Florida's new restrictive voting laws blocked

[poweRob]

One more Republican attempt to thwart democracy has been stopped for the time being.

​

 

[bluesmoke]

At least one court is getting it right. Until it gets to SCOTUS.

 

[Mycroft]

One more Republican attempt to thwart democracy has been stopped for the time being.

​

Well, I looked over the summary of that Florida law...Senate Bill 90...and I can't find anything that looks like it suppresses anyone's right to vote or does anything the article reports the judge saying it does.

Maybe someone else can look at the summary and tell me what's bad about the law.

2021 Bill Summaries - The Florida Senate

www.flsenate.gov

Anyway, I expect this will be appealed and that judge's ruling flushed down the toilet where it belongs. The only bad thing is that this probably won't happen before the next election, which means this one ****ed up judge is single-handedly enabling election fraud in the state of Florida.

 

[Michael Cole]

this one ****ed up judge is single-handedly enabling election fraud in the state of Florida.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

One more Republican attempt to thwart democracy has been stopped for the time being.

​

For now.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

this one ****ed up judge is single-handedly enabling election fraud in the state of Florida.

 

[poweRob]

Well, I looked over the summary of that Florida law...Senate Bill 90...and I can't find anything that looks like it suppresses anyone's right to vote or does anything the article reports the judge saying it does.

Maybe someone else can look at the summary and tell me what's bad about the law.

2021 Bill Summaries - The Florida Senate

www.flsenate.gov

Anyway, I expect this will be appealed and that judge's ruling flushed down the toilet where it belongs. The only bad thing is that this probably won't happen before the next election, which means this one ****ed up judge is single-handedly enabling election fraud in the state of Florida.

Dumb post. You are dismissed.

 

[Mycroft]

Dumb post. You are dismissed.

Dumb post? Is it dumb to question a reaction by a judge?

Maybe you think it's dumb because you can't answer my question?

That's okay. I don't expect any kind of reasoned response from you.

You are dismissed.

 

[bluesmoke]

Dumb post. You are dismissed.

Should be sat in a chair facing the corner of the room, wearing a dunce cap.

 

[Luckyone]

One more Republican attempt to thwart democracy has been stopped for the time being.

​

 

[poweRob]

Dumb post? Is it dumb to question a reaction by a judge?

Maybe you think it's dumb because you can't answer my question?

That's okay. I don't expect any kind of reasoned response from you.

You are dismissed.

Too late. You were already dismissed before you posted this.

 

[Luckyone]

Dumb post? Is it dumb to question a reaction by a judge?

Maybe you think it's dumb because you can't answer my question?

That's okay. I don't expect any kind of reasoned response from you.

You are dismissed.

Here is the response to your question, Mycroft:

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A federal judge struck down portions of a Florida election law passed last year, saying in a ruling Thursday that the Republican-led government was using subtle tactics to suppress Black voters.

The law tightened rules on mailed ballots, drop boxes and other popular election methods — changes that made it more difficult for Black voters who, overall, have more socioeconomic disadvantages than white voters, U.S. District Judge Mark Walker wrote in his ruling.

Here is the explanation of why it is "more difficult for Black voters that have socioeconomic disadvantages" to vote under these new requirements:

Voter ID laws have underlying racial biases and prevent minorities from engaging in active democratic participation. These requirements compel an individual to present his or her ID in order to cast a ballot on Election Day. Obtaining an ID can be costly and requires an individual’s birth certificate, which may be burdensome. Proponents advocate for the law under the guise of preventing voter fraud and ensuring that only voter-eligible citizens partake in elections; however, individuals who lack government-issued identification are more likely to be younger, less educated, and impoverished, and—most notably—nonwhite. An example of the inherent discrimination of voter ID laws can be found in the implementation of Georgia’s “exact match” system. This program requires an individual’s voting status to be suspended if the name on their driver’s license or Social Security records does not exactly match the name they inputted on their voter registration form. Of the 51,000 individuals that this law affected in 2018, 80 percent of them were African American. There is evidence that the “exact match” law played a role in the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election, as African American candidate Stacey Abrams lost by approximately 55,000 votes.

