Graham on Georgian legislation banning giving water to voters online: ‘It doesn’t make much sense to me’



[ad_1]

His. Lindsey grahamLindsey Olin Graham The Hill’s Morning Report – Biden to talk about infrastructure in the middle of the border, voting controversies Graham says Biden is playing the ‘race card’ on electoral law changes in Georgia on Sunday Shows: Les Biden’s border issues and gun control dominate MORE (RS.C.) said in an interview that he agreed with a provision included in a GOP-backed voting law in Georgia that seeks to prohibit anyone other than election officials from donating food or water for voters waiting in long lines to vote. doesn’t make much sense.

The time came during Graham’s recent interview on “Fox News Sunday” in which he was pressed by the host. Chris WallaceChristopher (Chris) WallaceBiden’s first bail wasn’t about him – not really Graham says Biden should apologize to border patrol agents White House confirms infrastructure plan will be in two parts MORE on legislation promulgated by the Governor of Georgia. Brian kempBrian Kemp The Hill’s Morning Report – Biden to talk about infrastructure in the middle of the border, controversy vote on Sunday shows: Biden border issues and gun control dominate SNL’s Kamala Harris welcomes Ted Cruz for ‘Unity Seder’ ‘ MORE (R) last week that sparked backlash from Democrats and voting rights advocates.

“Alright, well, let’s take a look at some of the provisions in Georgia, and these are specific provisions that a lot of people have heartburn on, senator. It would limit the number and location of drop boxes, ”Wallace told Graham on Sunday.

“Good,” Graham said.

“It allows counties to cut off early voting at 5 p.m., before a lot of workers get down and can go and vote, and that’s the one that I think creates the most noise, it bans, that makes it a crime. give food or drink to voters in line, ”Wallace continued.

“Senator, why the hell, if Americans are willing to wait hours to vote, would you make it a crime for people to come and give them a bottle of water?” Wallace then asked.

“All I can say is it doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. I agree with you on that, ”Graham said.

Georgian law would allow poll workers to bring someone a cup of water online, but would prohibit others from doing so as part of an effort to stop the election campaign.

This provision is one of many changes that Republican-backed legislation seeks to make to voting in the state.

The law would also end absentee voting without excuse in the state, a practice long favored by Republicans, after recording a record absentee vote in the last presidential election.

In 2020, Georgia went blue for the first time since 1992. And in January, Democrats won two ballots for the US Senate, which gave Democrats a majority.

The passage of the law comes as Georgia’s Republican-led legislature has seen a slew of election bills tabled or advanced in recent months, which include provisions that would limit voter access.

Republicans said the legislation was needed to boost electoral security and public confidence in the Georgia elections.

Democrats and voting rights advocates have argued that the legislation would make it more difficult for people to vote, especially those of color, and that the measures come in response to the party’s victories in the state in the presidential elections of November and the second round of the Senate in January.

Many advocates have said the legislation in Georgia raises the stakes for Congress to pass legislation containing provisions to expand access to the vote, such as HR 1.

Republicans argue it would federalize the election, taking too much state control.

In his appearance on Sunday, Graham instead urged those who are upset with election laws in Georgia to take their challenges “to court and to arrest them.”

“But what they are doing with HR 1 destroys any state’s ability to hold elections, suppressing the idea of ​​voters, changing the Federal Election Commission to make it partisan, and institutionalizing the collection of national ballots.” , he said, arguing the measure “would be a disaster for our elections.



[ad_2]

Source link