News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
The problem is that campaigns will use snacks and water to campaign as close to polling places as possible. That's what the law is trying to prevent, so that there aren't 15 10'X10' tents with names emblazoned on top just to garner more votes.
How you solve for that is: No branding or signage beyond "Free Water" or "Free Refreshments" and workers are not allowed to speak to anyone. Just place things on a table. Campaigns can setup tents, refreshments outside of a new buffer, 300 ft. Or, OR, just ban campaigns from setting up tents. If it's found, they forfeit the election.
But, we all know that legislatures aren't about making common sense laws.
Update: I appreciate all of the responses. I've read up more on this law, and ya'll are right. The way it's written, and how it's communicated are different. I'm leaving my original comment up for clarity. Discourse is good and I appreciate the softer approaches along with some of the more angry of you.
This is the deceit of these laws. They pretend to be about a genuine "problem", giving a degree of plausibility, just like you are doing now. But we should not be fooled. The real motivation is to deter voting by non GOP groups.
In this case, consider which areas have long lines and which don't. You're not sure? Look at which areas have had the number of voting places reduced. Look at which groups find it difficult to vote during weekday working hours, and who is limiting weekend voting and early/late voting hours.
It's always been illegal to campaign within X feet of a polling place. Banning water and snacks is irrelevant to that. You could never just set up campaigning tents anywhere you wanted. Was there really an epidemic of lawless tent-weilding water and snacks givers before this law? "How do you solve for that?" You don't because it's not a real problem, the law is simply designed to make it difficult to stay in line in mainly non GOP overloaded voting places, to make people give up and go home.
But you already weren't allowed to campaign within 150ft of a poling place or 25ft of a voter standing in line. So, that would have already been a solved issue.
This is from the 2010 GA code.
O.C.G.A. 21-2-414 (2010)
(a) No person shall solicit votes in any manner or by any means or method, nor shall any person distribute or display any campaign literature, newspaper, booklet, pamphlet, card, sign, paraphernalia, or any other written or printed matter of any kind, nor shall any person solicit signatures for any petition or conduct any exit poll or public opinion poll with voters 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.
Edit: I personally believe that the food and water restriction was to make people not want to stick out waiting 2+ hours in line. Unfortunately people seem to have to wait multiple hours every election.
It's 100% another move by republicans to block black voters. There won't be lines where the white voters are a majority.
This is the biggest reason that compulsory voting like we have in Australia is so good.
It's not a violation of free speech at all. You can always choose to just hand in a blank or deliberately-spoilt ballot.
But what it does mean is that the Government is forced to provide adequate resources to polling places to ensure that everyone is able to conveniently vote. You can't get away with nearly as much voter suppression when everyone has to vote.
I can't help but feel this is an optimistic view. There's plenty of things everyone has to do in America that are still much more convenient or differently funded in rich or white areas. For example, going to school or getting government ID.
If you're legally required to vote but voting is made into a very painful experience, who are you going to vote for? The guy that made it very difficult?
Sure, if you haven't been brainwashed into believing it was the other guy who made it very difficult.
Yeah, most people would believe the bad guy was the one who made it mandatory.
Sweet child...
If the voting experience is sufficiently onerous, people will still not vote and pay the penalty (or go to jail). Then it'll be just another tax/burdon on people in disadvantaged areas.
Looks like Western Australia charges $50 for repeated failure to vote. $50 Australian ($31 USD) to not take off work to stand in line for 3 hours getting sunburnt? That's less than minimum wage in my state. It would make financial sense to just go to work and pay the penalty, ignoring the less tangible potential long-term benefit of effecting change in favor of paying rent.
Except voting day in Australia is on a weekend, not during the week. And there are also pre polling centres, where if you plan to be away on vacation or working on voting day, you can go along to a pre poll centre and vote weeks in advance. Australia also has mail in and even telephone voting for those unable to visit these centres.
