t make people free. All the Soviet Bloc nations had the vote, Red China has the vote, the former colonies of Africa have “one man, one vote, one time,” and Iraq and Iran both have the vote, but people still tried and try today to escape from all of them.

  29. “As of February 19, 2021, Republican legislators in at least 43 states had introduced more than 250 bills to suppress or constrain voting”

    This isn’t happening in a vacuum. The Democrats in the House have already passed a bill to preempt state laws on voting, and they’re threatening to nuke the filibuster if the Republicans try to stop it from passing the Senate.

    “The bill would require states to offer same-day voter registration for federal elections[3][2] and to permit voters to make changes to their registration at the polls.[3] It would require states to hold early voting for at least two weeks and would establish automatic voter registration[15][3][2] for individuals to be eligible to vote in elections for federal office in the state.[16] Under the automatic voter registration provision, eligible citizens who provide information to state agencies (including state departments of motor vehicles or public universities) would be automatically registered to vote unless they opt out of doing so.[15] The bill would also expand opportunities to vote by mail and would make Election Day a federal holiday.[15].

    —-“For the People Act” (H.R. 1)

    If your article didn’t acknowledge that the states are attempting to set their own voting rules–in the face of H.R. 1–then your article is at best misleading.

    I maintain that the states should be free to set their own voting requirements for the offices that represent state voters, be they for offices within the states or offices to represent the state in Washington. Reasonable people can disagree about what those requirements should be within each state, but it’s the states themselves that should set their own voting requirements. If the Democrats in Washington want to write voter laws for the states, then they should pass a Constitutional amendment.

    P.S. Throwing democracy out the window because you don’t want what the voters want is an excellent example of elitism, and just in case you don’t know, populism in all its forms, from left to right, is the reaction to elitism. If you want to see a real populist dictator arise in the United States of American, you’re doing a great job. Libertarians like me don’t think that’s doing a good job at all.

    1. Well said.

    2. You don’t provide any evidence for what you’re bitching about, but nonetheless, the bitching.

      About “elites” no less.

      As in “We must elect the ‘billionaire’ with gold toilets or the elites are going to get us!”

      Anything that keeps Nazis out of power is fine with me.

      1. This is nonsense.

        1. Yep. Pure troll.

        2. Your post was incoherent, and your quasi-antisemitic hysterics are tired.

          1. Tony just called me antisemitic, but he’s repeatedly insisted that Jews didn’t have a right to their lives during the holocaust.

            And I’m not kidding.

            Tony would sooner defend the logic of the holocaust rather than admit that our rights exist regardless of whether the government says so. Tony also says that Rosa Parks didn’t have the right to sit in the front of a public bus for the same reason.

            P.S. Because Tony can’t understand the simple things he reads doesn’t mean the things we write are incoherent. Tony’s willful stupidity isn’t evidence of anything but his own limitations.

            1. I can’t tell if you know what you’re saying is complete bullshit and your afraid your groupies might accidentally get some independent thought on them, or if you are actually that obtuse.

              Rights. If you have them in theory, but someone is shoving you into an oven regardless, do you really have rights?

              Oh no I am asking that we use language precisely, I must be a Nazi.

              Unlike the guy ranting about “global elites” while jacking off to dreams of owning gold toilets too.

    3. Thank you Ken !
      Looks to me like the international direction is oligarchy. The union of states that was formed under the Constitution of the US is a significant and annoying obstacle to that. Very much of the populous seems to me, care little, don’t see it, or are just fine with it.

      Reason mag is rolling with it. Very few writers articulate libertarian or individualist ideas and those get easily lost in the collective groupthink. I’ve watched the progression here for near on forty years. Of recent it is pronounced. Thoughtful discourse in comments is often shouted out by trollish noise, bots?

      I’ve come to think that maybe those who truly cherish their own freedom are just mavericks. Curious they are still in the gene pool. Wonder if that is supposed to change?

  30. Here’s a simple fix- do away completely with in person voting, minimum voting age, ID requirements, etc and put ballots in cereal boxes, cigarette packs, and lottery tickets. Also have online ballot links from porn sites. Hey, if you are going to make voting a complete joke, might as well go all the way.

    1. Why not cut out the middleman and just tell Facebook to determine the winner by algorithm?

    2. just hold the votes on Twitter. one account, one vote. as soon as they delete the accounts of everyone who doesn’t think the right way.

    3. The sad thing is you people have actually been convinced that Republicans are trying to solve a problem that exists.

      I prefer to think of you as evil antidemocratic cunts instead of morons who don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about.

      Be more evil. At least it’s less sad.