Simply stated for you Mycroft. Until you put yourself into the shoes of a socioeconomically disadvantaged Black voter, the White privileges that you have will forever prevent you from understanding what the problems exist for many Black voters. You will never see the problem because you are not a disadvantaged Black voter and have 'no ability mind-wise to put yourself in anyone else's shoes.

 

[Luckyone]

Well, I looked over the summary of that Florida law...Senate Bill 90...and I can't find anything that looks like it suppresses anyone's right to vote or does anything the article reports the judge saying it does.

Maybe someone else can look at the summary and tell me what's bad about the law.

2021 Bill Summaries - The Florida Senate

www.flsenate.gov

Anyway, I expect this will be appealed and that judge's ruling flushed down the toilet where it belongs. The only bad thing is that this probably won't happen before the next election, which means this one ****ed up judge is single-handedly enabling election fraud in the state of Florida.

Talking about reality and not your ******-up idea of what you fear.

The voting laws as they have been (not the new ones the Republicans are pushing) have served the nation well. Very little voter fraud has ever been found. Here is the proof of it:

Studies Agree: Impersonation Fraud by Voters Very Rarely Happens  The Brennan Center’s seminal report on this issue, The Truth About Voter Fraud, found that most reported incidents of voter fraud are actually traceable to other sources, such as clerical errors or bad data matching practices. The report reviewed elections that had been meticulously studied for voter fraud, and found incident rates between 0.0003 percent and 0.0025 percent. Given this tiny incident rate for voter impersonation fraud, it is more likely, the report noted, that an American “will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.”

As such, Mycroft, your statement about the judge's ruling needs to be "flushed down the toilet" is totally ridiculous, given that he is actually following the law and the actual incidents history of voter fraud.

It is you and all the other Republicans in favor of changing these laws that are basing your comment on pure BS and on the words of one man (Trump) that does not follow the law, does not to any research, cares only about himself and totally believes in the benefit of lying.

and you value his opinion over a judge that studied all the information, studied the laws applicable to this, studied the facts as known?

It is you that in living in a fantasy world that expects us to join you......................if it wasn't so sad, it would be laughable.

 

[CaughtInThe]

...and I can't find anything that looks like it suppresses anyone's right to vote

Shocker

 

[code1211]

One more Republican attempt to thwart democracy has been stopped for the time being.

​

What was the objectionable thing to which the judge objected?

 

[Mycroft]

Here is the response to your question, Mycroft:



Here is the explanation of why it is "more difficult for Black voters that have socioeconomic disadvantages" to vote under these new requirements:



Simply stated for you Mycroft. Until you put yourself into the shoes of a socioeconomically disadvantaged Black voter, the White privileges that you have will forever prevent you from understanding what the problems exist for many Black voters. You will never see the problem because you are not a disadvantaged Black voter and have 'no ability mind-wise to put yourself in anyone else's shoes.

I don't think black people are anymore "socioeconomically disadvantaged" than anybody else. That's utter bullshit.

If black people can buy and drive cars, have bank account, fly on airplanes, buy booze or cigarettes...hell, if they can even go into a federal building...then they can do anything that anyone else can do.

That bullshit reasoning you trotted out is nonsense.

 

[Mycroft]

Talking about reality and not your ******-up idea of what you fear.

The voting laws as they have been (not the new ones the Republicans are pushing) have served the nation well. Very little voter fraud has ever been found. Here is the proof of it:



As such, Mycroft, your statement about the judge's ruling needs to be "flushed down the toilet" is totally ridiculous, given that he is actually following the law and the actual incidents history of voter fraud.

It is you and all the other Republicans in favor of changing these laws that are basing your comment on pure BS and on the words of one man (Trump) that does not follow the law, does not to any research, cares only about himself and totally believes in the benefit of lying.

and you value his opinion over a judge that studied all the information, studied the laws applicable to this, studied the facts as known?

It is you that in living in a fantasy world that expects us to join you......................if it wasn't so sad, it would be laughable.

So...you can't look at the summary and tell me what's bad about the law. You can only tell me about the bullshit ruling from that judge.

You are dismissed.

 

[Mycroft]

Shocker

What's not shocking is that you are unable to point to anything in that law that suppresses anyone's ability to vote.

