Society is funny and I certainly can't predict how people react - you might be right that people aren't willing to listen to actual issues (which probably is slightly different between us). I wonder what happen if blacks and other during the Jim Crow era compared those laws to slavery? Would the general population "not listen" to the real issues...? maybe. My response below is of course my point of view on 'Jim Crow' then and today... I don't take it literally, but the parallels are there for me. I also think that while the impacts are not so obvious, are different, they can be devastating. The re-construction period was supposed to be a progression toward equality for all - the end of slavery and the beginning of equality of access, rights, and freedom. To White landowners that means sharing power and wealth. That was halted, stopped by Jim Crow era (I know you know this, but this refers to the period before and after the man's time). It was an ugly period with lasting effect. A White majority did not want slaves to be integrated, to be part of their society, to share power and wealth, and used legislation to reach those goals. Laws were passed national wide, successfully accomplishing these goals for a few decades and the effect of it is still here today. Jim Crow era "slowed and paused" with the civil rights movements, with the civil rights act, and the voting right act. Progression again slowed when in 2013, the Robert court strikes down a section of the voting right act, in particular, weakening the ability of the federal gov to block discriminatory voting laws. Since then, we have, as I said shift from 1st to 2nd to 3rd gear with new laws to restrict, to suppress the voting rights of certain groups. These are groups that the Republicans, the majority, do not want to share power and wealth with. Once Obama won, a new urgency started. Once Trump lost, it went into overdrive. There is now an urgent push by Republicans, to pass laws national wide, to meet that goal - to stop the progression, or more accurately, to reverse any progress made toward a society of more equals, one that they feel they would lose power and wealth to. Jim Crow laws were statutes crafted locally at the state and city levels, with a unified goal of racial segregation, to maintain status. They each navigated around the 15th Amendment and their own State's constitution and were designed to impact the local population. Similarly, voting laws are crafted locally, each needing to navigate around federal regulation, their own State's constitution, and are designed to impact the local population. The goal is for Republicans to win elections - they have stated this out loud. Because 90+% of Black votes for Democrats, the end result of these voting laws is to depress Black votes, to suppress them. These are laws crafted by very smart and powerful politicians in suits and ties. Many in society during the Jim Crow era rational those laws with a simple thought - look how much you have now compared to the past - you are much better off than when you were slaves. Be grateful and happy, and don't be trouble makers. Asking for equal rights, like MLK did, was radical. Today, in society, we see similar rationalizing. Look how much you have now compared to the past - you are much better off than during the segregation period. Be grateful and happy, and don't be trouble makers. Asking for equal and fair votes, like Stacey Abrams and others are doing, are radicals. The impact of the Jim Crow era was vivid and easy to see. The impact of the ongoing degradation of fundamental voting rights is not so easy to see, it has escalated with the Big Lie of widespread election fraud and we have witnessed one dramatic side effect of it - the Jan 6th storming of the Captial. That does not compare to the beating and killing of blacks during the Jim Crow era. They both however were "side effects" that weren't legislated or even intended - laws didn't allow beating or killing, or storming of the Capital. It's hard to tell what would happen. But if, GA and other State legislative bodies had the power to suspend and replace local election officials. If they were able to successfully certify the result for the losing candidate, instead of the winning one. If the Court rejects and overturns the state legislative bodies afterward... Those are new possibilities with these new laws. Suppression is ongoing with an extra ability designed to disenfranchise legally at the local levels. The Jan 6th storming was a surprise to me, I didn't imagine that would happen. I don't know what would happen if these news laws are allowed to stand - but I can imagine it would be worse than the Jan 6th event and potentially sway the whole nation toward a different form of government, one that Republican, in their zest to win might not even intend. The impact of that can't be underestimated. The solution is simple. Don't cheat. Be fair. Let's democracy win and live on. HR1, for the people act, is one step toward that.
this is helpful, but the specifics are buried in the piece (not a criticism). this ↑ to me is the most serious complaint. this ↑ to me is somewhat less serious. My place of polling, for example, has change four times over the past 20 years. If you can't figure out the correct place to vote, that's kind of on you. With that said, I can see people being upset about this. hard to know from this ↑ description whether this is a good thing or bad thing. If critics of the law object to top-down state-level direction of local election boards, where then does the support for federal-level top-down direction originate? and how would that federal-level direction of local elections be justified? Again, I appreciate this essay and the history behind the "Jim Crow" complaints. But these specific problems do not seem particularly catastrophic in the cosmic scheme of things. Troubling, yes. End-of-the-world fascism, no. Reducing the number of drop boxes seems most significant. If they are monitored in some way by human monitors (just a guess--perhaps you know the answer), then I can see the number reduction being possibly related to cost. But again I have not followed Georgia election laws closely over the past 40 years, and I do not know the specifics of why or how these changes were justified.
All of this are facts but we are in a different time and when you evoke Jim Crow today you are talking about some specific stuff like poll taxes and literacy test and those things being waived if you were white. We also are far more literate these days and have ways and people to get around these regulations which people in the Jim Crow days did not. It's highly probable these laws get struck down in court which did not happen in the Jim Crow era. I agree we need to nip this in the bud but I think we can do it more effectively than using Jim Crow as an example for one reason this targets the youth just as much as blacks. You don't have to always lead with your chin and always go to the race card for a reaction, I just find it a lazy way to get attention along with using Jim Crow for a debate about the filibuster.
I really don't know what McConell thinks he is doing here, does he think he holds that much power over "Corporations" Hell they already got their money in the tax cuts.
Yeah, trying to suppress the vote in the year 2021 is nothing to get upset about, unless as you guys show democracy is no big deal. I guess you guys never believed in even high school civics and the American way. Wow!
If republicans didn't think voter suppression was that important they wouldn't be trying to do it in 47 states. Lawmakers in 47 states have introduced bills that would make it harder to vote. See them all here https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/03/politics/state-legislation-voter-suppression/index.html
Sure seems that republicans are so determined to suppress votes that they will increase their lying to get it power back...
btw, Colorado has universal mail-in ballots (every voter automatically receives a mail-in ballot) and 24 hour drop boxes (one from early October to the voting date).
Also did CO change their laws that gives the Legislature the opportunity to influence or even change the voting certification?
meanwhile the senate republican minority leader continues to threaten major American corporations the first amendment right he supported in Citiens United...
They also have automatic registration & same day registration Some of the friendliest voting laws around.
Man the Republicans are really slipping. Who is coming up with the talking points? How is bringing up China anybodies idea of a good retort. I really don't see how they sustain any momentum with the current rhetoric. It's all like mad libs with the same 5 words China, Woke, Cancel Culture, MSM, DR Seuss, rinse and repeat.
Turley reminds us that the Washington Post's fact checker summarized the net impact of the Georgia bill as beneficial to most voters ("As the Washington Post noted, 'the net effect [of the Georgia law] is … to expand the opportunities to vote for most Georgians, not limit them' ”). "MLB Moves All-Star Game To Colorado Despite The State’s Mandatory Voter Identification Rule": https://jonathanturley.org/2021/04/...e-states-mandatory-voter-identification-rule/
