Progress is slow but.........

[berg80]

Minnesota Legislature Passes Pro-Voting Reforms in Funding Bill

WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Thursday, April 20, the Minnesota Senate passed House File 1830, an omnibus state government funding bill that includes several pro-voting election reforms. The 182-page bill already passed the House, but lawmakers must agree on the differences between each chamber’s version before H.F. 1830 heads to Gov. Tim Walz (D) for his signature.

H.F. 1830 covers a range of spending priorities, but also outlines a handful of voting reforms. Election law changes incorporated within H.F. 1830 include:

• Establishing 18 days of in-person early voting. Currently, Minnesota has an early voting period of 46 days before Election Day, but the only options available during that time are sending in a mail-in ballot or filling out a mail-in ballot at an elections office.
• Restricting voter challenges, a process by which, under current Minnesota law, any eligible voter can challenge the eligibility of another voter. H.F. 1830 would ban mass challenges by requiring officials to reject any effort to challenge “the eligibility of more than one voter,” limit the time frame before an election and add new evidence expectations for the grounds of a challenge. “The filer has the burden to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the basis for challenging the individual’s eligibility to vote is valid,” the bill text reads.
• Joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an alternative to the Electoral College that would ensure that the winner of the national popular vote becomes president. Currently, 15 states and Washington D.C., accounting for 195 electoral votes, have signed onto the interstate agreement; it will take effect once states with 75 more electoral votes join. Once signed, Minnesota will move the compact 10 electoral votes closer to enactment.

https://www.democracydocket.com/new...re-passes-pro-voting-reforms-in-funding-bill/

It is said “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” I don't know if we will ever achieve majoritarian governance in this country but seeing incremental progress gives me hope. Getting rid of the EC is a step in the right direction. Now if gerrymandering could only be outlawed perhaps the people's agenda might have a chance of being enacted.

 

[berg80]

Justice Thomas reached the same conclusion as the other justices, but he (and Justice Gorsuch) said that the 10th Amendment provided a basis for the decision. Thomas wrote that the “powers related to electors reside with States to the extent that the Constitution does not remove or restrict that power. Thus, to invalidate a state law, there must be ‘something in the Federal Constitution that deprives the [States of] the power to enact such a measure.’”

This clear reaffirmation of the power of states to appoint their electoral votes “in whatever way it likes” supports the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact and Article II, section 1 upon which National Popular Vote is based. States have broad authority over their electors, and nothing in this case would suggest this plenary power would suddenly be limited if the states’ electors were awarded to the National Popular Vote winner.

And second, the Court’s decision reinforces the validity of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Under National Popular Vote, states that combine for at least 270 electoral votes agree to award their electors to the presidential candidate who wins the most individual votes across the nation. (Fifteen states and the District of Columbia, totaling 196 electoral votes, have already passed the measure.)

Supreme Court’s “faithless electors” decision validates case for the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

Barry Fadem, President of the National Popular Vote, writes that the Supreme Court's decision on faithless electors reaffirms the states' ability to choose electors based on the outcome of the national popular vote, given that it holds they may choose electors in any way they wish.

www.brookings.edu

 

[johngaltshrugged]

So election fraud & mob rule is progress... sounds about right for progbots.

You rubes never think things through, do you?

 

[berg80]

So election fraud & mob rule is progress... sounds about right for progbots.

You rubes never think things through, do you?

That's an interesting spin on the democratic principle of majority rule you have there, calling it mob rule. Do you have a similarly derogatory term for minority rule? You know, the thing Repubs continue to try to orchestrate.

 

[Independentthinker]

Minnesota Legislature Passes Pro-Voting Reforms in Funding Bill

WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Thursday, April 20, the Minnesota Senate passed House File 1830, an omnibus state government funding bill that includes several pro-voting election reforms. The 182-page bill already passed the House, but lawmakers must agree on the differences between each chamber’s version before H.F. 1830 heads to Gov. Tim Walz (D) for his signature.