  31. Let us just ignore the Democrats current attempt to federalize voting though.

  32. Clearly the only way to assure voting is treated the same as other constitutionally guaranteed rights is to require a pistol permit to vote.
    Who could object to that?

    1. I do. The government has no business issuing permits for exercising our fundamental human right to self-defense.


    2. What is this ‘pistol permit’ you speak of? We have no such thing where I live.

  33. It should be as easy to vote as it is to buy a gun. 😉

    In fact, some intelligent R’s (I know, I know…) should pass a law that exactly synchronizes the voting requirements and gun requirements – and watch heads explode.

    1. I wish I could tell if you were serious.
      However, to those who don’t get it, this would make voting an insanely disruptive and slow slog

      1. Really? Because where I live it would make voting extremely easy and utterly unsecure.

        1. And where is that. I’m in Texas. We love our guns, but it’s still an order of magnitude harder to purchase a firearm than to vote.

  34. Policies such as requiring a government-issued ID to vote or cutting back on early voting are facially neutral, but they disproportionately affect voters of color—who, not incidentally, overwhelmingly favor Democratic candidates.

    Oh ffs… we’re still digging in on this? In Canada, you have to provide two forms of ID and proof of address to vote, and no one considers Justin Trudeau’s Canada has a discriminatory voting system.

    Once again, someone who’s telling us that black people are uniquely incapable of navigating public life is telling me I’m the racist.

    1. Oh ffs. Canada’s voter registration system is far different than the Us. As is part of their id requirement – where student id, health insurance card, utility bills, bank statements, etc – can all serve as part of the ‘who are you’ verification of id.

      EVERY WORD uttered by Republicans on this issue is about voter suppression not election integrity. The Republican Party now is the greatest threat to the ‘republican form of government’ in the Constitution.

      1. Canadian here. You can’t have a health insurance card, utility bills, bank statements unless you’ve provided a government-issued ID to the issuer.
        In addition you can only use those as one form of the two-part ID requirement, and it must be paired with either a Canadian Passport, Driver’s License, Birth Certificate or Provincial Government-issued identity card.

        For all intents and purposes you just lied.

        1. I’ll trust Elections Canada re their id requirements. But thanks for playing. And specifically one of those govt-issued id’s is the voter information card that is sent to everyone on the voter registry list. Very different from the US where voter registries are regularly scrubbed of voters – on the quiet by bureaucrats with no notification to the voter.

          The reality is the goal of the Canadian id requirements is to affirm/prove/disprove what the government itself created with its voter registry list. The goal of US id requirements is to add additional id requirements to what an individual PREVIOUSLY used to take the initiative to register as a voter.

          1. Again, didn’t refute the point.

            A system where deceased and ‘otherwise departed’ voters are purged and then IDs are mailed out isn’t inherently more/less racist than one where no IDs are mailed out, voters apply ad hoc, don’t present ID, and are purged by byzantine bureaucractic policies post hoc.

            Frankly, it’s a bit odd that you would put forth the “check ID, mail out ID, present ID for verification” as the less burdensome process.

            1. A system where deceased and ‘otherwise departed’ voters are purged and then IDs are mailed out isn’t inherently more/less racist

              Not inherently but yes it is IN PRACTICE. The notification that is (sometimes) sent to the voter when their information has been purged is NOT actually an acceptable form of ID. It specifically is in Canada. So someone who has been purged – but still lives at that address – cannot bring that specific notice to the polling place as evidence that they themselves were purged from the registered voter database. Rather the working assumption is that they were correctly purged and now must re-register as a voter – WITHOUT prior notification that they must now re-register from scratch as a voter.

              IOW – if the person is correctly dead, they will not show up at the polls but who the hell really gives a damn that their name is not on some list.
              If the person has moved, then they will be required to re-register from scratch. Vs Canada where that notification (which may or may not have arrived with a change of address from the PO) serves as a form of ID so the government itself CORRECTS that voter registration list scrubbing.
              If the person is both alive and at the address, then the ERROR of that scrubbing results in a re-registration from scratch for everyone who doesn’t have a government-issued PHOTO id. THAT third category is racism.

        2. And, moreover, didn’t refute the underlying point. Canada requires two forms of ID and isn’t racist but the US would be racist by requiring anything other than zero is nonsensical. Doesn’t matter if Canada only accepts military ID and Top Secret clearance or the word of the two people standing either side of you in line, nobody would/should/could say the US asking the two people standing either side of you in line to verify your identity is inherently racist here but not racist in Canada.

          The idiocy is even more clear or even well supported in reverse: Canada’s two-ID policy is clearly more racist because fewer black people vote in Canada.