Some would, for sure. But some would stick it out. And even in many areas thought of as deeply red, the margin required to flip the result is not that much. If you have a previous voter turnout of 2/3, and just 1/4 of the previous non-voters end up voting because it's mandatory, that's an 8 point swing. That would have been enough to swing 4 more states in 2020, as well as Maine's 2nd district. Or if it were the Democrats responsible for attempted voter suppression, those same stats would see 7 states plus Nevada's 2nd flip to Republican. That's looking at the presidential race because the stats were easiest to find and compare, but it's likely even more pertinent in congressional races. Enough of the races would be close enough to basically guarantee the side supporting people's democratic rights will win a majority of seats.
Yeah, I don’t see this working at all. If it does for you guys, that’s great, but we’re talking places where voting rights are already protected. None of these laws actually prevent people from voting, but can discourage enough to make a difference. Even if it’s partisan, the results skew quite racist. It’s only a few places in the US where officials think they can get away with this, but it’s definitely huge news.
Fr a specific example, I believe there was something in Texas like one place to drop off mail in votes per county. Maybe that’s even reasonable in most counties, but not when one county is the city of Houston. Do you really think a measly fine would make people endure that wait?
If only these states would make voting free, easy and accessible so lines wouldn't get so long that people need food and water to survive while waiting to fucking vote? But nope. Clinging to power is more important than the survival of humanity.
That's the thing which seems so barbaric to me. I'm in a state with 100% mail-in ballots, and I've never stood in a line to vote. Neither has anyone else in my state since mail-in became the standard.
When turnout is really, really high, there might be, like, four people ahead of me if I've procrastinated and missed the mail-in date and have to use a ballot drop-box.
But you see letting people vote is woke or communist, or whatever word Bingo the right has decided.
It's duckspeak, and the fact that it's so effective is horrifying. They go around making literally meaningless word-like noises - not one of them could coherently define either "woke" or "communist" if you offered them a million dollars to do it - and yet they squawk both words endlessly.
And I’m in a state where I never really waited in line even before mail in voting was expanded.
My voting place has always been the nearby elementary school, and I usually go at peak time, on my way to or from work. Yes, admittedly I’ve had to wait outside the classroom for a minute or two, but that’s not the kind of line we’re talking about
Actually, it’s always been so easy to vote, that I usually Fido t bother with all the effort to find the mail in ballot and take it all the way to a mailbox
The law is trying to discourage people from voting. It's sad that you either can't see that or you pretend not to.
I think most people with critical thought realize that's the true intent. But the mask-on justification is to prevent campaigning at the polling line.
PSA: If you even have the notion of a feeling that a food truck outside the building could decide the person you vote for, please never vote in politics.
But it does whether you think it should. That's the very reason why all political messaging is forbidden close to voting stations.
Laughs in Bill Clinton touring polling stations during election
Youre fucking sad if you think there aren't civic minded people that would pass out food and water just to make sure people get a chance to exercise their rights. The fact that you cant conceive of helping people without personal gain is just you telling on yourself. It is not a reflection on the people who support and uphold our democracy by helping people vote.
The "bribery" talking point is clear bullshit anyway. This law is 100% designed to get people in cities, where there are long lines to vote unlike rural areas, to give up on voting, because they tend to vote against the people passing these laws. Its direct and blatant voter suppression. No one is buying the made up issue of "buying votes with water bottles" that is not happening, and has never happened.
Yall aint fooling no one.
Youre ohh so cynical clapback is "the people that support democracy are just doing it to support democracy, so it's really self interest at play?"
Wow, such insight.
Don't assign your self-serving attitude to everyone else. Some of us sometimes do things just because they are right/kind/helpful.
It's cute that you think a dollar bottle of water is a bribe.
I was gonna try to explain it, but @lolcatnip said it more succinctly than I would. I'll just chime in to say that this is disingenuous:
As if anyone standing in line hasn't already made up their mind. "Oh, a bottle of water when I've been in line for an hour? Guess I'll vote for your guy because I'm a thoughtless idiot."
Of course this is the real answer, if it is true. It’s not just suffering in the heat that would make people disinclined to vote, but the line itself. Somehow I doubt they’ve really shortened the lines in places where “those people” vote.
I’ve never in my life had to wait in a line long enough to matter, since I live where we encourage people to vote. Of course it’s also a mostly white suburb, so I could be totally off-base