Posts Tagged "voting"
  1. video
    Oct 21, 2014 4:40 pm
  2. photo
    Aug 10, 2014 7:45 pm


    Out of a billion votes cast, there have only been 31 credible cases of voter impersonation.

  3. quote
    Apr 09, 2014 4:30 pm

    "Twenty-one million people with disabilities did not vote,” said [Christopher] Dodd. “That made the disabled communities the single largest demographic group of nonvoters in the United States of America. At that time, only 16 percent of polling places were physically accessible. And not one, not one of the nearly 500 polling locations which the General Accounting Office (GAO) visited on Election Day in 2000, had special ballots adapted for blind voters."

    Improving the Voting Experience in America

    My polling place is not accessible (the line to vote goes up an enormous staircase), so I have to use the “special” accommodations instead of voting like everyone else. 

    But if I didn’t know about that option, I would’ve just turned away. And what about all the people that don’t consider themselves disabled and wouldn’t ask for accommodations but also can’t stand in line for HOURS at a time, either because of their knees or their hearts or their kids or their jobs? 

    Not to mention these absurd “voter ID” laws that require people of color, poor people, old people, students, and disabled people - disproportionately - to stand in line at the DMV for hours on end just for the “privilege” <ahem shouldn’t it be a right> to vote.

    (via disabilityhistory)

  4. quote
    Dec 16, 2013 9:23 pm

    "Vote against discrimination…Do not do them because they are economically sound — although they are — do them because they are right and just. Never allow the majority to limit the rights of the minority. Never allow people who fear anyone different from themselves to limit other’s human rights or human dignity."

    Tim Cook, the openly gay CEO of Apple who tends to keep quiet about his personal life, spoke about discrimination and equality at the United Nations last week while accepting a Lifetime Achievement Award from Auburn University. (via Out)
  5. link
    Oct 26, 2013 1:33 pm

    A British Comic's Brilliant Reason To Stop Voting Just Went Viral

  6. photoset
    Aug 09, 2013 7:45 pm





    [from this earlier post]

    Actually, those almost seem like fair questions, HOWEVER:

    • Voting is a valuable and cherished right that many people have fought and died for. Other comparisons tend to fail because voting is not a purchasable, nor an easily revoked privilege like flying or driving —how many people were tarred and feathered or murdered because of fighting for their “right” to fly or drive?
    • The 24th Amendment makes poll taxes illegal. Requiring someone pay —directly or otherwise— for the right to vote is neither democratic nor patriotic
    • Voter ID laws disproportionately impact disabled, the poor and the elderly —all groups that often lack “proper ID.”
    • Many college students (and older people) simply do not drive —and thus have no need for a state issued driver’s license. I know people who live in New York who have never, ever owned a license or a car
    • Students have used their college IDs to vote in elections for decades. But suddenly, after the 2008 and 20012 election results, Republican led legislatures have found cause to suppress their votes. Additionally, it is worth noting such Voter ID restrictions tend to be more lax in districts that have consistently voted for Republicans. Why is that?
    • Many states requiring an “official government ID” to vote have simultaneously reduced drivers license office hours and/or completely closed many offices, thereby making it even harder to obtain the very type of ID they’re mandating
    • Some elected Republican officials like Mike Turzai have said that Voter ID laws were being passed for the expressed purpose of rigging an election. Other elected Republicans like Bill O’Brien, have openly stated they simply do not want college students voting because they tend to vote for Democrats
    • ALEC, a GOP/Koch Brothers political organization, is directly responsible for the surge of voter suppression laws seen in the last decade. ALEC’s founder, Paul Weyrich, was quoted as saying, “I don’t want everybody to vote. Our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”
    • There have been more elected GOP officials found guilty of Election Fraud than actual voters committing voter fraud
    • Voter ID laws are “solutions” to a problem that does not exist. Voter ID laws are a Republican response to Republicans losing elections, not to fixing voter fraud. There has been a comprehensive study—at the behest of many Republicans—which showed that in more than a decade of voting, exactly 10 people engaged in voter fraud. That’s 10 people out of the millions who voted since the year 2000. And some of those likely did so unknowingly (ie, voted at the wrong voting precinct, or were genuinely unaware they were ineligible to vote, etc.)