          1. What is racist is the exclusionary intent/effect. The two-id in Canada is intended to provided options to deal with the two separate information pieces – name and current address – if the person doesn’t have a government-issued ID that includes both elements (that form of id stands alone for voter id presentation).

            The two-id in the US is intended to be exclusionary. Because it generally adds a required third information piece – a photo of the person – and that photo is only allowable from a government-issued id. And even when it doesn’t add that extra info, it often requires that a voter cast a provisional ballot which won’t be counted unless the voter returns at a later time to show the proper form of photo id. That exclusion has nothing to do with actual election integrity but it has everything to do with excluding voters who don’t have photo id (ie drivers license).

            1. So you claim.

              What if I claim that no, its not to deal with situations where your address doesn’t match (though how anyone would know unless you told them . . . ), but rather to suppress voters to ensure the Left-Nationalism and Quebec-domination of the government continues uninterrupted?

              1. It’s not my claim. It is explicitly on the Elections Canada.

                One id needed – Drivers license or any govt-issued id with name and current address

                Two id needed – a whole slew of different id’s – including some that are govt issued

        3. This bill doesn’t forbid voter IDs.

      2. health insurance card, utility bills, bank statements, etc – can all serve as part of the ‘who are you’ verification of id.

        Which they can do here also.

        Proof of identity. Bring ONE of the following: Certified birth certificate. U.S. passport. …
        Proof of Social Security Number. Bring ONE of the following: Social Security card. W-2 form.
        Proof of Arizona residency. Bring TWO of these showing your current address: Utility bill.

        And its 12 whole dollars for the fee.

        Now, I ain’t one to push for government ID’s or anything. But you can hardly say its a major imposition that makes it impossible for people to vote because they can’t get one.

        1. The imposition is because the voters are continually scrubbed off voter lists and then forced to show all the id and be challenged by the partisan pollwatcher. The main purpose being to ensure that it takes 5-10 times longer for an individual to vote. Meaning long lines outside the polling place where the intent is to visibly discourage others from voting precisely because they see those long lines.

  35. Members of Congress now have a choice. They can see what Republican state legislatures are doing and consider using their power under the Elections Clause to do something about it.

    Wrong clause. The elections clause is something that can only be partisan. Voting rights are far more fundamental than that and both political parties have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have no interest in maintaining those fundamental rights beyond their own voting base.

    What we need is to put teeth into the Guarantee Clause – The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,. That is the one part of the Constitution that gets at the remedy for what occurs when political institutions collude to destroy the rights and privileges of individual citizens.

    1. Thats an intriguing comment and I am curious to hear you delve a little deeper.

      1. I wish I knew how to put teeth into that clause. It’s part of Article 4 so responsibility for the guarantee – and even working definition of ‘what does a republican form of government mean’ and ‘what sorts of institutional practices undermine it’ – is not subordinated in one of the three named branches of federal government – though all three are obligated under that guarantee. It’s not Article 5 so it doesn’t have to be associated with formal amendment or constitutional convention – but I suppose it could preemptively suggest things like that.

        Maybe it’s along the lines of – if we the people ever give a shit about our self-governance at the state or federal level, then this is what gives us the power to make those changes.

        1. I appreciate you sharing the idea with us. It is worth ruminating on, even if we don’t know what it would look like. God knows things are a mess and I don’t think any idea that doesn’t require a constitutional convention should be tossed without consideration.

    2. I do not think you understand what ‘republican form of government’ means.

      The US, at the Federal level is a republic. That means a central government EQUAL AND CO-SOVEREIGN to the state governments.

      You seem to support every increasing federal centralization. Which would be the opposite of a republic.

      Now, extending republic government into the states would mean the cities and counties are now equal to and co-sovereign with the state government.

      While I wouldn’t oppose that sort of organization – I don’t see how it helps you support your contention that the states shouldn’t be allowed to set election law.

      1. Otherwise, the states *already have* a republican form of government – that’s the point of having states – and the attempt by the federal government to centralize election law there would be an undermining of this.

        The reason we have 50 states is so that they can try different things and we can see how it comes out. If we knew what the fuck we were doing then yes, it would be great to have one single massive government.

        But right now, centralizing things – even if the alternative means mistakes are made – would just guarantee that mostly we’d be forcing the whole country into a single set of rules that aren’t suitable for most of the country.

      2. You seem to support every increasing federal centralization.

        I am more decentralizing – in reality – than any of you R’s. The big exception is the privileges and immunities of AMERICAN citizens – where only the federal government can improve or diminish those and where I believe that vigorous action to improve that – at the federal level for American citizens and the state level for state citizens – enhances our individual liberty.

        If you don’t like it – take it up with the 14th amendment.

        Which would be the opposite of a republic.

