Connect with us

Politics

Experts Call Georgia’s Long Election Lines Evidence of Voter Enthusiasm, Not Suppression, Following Outrage

Published

on

Photo source: The New York Times

  • Georgia began its early voting period Monday, and at many locations, lines quickly stacked. Some people even reported waiting more than eight hours to cast their votes.
  • While many have since called those lines evidence of voter suppression in Georgia, a number of election officials have said the lines are actually evidence of voter enthusiasm.
  • In fact, Georgia’s Secretary of State estimated that nearly 127,000 voted on Monday, shattering the previous single-day record of 90,000.
  • Still, others have said that while the lines clearly show voter enthusiasm, there is a larger problem that must be addressed if people are having to wait hours on end to vote.

Georgia Polls Open to Long Lines

Georgia began its early voting period Monday with massive lines that resulted in some people waiting for more than eight hours to cast their ballots. 

Altanta-based news outlet WSB-TV reported that at some locations, people were still waiting in line well past 10 p.m. In fact, lines were so long that people even brought their own lawn chairs to sit in.

“It doesn’t matter how long it takes, we will stand in line to vote,” voter Viola Hardy told a local reporter. “So I think that’s the most important part. We’re voting like our life depends on it.”

While Hardy was able to wait in line for more than five hours, many others weren’t. A woman by the name of Elizabeth Brownlie told BuzzFeed News that she had to leave after an hour and a half of standing in line because she had an appointment to go to.

“For me, it’s very, very, very important and [it was] disheartening… to have that experience,”  Brownlie said. “Voting should not be this difficult.”

Voter Suppression or Voter Enthusiasm?

One video tweeted by former Senator Claire McCaskill (R-Mo.) showed people lined up more than a street away at one voting center.

“This is a picture of voter suppression,” McCaskill said. “Why do Americans have to wait in lines this long?”

McCaskill was far from the only person accusing Georgia of engaging in voter suppression. 

“What’s happening in Georgia should upset us all,” one person tweeted. “There is NO REASON people should wait hours in line to vote. Pure voter suppression.”

Despite cries of voter suppression, Georgia’s voter turnout on Monday was unprecedented. In fact, according to the secretary of state, nearly 127,000 Georgians cast their votes, up from the previous single-day record of about 90,000 voters. 

In an interview with a WSB-TV reporter, one election official essentially compared the voting lines to lines when a new iPhone goes on sale. Many others have agreed, pushing against the claims of voter suppression. 

“So much voter suppression happened in Georgia yesterday that almost 37,000 more people voted than any other early voting day!!” one person sarcastically tweeted. “Someone should be arrested for this travesty of justice!”

Others have also referenced the fact that Georgia allows any registered voter to request an absentee ballot.

Alongside that, a number of experts have questioned if the long lines are truly evidence of voter suppression. That includes David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, who told BuzzFeed News, “I’d be concerned if I didn’t see long lines.”

“We’re 22 days away from the election,” he said. “Anyone who sees a long line and does not have the time to wait can come back tomorrow.”

Becker called long lines for early voting a sign of voter enthusiasm, saying that each person who votes early is one less person who could potentially be stuck waiting to vote on Election Day.

Long Lines Are Still a Fundamental Problem

A full explanation may be more complicated than either just voter suppression or enthusiasm. 

“Some of this is voter enthusiasm,” Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, saying on Twitter. “But this is just not acceptable in a modern day democracy. We need restoration of the [Voting Rights Act] & officials who’ll provide more voting opportunities during a pandemic.”

Essentially, Clarke is making the argument that while there was a record-breaking turnout, if people are still finding themselves in situations where they’re having to wait hours on end just to vote — with some people having to leave before they could even cast their vote — then there is still an underlying, fundamental problem that needs to be addressed.

Some have wondered how many of those people who couldn’t vote on Monday will actually return to try to vote again. 

Others have wondered how many voters will wait until Election Day to vote. That itself could lead to similar delays like those that were seen on Monday.

Glitches, Paper Ballots, and Other Unexpected Holdups

Part of the reason lines were so long in some places Monday wasn’t just because of the sheer number of people turning out to vote.

It was also reportedly because of technical glitches that delayed voting. For example, at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta, lines came to a stop when check-in tablets started giving voters error messages. 

Instead of issuing emergency paper ballots, poll workers and tech support staff held up lines to fix the tablets. 

The same day, a federal judge in Georgia rejected an effort to require higher numbers of emergency paper ballots at Georgia polling places, ruling that the request “invites the court to plunge into the task of advising election officials on precise details of election administration.”

Election officials do still have the option to provide more backups if they want to.

In addition to glitches and questions about the role of paper ballots, lines were also held up Monday by people who had originally requested mail-in ballots, now showing up to vote in-person instead.

“That slows things down because they have to cancel that one in order to vote in-person so there’s more steps,” Cobb County Elections Director Janine Eveler said.

One man who spoke with BuzzFeed News said he switched from voting by mail because he was concerned about potential delays and President Donald Trump’s attacks on the U.S. Postal Service. 

