Biden falsely claims the new Georgia law 'ends voting hours early'
By: Glenn Kessler (MSN)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
"What I'm worried about is how un-American this whole initiative is. It's sick. It's sick … deciding that you're going to end voting at five o'clock when working people are just getting off work."
(Evan Vucci/AP)
— President Biden, in remarks at a news conference , March 25
"Among the outrageous parts of this new state law, it ends voting hours early so working people can't cast their vote after their shift is over."
— Biden, in a statement "on the attack on the right to vote in Georgia ," March 26
During his first news conference, President Biden became especially passionate when discussing a law being pressed by Republican lawmakers in Georgia that he said was intended to make it harder for people to vote. He reiterated those concerns the next day in a written statement after Gov. Brian Kemp (R) signed the bill into law.
The law has come under fire for restricting the distribution of food and water to people standing in line, making it harder to cast absentee ballots, reducing drop boxes for mail ballots, barring mobile voting places and for making significant procedural changes that potentially give more power to the GOP-controlled legislature in the election process.
Biden has echoed many of those concerns. But there was one line in both his news conference and his statement that has kept us puzzling until our puzzler was sore. It also puzzled experts who have studied the new law.
Let's take a look.
The Facts
On Election Day in Georgia, polling places are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., and if you are in line by 7 p.m., you are allowed to cast your ballot. Nothing in the new law changes those rules.
However, the law did make some changes to early voting. But experts say the net effect was to expand the opportunities to vote for most Georgians, not limit them.
"You can criticize the bill for many things, but I don't think you can criticize it for reducing the hours you can vote," said University of Georgia political scientist Charles S. Bullock III. He speculated that Biden may have been briefed on an early version of the bill — "there were 25 versions floating around" — and he did not get an update on the final version.
For instance, at one point lawmakers considered nixing all early voting on Sundays, thus eliminating "souls to the polls," a get-out-the-vote initiative popular with predominantly Black churches. But that idea was scrapped in the end.
"One of the biggest changes in the bill would expand early voting access for most counties, adding an additional mandatory Saturday and formally codifying Sunday voting hours as optional," Stephen Fowler of Georgia Public Broadcasting said in an excellent and comprehensive report on the impact of the new law. "Counties can have early voting open as long as 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., or 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at minimum. If you live in a larger metropolitan county, you might not notice a change. For most other counties, you will have an extra weekend day, and your weekday early voting hours will likely be longer."
Charles Stewart III, an election expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said: "I had also heard this generally reported as expanding early voting, so I'm surprised by the characterization." He studied the precise language changes at our request and said it indicated an expansion of hours, especially in rural counties.
So where would Biden get this perception that ordinary workers were getting the shaft because the state would "end voting at five o'clock"? We have one clue.
The law used to say early "voting shall be conducted during normal business hours." Experts said that generally means 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. The new law makes it specific — "beginning at 9:00 AM and ending at 5:00 PM." A Georgia election official said the change was made in part because some rural county election offices only worked part time during the week, not a full eight-hour day, so the shift to more specific times makes it clear they must be open every weekday for at least eight hours.
But, as noted, the law also allows individual counties to set the hours anywhere between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. So the practical effect of the 5 p.m. reference in the law is minimal.
During the 2020 election, for instance, vote-rich Fulton County, with a substantial Black population, set early-voting hours at 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. on most weekdays and two Saturdays, though the last weekdays had 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. voting hours. Voting was allowed on two Sundays between 12 p.m. and 6 p.m.
Under the new law, Fulton County could set the exact same hours for in-person early voting — or expand them from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. every day.
Bullock noted that one change in the law may impact early voting in runoff elections. The law reduced the period between the initial election and the runoff election, from nine to four weeks, potentially shortening the period for early voting.
We were curious what the early-voting rules were in Delaware, Biden's home state. It turns out Delaware did not allow any in-person early voting in 2020. A law signed in 2019 will permit early voting starting in 2022. (Voting hours are 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Election Day.)
We sought an explanation from the White House for the reason for Biden's remarks but did not receive an on-the-record response.
The Pinocchio Test
Biden framed his complaint in terms of a slap at working people. The law would "end voting at five o'clock when working people are just getting off work" or "ends voting hours early so working people can't cast their vote after their shift is over."