 

[Jay Falcon]

Well, I looked over the summary of that Florida law...Senate Bill 90...and I can't find anything that looks like it suppresses anyone's right to vote or does anything the article reports the judge saying it does.

Coming from someone who pushes the election fraud lie to this day, I'd say your personal opinion on this topic means **** all to anyone with a functioning brain and conscience.

 

[Luckyone]

I don't think black people are anymore "socioeconomically disadvantaged" than anybody else. That's utter bullshit.

If black people can buy and drive cars, have bank account, fly on airplanes, buy booze or cigarettes...hell, if they can even go into a federal building...then they can do anything that anyone else can do.

That bullshit reasoning you trotted out is nonsense.

Why did I actually expect you to not reason even after I was specific in my last post. Could it be that you never put yourself in anyone else shoes?

I was talking about the socio-disadvantaged Black people that you have no identification with but are part of our society. You know, the ones born in poor neighborhoods that did not get much education because the schools they went to did not have good teachers, they were unable to do much because both parents were working to make ends meet or were robbing and looting in order in order to survive or their parents were in jail. The ones that had lower IQ because of all of that. The people that grew up in a racist community where they did not have the same opportunities that you and I had? The people that had it extremely hard just trying to stay alive. Did you (or others like you) have that kind of a childhood? No, of course not. You were one of those White people that had it mostly given to you as a child.

I am not talking about the Blacks that were able to grow up like you and I did. I am talking about the "great amount" of Blacks that were disadvantaged at a young age or the ones that grew up being the ostracized people that went through all of that when young and are now older and still suffering the consequences.

They do exist and in large numbers, you didn't know Mycroft? Do you believe those people should not have a voice in what happens in their life? No, of course not because if they had a voice, you would need to give a bit more of yourself for their benefit and that is the last thing you want to do................give anything.

How could you know about this? you never leave the fantasy world you live in. Never visit the real world in order to get informed. This is why all of your comments are misinformed and degrading. Anyone not like you and thinking as you do, has to be bs'ing. That is why you dismiss everyone that doesn't think like you and calls you out on it.

Keep on living in your world, just doesn't expect anyone in the real world to pay any attention to you. I hope the puppets in your world are enough to keep you company.

 

[Luckyone]

So...you can't look at the summary and tell me what's bad about the law. You can only tell me about the bullshit ruling from that judge.

You are dismissed.

bad about the law? That is not what you and I are here about. The laws we have, have in the past been passed by elected people getting together and discussing the issue. They have been passed by people who did all the research necessary to make those decisions. Neither YOU nor I have enough information to make any opinions on what is already law.

Your opinion and mine of the laws are unimportant. In this particular issue (voting laws) there has never been a problem before and therefore not something that should be re-discussed and re-investigated, much less passed by people that are biased and that are listening to the rantings of an egomaniac (Trump) that wants the laws passed for his own benefit and not for the benefit of the nation.

and then, Trump convinces millions of his brainwashed minions (like you) to argue "his" points, above and beyond the constitution, above and beyond what has already been decided by intelligent people in the past, and above and beyond there being any need of doing that as there never has been a problem before.

Go ahead and comment on the summary and tell us all about what is bad with the law and why it should be changed. Intelligent and non biased people will ignore and laugh at your inability to use your brain or your common sense.

In simple words for you to understand. I do not care to comment on what is bad about the law because it is not causing the nation any problems. The only problems that are being caused by the law is that it did not help Trump win and given that he is trying to run again in 2024, they want those same problems resolved so he can win in 2024.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Well, I looked over the summary of that Florida law...Senate Bill 90...and I can't find anything that looks like it suppresses anyone's right to vote or does anything the article reports the judge saying it does.

Maybe someone else can look at the summary and tell me what's bad about the law.

2021 Bill Summaries - The Florida Senate

www.flsenate.gov

Anyway, I expect this will be appealed and that judge's ruling flushed down the toilet where it belongs. The only bad thing is that this probably won't happen before the next election, which means this one ****ed up judge is single-handedly enabling election fraud in the state of Florida.

