Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org
While legislation that would essentially do away with DRE touch-screen voting in Florida in favor of optical scan voting, sailed through the House without problem a Senate bill has been amended 14 times with amendments that try to help some legislator’s agenda to make it harder for people to vote. Added to the bill were unheard amendments that would limit the ability of groups to register voters and that would prohibit unions from political activity. Support for the legislation was immediately withdrawn by the Democratic party, League of Women Voters, ACLU, AFL-CIO and many others. So why this change? Is it an act to put in a poison pill to kill the bill or is it a hope that there is enough strength in the bill that it can carry these restrictive, disenfranchising amendments?
That voting news story, and many more, linked below…
County officials keep turning to their star for 31 years LINK
County to purchase modern machine LINK
**”Daily Voting News” is meant as a comprehensive listing of reports each day concerning issues related to election and voting news around the country regardless of quality or political slant. Therefore, items listed in “Daily Voting News” may not reflect the opinions of VotersUnite.Org or BradBlog.Com**







John said:
I wonder if it would not be more productive simply to oppose the offending amendments on grounds specific to each amendment? That is the way it is done in the House and Senate in DC.
Speaking of votes … can votes prove or disprove torture … some (Tenet, CIA) say there has been no torture?
But the House voted (419-7) to pass HR 1678 which amends the “Torture Victims Relief Act“. Seven republicans (Burton, IN, Duncan, Flake, Goode, Paul, Rohrabacher, and Sali) voted against the bill.
When it was originally passed in 1998 I do not think that the US was contemplated as a source of torture.
Surely victims of Cheney/Bush torture should also have access to relief. After all, right and wrong is not determined by who is doing it.
RE post #2
What is your vote as to whether or not the following story involves torture:
(Blogger In Baghdad, emphasis added). It seems to be torture to me … torture in the modern, sophisticated, and civil sense is surely present in the blogger’s story.
My vote is that torture does not have to be the kind of brutality that only terrorists use.
I hope torture leaves their lives and I wish the neoCon madmen had not visited torture on them.