Oh, Georgia, you’re just full of racist assholes, aren’t you? They’re up to their same old tricks.
Some review: Puerto Rico is a US “territory” rather than a state because the people there are brown and it was obvious at the time that keeping them from voting was important. I’ll spare you all the recap, but the entire reason that Puerto Rico is a “territory” is racism and colonialism. Congress used the word “territory” because “colony” was starting to smell bad, and they came up with a dodge on the voting: Puerto Ricans can’t vote in the national vote unless they emigrate to the fatherland mainland and vote there. Naturally, they aren’t exactly welcome there, either, but the recent hurricane has caused migration, so the political entities on the mainland are reacting to the influx of brown people.
In Georgia, they have realized that if they can keep the Puerto Ricans from getting drivers’ licenses, they can keep them from the polls at voting time. [mj]
Georgia has been requiring Puerto Rican natives seeking Georgia driver’s licenses to answer a special set of questions such as “identifying ‘what a meat filled with plantain fritter’ is called; where a specific beach is located; and ‘the name of the frog [that is] native only to PR,'” according to a lawsuit filed this week.
A meat filled with plantain fritter is called a “fuck you, redneck.” I believe the frog is also of genus Vilis Redneck.
The allegations in the complaint, filed in federal court in Atlanta against two top officials at the state’s Department of Driver Services (DDS), suggest that Georgia is singling out Puerto Ricans for questions that resemble the literacy tests used to deny voter registration to African Americans in the Jim Crow South. Without driver’s licenses, Puerto Ricans moving to Georgia will struggle to find jobs and cast a ballot, where a photo ID is required to vote. A growing number of Puerto Ricans continue to leave the island, which has been devastated in recent years by hurricanes and economic crisis, for better opportunities in states like Georgia.
“Of course we wants you to vote the Democratic ticket”
The US is not serious about the integrity of its elections, if things like this and gerrymandering are even possible, let alone tolerated. The entire system, with districted voting, etc., is designed to be rigged. If the US wanted less riggable elections, it would be “one person one vote” at a per-state level, and the national election would be at a national level. Nowadays, we have the technology to do that, but instead you’ve got things like the state of Georgia, Florida, or North Carolina buying their own voting machines that have all kinds of operational “problems” – it’s a travesty when they scream “Russians may have gotten into the voting system!!” You’ve already got rednecks in the voting system. Computer security experts have been pointing out the flaws in those systems for over a decade and it’s as if they just don’t care … or they’re waiting for another Bush V Gore where instead of “hanging chads” it’s “Russians.”
The system is shit by design.
I think compulsory voting (call it an enforced ‘civic duty’) such as we have in Oz is a damn good idea. Political apathy is about the same, I reckon, but participation (however uninformed) is greater, evening out special interests.
(Also, the Electoral College system sucks)
Texas put together a list of people who voted last election whose drivers licenses indicated they were not citizens, and forwarded that list to county governments for investigation. Turns out they became naturalized citizens since they got their drivers licenses. Again there was a lawsuit.
John Morales,
They are trying to discourage people who should be able to vote from voting.
As much as I used to hate the idea of compulsory voting, I’m beginning to come around to being in favor of it (so long as there is some sort of “abstain” option or similar)
Granted, we have to do something about the broken government that keeps voluntary people who WANT to vote from doing so first, and I’m not optimistic about that.
Is it just me, or is it kinda funny how the very same people so worried about “voter IDs” and such, don’t seem to care about any other aspect of election security?
And what in the hell do those questions have to do with either operating a motor vehicle, or establishing identity? I really hope they get smacked down hard in court.
I guess they (probably rightly) figured that since the Supremes said racism was over and they didn’t need adult supervision anymore, they could just go back to the old tried and true ways. Nobody said that fixing what was broken means you can’t break it again, duuuh. When the Fed’s main argument against having to provide soap and water to prisoners is “Nuh-uh, you didn’t specifically say ‘soap and water’ so we don’t have to,” it’s really not unreasonable for GA to follow along and think this will fly.
lochaber,
It’s not that bad.
We use paper slips to vote; all one needs to do is to turn up, get signed-off, get the bit(s) of paper, go to a booth and fiddle (or vote validly, or draw a penis) with the paper, and then fold and drop the bit(s) of paper into a receptacle. Civic duty done.
Effectively, the compulsory part is having to turn up and and thus having an opportunity to vote, not the actual voting itself. But most people do take advantage, since they’re there anyway.
Computer security experts have been pointing out the flaws in those systems for over a decade
Make that twenty or more years? I used to read the ACM Risks newsgroup way back then and the problems were discussed at length there long, long ago.