See what others are saying: (Atlanta Journal-Constitution) (WSB Channel 2) (BuzzFeed News)

Politics

Supreme Court Rules High School Football Coach Can Pray on Field

Published

on

All of our rights are “hanging in the balance,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor in a dissenting opinion.


Court’s Conservatives Break With 60 Years of History

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of a former high school football coach who lost his job after he refused to stop praying on the field at the end of games.

Joseph Kennedy, who was hired at Bremerton High School in Washington State in 2008, kneeled at the 50-yard line after games for years and prayed. He was often joined by some of his players, as well as others from the opposing team.

In 2015, the school asked him not to pray if it interfered with his duties or involved students.

Shortly after, Kennedy was placed on paid administrative leave, and after a school official recommended that his contract not be renewed for the 2016 season he did not reapply for the position.

Kennedy sued the school, eventually appealing the case to the Supreme Court.

The justices voted 6 to 3, with the liberal justices dissenting.

“Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse republic — whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion.

“Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance,” he added.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion.

“Today’s decision is particularly misguided because it elevates the religious rights of a school official, who voluntarily accepted public employment and the limits that public employment entails, over those of his students, who are required to attend school and who this court has long recognized are particularly vulnerable and deserving of protection,” she said.

“In doing so, the court sets us further down a perilous path in forcing states to entangle themselves with religion, with all of our rights hanging in the balance.”

The defense in the case argued that the public nature of Kennedy’s prayers put pressure on students to join him, and that he was acting in his capacity as a public employee, not a private citizen.

Kennedy’s lawyers contended that such an all-encompassing definition of his job duties denied him his right to self-expression on school grounds.

“This is just so awesome,” Kennedy said in a statement following the decision. “All I’ve ever wanted was to be back on the field with my guys … I thank God for answering our prayers and sustaining my family through this long battle.”

Religious Liberty or Separation of Church and State?

Sixty years ago, the Supreme Court decided that the government cannot organize or promote prayer in public schools, and it has since generally abided by that jurisprudence.

But the court led by Chief Justice John Roberts has been increasingly protective of religious expression, especially after the confirmation of three conservative Trump-appointed judges.

Reactions to the ruling were mostly split between liberals who saw the separation of church and state being dissolved and conservatives who hailed it as a victory for religious liberty.

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, which represented the Bremerton school district, said in a statement that the ruling “gutted decades of established law that protected students’ religious freedom.”

“If Coach Kennedy were named Coach Akbar and he had brought a prayer blanket to the 50 yard line to pray after a game,” one Twitter user said, “I’ve got a 401(k) that says this illegitimate, Christofascist SCOTUS rules 6-3 against him.”

“The people defending former Coach Kennedy’s right to kneel on the field after the game to pray – are the ones condemning Colin Kaepernick’s right to kneel on the field to protest police brutality against Black Americans,” another user wrote.

Others, like Republican Congressmember Ronny Jackson and former Secretary of State for the Trump administration Mike Pompeo, celebrated the ruling for protecting religious freedom and upholding what they called the right to pray.

“I am excited to build on this victory and continue securing our inalienable right to religious freedom,” Pompeo wrote.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (Fox News)

Continue Reading

Politics

Rep. Schiff Urges DOJ to Investigate Trump for Election Crimes: “There’s Enough Evidence”

Published

on

“When the Justice Department finds evidence of criminal potential criminal wrongdoing, they need to investigate,” the congressman said.


Schiff Says DOJ Should Launch Inquiry

Rep. Adam Schiff (R-Ca.) told Rogue Rocket that he believes there is “certainly […] enough evidence for the Justice Department to open an investigation” into possible election crimes committed by former President Donald Trump.

Schiff, who took the lead in questioning witnesses testifying before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection on Tuesday, said that it will be up to the DOJ to determine whether “they have proof beyond a reasonable doubt” of criminal activity, but added that an investigation must first be launched.

“Donald Trump should be treated like any other citizen,” the congressman said, noting that a federal judge in California has already ruled that Trump and his allies “likely” engaged in multiple federal criminal acts. “When the Justice Department finds evidence of criminal potential criminal wrongdoing, they need to investigate.”

“One of the concerns I have is it’s a year and a half since these events. And while […] there’s an investigation going on in Fulton County by the district attorney, I don’t see a federal grand jury convened in Atlanta looking into this, and I think it’s fair to ask why,” Schiff continued, referencing the ongoing inquiry into Trump’s attempts to overturn the election in Georgia.

“Normally, the Justice Department doesn’t wait for Congress to go first. They pursue evidence and they have the subpoena power. They’re often much more agile than the Congress. And I think it’s important that it not just be the lower-level people who broke into the Capitol that day and committed those acts of violence who are under the microscope,” he continued. “I think anyone who engaged in criminal activity trying to overturn the election where there’s evidence that they may have engaged in criminal acts should be investigated.”

Schiff Takes Aim at DOJ’s Handling of Committee Subpoenas

Schiff also expressed frustration with how the DOJ has handled referrals the committee has made for former Trump officials who have refused to comply with subpoenas to testify before the panel.

