General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOf all the restrictive voting laws that have been proposed or passed how is this one justified:
Making passing out water or food to people waiting in long and possibly sweltering lines a crime? How is that supposed to maintain so called Election Integrity? It really comes across as petty and mean spirited, meant to make folks that dare exercise their rights despite the will of their 'lord' suffer for it.
What figles- err. rational reasonable and totes not bigoted explanation was put forth for it? 
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)Republicans, naturally, would not be inclined to feel for the people waiting on line to vote, so it would affect Democrats.
Dan
(3,570 posts)That is the long and short of it.
The Magistrate
(95,247 posts)Wouldn't you sell your vote to commies out to destroy America for a bottle of water and a slice of Domino's?
You think these people would even get off their porch and stand in line if that didn't get 'em a bottle of water and a slice of Domino's?
What'll it be next, hundred dollar bills if you'll stand in line all day? Is that what voting is all about in our country?
Speaking as a legislator priced at half a tin of bacon grease in Satan's market for souls, I say no! No, a thousand times no! We, us good decent freedumb loving Americans, we've got to stop this now! Before they start passing out cars to these so-called 'voters'!
Ohio Joe
(21,757 posts)Now... If it came from a nice mom-n-pop pizza place... Well, that is a different story 
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)Justsumguy
(14 posts)The law was no handing out anything to voters within xx feet of polling place, similar to the no signs or handing out pamphlet rule. An unmanned water supply is ok. Do we have an actual copy of what the proposed law is?
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)This law would prohibit even an unmanned distribution station since someone would be providing the water, which would violate this provision of a person giving something to the voter or setting up tables or booths within 150 feet of a pillow place or within 25 feet of any voter.
They factored in every possible scenario for providing a person with any sustenance while they wait ... (Except maybe dropping it down from a helicopter or delivering it by drone).
Justsumguy
(14 posts)Do people actually hand out food and water at polling places? Ive never seen anything like it when voting.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)if they can have water and a snack while they wait
Of course, those hours long lines tend to only occur in largely Black and Brown communities ...
TomSlick
(11,100 posts)You will only see it happen at polling places with long lines - like those in poor and black areas. Where wealthy and white people live, the lines are short and there is no reason to pass out food and water.
You are fortunate to live and vote in an area where people are not made to wait in line for hours to vote. Not everyone is for fortunate.
My perception from your posts on this topic is that you have no problem with voter suppression laws. Is that what you mean to be saying?
Justsumguy
(14 posts)I’m just trying to determine if this particular law is actually aimed at suppressing votes or if it’s aimed toward people trying to skirt the current laws with campaigning at the polls. If I lived where it took hours to vote, I would first try to figure out and remedy why it takes so long, and bring a bottle of water with me when I went to vote, maybe a granola bar if I didn’t think I could go that long without a snack.
TomSlick
(11,100 posts)If you were poor and black, you would find that GQP government likes long lines in your district. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
Finding excuses for GQP voter suppression laws is at least tacit approval. If you favor laws to disenfranchise people in black or poor precincts, you sure you posting on the right forum?
Justsumguy
(14 posts)Are they the ones creating them? Is it a problem of not enough poll workers? The R’s aren’t solely in charge of the details are they? Who is responsible? I’m sorry if I sound like I’m trying to be antagonistic but I honestly don’t understand how black precincts could be purposely shorted on resources at their polling places in this day and age. They have Democrat leaders locally, what keeps them from fixing this problem?
berniesandersmittens
(11,343 posts)precincts, that makes lines longer.
The Democratic election officials are not to blame for RW closures of voting locations.
Here is a link for more information
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-locations-idUSKCN1VV09J
Justsumguy
(14 posts)The article talks about all the polling places closing. One state (SC?) actually added some. It does not talk about the reasons, if any, given by the people responsible for closing them. Did they just close with no explanation? Also,when they say they closed 1200 polling places, do they count any that moved.. as in did they close 1400 and open 200 new ones, or did they close 1200 and open 500?
berniesandersmittens
(11,343 posts)When the end result is urban, democratic, and poc, having to stand in hours long lines?
Is there ANY reason that our Democratic election process force ANY group of voters to face unnecessary hardships in order to cast their vote?
It's voter suppression as old as democracy itself.
Would you not agree?
Justsumguy
(14 posts)“Voters in many U.S. states can now mail in their ballots or vote in person before Election Day. But in last year’s vote, most still cast their ballots in person, just as they did in 2012, according to figures compiled by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
State election officials have cited a variety of reasons, from budget pressures to disability laws, for closing polling places, while officials in many parts of Texas and Arizona have tried to shift from neighborhood-based polling places to “voter centers” that accept ballots from all qualified citizens.”
