[cdoxsey]

Its not true that "that only one of the two major American political parties is even feigning interest at fixing what is clearly a vulnerable system".

Apparently some Republicans support this bill. I bet there are some Democrats that don't support the bill.

Partisan reductionism presents an overly simplistic view of a complex phenomena.

And bills don't represent ideology anyway. They often have unintended consequences. Politicians might be interested in fixing a "vulnerable system" while rejecting a particular bill for some other reason. For example: Voter ID.

[save_ferris]

It's not that complicated: one party is committed to fixing this problem and has influential leaders backing such an initiative. Another party isn't even seriously trying. One GOP senator is interested in solving this problem? Good for that guy, but shame on the other 52 GOP senators that aren't.

> And bills don't represent ideology anyway.

Yes they do, that's why we vote for one party or another. Think taxes are too high? Want to expand social programs? Legislation is how all of that is executed. Bills absolutely represent party ideology. Take the green new deal, for example. How was that bill not an example of party ideology?

> Politicians might be interested in fixing a "vulnerable system" while rejecting a particular bill for some other reason. For example: Voter ID.

Voter ID laws were designed explicitly to suppress minority votes and have been struck down time and again by the courts. They were not designed to solve a legitimate issue, because there is no evidence that rampant voter fraud exists in the US[0].

What does exist, however, are coordinated ballot-harvesting efforts designed to unduly influence the outcome of elections, as was witnessed in NC-9 in this past election. But again, the GOP doesn't seem to be very concerned about this specific issue.

[0]: https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/debunking-voter-fraud...

[cdoxsey]

> Voter ID laws were designed explicitly to suppress minority votes and have been struck down time and again by the courts. They were not designed to solve a legitimate issue, because there is no evidence that rampant voter fraud exists in the US[0].

That is not what motivates many people who care deeply about this issue. Its partisan spin used to malign a contrary view. Believe it or not many Republicans are not racists hell-bent on denying minorities the right to vote. I know it seems impossible, but some Republicans even are minorities.

> What does exist, however, are coordinated ballot-harvesting efforts designed to unduly influence the outcome of elections, as was witnessed in NC-9 in this past election. But again, the GOP doesn't seem to be very concerned about this specific issue.

A lot of Republicans in California complained about ballot harvesting.

FWIW I agree that voter fraud not a major problem. And neither is vote hacking.

Both sides play footsie with these issues and its dangerous as it undermines the credibility of the system as a whole. If you believe elections are stolen or democracy is dead, then the American government is illegitimate. How long till we're advocating ignoring its laws, or overthrowing the regime.

Another civil war is the last thing we need in this country.

A slightly corrupt system that we collectively pretend is pristine is far better than the alternative.

[raquo]

It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to see republicans as interested in fixing election problems after everything they have and haven't done since 2016.

They would have done that long ago if they wanted to, but instead they made themselves the primary beneficiaries of a broken election system, rampant gerrymandering, voter suppression and election fraud.

It doesn't matter which individual R's turn it is to temporarily go against the grain for some publicity, the republican committee and caucus will always vote with their party if they have majority to pass what the party wants. Partisan reductionism is the only proper attitude to this party.