“We have referred four people for criminal prosecution who have obstructed our investigation. The Justice Department has only moved forward with two of them,” he stated. “That’s not as powerful an incentive as we would like. The law requires the Justice Department to present these cases to the grand jury when we refer them, and by only referring half of them, it sends a very mixed message about whether congressional subpoenas need to be complied with.”

As far as why the congressman thought the DOJ has chosen to operate in this manner in regards to the Jan. 6 panel’s investigation, he said he believes “the leadership of the department is being very cautious.” 

“I think that they want to make sure that the department avoids controversy if possible, doesn’t do anything that could even be perceived as being political,” Schiff continued. “And while I appreciate that sentiment […] at the same time, the rule of law has to be applied equally to everyone. If you’re so averse, […] it means that you’re giving effectively a pass or immunity to people who may have broken the law. That, too, is a political decision, and I think it’s the wrong decision.”

On the Note of Democracy

Schiff emphasized the importance of the American people working together to protect democracy in the fallout of the insurrection.

“I really think it’s going to require a national movement of people to step up to preserve our democracy. This is not something that I think Congress can do alone. We’re going to try to protect those institutions, but Republicans are fighting this tooth and nail,” he asserted. “It’s difficult to get through a Senate where Mitch McConnell can filibuster things.”

“We don’t have the luxury of despair when it comes to what we’re seeing around us. We have the obligation to do what generations did before us, and that is defend our democracy,” the congressman continued. “We had to go to war in World War II to defend our democracy from the threat of fascism. You know, we’re not called upon to make those kinds of sacrifices. We see the bravery of people in Ukraine putting their lives on the line to defend their country, their sovereignty, their democracy. Thank God we’re not asked to do that.”

“So what we have to do is, by comparison, so much easier. But it does require us to step up, to be involved, to rally around local elections officials who are doing their jobs, who are facing death threats, and to protect them and to push back against efforts around the country to pass laws to make it easier for big liars to overturn future elections.” 

“We are not passengers in all of this, unable to affect the course of our country. We can, you know, grab the rudder and steer this country in the direction that we want.”

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Washington Post) (CNN)

Continue Reading

Politics

Senate Passes Bill to Help Veterans Suffering From Burn Pit Exposure

Published

on

For Biden, who believes his son Beau may have died from brain cancer caused by burn pits, the issue is personal.


Veterans to Get Better Healthcare

The Senate voted 84-14 Thursday to pass a bill that would widely expand healthcare resources and benefits to veterans who were exposed to burn pits while deployed overseas.

Until about 2010, the Defense Department used burn pits to dispose of trash from military bases in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations, dumping things like plastics, rubber, chemical mixtures, and medical waste into pits and burning them with jet fuel.

Numerous studies and reports have demonstrated a link between exposure to the toxic fumes emitted by the pits and health problems such as respiratory ailments and rare cancers. The DoD has estimated that nearly 3.5 million veterans may have inhaled enough smoke to suffer from related health problems.

For years, the Department of Veterans Affairs resisted calls to recognize the link between exposure and illness, arguing it had not been scientifically proven and depriving many veterans of disability benefits and medical reimbursements.

Over the past year, however, the VA relented, awarding presumptive benefit status to veterans exposed to burn pits, but it only applied to those who were diagnosed with asthma, rhinitis, and sinusitis within 10 years of their service.

The latest bill would add 23 conditions to the list of what the VA covers, including hypertension. It also calls for investments in VA health care facilities, claims processing, and the VA workforce, while strengthening federal research on toxic exposure.

The bill will travel to the House of Representatives next, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi has pledged to push it through quickly. Then it will arrive at the White House for final approval.

An Emotional Cause for Many

Ahead of a House vote on an earlier version of the bill in March, comedian John Stewart publically slammed Congress for taking so long to act.

“They’re all going to say the same thing. ‘We want to do it. We want to support the veterans. But we want to do it the right way. We want to be responsible,’” he said. “You know what would have been nice? If they had been responsible 20 years ago and hadn’t spent trillions of dollars on overseas adventures.”

“They could have been responsible in the seventies when they banned this kind of thing in the United States,” he continued. “You want to do it here? Let’s dig a giant fucking pit, 10 acres long, and burn everything in Washington with jet fuel. And then let me know how long they want to wait before they think it’s going to cause some health problems.”

For President Biden, the issue is personal. He has said he believes burn pits may have caused the brain cancer that killed his son Beau in 2015.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer applauded the fact the long-awaited benefits could soon arrive for those impacted.

“The callousness of forcing veterans who got sick as they were fighting for us because of exposure to these toxins to have to fight for years in the VA to get the benefits they deserved — Well, that will soon be over. Praise God,” he said during a speech on Thursday.

A 2020 member survey by Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America found that 86% of respondents were exposed to burn pits or other toxins.

Although burn pits have largely been scaled down, the DoD has not officially banned them, and at least nine were still in operation in April 2019.

See what others are saying: (CNN) (Military Times) (Politico)

Continue Reading