        You pretty obviously have no clue what an actual republican – res publica – form of government is. Which is fine because putting teeth into how to guarantee it still requires input and feedback from the entirety of the publica. No matter how dumb or deluded. But hey – if you’re interested, the founders also had plenty to say about republican form of government. eg Thomas Jefferson

  36. Just to be clear, Powell didn’t say she was wrong, she said if, for the sake of argument, she was wrong, it still doesn’t matter because its protected speech etc. etc. etc. supported by fact etc. etc. etcc.

  37. >>a raft of new bills aimed at restricting the fundamental right to vote

    people overreact to being robbed. look at Ring.

  38. Whose right to vote is being restricted? Seems like everyone can still vote.

    And how can Dems be opposed to common sense restrictions on a fundamental right?

    1. And how can Dems be opposed to common sense restrictions on a fundamental right?

      So are you amenable to common sense restrictions on guns?

      One cold night, as a Bedouin sat in his tent, a camel gently thrust his nose under the flap and looked in. “Master,” he said, “let me put my nose in your tent. It’s cold and stormy out here.” “By all means,” said the Bedouin, “and welcome” as he turned over and went to sleep.

      A little later the Bedouin awoke to find that the camel had not only put his nose in the tent but his head and neck also. The camel, who had been turning his head from side to side, said, “I will take but little more room if I place my forelegs within the tent. It is difficult standing out here.” “Yes, you may put your forelegs within,” said the Bedouin, moving a little to make room, for the tent was small.

      Finally, the camel said, “May I not stand wholly inside? I keep the tent open by standing as I do.” “Yes, yes,” said the Bedouin. “Come wholly inside. Perhaps it will be better for both of us.” So the camel crowded in. The Bedouin with difficulty in the crowded quarters again went to sleep. When he woke up the next time, he was outside in the cold and the camel had the tent to himself.

      1. So are you amenable to common sense restrictions on guns?

        We already have them – and look how easy it is to get a gun in most states *snerk*.

        So, I have a counter-proposal – let’s make getting a gun just as easy across the country as it is to vote?

        You don’t want ID for voting? Fine. No ID for guns either.

        And don’t give me the old ‘votes never killed anyone’ – there’re several hundred million graves out there filled with people killed by a vote.

  39. Bored, didn’t bother reading, I know it’s bogus.

  40. What is this shit doing here?

  41. The author of this shallow reasoning pretends as if this is occurring in a vacuum. No external factors that would compel Republicans to act.

  42. There’s a lot more evidence of vote fraud than there is of racism.

    1. the goalposts have moved. *direct* evidence will only suffice.

  43. Okay, Reason. I used to like your articles as a valuable outside point of view, but lately you’ve wandered into the mentally deficient and deranged. I’ll be cancelling my subscription now. You’re junk

    Voter ID laws and security are basic, fundamental, and NOT racist. If every vote is sacred then you would think that the same basic protections we give things like bank accounts would apply to voting. Instead, we’re supposed to doublethink that VoterId is DoublePlusBad but Vaccination Passports are DoublePlusGood.

  44. But voeter IDs AREEA COMMUN SENCE!

    But this law doesn’t say states can’t require IDs for voting. It does a whole fuckton of a lot to reverse Republican skullfucking of democracy, but not what you’re bitching about.


    I personally am going to lobby for denying the right to vote to anyone who supported the attempted overthrow of the United States, and restoring it to all the patriotic felons.

    1. will you go start doing that now?

      1. You people obviously are not ready for democracy. It takes work, and it takes the mature patience of someone who can handle not winning every time.

        1. Says the Democratic Nazi who can’t figure out which Nation he lives in.

        2. attempted overthrow of the United States is subjective are you going after the wolf-hat guy or the entire (D) machine?

          1. Just because it was an embarrassing failure doesn’t mean it wasn’t an attempt.

            Failed revolutions usually don’t get such delicate treatment as the US criminal justice system offers. My advice is just don’t ever vote again, what with all the time you need to spend thinking about what you supported.

            1. Man, you’d think with all those “assault weapons” out there, one of the attempted “overthrowers” would have thought to use one.

              Those right wingers really are all idiots! I’ll bet they don’t even know which end is the dangerous one!

              1. Well, if you are trying to have a revolution against the most powerful human organization in history, you ought to at least bring one gun.

                1. Obviously too dumb, right?

  45. Blah, blah, blah. Etc, etc, etc.

    Voter ID is not voter suppression.

    1. This law won’t forbid requiring voter IDs.

      1. No, but it will mandate that all states allow those without valid IDs to just sign an affidavit saying they are who they claim to be, and then they get to vote. TOTALLY LEGIT! No way anyone would just claim to be someone else if they had to sign a piece of paper. ELECTION: SECURED FOREVER!