Response to Justsumguy (Reply #45)
SheltieLover This message was self-deleted by its author.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)Interesting
Justsumguy
(14 posts)for anything.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)And, fyi, it's DemocratIC leaders, not "Democrat."
It's interesting that you decided to devote your initial posts on DU to arguing that Georgia's massive and egregious voter suppression law isn't really THAT bad ...
Justsumguy
(14 posts)I asked what keeps the local leaders of the party from resolving the problem and you see that as blaming black voters? I didn't even BLAME the leaders, merely asked why they cant solve the problem. How do you get that I'm blaming black voters out of that?
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)If only those Black and Brown people who are being targeted for suppression would just take the time to research and fix why the government is making it so much harder for them to vote and then were self-sufficient enough to prepare and bring their own food and water with them when they stand on hours-long lines to that most white voters don't ever have to deal with, this wouldn't be an issue.
Wow. Welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay.
DemocraticPatriot
(4,372 posts)so that I might violate this fascist law.
Zeitghost
(3,862 posts)The GA law allows for self service water receptacles at the polls.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)But it neither requires it nor does it allow anyone other than the government entity to do it.
If the polling place - which is under the direction of partisan political official - decides not to provide water, no one else can.
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.
I guess this is a good thing. It will prevent the rash of "vote buying" we saw in recent elections when Democrats convinced Black and Brown voters to switch from voting for Donald Trump to voting for Biden by plying them with bottles of Aquafina and granola bars ...
gab13by13
(21,360 posts)Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)The law doesn't say 'Whites can get water, but Jews and Blacks cannot', or anything of that nature.
The PuQs are too clever to be that obvious at this point, plus they know that the Voting Rights Act still has some teeth to it.
When we try to argue 'it's bigoted', they ask ... what is our evidence?
What tangible proof do we have?
Their 'reasonable' explanation (that they've claimed) is that people have, in the past, been 'bribed' with food and drink ... to come down and vote. In the past, groups have shown up, and thrown barbeques in the park across the street from a voting location, that sort of thing.
WE all know this sort of thing more often happens in minority neighborhoods, and so does the other side. But how do we prove this is their true motivation?
They claim it's a form of bribery, so that's what they're outlawing.
We know their intent. We also know they'll make the places minorities need to go to vote ... as unpleasant as possible. But they've always done that.
They've always gotten away with it, and they will with this too. They're sneaky friggin pricks, having had 160+ years at this point to perfect their tactics.
They know as long as their laws apply to everyone 'equally', they can't really be pegged as being bigots. WE know they are ... but we can't prove it.
mopinko
(70,127 posts)which, of course, they also provide.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)I mean that alone is discriminatory, and it should be statistically provable, and it should violate Section 2 of VRA.
But seems like they always get away with it, cycle after cycle 
mopinko
(70,127 posts)they assume it will always be thus.
Zeitghost
(3,862 posts)How many people don't vote because they get thirsty in line? This is a non-issue and most people know it. Continuing to raise it only serves to take attention off real voter suppression issues (like the long lines themselves) and allows the right to dismiss the entire subject altogether.
When people try to make a lot of noise over inconsequential minutiae with no real world impact, it's because they are trying to distract from the real issues at play. When it comes to getting people to vote, eliviating thirst doesn't move the needle and yet that is what the media wants you to focus on. Why? Because a middle of the road swing voter who doesn't do a lot of in depth political analysis thinks "if you think you might get thirsty in a line, bring a water bottle" and moves along while dismissing all criticism from the left on voting rights as nonsense. You would think we would be smart enough to not fall for these distraction tactics, but we continue to do so over and over again.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)That's why local groups have organized the effort to provide food and water to voters. They're not doing it just to have something to do - they're doing it because it's needed.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)The law does not require catching someone on tape saying, "We are doing this because we're bigots."
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)And honestly hope that your confidence is totally warranted on this subject 
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)
Response to Hugh_Lebowski (Reply #19)
StarfishSaver This message was self-deleted by its author.
csziggy
(34,136 posts)In predominately minority areas. That is what causes the long lines. I don't have time to dig up the figures but I believe in the past that it was proven that in areas with mostly white voters there were more polling locations and more functional machines to vote on than in the other neighborhoods.
This of course leads to longer lines and long waits which make it difficult for voters to cast their votes, which is what causes the need for water and snacks. I remember reports of eight hour waits to cast votes, which is absurd.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)But even before the new law, the 'long lines' themselves are de facto bigoted, and apparently nobody has been able to fix that long-standing scam, have they?
