SB-7 in Texas: A sweeping voter suppression bill set to pass

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,884
33,518
136
Based on that same old lie of mass voter fraud and claiming to be concerned about voter integrity. Republicans are slow stealing democracy right from under our noses. Some of the more problematic parts of the bill

● Impose state felony penalties on public officials who offer an application to vote by mail to someone who didn’t request it;

● Allow signatures on mail ballot applications to be compared to any signature on record, eliminating protections that the signature on file must be recent and that the application signature must be compared to at least two others on file to prevent the arbitrary rejection of ballots;

● Limit Sunday early voting to a maximum between the hours of 1 p.m. and 9 p.m., a time constraint Democrats and voting rights activists tell CNN that they fear could add a hurdle to "Souls to the Polls" after-church, get-out-the-vote efforts in Black and Latino communities.

● Grant partisan poll watchers new access to watch all steps of the voting and counting process “near enough to see and hear the activity;”

● And require individuals to fill out a form if they plan to transport more than two non-relatives to the polls, and expand the requirement that those assisting voters who need help must sign an oath attesting under penalty of perjury that the person they’re helping is eligible for assistance because of a disability and that they will not suggest whom to vote for.

● The bill would also make it easier to overturn an election, allowing courts to throw out results if enough ballots were cast illegally that it could have made a difference -- rather than proving that fraud actually altered the outcome of a race. (Of course bill does not state who determines if a vote is illegal.)

● It would also impose $1,000-a-day fines on local election officials who do not follow prescribed procedures to update their voter rolls, and criminal penalties on election workers who obstruct poll-watchers. Those partisan poll-watchers would see their power expanded, allowing them to be "near enough to see and hear" election activity.

Texas voting restrictions bill: What it means for elections | The Texas Tribune
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,246
55,794
136
To me the most insane part is the one where it empowers judges to throw out election results without determining who they voted for. That means if the loser cheats they could void the election of the honest winner.

Hope federal democrats are paying attention. Republicans do not intend to lose another election.
 

gothuevos

Diamond Member
Jul 28, 2010
3,528
2,420
136
Say hello to our new GOP perma-overlords.

Why are so many state legislatures GOP controlled in the first place? Are those state level elections gerrymandered too?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,754
16,091
146
To me the most insane part is the one where it empowers judges to throw out election results without determining who they voted for. That means if the loser cheats they could void the election of the honest winner.

Hope federal democrats are paying attention. Republicans do not intend to lose another election.
I was trying to find that verbiage in SB7. Haven’t found it yet. (Not saying it isn’t there)
 

balloonshark

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2008
7,300
3,725
136
This is why the 2nd amendment was written.

No taxation without representation. Half of the country should just quit paying taxes and buying unnecessary items until the country buckles and they get pressure from above (their wealthy masters) which makes them give in. Hit them where it hurts in the wallet. That's the only way to prevent becoming a dictatorship or starting a uncivil war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,754
16,091
146
Here you go, assuming he is quoting it accurately and there aren't other caveats.

Yup. That’s what I saw, but a search for “Overturn” isn’t finding anything.
https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/87R/billtext/html/SB00007I.htm

neither is 232.063

edit found this under 232.063
Sec. 232.063. CIVIL PENALTY. (a) If the court in its
judgment finds that the contestee, an agent of the contestee, or a
person acting on behalf of the contestee with the contestee's
knowledge committed one or more violations of a section described
by Section 232.061, the contestee is liable to this state for a
civil penalty of $1,000 for each violation.
(b) A penalty collected under this section by the attorney
general shall be deposited in the state treasury to the credit of
the general revenue fund.
 
Last edited:

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
17,540
16,892
146
● And require individuals to fill out a form if they plan to transport more than two non-relatives to the polls, and expand the requirement that those assisting voters who need help must sign an oath attesting under penalty of perjury that the person they’re helping is eligible for assistance because of a disability and that they will not suggest whom to vote for.
As someone who's in a relationship with someone with a visual disability who struggles filling out multi-field forms, and who'd rather not bring it up, I'd like to say, go fuck yourself Republicans. Keep being fucking dinosaurs and don't be surprised when you end up extinct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,076
2,635
136
Here you go, assuming he is quoting it accurately and there aren't other caveats.