Many listeners might assume he was talking about voting on Election Day, not early voting. But Election Day hours were not changed.
As for early voting, the law made a modest change, replacing a vague "normal business hours" — presumed to be 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. — to a more specific 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. time period. But that's the minimum. Under the new law, counties have the option to extend the voting hours so voters can start casting ballots as early as 7 a.m. and as late as 7 p.m. — the same as Election Day in Georgia. Moreover, an additional mandatory day of early voting on Saturday was added and two days of early voting on Sunday were codified as an option for counties.
One could understand a flub in a news conference. But then this same claim popped up in an official presidential statement. Not a single expert we consulted who has studied the law understood why Biden made this claim, as this was the section of law that expanded early voting for many Georgians.
Somehow Biden managed to turn that expansion into a restriction aimed at working people, calling it "among the outrageous parts" of the law. There's no evidence that is the case. The president earns Four Pinocchios.
Tags
Who is online
86 visitors
Battle ground states are now battling to restore the election rules they had in place before the 2020 election.
Democrats want to codify what Marc Elias did for them.
Joe Biden has lied about Georgia's election laws and the Washington Post has assigned him 4 pinocchios.
Yup, those Jim Crow laws were waayyy before the 2020 election.
Voter I.D. is scary.
And unnecessary.
Tell me Vic, how do you feel about the law making it illegal to provide a drink of water to someone standing in line to vote, in Georgia, for hours under the hot sun?
And another strawman from you. Is that all you have?
There actually should be much less of that, going forward.
What Does Georgia's New Voting Law SB 202 Do?
There’s actually a lot of good ideas in the law that both expand access for voters, and help to ensure a more accurate count. It should give everyone more confidence in the system. It’s a shame that - for political reasons - people are ignoring the content of the law and complaining about something they clearly haven’t read.
The election in November 23020 was one of the most secure ever held. Then there were recounts after recounts that showed little or no voter/election fraud. If some people still aren't confident in our elections they never will be.
The same people who claim the Georgia governor election was stolen from Stacey Abrams think everything is working perfectly because Trump lost there.
The most obvious question about that election, to me is that Kemp was Secretary of State at the time. He was responsible for overseeing elections and did not recuse himself while running for governor. That's pretty corrupt. And there were a number of other questions regarding voter suppression in that election.
But November 2020 was an entirely different situation due to Covid-19. Efforts were made to allow voting with as little social exposures as possible, hence the huge amount of mail-in-votes that took place. Why more Dems than Repubs used mail-in, I don't know but election law changes are flying fast and furious in the wake of 11/3/2020.
In your completely unbiased opinion of course. No one ever lies about who they are; which is the reason that all banks, credit institutions, courts, airlines, and government agencies require ID to get anything done.
Show where such a law exists? Go ahead we will wait. The law that you are bemoaning only prevents political parties from providing it and distributing to those in line. That is the same law as many other states have. Non politically associated individuals can provide it; voters can bring their own; and they can even order food and water from grubhub and have it brought to them.
Democrats and their media surrogates lie; and the leftist sheeple nod their heads and follow along.
Based on the law, that will only take effect after the 2022 mid-terms.
I also found it interesting that the law only addresses precincts with over 2000 voters. Those with fewer are SOL no matter how long the wait time.
It also has what seems to be an arcane process to inform voters that their precinct [and thereby polling station] has been changed by posting the change in the 'legal organ' of the precinct and using signage at prior and new polling stations. It's almost like modern communication methods are intentionally being avoided.
At least they aren't relying on the fucked up USPS to inform voters of the change...
There is ongoing litigation about the governor's election.
Now, is 'working perfectly' your litmus test? Oh and WHAT does that constitute and WHERE has that EVER happened?
The law does not prevent people from giving water to those standing in line. The law allows “self-service water from an unattended receptacle” for voters waiting in line. It also allows anyone to give water or food to any voters outside of limited area around the polling place.
That's not what bothers progressives. It's voter I.D.
It is common to bar any political campaigning or activities within a certain number of feet (often 150 feet — or a shorter distance from any line extending beyond that area).
Here is the provision:
Then I suggest you look at the text of the law itself.
Correct. And in the opinion of all the investigations that have failed to turn up any meaningful number of fraudulent votes.
Have you ever heard of Google?
One provision of the new law includes a ban on giving away water or food to voters within a certain distance of voters or polling sites.
