Texas’ top elections official told the U.S. Department of Justice on Friday its election monitors aren’t permitted in the state’s polling places after the federal agency announced plans to dispatch monitors to eight counties on Election Day to ensure compliance with federal voting rights laws.

  • @halcyoncmdr
    link
    English
    872 days ago

    Sounds like they very explicitly don’t want oversight to see something. All the more reason those monitors need to be there.

    • @NateNate60
      link
      182 days ago

      Either that or because they want to feel like a big boy all mighty and powerful by telling the federal government to kick rocks

      • @halcyoncmdr
        link
        English
        292 days ago

        I wonder how they’d feel about losing the 37% of the Texas budget that comes from the Feds?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        102 days ago

        The only way that notorious piss-baby, Greg Abbott, can win an election is by telling the fed to fuck off, losing, but then campaigning on both telling the fed to fuck off and taking credit for other people’s work.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    342 days ago

    pretty sure you can’t tell the federal government ‘no’, here. and besides, who else is gonna help you count past ‘1’?

    • @horse_battery_staple
      link
      222 days ago

      Elections in America are run by and certified by the States. The Federal government has laws on campaign finance (FEC) when the elections are held and to be certified by, and who is eligible to be elected.

      If a state wants to refuse access to monitors they can. It’s absolutely ignorant to refuse monitoring as it would only help to prove a fair election to have them there. However, under the constitution it is the right of a state to verify their own electoral process.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_United_States

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        192 days ago

        The idea, this year, is to prevent certification. Then they can manipulate the system through a compliant Speaker of the House to finagle a Trump win. If federal monitors are there, it will undermine this plan.

      • @grue
        link
        English
        102 days ago

        It’s absolutely ignorant to refuse monitoring as it would only help to prove a fair election to have them there.

        That’s exactly why they’re kicking them out: they want to cast doubt on the fairness of the election, so that they can manufacture excuses to throw out votes in Democrat-leaning ares, make it easier for Trump’s lawsuits challenging the results to succeed, etc.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        92 days ago

        Plenty of precedent for federal government to get involved. Voting rights act (1965) would be the most recent significant example that comes to mind. Constitutionality at that time was challenged and upheld as the states were violating the constitution by disenfranchising African Americans.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -12 days ago

      Hey! You’re wrong for more than one reason:

      1. We’re Texas and we can do whatever we want! 1+1. We can too count good!
      • @TexasDrunk
        link
        32 days ago

        I once counted to 23 by taking off my shoes. Would have been 25 if it hadn’t been for that firework accident at the meth lab.

  • @Hobbes_Dent
    link
    162 days ago

    What a dystopian and normal headline.