Donald is about to go through some things...

[LogGrad98]

What is the reason for the opposition of shumer to that legislation according to the article you provided?
Is it,A: shumer wants the VP to have more power to decertify votes and more loopholes?
Or B: shumer wants even less power for the VP in the vote certification process and less loopholes?

Again, acoording to the article you posted. After reading the article you posted i have to go with B. Nice self own though.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

My feeling is that we are at a point where they are all basically saying "oh yeah, well we are going to pass an even better bill...with blackjack, and hookers!!" Instead of looking for the point of compromise and getting it done, they just want to stifle the other guy for no reason other than to stifle the other guy, then do one themselves so they can get the credit. That has been the MO for a while now on lots of actions taken. I am sure their bill will be more restrictive, but why not just try to negotiate that into the bill being proposed? Our factions refuse to work together anymore, and it is a major reason for the huge rift developing in the country. It allows everyone to pain themselves as the hero and the other guy as the villain, because everyone knows Iron Man would never negotiate with Thanos.

 

[One Brow]

You've been hanging around One Brow too much and have picked up his habit of moving goal posts.

I apologize for having created this trend in argumentation 4000 years ago, and having infected you with it a couple of years ago. Still, considering the back-pedal you performed from your own quote within the post couple of days, perhaps you should be throwing around this accusation quite so freely.

 

[LogGrad98]

You've been hanging around One Brow too much and have picked up his habit of moving goal posts. I would remind you this started with a concern the GOP was trying to make it so the VP could choose whomever he wanted to which I pointed out this Electoral Reform Act does the opposite. It does do the opposite. I am glad that you now appear to see that Schumer is in opposition to this legislation that would close loopholes.

As for Schumer wanting to close even more loopholes, that isn't correct either. Schumer is trying to seize power by attaching power seizing provisions to legislation that would close the exact same loopholes the Electoral Reform Act closes. If the Electoral Reform Act is passed then the loopholes are closed and Schumer has nothing with broad public support to attach the power seizing provisions to. What Schumer is trying to do is so unpalatable to the electorate standing on its own there is zero chance it will go anywhere if it isn't hidden in something else they can sell to the public. The Electoral Reform Act does more than close loopholes. It also closes an opportunity to Schumer and that is why he opposes it.

Can you post the verbiage of what she is trying to add? I couldn't find anything definitive, but granted I didn't look very hard. Please hear me, I want to see what she said directly, not as a "gotcha" but because I want to see these power-grabbing proposals so we can discuss the implications and impact of them. That is concerning if that is what they are trying to do.

 

[One Brow]

Our factions refuse to work together anymore,

Except when it comes to defense spending, corporate tax breaks, increasing funding for the police, etc.

 

[LogGrad98]

Except when it comes to defense spending, corporate tax breaks, increasing funding for the police, etc.

Affordable health care for everyone and not just the elite?




Oh wait....

 

[LogGrad98]

Except when it comes to defense spending, corporate tax breaks, increasing funding for the police, etc.

To be fair, then they are not actually working together, they are lemmings following the money off the cliff.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Can you post the verbiage of what she is trying to add? I couldn't find anything definitive, but granted I didn't look very hard. Please hear me, I want to see what she said directly, not as a "gotcha" but because I want to see these power-grabbing proposals so we can discuss the implications and impact of them. That is concerning if that is what they are trying to do.

Here is the verbiage:

Text - S.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021

Text for S.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021

www.congress.gov

 

[LogGrad98]

Here is the verbiage:

Text - S.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021

Text for S.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021

www.congress.gov

So what is exactly the part where they are trying to take more power, as stated?

As for Schumer wanting to close even more loopholes, that isn't correct either. Schumer is trying to seize power by attaching power seizing provisions to legislation that would close the exact same loopholes the Electoral Reform Act closes. If the Electoral Reform Act is passed then the loopholes are closed and Schumer has nothing with broad public support to attach the power seizing provisions to. What Schumer is trying to do is so unpalatable to the electorate standing on its own there is zero chance it will go anywhere if it isn't hidden in something else they can sell to the public. The Electoral Reform Act does more than close loopholes. It also closes an opportunity to Schumer and that is why he opposes it.

