Campaigners were squirming around the electioneering prohibition by handing out waters that had labels with candidates on them. So this ends that.
So when a aspect of Jim Crow, voter supression of Black folks, is being attempted, people can't label it a Joke Crow era type bill? You seem to be beating up a strawman that the bill invokes all aspects of Jim Crow from segregation to redlining when it's just a voting regulation bill.
Key word aspect, Jim Crow was entire ecosystem. Since this bill has been talked about in GA everybody and their mother have been invoking Jim Crow how the hell is that a strawman? Your right it is just voting regulations so why invoke Jim Crow in the 1st place? Werner has used it on the floor of Congress Biden has used it and a multitude of other Democratic office holders. Talk about what is happening in the actual bill instead of using Jim Crow to blanket condemn the entire thing and getting easy outrage points.
They weren't sqirming around the prohibition. They were breaking the law. Go ahead and prosecute the group/people that broke the law by handing out water with the candidate's name on it. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water by making changes that have other negative consequences. It just reeks of political motives to make waiting line more uncomfortable for voters. Existing law: https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2019/title-21/chapter-2/article-11/part-1/section-21-2-414/
Ya I have talked about the bill and it's aspects are aspects of Jim Crow which is voter supression of Black majority voting districts. I don't know who you are trying to appease. Anyone offended that this bill is a relic of Jim Crow era voting regulation intentions already agree with the measures in the bill and already believe that those communties should have lower turnout. They are the type who say "quality over quantity" when it comes to voting.
Now you are spouting gibberish that has nothing to do with my point. Why don't you go back and read why I have an issue with using Jim Crow in this context. I am not trying to appease anybody I have no idea where that is coming from. The bolded sentence shows how bigoted you are to think that not liking the use of Jim Crow means you agree with the bill. Do I agree with the bill? This why I say its a lazy argument it's too easy to discount an entire group of people but you seem to like labeling people and putting them into groups.
You have an issue claiming an aspect of Jim Crow is invoked and your issue is based on a strawman that that people are claiming the entirety of every aspect of Jim Crow is invoked. And I never said you are agreeing with the bill. I'm saying you are trying to appease these magical moderates you believe exist who also disagree with the bill but think labeling it "Jim Crow" is bad and makes them start having sympathy for the people defending it.
You don't get his point. You don't need to make an encompassing restriction that prevents any water from a third party being handed to them. Georgia election laws before the bill already made it a violation to have any campaign staff and paraphernalia at voting sites. So their actions were already violations. It's a redudant regulation that broadens the scope to merely anyone even those who aren't affiliated with any campaign.
I don't understand how this suppresses just one cross section of voters. Are whites allowed to have water in lines and blacks aren't? Anybody that does not want to wait in voting lines can vote early, or request a mail in ballot, which the new bill allows without having to have a specific reason. The new bill is actually less restrictive in that sense.
Early voting lines are often longer than election day. I waited over 2 hours to early vote in the GA runoff.
Especially for poorer hourly wage workers where hours determine whether they can pay basic essentials for the month like rent, healthcare costs, utilities, gas, groceries etc. They have less time to waste than well off people who don't live paycheck to paycheck.
Not really. Just a completed I-9 form to check for legal employment eligibility. And the form allows these non-id forms for verification: Social Security account number card (unless the card says: not valid for employment, valid only for work with INS authorization, or valid for work only with DHS authorization) Certification of birth abroad issued by the Department of State (Form FS-545) Certification of report of birth issued by the Department of State (Form DS-1350) Original or certified copy of a birth certificate issued by a state, county, municipal authority, or territory of the U.S. that has an official seal Native American tribal document
Bahahaha now you're the expert at other people's job applications requirements. Your mouth is squarely planted onto your butt crack.
I've never been required to give my ID on any job application ever. I've only been asked to supply the I-9 required documents after being hired, which most people use SS Card and DL. But providing ID continues to be the least concerning part of this.
