The Republican-dominated legislature of Wisconsin has been able to enact laws on Voter ID laws and limits on labor unions, and despite legal challenges from Democrats, the Supreme Court saw little to overturn. Let’s not mask the real angle here at play on how the court would play a pivotal role in reviewing the drawing of new district lines for legislative and congressional offices following the 2020 census, which has a major impact on the balance of political power.
In 2018, when the Democrats won the governorship of Wisconsin, they also polled a majority of votes for the state legislature, but the state is so gerrymandered that a majority of votes yielded 36% of total seats. The issue this weak was the composition of the State Supreme Court and its position on Republican-led voter suppression efforts. The Republican Party is in overdrive trying to maintain dominance in Wisconsin while ignoring the will of the voters.
The Roberts’ Court decision was a deliberate attempt to suppress turnout to enable these Republican efforts… and their reliance on an absurd justification shows how much these conservative activist judges are willing to to further political ends.
Scott Walker was a lame duck governor who merely signed legislation shortly before leaving office in Wisconsin. No matter what party is on the way out, this kind of activity is commonplace in both Federal and state governments.
Take a look at the 20th Amendment to the US Constitution adopted in the early 20th century. Even then this very Amendment does not completely eliminate the gap of time in its attempt to bring Congress closer to the practice of the states.
Can we compare to the Civil War? They had much more time to prepare for the election as compared to Wisconsin today who did not have time to send out the ballots. Similar but different in the most important detail, time to react.
Comparison: In the Civil War, the three states (NJ, DE, KY) controlled by the Democrats did not allow absentee ballots. Soldiers had a much harder time traveling back home to vote in person before cars were invented.
Back then there was no social distancing. Today whether voting or going food shopping some only allow a limited # of people inside at the same time. All indications are people past and present managed well enough often braving bad weather and traveling extra long distances to vote.
Ok. You seem happy with the prospect of putting people in danger if they vote. Likely will depress turnout, which seems to be the goal. Sad.
Can you cite anything written by the founders stating we should remove all risk and make voting as easy as possible for those too lazy or too scared to go to the polls?
We should be leaning towards to make voting easier, not harder. Mail in ballots are very secure, I use them myself. What a bunch of bull ■■■■■
If they were “very secure”, “vote harvesting” would not be a “thing”.
1 Like
People are also doing lengthy prison sentences for their fraud, but it’s easily fixed by making it a crime for anyone to be in possession of any ballots that are not their own or their spouse’s.
No, I can’t. You seem happy suppressing the vote.
Nobody is suppressing it. Anyone that legally can vote, can vote.
1 Like
That doesn’t make it secure. If it was secure, those people could never have done it.
1 Like
It’s not illegal for someone to “collect” armloads of ballots and turn them (or not turn them in) in in like 27 states. That is ■■■■■■■ preposterous and just cause for federal legislation to make it illegal in all states.
What does that have to do with the claim it is secure?
Nobody collects my ballot but the mailman.
Yet vote harvesting happens so obviously it’s not secure.
1 Like
Florida has fixed it and so can other states or at the federal level. I agree that in some states it is a problem, and there is no excuse for it.
https://dos.myflorida.com/elections/for-voters/voting/vote-by-mail/
Right.