        1. And that’s already a sop to people disengenuously whining about a problem that doesn’t exist.

          Your problem is that the neo-fascist cunts you think should decide everything can’t get elected because they’re too stupid and evil. Not in-person voter fraud. It literally doesn’t exist, except for a handful of cases when Republicans tried it and got caught.

          Work on your own problems and stop advocating unnecessary government bureaucracy.

          1. Not in-person voter fraud. It literally doesn’t exist, except for a handful of cases when Republicans tried it and got caught.

            Ah, here we are with the lies.

  46. What kind of ignoramus does it take to pretend a 94% Biden favor on 600,000 votes in a Swing State ISN’T fraud…

    Oh, oh, oh I know! The same kind of ignoramus that likes to pretend having an ACTUAL legitimate ‘person’ vote is “attacking voting rights”.

    Where’s my “rights” to send out a mail-order of items and to just ‘charge it to Mr. Miyagi’???

    Let’s make laws that require all seller’s be required to sell anything to anyone that puts down “charged to” Mr. Miyagi even though the name is but an imaginary person of Hollywood Studio’s.

    Dementia Democrats and Reason(WTF) trying to brainwash the 80% of reasonable people who aren’t stupid enough to think there wasn’t election fraud given numbers so wildly ridiculous the entire PA Hearing Committee laughed out-loud when they were stated.

    The full-fall of USA election integrity is playing out by the day.
    1) Fraud the Election
    2) Use Gov threats to censor media that acknowledges fraud
    3) Censor the sitting president and call him an insurrectionist
    4) State repeatedly there was no election fraud.
    5) Complain about any “leak” ending up as correcting fraud.
    WOW.. JUST WOW!!!

  47. What Everyone Should Want
    This eruption of legislation should worry anyone who believes that the ultimate authority in this nation rests with the people and not the politicians.

    Wait, we’re supposed to be concerned about “an eruption of legislation” when no one was supposed to be concerned about an eruption of rule changes made by unelected bureaucrats weeks and months before the elections, all under the guise of “BUT THE ‘RONA!”

    Whatever the details, at least these particular changes are being proposed by elected representatives of the people, yet I bet the Brennan Center had no problem with unelected partisan hacks making random diktats before the election.

    “This is very upsetting to people,” she said, referring to family members who received ballots for deceased relatives. “I don’t know how prevalent it is. I just don’t think it should be happening.”

    In Morris County, the staff was working twelve-hour days, including weekends, to rush out hundreds of thousands of ballots, while other states have spent years perfecting mail-in ballot systems, she said.

    “What we’re trying to do here in New Jersey is condense what they’ve taken 10 to 20 years to do in an eight month period,” Grossi said.

    Other county clerks concurred. “I’m sure it will happen in my county too because the state voter registration system is not up-to-date,” said Christine Giordano Hanlon, the Monmouth County Clerk.

    Gov. Phil Murphy’s office didn’t respond to questions and referred NJ Advance Media to the Secretary of State.

    And cleaning up these voters rolls? Opposed at every step by Democrats, because they don’t just benefit from shaky voter roll information, the count on it.

  48. This writer makes a stupid error about Georgia’s proposed ban on water and food at poling places. The intent of the rule is to prevent electioneering at the poling places -and that is a common rule in many states. The neutral poling workers can hand out water – they can set up self serve water stations – and there’s nothing preventing Domino’s from delivering food to the people in line. Georgia just wants to prevent “Harris for President” volunteers, with their campaign hats, shirts, buttons on their collars, etc. (same goes for GOP candidates) from showing up and passing out free goodies to people in line at the polls.

    1. Then why do you need a law. Election rules limit electioneering near the polling place. So if those people handing out water have a MAGA hat or Trump button you could tell them they can not pass out water. If they go take off the hats and get rid of the buttons they can come back and pass out water or pizza. No law is necessary.

    2. Polling workers are far too busy to hand out water. You’ve obviously never been one.

  49. I’m sorry, Reason, are you:

    1. Blind,
    2. Stupid, or
    3. Evil?

    Other than the people arrested for voter fraud, the videos of voter fraud, all the affidavits of voter fraud, and the breaking of laws by making up the rules as they went, here’s an article that you, Reason, keep ignoring:

    -An An-Cap who wouldn’t have voted for Trump with a gun to his head

  50. The author works for the far left Brennan Center. I stopped reading after I saw that.
    For 200 years, before the rise of automobiles, we voted in person and on Election Day.
    Now we “need” early voting and vote by mail? Why?
    We need voter ID, and making all Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid cards photo ID would solve that issue easily, while combating fraud in the various systems.