I mean... how many votes are cast illegally? The reality is this bill probably will have zero effect on texas voting patterns and will probably not slow the inevitable.

● Impose state felony penalties on public officials who offer an application to vote by mail to someone who didn’t request it;
Probably will not change anything

● Allow signatures on mail ballot applications to be compared to any signature on record, eliminating protections that the signature on file must be recent and that the application signature must be compared to at least two others on file to prevent the arbitrary rejection of ballots;
Mail in ballots were something heavily used in the covid pandemic by democrats. Outside of covid, mail in was mostly used by the older than 65 population in texas which largely voted GOP. So it seems they are basically increasing the likelihood of throwing out votes from older people in their camp. Remember before covid you could only vote by mail if you were out of town basically. Also I don't know how many ballots were tossed because of signature issues in texas but I don't remember hearing that it was of any significance (usually these is a process as well in place to rectify those ballots for signature concerns)

● Limit Sunday early voting to a maximum between the hours of 1 p.m. and 9 p.m., a time constraint Democrats and voting rights activists tell CNN that they fear could add a hurdle to "Souls to the Polls" after-church, get-out-the-vote efforts in Black and Latino communities.
I think this one could hurt but again not really sure how much impact souls to the polls really has these days.

● Grant partisan poll watchers new access to watch all steps of the voting and counting process “near enough to see and hear the activity;”
Will change nothing.

● And require individuals to fill out a form if they plan to transport more than two non-relatives to the polls, and expand the requirement that those assisting voters who need help must sign an oath attesting under penalty of perjury that the person they’re helping is eligible for assistance because of a disability and that they will not suggest whom to vote for.
Not enforceable at all. Like how will they enforce this? Lets say you and 4 of your friends decide to drive to the polls to vote during your work break, how will they enforce this? Who is enforcing policing of how people get to the polls? Will there be people at the polls watching people get out of cars and asking for papers? Sounds bat crazy and not enforceable at all.

● The bill would also make it easier to overturn an election, allowing courts to throw out results if enough ballots were cast illegally that it could have made a difference -- rather than proving that fraud actually altered the outcome of a race. (Of course bill does not state who determines if a vote is illegal.)
You need to establish illegal votes something republicans have been looking for the last 12 months and cannot find. Ultimately I don't see it changing anything if they can't establish that people are voting illegally. Might as well say if enough ballots are being cast by creatures from mars that could have made a difference.

● It would also impose $1,000-a-day fines on local election officials who do not follow prescribed procedures to update their voter rolls, and criminal penalties on election workers who obstruct poll-watchers. Those partisan poll-watchers would see their power expanded, allowing them to be "near enough to see and hear" election activity.
This is more of an annoyance to election workers but wouldn't change outcomes of elections.


I mean ultimately its a lot of bluster and to me basically is a loyalty affirmation to trump more than legislation that actually does anything to make voting more secure or to try and make it harder for people... Its a stupid law and they can all rot in hell for passing it but whatever... at the end of the day the population changes in texas will kick in within the next decade and we''ll start seeing real change.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,246
55,794
136
I mean... how many votes are cast illegally? The reality is this bill probably will have zero effect on texas voting patterns and will probably not slow the inevitable.

● Impose state felony penalties on public officials who offer an application to vote by mail to someone who didn’t request it;
Probably will not change anything

● Allow signatures on mail ballot applications to be compared to any signature on record, eliminating protections that the signature on file must be recent and that the application signature must be compared to at least two others on file to prevent the arbitrary rejection of ballots;
Mail in ballots were something heavily used in the covid pandemic by democrats. Outside of covid, mail in was mostly used by the older than 65 population in texas which largely voted GOP. So it seems they are basically increasing the likelihood of throwing out votes from older people in their camp. Remember before covid you could only vote by mail if you were out of town basically. Also I don't know how many ballots were tossed because of signature issues in texas but I don't remember hearing that it was of any significance (usually these is a process as well in place to rectify those ballots for signature concerns)

● Limit Sunday early voting to a maximum between the hours of 1 p.m. and 9 p.m., a time constraint Democrats and voting rights activists tell CNN that they fear could add a hurdle to "Souls to the Polls" after-church, get-out-the-vote efforts in Black and Latino communities.
I think this one could hurt but again not really sure how much impact souls to the polls really has these days.

● Grant partisan poll watchers new access to watch all steps of the voting and counting process “near enough to see and hear the activity;”
Will change nothing.