VBM (Vite By Mail) request provision reduces the duration of a voter’s VBM ballot request from two election cycles to one general election cycle.

The drop-box provisions require an employee of each Supervisor of Elections’ office to continuously monitor any secure drop box at the Supervisor’s office when the drop box is accessible for deposit of ballots. They also reduce the availability of drop boxes outside of early voting hours and impose a $25,000 civil penalty on the Supervisor if any drop box is left accessible for ballot receipt other than as authorized.

The solicitation definition can be read to prohibit “line warming” activities. Line warming refers generally to the non-partisan provision of aid to voters waiting in line to vote, such as giving out water, fans, snacks, chairs, ponchos, and umbrellas.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21564733/ndfl-voting.pdf

 

[Mycroft]

VBM (Vite By Mail) request provision reduces the duration of a voter’s VBM ballot request from two election cycles to one general election cycle.

What is bad about this?

The drop-box provisions require an employee of each Supervisor of Elections’ office to continuously monitor any secure drop box at the Supervisor’s office when the drop box is accessible for deposit of ballots. They also reduce the availability of drop boxes outside of early voting hours and impose a $25,000 civil penalty on the Supervisor if any drop box is left accessible for ballot receipt other than as authorized.

What is bad about this?

The solicitation definition can be read to prohibit “line warming” activities. Line warming refers generally to the non-partisan provision of aid to voters waiting in line to vote, such as giving out water, fans, snacks, chairs, ponchos, and umbrellas.

"can be read"?

This is what the summary says:

Related to no-solicitation zones, the bill:

• Conforms the distances for statutory no-solicitation zones.
• Adds drop box sites to the locations protected by the zones.
• Expands the definition of “solicitation” and specifies that the definition does not prohibit supervisors’ staff from providing nonpartisan assistance or items to voters within the zone.

Sounds to me like someone doesn't know how to read.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21564733/ndfl-voting.pdf

 

[Binary_Digit]

What is bad about this?

There's no good reason to reduce the duration of ballot request forms. Fraud is not possible with ballot request forms. All this would do is make it more difficult to vote.

What is bad about this?

There's no good reason to reduce the number of drop boxes. There was no evidence of drop box tampering that I heard of, and they are secured and fastened to prevent tampering anyway. All this would do is make it more difficult to vote.

"can be read"?

This is what the summary says:

​

Related to no-solicitation zones, the bill:​

• Conforms the distances for statutory no-solicitation zones.
• Adds drop box sites to the locations protected by the zones.
• Expands the definition of “solicitation” and specifies that the definition does not prohibit supervisors’ staff from providing nonpartisan assistance or items to voters within the zone.

Sounds to me like someone doesn't know how to read.

While it does have that clause which you highlighted, it also expands the definition of "solicitation" to be extremely vague. Maybe this is what the judge didn't like?

"engaging in any activity with the intent to influence or effect of influencing a voter."

Witnesses testified to the court that their organizations had already considered stopping their line warming activities, for fear of how the authorities might interpret the new law and what things they might mistake for "intent to influence" voters.

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/90/BillText/er/PDF

 

[Mycroft]

There's no good reason to reduce the duration of ballot request forms. Fraud is not possible with ballot request forms. All this would do is make it more difficult to vote.

It doesn't make it more difficult to vote. People still have the choice to vote in person or request an absentee ballot.

There's no good reason to reduce the number of drop boxes. There was no evidence of drop box tampering that I heard of, and they are secured and fastened to prevent tampering anyway. All this would do is make it more difficult to vote.

They aren't worried about people stealing drop boxes. They are worried about people stuffing drop boxes...hence the increased security measures.

While it does have that clause which you highlighted, it also expands the definition of "solicitation" to be extremely vague. Maybe this is what the judge didn't like?

Please quote the definition. Point out what is "extremely vague" about it.

"engaging in any activity with the intent to influence or effect of influencing a voter."

And that's a bad thing? I don't think so.

Witnesses testified to the court that their organizations had already considered stopping their line warming activities, for fear of how the authorities might interpret the new law and what things they might mistake for "intent to influence" voters.

shrug...their choice. All they have to do is follow the law.

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2021/90/BillText/er/PDF