Filibuster and Texas

[CivilDiscourse]

We hear from many (including on this board) that the majority should get their way. That it's not for the place for the minority to stand in the way of legislation. Therefore, we should do away with the filibuster.

In Texas, democrats just threw that line of reasoning out the window. They believe that they should be able to stand in the way of Texas's election reform law. Democrats, in a bid to stop the law, have walked out, denying a quorum, as a means of trying to stop the law.

Apparently, democrats don't believe that the majority should get their way.

[rogue06]

We hear from many (including on this board) that the majority should get their way. That it's not for the place for the minority to stand in the way of legislation. Therefore, we should do away with the filibuster.

In Texas, democrats just threw that line of reasoning out the window. They believe that they should be able to stand in the way of Texas's election reform law. Democrats, in a bid to stop the law, have walked out, denying a quorum, as a means of trying to stop the law.

Apparently, democrats don't believe that the majority should get their way.

The Democrats have a history of walking out when things don't go their way. Like an angry little kid taking the ball and going home.

Of course it is better than their other favorite reaction. Looting and rioting.

[Juvenal]

The Texas walkout was in protest of a bill designed to prevent the majority of Texans from getting their way. Bertrand Russell would be proud.

[CivilDiscourse]

The Texas walkout was in protest of a bill designed to prevent the majority of Texans from getting their way. Bertrand Russell would be proud.

So, blocking legislation that the majority of the legislature wants is now a good thing?

[Juvenal]

So, blocking legislation that the majority of the legislature wants is now a good thing?

Suppressing the vote is now a good thing?

Really, CD, up your game.

[CivilDiscourse]

Suppressing the vote is now a good thing?

Really, CD, up your game.

Really, actually show how the vote is suppressed. Who is prevented from voting?

[Juvenal]

It should go without saying that suppressing the vote means suppressing the vote of people of color.
.

The bill targeted voting methods that Black and Latino voters in Houston used widely in the pandemic.

An analysis of the Harris County vote showed that voters of color made up more than half of those who used drive-through early voting and the 24-hour early-voting window, Hollins said. That was a higher share than in early voting overall, when Black and Latino voters accounted for just 38 percent of all voters, he said.

The bill would have barred Sunday morning get-out-the-vote programs used to mobilize Black churchgoers.

Similarly, the bill’s provision barring early voting before 1 p.m. on Sundays would have had a disproportionate impact on the long-standing get-out-the-vote effort known as “souls to the polls,” which aims at encouraging Black churchgoers to cast their ballots right after services.

“Why in the world would you pick Sunday morning to outlaw voting in Texas, but for the fact that they know that a lot of Black parishioners historically have chosen that time to organize and go to the polls?” Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Tex.) said Sunday.

Another key provision in Senate Bill 7 could have further hobbled such community voter mobilization programs: It would have required that anyone who drives more than two non-relatives to the polls to submit a signed form stating the reason for the assistance. That means volunteer van drivers who provide transportation for churchgoing voters would have had to jump through the added hoop of submitting a signed document.

The measure drew comparison to Jim Crow laws.

Albright noted that an early version of the voting bill included the phrase “purity of the ballot box,” language that is in the Texas Constitution. Similar references to the word “purity” were used in the South to justify the disenfranchisement of Black voters. “They literally used Jim Crow language explicitly in the bill,” Albright said.

Cain, the lead House proponent, said he was unaware of that legacy and agreed to remove the language after Democrats criticized it during debate. He said he “wasn’t aware of any kind of malicious intent in the use of that term.”

I'm all the way open to any evidence that black churchgoers driving to the polls after Sunday services were patient zero in a voter fraud pandemic.

[Juvenal]

Really, actually show how the vote is suppressed. Who is prevented from voting?

Honestly, your weird obsession with HA is so cringe-worthy it would take some sterling argument to make it worth my time to engage with ya. Being a math guy, the equivalence with the Russell paradox crossed over the bar, but you haven't provided anything since then, and even that contribution was unwitting.

Is this the apex of your wit:
.

So, blocking legislation that the majority of the legislature wants is now a good thing?