  51. Over 100 nations, including all you would recognize a “civilized” or “developed”, require POSITIVE ID before voting. Virtually all require same day in person voting too. Amazing isn’t it that only in the USA do these common sense requirements cause a sh*tstorm of emotion drive drivil.

    1. Plenty of countries (see below) allow early voting either at polling sites or by mail. In Sweden you don’t need to register. The fact is that single day voting is a remnant of an earlier time. In todays 24/7 world people need more options.

      New Zealand

      1. With most folks working remote or just collecting a check from the Fed’s printing press..esp democrats..they have plenty of time to stand in line and vote..just like we always have. show up in person and with an ID…boomer

  52. LOL, that’s the most embarrassing article I’ve seen Reason publish.

  53. Awesome, I used to have to subscribe to “In these Times” or “The Nation” to get left wing drivel, but now my reason subscription brings me fresh left wing drivel without having to subscribe to actual left wing magazines.

    Maybe reason should rename itself as Leftist reasoning instead!!

    1. Must be hard to discover that Reason is a division of the Republican Party.

  54. Hey cultists, no one in power is actually concerned about fraud. They have looked for fraud; can’t find it. They have claimed they have evidence of fraud; “no reasonable person would believe it” -(Sydney Powell when sued for defamation).

    And similar to how a GOP strategist’s papers were leaked by his daughter when he died, that showed that gerrymandering on racial lines was a primary GOP election strategy for decades, we now have a leaked call in which billionaire donors and GOP big wigs lament that HR1 is a reasonable and popular bill, and they can’t think of good “marketing messages” to convince us little poors that HR1 is actually bad for us.

    This is not about fraud, and that is by the admission of the people opposing HR1. This is about one side trying to prevent certain people from voting, and the other side trying to encourage maximum voter turn out.

    1. The fact is that HR1 and the state legislation is all designed to favor their own voters. The difference is that HR1 favors but making voting more accessible and the new state legislation works by making voting less accessible.

      1. Yes. It just so happens that the HR1 measures make it easier for people to vote regardless of their political affiliation or any other …ahem… demographic characteristics.

        1. If the Federal Govt in particular operated in the bounds of the Constitution, this wouldn’t even be an issue. The fear is mob rule talking away natural rights in the name of “fairness” and “democracy”.

          1. Thank you for clearly and honestly stating your position.

            I think it’s awful, and unamerican, but now we can at least talk about something productive.

            Do you think it is very libertarian or liberty-minded to make it harder for certain individuals to vote, because someone somewhere else in government does something that you personally think is unconstitutional?

            And how is everyone voting not “fairness” or “democracy”? Don’t we want maximum buy in, the consent of the governed, and for the majority to pick their elected representatives in government?

            We are still a Majority-ruled country. Having inalienable rights for the minority does not mean they get to be in charge. Elections matter. Having the majority of the population supporting you matters.

            You guys seem to think you can keep winning elections while losing the popular vote. That is a quirk in our system that is unfair on its face. It is not sustainable or tolerable. Whether or not you believe it is fair, it would lead to the collapse of the US, if it became the norm.

            1. We’re not in “harder to vote” territory. We’re in “slightly less convenient” territory.

              When I first started voting in Michigan in the 70’s, there was no early voting, you voted on election day, and that was it, unless you could demonstrate that you’d unavoidably be out of town or confined on election day. Was this a voting rights violation, and, inexplicably, nobody noticed?

              That represents the minimum amount of ease of voting which is Constitutionally required, anything beyond that is mere optional convenience.

              Remember, while a lot of people try to push the ‘non-retrogression principle’, it is NOT rooted in the Constitution. It’s merely their personal preference.

      2. The question being, less accessible to who? If you are a serious citizen and concerned with the direction of the country, are well informed and have the ability to think rationally the laws being passed by the GOP are not only acceptable but are wanted. If you are a political activist willing to go into the streets and harvest ballots and even reward voters that would otherwise not bother to vote they are restricting. If voter ID was suppressing the vote why is their no court cases by Americans being disenfranchised? In most states with strict voter ID laws they also have a way to vote for people willing to swear they are who they are but are unable to get an ID. There has to be a real advantage by Democrats to be opposed to keeping voter rolls updated and voter ID laws suppressed. When you figure that out you will begin to understand.

  55. Way back in the 1970s when I was talking law classes I seem to remember something about churches being tax exempt because they were non political. More recently I recall some cases where churches tax exempt status was challenged due to sermons preaching to vote for a particular candidate.

    So riddle me this all you smart guys; how is this allowed.