It has been clear for many years that given proprietary software and lousy security that a 16 year old boy scout could corrupt most Us election results. Add in gerrymandering, voter exclusions on any possible flimsy grounds and the US really does not come off well it the Election Sweepstakes.
For some reason I was googling exactly that this afternoon and the US consistently rates lowest out of OECD democracies as a bastion of fair election practices. Mind, Canada is well below the Scandinavian countries and some others.
@ 6 John Morales
We, in Canada, have basically the same system though in the municipal elections last year we had a machine readable paper vote. You filled it out, it was run through as tiny optical reader and voilà your vote was registered. One worker did mention that they would be back the next morning for a manual count as a check.
Here in Canada we typically vote for one position at any one election (municipal elections are the exception as one may vote for a city councilor and a school board trusty.
My impression, from looking at a couple of photos of US ballots is that they have one election in November and one votes for any position from the President of the United States to town dog catcher at the same time so the election procedure must be much more fraught. Can any US type tell me if I am totally mistaken?
I’ve also got to agree with the idea of mandatory voting, so long as one option is “meh.” Although, as I mentioned in my pieces on Badgeria, I like an electoral system where you, if “meh” won the election then none of the candidates are ever able to run again. Because if you can’t beat indifference, you’re not a candidate.
What drives me bonkers about this stuff is that rather clearly the US south is perfectly comfortable with this sort of chicanery. They know it’s wrong but they pretend not to notice because: power.
When Ghengis Khan encountered disloyalty, he left behind piles of skulls and not much else. “Reconstruction” was a joke (I have some postings about that I need to write) and it amounted to the south getting what they wanted in spite of losing the civil war.
Why do people here see mandatory voting as a good thing? What’s the point of forcing a person to drag their feet to the polling station just so that they could drop an empty envelope into the ballot box? An uninformed citizen who doesn’t follow the news about politics casting an empty ballot would be the preferable option. The same person picking some candidate randomly and casting a valid (but uninformed) vote would be even worse. So what’s the point?
For example, I have an elderly family member who doesn’t watch news and is uninformed about politics. On top of that, she’s sort of old and walking around is uncomfortable for her. Sure, she can walk, but she doesn’t want to leave the house unless it is necessary. Who would benefit from forcing a person like her to arrive to the polling station assuming that she doesn’t want to be there and would cast an empty envelope or pick some political party at random anyway?
If some citizen believes that all the candidates suck and doesn’t want to vote, then the state should have no right to force them to arrive at the polling station against their will.
Andreas, postal votes are available. For free.
PS Are you lazy?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting#Arguments_for
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting#Arguments_against
Puerto Rico is a “territory”
Colony does seem the better term. As far as I can remember, it is the last “large” colony in the world. Certainly it has no vote in US elections.
As far as I am aware residents in the French DOM–TOM’s can, at least, vote for the President of the Republic and may have representation in the National Assembly.
Hell, even Saint Pierre and Miquelon can vote and apparently, if the wiki is correct, sends a Senator and a Deputy to Paris.
The English are less accommodating. I am pretty sure that residents of the Falklands or Gibraltar do not sent people to Parliament but they are small colonies. Well, Saint Pierre and Miquelon is a lot smaller in population but anyway….
A few years ago, I remember saying something about Puerto Rico being conquered by the USA but that they would be crazy to want to leave.
Now, I am wondering if the Puerto Rico Independence movement is picking up members.
Given the disgraceful, racist, corrupt, and incompetent treatment Puerto Rico has received since Hurricane Maria, I am starting to think that they might be crazy to stay as a US colony, err, excuse me, territory.
Andreas Avester@#12:
Why do people here see mandatory voting as a good thing? What’s the point of forcing a person to drag their feet to the polling station just so that they could drop an empty envelope into the ballot box
I doubt it’d make sense to schedule the elections separately. In a rational well-run country, there’d be a national holiday on which everyone filed their tax returns, voted, and renewed their drivers’ license. Or something like that. All on one form. With a check box “are you a citizen?”
John Morales @#11
Only in some countries, which, for some odd reason, do not seem to worry about the security risks caused by allowing people to vote by post.
Marcus @#13
Where I live, majority of people do not have a driver’s license. On top of that, only a few people who are self-employed and run their own small businesses have to fill out their tax returns. For the overwhelming majority of the population, tax returns are filled out by the accountant who works for the company that employs them. I can only assume that you weren’t advocating that voting should be compulsory only for self-employed people with a driver’s license.
jrkrideau @ #12
They’re both self-governing. They are not administered from London.
@ 15 Dunc
They’re both self-governing
Duh, of course.
I missed that totally and I am Canadian. I should know better.
Excuse me while I go hide my face.