    Reblogging this since I’ve had a lot of friends confused about this topic for the reasons expressed in those screenshot replies. Voter ID is an idea that may make sense at first glance but not when you really think about and research it - as we all should, because our right to vote should not be taken for granted.

    A few things that need to be spelled out.  These laws do not allow “photo ID in some form.”  They often explicitly disallow student ID’s or ID’s like most people actually have, among many others.  

    Each state sets their own requirements to issue a photo ID.  During the entire time I was an undergrad I did not have a valid photo ID because I could not meet the requirements to get one.  I am a natural-born citizen of the US with a birth certificate and a social security card, that is not enough in any sate where I have lived.  You must also prove your address tot heir satisfaction.  Huge numbers of people cannot do this.  Live in a dorm?  Couch surfing? Utilities in someone else’s name?  Use a P.O. box?  You may be out of luck.

    reblogging myself because added commentary brings up excellent points

  7. link
    Jul 03, 2013 9:49 pm
  8. link
    Jul 03, 2013 1:33 pm

    SCOTUS Voting Rights Act Decision Might Not Apply to Texas


    After the U.S. Supreme Court hollowed out the Voting Rights Act, Texas was one of the first out the gate to declare that it would immediately enforce a voter ID law and redistricting plan that were both blocked by the Act last year. Texas couldn’t prove that the voter ID law wouldn’t have racially discriminatory effects, as was required under Section Five, and state lawmakers were found to have discriminatory intentions when they created the redistricting plan. 

    Because of those intentions, Texas may find itself subject to preclearance despite the SCOTUS ruling. Reason being is that Section Three of the Act allows jurisdictions to be “bailed in” to Voting Rights Act oversight if a court finds it guilty of racist intentions. Texas, which leads the nation in Voting Rights Act violations despite it being one of the latest states added, probably won’t be happy with this. 

    As reported in the Texas Redistricting & Election Law blog:

    Could Texas remain subject to preclearance? The answer, which may surprise, is actually, yes.

    In Tuesday’s Shelby Co. decision, the Supreme Court effectively ended preclearance - for now - under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act by invalidating the formula for determining what states are covered.

    However, Section 5 is not the only section of the Voting Rights Act that deals with preclearance. If certain conditions exist, courts also can impose tailor-made preclearance requirements under Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act - a provision that, unlike Section 5, applies nationwide and is not subject to expiration.

    Up until now, that section hasn’t gotten a lot of attention in Texas because the state was already required to submit all voting changes for preclearance under Section 5.

    But it very well could come into play in the future, now that Section 5 is effectively dead.

    So how does Section 3 work?

    Basically, Section 3 comes into play whenever a court in a case under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act finds intentional discrimination that would violate the 14th or 15th amendments to the Constitution.

    Once that happens, the court has the discretion under Section 3 not only to remedy the intentional discrimination but, if it chooses, to retain jurisdiction and impose preclearance requirements—a process known colloquially as ‘bail in.’

    As under Section 5, preclearance under Section 3 would require a jurisdiction to submit election or electoral changes either to the court or to the Justice Department.

    Changes would be rejected unless the jurisdiction can show that the change “does not have the purpose and will not have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color” or abridge the guarantees afforded language minorities.

    Read the rest of the Texas Redistricting blog here.

  9. link
    May 19, 2013 10:24 am
  10. photo
    Feb 28, 2013 5:55 pm

    MAP: Definitive Proof That We Don’t All Live In The Same Democracy

    What this map tells me is that, basically, Florida really needs to get its s#*t together. 

    [Original by Progressive States Network. Data compiled by MIT’s Charles Stewart III.]



Just a steady stream of the most irresistible stuff you can share and feel good about yourself afterwards. We're at Found something Upworthy? Email it to

Use the links at the top of the page to navigate.

Recent Tweets