Deep Dive De: GA Voting Law

[ellu]

What Georgia’s Voting Law Really Does

The New York Times analyzed the state’s new 98-page voting law and identified 16 key provisions that will limit ballot access, potentially confuse voters and give more power to Republican lawmakers.

www.nytimes.com

Long form analysis for those so inclined.

 

[cortez55403]

Thanks Ellu. Very helpful.

 

[central17]

Thank you for providing a very detailed and well written summary, The best I have seen to date. While the pro and con of the bill can be debated, it is a great start to have the facts of what the bill is actually proposing.

 

[ellu]

Thank you for providing a very detailed and well written summary, The best I have seen to date. While the pro and con of the bill can be debated, it is a great start to have the facts of what the bill is actually proposing.

Thanks for an intellectually honest response, its appreciated.

 

[ZEKEMUG]

Stopped right here.
Another provision makes it a crime to offer water to voters waiting in lines, which tend to be longer in densely populated communities.
Electioneering is the true focus of this not taking away access to water from voters. Since I’ve been voting The partisan poll workers had restrictions imposed ( All Parties ). Here are some.

• 15 states prohibit campaign apparel/buttons/stickers/placards
• 37 states prohibit campaign materials/signs/banners/literature
• 28 States prohibit influencing voters/soliciting votes/political persuasion
• 17 states prohibit circulating petitions/soliciting signatures
• 9 states prohibit projecting sounds referring to candidates/issues
• 6 states prohibit polls/exit polls
• 9 states prohibit loitering
• 3 states prohibit peddling/advertising
• 10 states prohibit voter intimidation/interfering with voter
• 10 states prohibit obstructing entrance/hindering voter

 

[cortez55403]

HJ,

Have you read Ellu’s post and it’s linked article?

You need to.

 

[central17]

Below is the cut and paste of the NYT piece; section on the "Water" subject. At least the NYT did provide the actual bill language. IMO the language is clear and is meant to prevent harassment, electioneering and even illegal inducements. The NYT section heading is misleading and its opinion kind of drifts into long lines and hot days to cloud the subject. But an informed reader can read the legislature's language and draw an informed conclusion of their own of its intent.

What to me is appalling is the President of the USA and other elected officials implying that if a grandson came to give grandma a bottle of water, they would be arrested. That is intellectually dishonest and quite frankly insulting to the intelligence of most citizens. These partisans are smart enough to know the bills intent, but don't want to address the true issues. The prefer to play the "Boogeyman" game and say Republicans want dirty water and want to push Grandma over the cliff.

Offering food or water to voters waiting in line now risks misdemeanor charges.​

Page 73: No person shall solicit votes in any manner or by any means or method, nor shall any person distribute or display any campaign material, nor shall any person give, offer to give, or participate in the giving of any money or gifts, including, but not limited to, food and drink, to an elector, nor shall any person solicit signatures for any petition, nor shall any person, other than election officials discharging their duties, establish or set up any tables or booths on any day in which ballots are being cast: (1) Within 150 feet of the outer edge of any building within which a polling place is established; (2) Within any polling place; or (3) Within 25 feet of any voter standing in line to vote at any polling place. These restrictions shall not apply to conduct occurring in private offices or areas which cannot be seen or heard by such electors.
This Code section shall not be construed to prohibit a poll officer from distributing materials, as required by law, which are necessary for the purpose of instructing electors or from distributing materials prepared by the Secretary of State which are designed solely for the purpose of encouraging voter participation in the election being conducted or from making available self-service water from an unattended receptacle to an elector waiting in line to vote.

Perhaps no provision in the Georgia law has received more attention than this one, which effectively bars third-party groups or anyone else who is not an election worker from providing food and water to voters waiting in line. Republicans defended the provision, saying it is enforceable only within a 150-foot radius of polling places. Civil rights groups note that it also prevents assistance “within 25 feet of any voter standing in line to vote at any polling place.”

Long lines for voting in Georgia are an unfortunate reality, and are often found in the poorer, densely populated communities that tend to vote Democratic. During the primary election last June, when temperatures hovered above 80 degrees with high humidity, multiple voting locations across the state had lines in which voters waited more than two hours.

Numerous studies have shown that long lines deter people from voting. According to research by the Bipartisan Policy Center, an independent research group, over 560,000 voters did not cast ballots in 2016 “because of problems related to polling place management, including long lines.” In 2014, Stephen Pettigrew, then a Ph.D. candidate in Harvard’s department of government, conducted a study that found that more than 200,000 voters did not vote in the midterm elections that year because they had faced long lines during the 2012 election.

The new law does make it clear that it is legal for voters to drink from a water fountain, if one exists along the line to vote and provided they get the water themselves.

While I disagree with the NYT assessment at least it was not the hysterical and factually devoid characterizations of Democrat officials. IMO the intent of this section of the bill is to prevent interference in the voting process by advocacy groups. They NYT's discussion about long lines is a separate discussion about the capability of local governments to properly fund and administer an election.

While we all may not agree, the OP has started this thread in a thoughtful and intelligent manner. That is how a good debate starts with all sides possibly learning something. Hopefully this thread can continue in intelligent and spirited discourse.

Or maybe it will just dissolve into a third grade food fight? LOL