    “During election season, black churches use the day to get their parishioners to vote, a tradition known as “Souls to the Polls.” ”

    Just another observation on a different topic. Even though Leon County in Florida is basically a dem stronghold (the local newspaper is “The Tallahassee Democrat”) it has what I consider a well run election system and I don’t recall having to wait in line to vote more than maybe ten minutes at most, and usually less than that. On the other hand I do remember an article in the Tallahassee Democrat about a long waiting time during one pre election day. Thing was both the local universities (FSU and FAMU) had busses paid for by (who knows who) bus literally thousands of students to the same polling place and create a long line. Another post above ran the numbers and in Atlanta and Philly where there was suppose to be long lines the polling places would have had to deal with 70 some and 40 some voters an hour if voting was spread out over the time the polls were open.

    “Souls to the Polls” could easily overwhelm a polling station by dumping way more voters than normal at a single precinct. On the other hand as a retiree I am able to pick and choose when I vote and would bet that is at least partly responsible for how easy it is for me to vote.

    It always amuses me when I see dems wanting more restrictions on firearms purchases and less restrictions on voting. In Florida to legally buy a gun you have to show picture ID and wait at a licensed FFL dealer while they run a background check using information you have provided on a form (which includes a space for your SSN, something that at the time it was started was never suppose to be used as identification); something that can take half an hour to a couple of hours depending on how busy the system is.

    1. Encouraging people to vote is non-partisan as long as you are not telling them who to vote for. I don’t think it would count as a reason to challenge the tax-exempt status of churches. In fact, I doubt all the right-wingers who are always worried about “freedom of religion” (instead of freedom from religion) would agree with you that encouraging people to use their right to vote at church is bad.

  56. This is why I don’t give reason donations anymore. You guys really are wading into leftist waters now. This isn’t even subtle.

  57. Brennan Center…wow a bolshevik funded organization pushing for “democracy” over liberty. Not surprised. I have to show my ID to buy beer in NY State and I’m over 50. If you want to vote no one is stopping up and bring your ID. Just like you have to do to fly on a damn plane.

    Unequal results does not mean discrimination. But this author seems to think so….so I’d like to see the make up of the Brennan School of Law…how many Irish, Catholic, Italian versus the same population in NYC? Opps..crickets…again. No one is losing their right to vote here…show up and bring an you have some skin in the game..

  58. Fredrick Douglas..let’s talk about old Fredrick..he was briefed by John Brown on his terrorist act and did not notify the authorities…and when Brown and his thugs started killing people (the first one being a free black man), old Fredrick ran to Canada…

  59. Every legal vote cast should be counted. No votes that are in question should be. If you are opposed to laws that ensure only legal votes are counted apparently you are for illegal votes being counted. Apparently Democrats are ok with families starving to death if they have no ID to get on food stamps but when it comes to voting for them they become very concerned. If you are so poor you can’t afford to apply for food stamps are you really concerned with voting?

    1. Reason is a left wing publication masquerading as a liberation website.
      No mention of Green Wisconsin Democratic operatives taking over the election from city officials.
      No mention of Biden’s inability to focus even short amount of time in his one press conference. His picture gram of reporters.
      No mention of the lack of transparency by the Biden administration.
      No mention of the border crisis. Border crossings up 350% from this time last year. And that is only the ones apprehended.
      No mention of overcrowded “kids in cages”.
      No mention of illegals being released with covid.
      Little mention of trillions being printed.
      Little mention of HR1. Democratic attempt to federalize elections while in total control of the government, while whining about Republicans trying to stop voter fraud. (see Green Bay and Milwaukee WI)
      No mention of comrade Pelosi saying she can overrule the will of the people and unseat and House Rep she wants to unseat.
      But hey, still blaming everything on Trump, who is no longer President, and is a private citizen.

      1. While letting much worse leftwing violence from well-documented “extremist” networks continue largely unchecked on federal property in Portland and elsewhere, the FBI has placed “thousands” of billboards across the country seeking tips to ferret out all private citizens who were at the capitol on the one day in the past year of repeated violent mayhem that any of it could be attached to non-leftists.

        Deep-seated discrimination according to political views is a tradition at this point for an FBI that revealed its naked partisanship during Donald Trump’s presidency. There is no other reasonable explanation that a former FBI lawyer who pled guilty of fabricating evidence to create a conspiracy against a president got a slap on the wrist in January, and people who lit fires in DC streets for months that threatened at one point to consume historic buildings had a public plaza named after them and repeatedly no charges pressed, while people merely suspected of having participated in vandalism in DC on Jan. 6 have been stripped of firearms and strapped with tracking devices. Some are in jail until their trials months later.