● And require individuals to fill out a form if they plan to transport more than two non-relatives to the polls, and expand the requirement that those assisting voters who need help must sign an oath attesting under penalty of perjury that the person they’re helping is eligible for assistance because of a disability and that they will not suggest whom to vote for.
Not enforceable at all. Like how will they enforce this? Lets say you and 4 of your friends decide to drive to the polls to vote during your work break, how will they enforce this? Who is enforcing policing of how people get to the polls? Will there be people at the polls watching people get out of cars and asking for papers? Sounds bat crazy and not enforceable at all.

● The bill would also make it easier to overturn an election, allowing courts to throw out results if enough ballots were cast illegally that it could have made a difference -- rather than proving that fraud actually altered the outcome of a race. (Of course bill does not state who determines if a vote is illegal.)
You need to establish illegal votes something republicans have been looking for the last 12 months and cannot find. Ultimately I don't see it changing anything if they can't establish that people are voting illegally. Might as well say if enough ballots are being cast by creatures from mars that could have made a difference.

● It would also impose $1,000-a-day fines on local election officials who do not follow prescribed procedures to update their voter rolls, and criminal penalties on election workers who obstruct poll-watchers. Those partisan poll-watchers would see their power expanded, allowing them to be "near enough to see and hear" election activity.
This is more of an annoyance to election workers but wouldn't change outcomes of elections.


I mean ultimately its a lot of bluster and to me basically is a loyalty affirmation to trump more than legislation that actually does anything to make voting more secure or to try and make it harder for people... Its a stupid law and they can all rot in hell for passing it but whatever... at the end of the day the population changes in texas will kick in within the next decade and we''ll start seeing real change.
I’m no lawyer and no expert on this legislation but how is what counts as an illegal vote determined?

Regardless, there is no sane scenario where cheating by the loser should result in invalidating the winner. It makes no sense.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
26,541
24,740
136
The only option is for blue state to leave the union. It's time to start a nationwide campaign for this
 

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,799
5,566
136
It would also impose $1,000-a-day fines on local election officials who do not follow prescribed procedures to update their voter rolls, and criminal penalties on election workers who obstruct poll-watchers. Those partisan poll-watchers would see their power expanded, allowing them to be "near enough to see and hear" election activity.

Many of whom are unpaid volunteers. Who promptly just decided to un-volunteer.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,163
136
No need to worry. If some of the extremes were imposed during/after an actual election then it would go straight to the US Supreme Court. Thing with that is.... it would delay the results from Texas for days if not weeks or months. Voters seem to like election night results to be reported on election night. I guarantee that this republican voter suppression nonsense will eventually backfire big time. Republicans will regret their misguided attempts after it bites them in the butt and they scurry to reverse what they have done. Stay calm people.... we are not dealing with wisdom nor common sense nor rocket scientist, we are dealing with sore losers and morons all of which happen to be..... republican.
 

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,076
2,635
136
The only option is for blue state to leave the union. It's time to start a nationwide campaign for this
Yeah it sounds great but honestly there are more democrats in texas than connecticut. Its not just so easy. What you really need is federal laws setting the rules for human decency in this country. How we vote in this country needs to across the board change cause what worked in 1876 doesn't work anymore.
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
8,259
9,331
136
Give Stacey Abrams a leadership position at the DNC with a $100,000,000 budget and none of these bills would matter at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cytg111

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
26,541
24,740
136
Yeah it sounds great but honestly there are more democrats in texas than connecticut. Its not just so easy. What you really need is federal laws setting the rules for human decency in this country. How we vote in this country needs to across the board change cause what worked in 1876 doesn't work anymore.
Are this point the manifestation of states is more powerful than the will of the people. Therefore we have to divy up this country by states.

Unfortunately it's time to leave the union as the Republicans have shown that they will only turn it fascist. Let them have it. We can support insurgents in the South. In the meantime, I'm done with letting a minority of the country run so much shit with zero ethics.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,246
55,794
136
^^^ Nothing. Just a delaying tactic.

That's really a childish (GOP-type) thing too.
Probably not long term successful, no.

I agree that denying a quorum is a fundamentally undemocratic thing to do, but we should probably note that what the Texas legislature is trying to do here is undermine democracy so it’s not like they can complain.