H.F. 1830 covers a range of spending priorities, but also outlines a handful of voting reforms. Election law changes incorporated within H.F. 1830 include:

• Establishing 18 days of in-person early voting. Currently, Minnesota has an early voting period of 46 days before Election Day, but the only options available during that time are sending in a mail-in ballot or filling out a mail-in ballot at an elections office.
• Restricting voter challenges, a process by which, under current Minnesota law, any eligible voter can challenge the eligibility of another voter. H.F. 1830 would ban mass challenges by requiring officials to reject any effort to challenge “the eligibility of more than one voter,” limit the time frame before an election and add new evidence expectations for the grounds of a challenge. “The filer has the burden to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the basis for challenging the individual’s eligibility to vote is valid,” the bill text reads.
• Joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an alternative to the Electoral College that would ensure that the winner of the national popular vote becomes president. Currently, 15 states and Washington D.C., accounting for 195 electoral votes, have signed onto the interstate agreement; it will take effect once states with 75 more electoral votes join. Once signed, Minnesota will move the compact 10 electoral votes closer to enactment.

https://www.democracydocket.com/new...re-passes-pro-voting-reforms-in-funding-bill/

It is said “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” I don't know if we will ever achieve majoritarian governance in this country but seeing incremental progress gives me hope. Getting rid of the EC is a step in the right direction. Now if gerrymandering could only be outlawed perhaps the people's agenda might have a chance of being enacted.

Gee, imagine that in lefty Minnesota.

 

[Anomalism]

That's an interesting spin on the democratic principle of majority rule you have there, calling it mob rule. Do you have a similarly derogatory term for minority rule? You know, the thing Repubs continue to try to orchestrate.

You can't really fault them for being against it if you're a pragmatic person. It's a fight and they're in it to win it. Y'all know damn well that going by the popular vote would eviscerate republicans. Conversely if the popular vote regularly favored republicans all of the roles would be reversed because none of you actually have consistent values. You just want to make moves to your advantage.

The popular vote tends to favor the left so it's very convenient for you to have the position that you do. It's weird. It kind of seems like everybody just happens to have opinions about the situation that favor their own side.

 

[Curried Goats]

You can't really fault them for being against it if you're a pragmatic person. It's a fight and they're in it to win it. Y'all know damn well that going by the popular vote would eviscerate republicans. Conversely if the popular vote regularly favored republicans all of the roles would be reversed because none of you actually have consistent values. You just want to make moves to your advantage.

The popular vote tends to favor the left so it's very convenient for you to have the position that you do. It's weird. It kind of seems like everybody just happens to have opinions about the situation that favor their own side.

We actually can hold you clowns at fault for your anti democratic tendencies. Just as the cucks who got caught up rioting at the Capitol on Jan 6th.

At least you're man enough to admit you don't think the person who receives the most votes from actual people should win since Republicans have such a hard time doing that. Good on you. Still a shit strategy though. The electoral college will only keep you treading water for so long.

 

[Anomalism]

We actually can hold you clowns at fault for your anti democratic tendencies. Just as the cucks who got caught up rioting at the Capitol on Jan 6th.

At least you're man enough to admit you don't think the person who receives the most votes from actual people should win since Republicans have such a hard time doing that. Good on you. Still a shit strategy though. The electoral college will only keep you treading water for so long.

I literally took a neutral position on it and you couldn't help but paint me as some right wing nut job that's against democracy. I'm just pointing out that very few of you, left or right, actually have real and consistent values. You just want to win and do whatever you can to work toward that goal.

At no point did I say it was my position that the popular vote shouldn't matter. You just don't actually listen and absorb what's being said to you because you're a partisan lunatic.

I'm not a Republican. Not even close. But you are just so far gone that reality is this ethereal thing that you cannot commune with anymore.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Minnesota Legislature Passes Pro-Voting Reforms in Funding Bill

WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Thursday, April 20, the Minnesota Senate passed House File 1830, an omnibus state government funding bill that includes several pro-voting election reforms. The 182-page bill already passed the House, but lawmakers must agree on the differences between each chamber’s version before H.F. 1830 heads to Gov. Tim Walz (D) for his signature.

H.F. 1830 covers a range of spending priorities, but also outlines a handful of voting reforms. Election law changes incorporated within H.F. 1830 include:

• Establishing 18 days of in-person early voting. Currently, Minnesota has an early voting period of 46 days before Election Day, but the only options available during that time are sending in a mail-in ballot or filling out a mail-in ballot at an elections office.
• Restricting voter challenges, a process by which, under current Minnesota law, any eligible voter can challenge the eligibility of another voter. H.F. 1830 would ban mass challenges by requiring officials to reject any effort to challenge “the eligibility of more than one voter,” limit the time frame before an election and add new evidence expectations for the grounds of a challenge. “The filer has the burden to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the basis for challenging the individual’s eligibility to vote is valid,” the bill text reads.
• Joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an alternative to the Electoral College that would ensure that the winner of the national popular vote becomes president. Currently, 15 states and Washington D.C., accounting for 195 electoral votes, have signed onto the interstate agreement; it will take effect once states with 75 more electoral votes join. Once signed, Minnesota will move the compact 10 electoral votes closer to enactment.

https://www.democracydocket.com/new...re-passes-pro-voting-reforms-in-funding-bill/

It is said “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” I don't know if we will ever achieve majoritarian governance in this country but seeing incremental progress gives me hope. Getting rid of the EC is a step in the right direction. Now if gerrymandering could only be outlawed perhaps the people's agenda might have a chance of being enacted.

