
Texas closes hundreds of polling sites, making it harder for minorities to vote - AndrewBissell
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/02/texas-polling-sites-closures-voting
======
vorpalhex
I used to be very skeptical that changes to voting locations were motivated by
animosity or an attempt to reduce the ability for minority voters to exercise
their rights.

Since the Hofeller dump, it's very clear that there's an extremely
intentional, well researched effort to directly impact minority voters.

~~~
sp332
Details on the Hofeller dump:
[https://www.npr.org/2020/01/05/785672201/deceased-gop-
strate...](https://www.npr.org/2020/01/05/785672201/deceased-gop-strategists-
daughter-makes-files-public-that-republicans-wanted-sea)

Files: [https://www.thehofellerfiles.com/](https://www.thehofellerfiles.com/)

------
munk-a
In 2016 Arizona did much the same thing[1] and the outrage quickly died down.
Voting should be easy and accessible, we _honestly_ should just have a holiday
for it, but long lines mean that people who can't afford to take as much time
off of work can't afford the price to vote and that's just ridiculous.

1\.
[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016...](https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/03/22/live-
arizona-primary-coverage-presidential-preference-election/82096726/)

~~~
gwright
This is an area where I think it is easy to not think it is a problem if you
happen to live/vote in a place with reasonably operated polling operations.

I've been voting for over 30 years and have never waited more than 30 minutes
to vote and it is usually less than 5 minutes yet in a nearby city they seem
to have all sorts of logistical problems during every election including long
lines, running out of ballots, etc.

I think I recall some folks from Australia describing in HN, their system as
having an independent agency/office that is responsible for voting operations.
Perhaps something like this would remove the disparities we have between
polling locations in the US.

~~~
cdumler
It is not an issue of "do this to fix it." It's an open secret that it is very
intentional. You just have to look at the demographics with any sense of
integrity. The issue is that there are people who fundamentally believe
certain groups should not have the right to vote.

They can't actually say "I don't want X to vote because we all know they
commit rampant voter fraud" because it isn't politically correct (or true, but
the U.S. doesn't care about truth); however, they really believe they are
literally fighting a holy/principled war to protect the U.S.

The U.S. is being carved apart because there are fundamental beliefs that are
beyond being tested for veracity and must be enacted or the "others" will
destroy this country.

~~~
gwright
I don't deny that this happens but at least around here I think Hanlon's Razor
is more apt: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by
stupidity.

In particular the problem areas around me are entirely controlled and
populated by Democrats so it doesn't make sense to say that there is some
cabal trying to prevent "certain groups" from voting since it is their own
constituency that is being affected.

Again, to my original point. The experiences are very different from place to
place and so you should be careful about extrapolating from individual
experiences.

------
mehhh
Sounds like we need to mandate vote by mail as an option for voting
nationwide.

~~~
jedberg
Sadly many conservatives believe that voting is an exclusively state's rights
issue.

That made sense when we had a weak federal government and were mostly a
conglomeration of states that agreed to work together.

But now the federal government controls a lot of our lives. The way Texas runs
their elections has a significant impact on my life here in California.

I should have a say in how Texas runs their elections (and they should have a
say in how California runs theirs).

~~~
jeffdavis
Isn't it at least a little scary to you to nationalize the voting process?
Would you want a Voting Administration with presidential appointees deciding
how to register voters, collect votes, and count them?

I guess other countries do things that way with lots of observers, etc. to try
to avoid the worst problems. But I'm not excited about my state/county giving
up its role (which it seems to do just fine) under the theory that the federal
government will do better in some other state and county that doesn't
currently do a good job.

~~~
lidHanteyk
If you want to elect folks to federal offices directly, then you need a
federal vote. The current system requires an awful lot of trust to be invested
into states that have consistently shown themselves unable to justify being
trusted.

------
nieksand
Less slanted reporting: [https://www.texastribune.org/2019/10/10/texas-
temporary-voti...](https://www.texastribune.org/2019/10/10/texas-temporary-
voting-access-young-rural-voters/)

~~~
awinder
This might be better described as the "hard news" version. Guardian's article
pulls in a lot of additional context -- about the racial impact assessments in
states with a long history of voter disenfranchisement going away, analysis of
where these polling places closed (it was in places with large minority
populations), etc. None of that really slants the article, but it does involve
more analysis.

~~~
belorn
After having read both, the only thing the ties the two article together is HN
and the seemingly word Texas.

The two articles describe two completely different problems. The parent
article discuss the issue of voting sites being used to target specific
voters. Rather then trying to maximum voting participation, the article
describe the problem of targeted desirable voting populations at the exclusion
of others. By removing temporary polling places and enforcing a rule that all
polling places must remain open for all 12 days of early voting, it forces
polling stations to focus only in areas with high populations.

The submitter article writes how texas is closing down most polling stations,
making it more difficult for people to vote and arguably benefiting
Republicans. It is saying that more voting locations close to Latinx
neighborhoods got closed than in non-Latinx neighborhoods, and that Latinx
people had to travel farther to vote than non-Hispanic whites. It also writes
that places where black and Latinx population is growing by the largest
numbers have experienced the vast majority of the state’s poll site closures.

Two different completely different problems, two completely different
articles, discussing the same event. Thanks to HN I at least see a bit more
from multiple sides, but it demonstrate quite well the issue with news article
like this.

------
faebi
Why can‘t the USA vote by mail like the swiss do?

~~~
sp332
Elections are run by the states. Some states do vote by mail.
[https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/all-
ma...](https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/all-mail-
elections.aspx)

------
topkai22
This is why, despite security risks, I’m in favor of developing an online
voting system.

Vote by mail is better then what we have now, but I’ve found usability issues
there to.

~~~
munk-a
I disagree, voting by mail is easy and convenient - I still like and support
polling places as a primary solution but online voting systems raise far too
many questions around accountability and verification. And, while some good
theoretical systems exist, it's anyone's guess which approach ends up being
picked by the same politicians who have repeatedly gone for budget voting
machines or those who have blatant conflicts of interest and have used voting
machine selection to line their own pockets.

Voting is _really_ important, if voting works we can theoretically solve a lot
of other problems. But if we can't vote then the only solution we have is
marching in the streets which will often lead to violence and destruction.

