Home | About | Donate

Once a 'Laughingstock' on Voting Rights, Reform Package Moves New York Toward More 'Inclusive Democracy'

Once a 'Laughingstock' on Voting Rights, Reform Package Moves New York Toward More 'Inclusive Democracy'

Jessica Corbett, staff writer

Voting rights advocates celebrated Monday night as state lawmakers in New York—long considered a "national laughingstock" on voting rights—took a major step toward creating a "strong, inclusive democracy" by passing election reform legislation.

1 Like

One of the most important pieces of legislation in New York that should be passed is the Equity in Education Act, re-introduced this session by Assembly-Member Kevin Cahill of Ulster and Dutchess Counties.

The Equity in Education Act legislation has many benefits for many people and the environment. It transitions over 5 years the way public education is financed from property taxes on homes and farms and open lands to income, the ability to pay.

Not only would all NY school kids from “rich” or “poor” districts be assured of a basic quality public education, but farmlands will be protected from development. Now farms and farmlands are taxed on their “highest and best” use, as if the land were developed with condos, not a farmers income or if they have a crop failure of flood that destroys a years efforts,

The homes of at-risk families of modest means be protected, and many people, the young, seniors, victims of some catastrophe, and others would not be forced to ransom their homes annually to fund public education while the beneficiaries of public ed, the richest and most able to pay evade giving -back to society that makes their success possible!! Progressive income tax brackets must be reformed just like our property taxes and a quality education for ALL NY kids!!

Along with this critical legislation is the changes in NY income tax rates that in 1972 were shifted from the wealthiest to the middle-class and poor. The previous 14 income-tax brackets from 2% to 15% were reduced drastically to benefit the richest. The bottom two brackets eliminated hurting the poorest and the top 9 brackets eliminated to gift the rich $8 Billion annually. That loss of $8 Billion annually was the beginning of the skyrocketing rise in local property taxes. fees and other costs to those least able to Afford them!

http://fiscalpolicy.org/the-path-not-taken-how-new-york-state-increased-the-tax-burden-on-the-middle-class-and-cut-taxes-for-its-highest-income-taxpayers-by-over-8-billion-a-year.

I urge all New Yorker’s to support the Equity in Education Act and call your elected representatives to demand it becomes law! About 85% or so NY’kers will pay less and have Home Security!

I attach the act text in full below.

https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A00091&term=2017&Summary=Y&Text=Y

I continually read about people in the US waiting 4 hours and more in a line to vote on election day. At the same time voter turnout is around 50 percent. Generally these waits are due to broken voting machines or a lack of voting machines.

Here in Canada we still use paper ballots counted by hand and I have never waited more then a few minutes to vote and we generally have a higher turnout.

If an old style paper ballot operates faster, is more accurate and leaves a paper trail that can be followed up on , how is it that none of these “voting reforms” ever suggest removing those Corporate run, proprietary software, hackable machines?

2 Likes

How will blue states survive when the Trumpers destroy all in favor of their fascism at the federal level by stacking the legal system, putting massive money out to buy Congress and allow the White House to do daily damage to the US.

Good fucking question. Why ARE the crap voting machines not ditched?

1 Like

Both of you know the answer to that question. Same reason the squeaky clean Dems (sic) never touch the voting machine issue.

Another thing I never see with these reforms, is a maximum number of voters per voting precinct. If a given area goes over the number, a new precinct is automatically opened in that area by law, also reducing the wait times to vote.

Are you saying that the dems promote crooked voting? If so, I believe you may be slightly damp, or maybe all wet.
Maximum number of voters. what’s that? Only half the people vote on a good day. Maximum is some sort of best guess I would think.And I don’t get your point about opening more places to vote. Are you saying that is a good thing, or a bad thing.
Maybe I just need to get more sleep tonight.
Peace Recon.

That’s just a baseless assertion on your part. Here in California, our former Democratic Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, actually decertified machines. Look for yourself:

https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-systems/oversight/top-bottom-review/

Voting in California requires paper ballots and everyone registered with a mail-in ballot or votes provisionally can check their ballot status online. Voting in California has become easier and far more secure than it ever was, despite some of the ignorant conspiracy mongering I’ve seen online.

Great, but is CA. the only place dems vote? What about the rest of the country? Why isn’t the national party pushing for this across the country?

If you think the dems vote counts are always on the up and up, check out Redacted Tonight episode about the Lipinski vs Newman primary election in IL. this past summer. Don’t you think it’s odd that most informed Americans know the machines can be and are easily rigged, but you rarely hear a peep about this subject from the dem party?

Let me try to be more clear with max. # of voters issue. I’m trying to say there should be a maximum number of voters assigned to any given voting precinct, so as not to overload that precincts capacity to serve the voters in a timely fashion, without these long lines we keep hearing about every election. If the population goes up in that precinct, there should be more precincts opened up to accommodate the increase in population. The last 10-12 years most areas have seen the opposite, precincts closed down to make the lines longer to reduce voter participation, a very bad thing. Hopefully this clears up the point I was trying to make, if not I’ll try explaining it differently. Stay real gandolf.

Did you read about HR 1? A voting rights access bill is the first major bill Democrats introduced in the House.

Really though, it’s the states that take the lead on voting in our country. From what I understand, New York is finally expanding ballot access because the IDC—a group of conservative Democrats that caucused with Republicans in the Senate—was dethroned. Bills that have languished are now moving forward, including one for early voting.

Well I tried to read you’re link, one problem, there’s nothing there to read, not even a summary. We’re supposed to get behind a bill without a stated substance? Very problematic. Does it do away with computerized voting, who knows.
I realize the states normally are responsible for voting, but I also realize there are issues important enough in the voting process, to be handed down from the federal level, the 1965 Voting Rights Act comes to mind. I view the issue of using easily hackable voting machines (a lot without a paper auditing system in place) as important as the Voting Rights Act that dealt with people’s votes not counting. Lets not forget these machines were pushed onto the states from the federal level also. So congratulations to those of you voting in CA., meanwhile the rest of us are still screwed using these dam machines. All of the issues with voting raised with this legislation need to be addressed, but at the end of the day if you’re still voting on corruptible machines, none of the rest of it matters.

I thought that was what you getting at, I just had trouble ASSUMING that with the way you worded it.
And that is one of the reforms I’ll rant about until I see a major effort to address it/them.
Proud I am Obiwan of NY and California, but aren’t we going to get major reform on a national/federal level?

1 Like