It's not like you noticed the relationship with the negative self-reference behind the class of paradoxes opened up by Russell, or could recognize it without a week's worth of instruction. There's a rich and fecund world outside your narrow partisan obsessions. Go and find it.

[CivilDiscourse]

Honestly, your weird obsession with HA is so cringe-worthy it would take some sterling argument to make it worth my time to engage with ya. Being a math guy, the equivalence with the Russell paradox crossed over the bar, but you haven't provided anything since then, and even that contribution was unwitting.

Is this the apex of your wit:
.

So, blocking legislation that the majority of the legislature wants is now a good thing?

It's not like you noticed the relationship with the negative self-reference behind the class of paradoxes opened up by Russell, or could recognize it without a week's worth of instruction. There's a rich and fecund world outside your narrow partisan obsessions. Go and find it.

So, here you are just ranting.

[CivilDiscourse]

It should go without saying that suppressing the vote means suppressing the vote of people of color.
.

The bill targeted voting methods that Black and Latino voters in Houston used widely in the pandemic.

An analysis of the Harris County vote showed that voters of color made up more than half of those who used drive-through early voting and the 24-hour early-voting window, Hollins said. That was a higher share than in early voting overall, when Black and Latino voters accounted for just 38 percent of all voters, he said.

The bill would have barred Sunday morning get-out-the-vote programs used to mobilize Black churchgoers.

Similarly, the bill’s provision barring early voting before 1 p.m. on Sundays would have had a disproportionate impact on the long-standing get-out-the-vote effort known as “souls to the polls,” which aims at encouraging Black churchgoers to cast their ballots right after services.

“Why in the world would you pick Sunday morning to outlaw voting in Texas, but for the fact that they know that a lot of Black parishioners historically have chosen that time to organize and go to the polls?” Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Tex.) said Sunday.

Another key provision in Senate Bill 7 could have further hobbled such community voter mobilization programs: It would have required that anyone who drives more than two non-relatives to the polls to submit a signed form stating the reason for the assistance. That means volunteer van drivers who provide transportation for churchgoing voters would have had to jump through the added hoop of submitting a signed document.

The measure drew comparison to Jim Crow laws.

Albright noted that an early version of the voting bill included the phrase “purity of the ballot box,” language that is in the Texas Constitution. Similar references to the word “purity” were used in the South to justify the disenfranchisement of Black voters. “They literally used Jim Crow language explicitly in the bill,” Albright said.

Cain, the lead House proponent, said he was unaware of that legacy and agreed to remove the language after Democrats criticized it during debate. He said he “wasn’t aware of any kind of malicious intent in the use of that term.”

I'm all the way open to any evidence that black churchgoers driving to the polls after Sunday services were patient zero in a voter fraud pandemic.

They are prevented from voting, how exactly? None of that showed that their vote is suppressed.

[rogue06]

Suppressing the vote is now a good thing?

Really, CD, up your game.

Considering how the MSM willfully lied through their teeth about Georgia's new voting laws which actually makes it easier to vote, I'll take unsupported claims that Texas is suppressing the vote with an entire shaker full of salt.

[rogue06]

They are prevented from voting, how exactly? None of that showed that their vote is suppressed.

Just like in Georgia they simply make the claims sans a scintilla of evidence and that is considered sufficient. Of course it turned out that none of it was true, that Georgia actually made voting easier and now a bunch of corporations that jumped on the bandwagon are now very quietly seeking a way to get off.

[RumTumTugger]

Suppressing the vote is now a good thing?

Really, CD, up your game.

how is requiring voter ID suppresing the vote since you have to have a valid ID to say rent an apartment, open a bank account, drive a car etc... in other words live

[rogue06]

how is requiring voter ID suppresing the vote since you have to have a valid ID to say rent an apartment, open a bank account, drive a car etc... in other words live

It is only suppression when a red or purple state does it. When a red state does it the only reaction from the left is the sound of crickets.

[seanD]

Considering how the MSM willfully lied through their teeth about Georgia's new voting laws which actually makes it easier to vote, I'll take unsupported claims that Texas is suppressing the vote with an entire shaker full of salt.

Especially the "people of color" leftist mantra and comparisons to Jim Crow laws. That's always a huge red flag.