Very good – another victory for democracy and the will of the people.

 

[Curried Goats]

I literally took a neutral position on it and you couldn't help but paint me as some right wing nut job that's against democracy. I'm just pointing out that very few of you, left or right, actually have real and consistent values. You just want to win and do whatever you can to work toward that goal.

I never said you were a nut job for approaching politics pragmatically. In fact I think the nut jobs are the people who've bought into the idea of inalienable and natural rights. No, I'm a pragmatist myself. I just don't see any long term path to victory for white Nationalist minded conservatives with this strategy of do nothing but try and maintain the status quo. As demographics shift that becomes harder and harder and then need to expend more resources just to stay in place.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So election fraud & mob rule is progress... sounds about right for progbots.

You rubes never think things through, do you?

The principle of majority rule is far preferable to the tyranny of Republican minority rule.

 

[Anomalism]

I never said you were a nut job for approaching politics pragmatically. In fact I think the nut jobs are the people who've bought into the idea of inalienable and natural rights. No, I'm a pragmatist myself. I just don't see any long term path to victory for white Nationalist minded conservatives with this strategy of do nothing but try and maintain the status quo. As demographics shift that becomes harder and harder and then need to expend more resources just to stay in place.

Your post above accused me of being an anti-democratic republican. You accused me of not thinking the person who got the most votes should win. You're attached things to me that you have absolutely no basis for doing so. It really just seems like when somebody doesn't fall in line and mirror your narrative you start accusing them of crazy stuff like you did above.

 

[Curried Goats]

Your post above accused me of being an anti-democratic republican.

You said we couldn't blame people for being pragmatic. Fighting against a popular vote while pragmatic for Republicans is the very definition of anti-democratic.

You accused me of not thinking the person who got the most votes should win. You're attached things to me that you have absolutely no basis for doing so. It really just seems like when somebody doesn't fall in line and mirror your narrative you start accusing them of crazy stuff like you did above.

Or maybe I just took your defense of anti-democratic principles as a sign you harbor anti-democratic tendencies.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I never said you were a nut job for approaching politics pragmatically.

"We actually can hold you clowns at fault for your anti democratic tendencies."

 

[Curried Goats]

"We actually can hold you clowns at fault for your anti democratic tendencies."

Clowns as in you're funny not crazy.

 

[Anomalism]

You said we couldn't blame people for being pragmatic. Fighting against a popular vote while pragmatic for Republicans is the very definition of anti-democratic.

No. You misunderstood and I don't think that is a pragmatic position for them at all. The pragmatic people are the ones that are not on their side but can view the situation and understand why they hold the positions that they do.

 

[Curried Goats]

No. You misunderstood and I don't think that is a pragmatic position for them at all.

You dont think its pragmatic for a political party who hasnt won the popular vote since 2004 to resist efforts to switch from an electoral college to a popular vote?

The pragmatic people are the ones that are not on their side but can view the situation and understand why they hold the positions that they do.

What?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Your post above accused me of being an anti-democratic republican. You accused me of not thinking the person who got the most votes should win. You're attached things to me that you have absolutely no basis for doing so. It really just seems like when somebody doesn't fall in line and mirror your narrative you start accusing them of crazy stuff like you did above.

Curried lashes out and quickly goes emotional when someone points out his/her errors.

 

[Anomalism]

Curried lashes out and quickly goes emotional when someone points out his/her errors.

Cringe poster for sure. Clearly has unhealthy hangups about racism and white republicans. He seems to be every bit the racist he accuses others of being. Narcissistic projection is my guess.

 

[Anomalism]

You dont think its pragmatic for a political party who hasnt won the popular vote since 2004 to resist efforts to switch from an electoral college to a popular vote?

What?

Meh. I think it'll hurt them more in the end. I'm tired of talking to you so I won't reiterate the part that went over your head.