Thread by @JessicaHuseman

It truly boggles the mind that people are so angry that I pointed out actual problems in an 800 page bill that exist on probably 70 pages of that bill. The op Ed takes specific positions on the election administration provisions of the bill, and nothing else.

If it’s a bad thing to point out bad ideas and an 800 page bill that will be damned by those bad ideas, meaning that the good ideas on the bill will never go into place, then I think that’s pretty silly.

The current make up of the court is not going to be kind to a bill that has so many problems. If you want this bill to stick, then make it a really fucking good bill. It’s not a good bill right now. That doesn’t mean it can’t become a good bill or that all parts of it are bad.

Do we think a Roberts court is going to magically be OK with provisions in HR one that aren’t enforceable? Obviously it won’t. It benefits everyone to simply fix these problems rather than ignore them, but that’s what both the House and the Senate have done to their own detriment

These problems can still be fixed, and they should still be fixed. But just saying that election administrators will have to comply with them because the law requires them to is simply not how laws are enforced. It’s simplistic and silly.

If the Roberts court is willing to so dramatically roll back the provisions of the voting rights act, then they will absolutely roll back the provisions of a bill that cannot be enforced. I don’t understand why this is even debatable.

And the crazy thing is that I know for a fact that both House and Senate staffers were aware of this when they wrote this law and chose to introduce it. Election administrators told them. Repeatedly. They had every opportunity to make these changes and chose not to.

The problem is not those who are pointing out the issues with HR one. The problem is that the same people have pointed out these issues from the beginning, and that they were flatly ignored. This didn’t have to happen. These problems don’t even have to be in the bill.

If you write a bill, then you should damn well be prepared for people to criticize it. You should be ready for ppl who are going to be responsible for implementing the bill telling you that there are structural problems with it. And if you aren’t, then maybe don’t write the bill.

It is an undeniable and unfortunate fact that voting has become intensely partisan over the last several decades. Any bill that is going to be introduced on this topic should be airtight and well researched. Anything less than that is a disservice to voters. I’m done.