 

[LogGrad98]

So what is exactly the part where they are trying to take more power, as stated?

Found this summary. Interesting. Also didn't this get killed last year? Are they reintroducing it this year? Shows it stalled in the senate. Is this what they want to reintroduce in place of the republican bill? Does the republican bill have any hidden agendas?

HR1, "For the People Act of 2021"

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Summary prepared by the Congressional Research Service​

The summary below was prepared by the Congressional Research Service and is presented in its entirety.[7]

“

This bill addresses voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government. Specifically, the bill expands voter registration (e.g., automatic and same-day registration) and voting access (e.g., vote-by-mail and early voting). It also limits removing voters from voter rolls. The bill requires states to establish independent redistricting commissions to carry out congressional redistricting. Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including sharing intelligence information with state election officials, supporting states in securing their election systems, developing a national strategy to protect U.S. democratic institutions, establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions, and other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems. Further, the bill addresses campaign finance, including by expanding the prohibition on campaign spending by foreign nationals, requiring additional disclosure of campaign-related fundraising and spending, requiring additional disclaimers regarding certain political advertising, and establishing an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices. The bill addresses ethics in all three branches of government, including by requiring a code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices, prohibiting Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity, and establishing additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House. The bill requires the President, the Vice President, and certain candidates for those offices to disclose 10 years of tax returns.[8]

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Found this summary. Interesting. Also didn't this get killed last year? Are they reintroducing it this year? Shows it stalled in the senate. Is this what they want to reintroduce in place of the republican bill? Does the republican bill have any hidden agendas?

That was Chuck Schumer's first attempt that had everything, and yes it died. Then Schumer and the democrats cut a ton of stuff out of it to make S.4 The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and that too has stalled. A group of more moderate democrats joined with a group of moderate republicans to actually get something done to close the squishy areas Trump seemingly tried to exploit with none of the add-ons Schumer wanted, and that had broad republican support. This third, bipartisan effort is the Electoral Reform Act and Schumer came out against it, calling it "The McConnell Plan", because if this passes then first effort S.1 and second effort S.4 are both permanently dead.

 

[LogGrad98]

That was Chuck Schumer's first attempt that had everything, and yes it died. Then Schumer and the democrats cut a ton of stuff out of it to make S.4 The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and that too has stalled. A group of more moderate democrats joined with a group of moderate republicans to actually get something done to close the squishy areas Trump seemingly tried to exploit with none of the add-ons Schumer wanted, and that had broad republican support. This third, bipartisan effort is the Electoral Reform Act and Schumer came out against it, calling it "The McConnell Plan", because if this passes then first effort S.1 and second effort S.4 are both permanently dead.

So again what is the verbiage of what they are trying to do in place of the republican one that is already out there that specifically is a power grab? If they have cut stuff out and made it more moderate, then what is the remaining provisions that make it a blatant power grab? Did they cut the part about the 6 to 1 match with taxpayer dollars for campaign funding, which I would highly oppose personally. I hope they get the redistricting part passed as I have always thought it should have always had 3rd part oversight. Not sure what else they are trying to use as the power grab. They mention vote harvesting but nowhere did I see verbiage that supported that assertion. It does very much loosen the controls over voting, making it much easier, but imo not a lot better. It is a 2-edged sword.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Found this summary. Interesting. Also didn't this get killed last year? Are they reintroducing it this year? Shows it stalled in the senate. Is this what they want to reintroduce in place of the republican bill? Does the republican bill have any hidden agendas?

HR1, "For the People Act of 2021"

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

I thought it died last year too since there weren’t enough votes to overcome the filibuster and Manchinema didn’t want to blow the filibuster.