        Meanwhile, USA Today is attempting to make sure these people either get no decent legal representation or that it bankrupts them. Leftist rioters accused of crimes including arson, rape, shooting at police, and murder, however, get the vice president of the United States to help raise their bail and huge financial donations for their legal defense, and no one bats an eye about Democrats’ open contributions to violent “insurrection.”

  60. don’t worry, the election will just keep getting better and better under Democrat rule

    until we all starve

    BOCA RATON, Fla.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Former US President Jimmy Carter stated “As a matter of fact, of the 92 elections that we’ve monitored, I would say the election process in Venezuela is the best in the world” during the kickoff of the Annual Conversations at the Carter Center series. Basing his opinion on the vast experience amassed by the institution observing and monitoring elections around the world, Mr. Carter praised the South American nation for having a voting system that makes verifying results an easy task.

  61. Matthew Harwood is an absolute complete moron. There is very little in this entire article that is factual. As a matter of fact, I would claim that Matthew is the true racist in this scenario to claim that POCs could not possibly follow the same laws that white people follow. Does Matthew claim that DMV does not allow POCs to obtain a free photo ID? Does Matthew claim the POCs cannot possibly find and arrive at the DMV?

    My biggest fear is that after David’s passing, Charles Koch has lurched to the eft and Reason Foundation is becoming just another branch of the MSM. I have not seen what I would call an objective article in close to a year.

  62. Oh puleeze! The promotion of vote-by-mail, motor voter, automatic voter registration etc. etc. has undermined the integrity of our system of voting. As was on display in Nevada and other places, adding millions of voters into the absentee voting system made it inevitable that there would be virtually zero hope of verifying whether or not the ballots were voted by the person whose name was on the envelope. In Nevada they went from requiring eight points of similarity in the signature to zero in a matter of hours after finding that they were rejecting hundreds of ballots. Clearly the same thing happened in every state that allowed ballots to be submitted with nothing but a signature on an envelope to verify authenticity. Machine verification will only go so far after that the signatures have to be reviewed by a human. Humans become incapable of making those distinctions after a couple of hours. This is a problem. We don’t know how many ballots were submitted fraudulently, but we know that the problem was very widespread. Our elections were overall fair and functional and corruption was unusual right up until 2020. We cannot allow the abuses created in the name of pandemic security to become the new norma.

  63. There is nothing “racist” about requiring all voters who are able to present themselves physically at a polling place on election day to cast their vote. If there were long lines anywhere that could be solved by establishing more polling places or keeping the polls open longer. Vote-by-mail is just a problem waiting to happen. As for same-day registration, why? I’ve noticed that when people want a marriage license, they have no trouble getting to the county clerk’s office during business hours.

  64. This is CNN.

  65. All the Republicans are doing is to certify and identify that the voters are who they say they are, and are citizens of of the precinct where they are voting. Plus they are attempting to stop stuffing the ballot box by holding down voting by mail. It takes very little effort to comply, and the vast majority of all of us are already there. These are the three things that caused all of the doubt about the 2020 election.

    1. A leftist isn’t interested in hearing that.

  66. Excellent piece over at National Review on this:

    This column is such an embarrassment, I can’t believe it passed editorial muster. KMW and Nick Gillespie are better than this; Welch and Suderman, maybe not so much.

  67. All REPUBLICANS want to do is make sure you scum-sucking, lying, less-than-worthless LIBTARD DEMOCRATS cannot steal another election blind like you sorry turds did with the Presidential Election. We, the People have EVERY RIGHT TO DEMAND EVERY VOTER PROVE WHO THEY ARE WITH A PHOTO IDENTIFICATION! ANYTHING LESS IS FRAUDULENT!!! EITHER PRESENT ID OR YOU DON’T VOTE. THAT SIMPLE. DON’T LIKE IT? GO OFF YORSELF!!!!!

  68. The attempted GOP ban on early Sunday voting in Georgia (when the black churchgoers vote) was so obviously racist it was partly pulled back.

    1. Who says whites don’t vote on Sunday? I’m sure you can find a lot, because it’s considered “work”, which is forbidden on the Sabbath.

  69. Are opponents saying that blacks are incapable of obtaining ID, unlike whites? How racist.

  70. Let me ask this: why do we have voter registration to begin with?

    1. To ensure only people who can vote, vote, and they vote in the places they live?

  71. Reason’s Attack on Secure, Free and Fair Elections
    Read above article!

  72. Matthew Harwood, why was it necessary to refer to James Madison as a “slave master”? Was his ownership of slaves vital to the subject of this article or did you just feel your need for virtue signaling overwhelming?

  73. Voting was never a Right

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.