So I'm skeptical that the addition of this 'no handing out food/beverages' is going to move a judge to say 'okay, NOW it's bigoted and the new law must be stopped on those grounds'.
I hope you're right to be confident though. Honestly fixing the line-length disparity is even more important IMHO. If that's corrected the 'water rule' becomes a lot less of a big deal.
csziggy
(34,136 posts)Will fix this situation that is only getting worse. This is why we need a national voting law that imposes requirements on state and local governments to run elections that provide equal opportunity to vote everywhere for everyone.
It's that or we have to get our own people in at the local levels and work our way up - something that has not happened in Florida, but hopefully Stacy Abrams and other people like her will kick everyone into action at all levels.
I wish I could be an activist but it is a fight for me to get things done just around the house anymore. Soon I will be able to provide financial support, though.
Walleye
(31,028 posts)Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)Walleye
(31,028 posts)
Azathoth
(4,610 posts)That's, at least, the official rationale. They think Democratic activists will set up tables with water bottles and use that as a pretense to circumvent electioneering restrictions at the polls and possibly reward "their" voters for voting.
Unofficially, of course, the goal is just to make voting as onerous as possible.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)their vote because someone gave them a bottle of water.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)There's no 'exemption' that says 'you CAN electioneer near a polling place if you're also handing out food/water', right?
So laws now would already prevent you from handing out water in "Biden/Harris" t-shirts to people in line. You basically already would have to do it in a non-political fashion.
Bettie
(16,110 posts)the fact that they now allow the legislature to just change any results they don't like.
Politicub
(12,165 posts)It functions as a cover for all of the more insidious parts of the law, like how local election boards can be replaced by a vote of the state legislature.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this part of the law gets repealed. Taking away the prohibition would make it seem like Georgia lawmakers are softening on the law. When in reality, the awful, seditious parts will remain intact.
jalan48
(13,870 posts)you going to do about it"?
WarGamer
(12,449 posts)What if Exxon was giving out $50 gas cards in the red suburbs at the polls?
Or the RNC handing out pizza?
The law is the law... on polling place grounds, no "free shit".
Having said that... in the parking lot there's no issue with handing out food, water, gift bags, whatever. That's assuming the parking lot is sufficient distance from the polls pursuant to local laws.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)A bottle of water is of negligible value and has absolutely no connection to standing in line to vote - it's just a gift, not sustenance. And Exxon is a for-profit entity, unlike the non-profit, non-partisan groups this law is targeted at.
But even then, neither the gift cards nor the handing out of water or granola bars, is electioneering, which this law is pretending to try to prevent, even though it's already illegal.
Electioneering is "the dissemination of information that advocates for or against any candidate or measure on the ballot."
Unless a candidate is handing out the granola bars or the label on the water bottle reads "vote for Bullworth," giving out something of negligible value - something of negligible value, with no political messaging or inducement that a poll worker can give out without violating the law - is NOT electioneering. In fact, the groups who are handing out water are - unlike Exxon - already prohibited by law from electioneering, so, by definition, just handing out water which doesn't endorse a candidate doesn't turn into electioneering just because they're doing it at a polling place.
The problem with this law is that it doesn't prohibit electioneering, which was already prohibited under existing law. It is clearly aimed to add one more obstacle to people voting in Black communities.
Under this law, if I were standing in line and got uncomfortable, hungry or thirsty and called my husband to ask him to stop by 7-11 to grab me a bottle of water on his way home from work and bring it to me, if he did, he would be committing a crime.
As for the parking lot - that excuse doesn't fly, either. The law prohibits the handing out of First of all, most polling place parking lots are within 150 of the polling place which often includes the parking lots. But even if the lot is more than 150 feet away, the law prohibits handing out food or water "within 25 feet of any voter standing in line to vote at any polling place." So of the line is within 25 feet of the parking lot, no one in that line can be given any water of food.
So, please stop making excuses for the inexcusable.
Y'all are sounding like the white people in Mississippi in the 1950s and 1960s who said, "What's the big deal about colored people taking a literacy test to vote? All they have to do is memorize the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and they can vote just like everyone else."
WarGamer
(12,449 posts)I'm not the alerting type... but that comment deserves it.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)I guess if you believe that not seeing how a seemingly innocuous law is intended to and actually does suppress the vote of Black people makes one "a 1950's segregationist Alabamian racist," your reaction is understandable. But since you were not accused of being such a person or even anything close to it - it's very misplaced.
Or maybe it's just to distract from the fact that I completely laid to waste your argument ...