"(a) No person shall solicit votes in any manner or by any means or method, nor shall any
person distribute or display any campaign material, nor shall any person give, offer to give,
or participate in the giving of any money or gifts, including, but not limited to, food and
drink , to an elector, nor shall any person solicit signatures for any petition, nor shall any
person, other than election officials discharging their duties, establish or set up any tables
or booths on any day in which ballots are being cast
The portion of the law I just posted shows you are once again WRONG .
So what? It still makes it illegal for anyone to give a person a bottle of water who is waiting in line to vote.
How nice of them. If you want to give a voter a bottle of water, make sure to bring your tape measure!!!!!
So, in your mind, a son trying to give his elderly mother a bottle of water is a political campaigning activity? Really?
You understand you can bring your own water right?
The idea that somehow not getting free water given to you somehow is now "voter suppression" shows how non existent the whole issue is. Imagine thinking, like our President, that's worse than Jim Crow.
You understand that if you are waiting, in the sun, for hours, you may need more than 1 bottle of water...right? And why would you be required to bring a bottle of water to vote?
You still haven't explained why it should be illegal to offer a bottle of water to someone standing in line for hours to vote.
The rest of the crap you posted is just more strawman that is not part of this comment thread.
That's some hyperbolic bullshit right there Tex.
NOTHING in the amended text says a fucking thing about attire OR affiliation. It says "ANY PERSON".
Just bring two bottles of water. Or three! Humans, at least some of us, have the capacity to plan ahead. For instance, if voting in person is suddenly the most physically impossible and demanding task known to mankind, than they could vote by mail.
I've somehow managed to vote my entire life without requiring someone to give me free water. Am I hero? Maybe. I've survived worse than Jim Crow, per Joe Biden.
I'd like some reparations, please
Disney world engages in ride suppression with it's racist lines.
Just bring two bottles of water. Or three!
Then you'll need a Porta Potty. Are those allowed, lol
Since YOU are the author, YOU should know Tex.
So then the question is, why post 'deliberately inappropriate humor' if you want to be taken seriously.
I'm not here to 'get' 'deliberately inappropriate humor'.
Well that's 'mighty white' of them...
Then YOU should have linked the article per the CoC Tex. You should fix that by posting that link. I'll wait.
Oh and BTFW, I note that you admit to posting 'deliberately INAPPROPRIATE humor' TWICE. Well done.
Amazing, isn’t it? Trump was supposed to concede right away, or challenge the outcome in only a limited way. But the arguments over Georgia are still going on 2 1/2 years after the election and that’s ok. Seems a little hypocritical.
A more careful reading of my comment will reveal that I said other people thought things were working perfectly. And they still say that as justification for making no changes to the existing system. I never said anything about needing anything to work perfectly, nor did I suggest a standard.
Yes, and I think if this was the only reform they were passing, I would say it was a change they could make now for the 2022 elections. However, they have made other changes that expand voting access, so some precincts might already be saved from the long lines they previously had. With that in mind, it makes sense to assess the next election and make changes based on real world wait times.
I don’t know how long it takes 2000 people to vote, but I would imagine that given the chance to vote over multiple days, as well as by mail or drop box, lines for a group of people that small shouldn’t need to be terribly long.
I posted that section of the law. Perhaps you should read it before spouting off.
That was the text of the law. I guess you can't handle the truth!!!
Actually, NO. The snail's pace of litigation in this country is well known.
He was?
Not every case warrants an 'emergency' ruling from the Courts Tacos. Nor does everyone have the 'pull' to expedite their case by leap frogging to the SCOTUS.
Only if one ignores the fact that your comment is based on a false equivalency.
Such as?
It's just one less obligation for those precinct poll workers.
Yes Tacos, you posted your OPINION about what other people are thinking.
Just like your version is only PART of the law. So WTF is your issue Tex?
Correction.
I never claimed it was the whole law.
[deleted]
I don't, so I'll just point out your hypocrisy.
It's not an opinion. It's a fact. The evidence is in news commentaries, and even in comments from NT members. It's their chief argument that the law is not necessary.
Oh but 'our readers' can now see that you don't hold yourself to standards that you demand from others.
ANYWAY!
Well since you've moved the goal posts from 'working perfect' to 'the law is not necessary' you'll need to pick ONE before you can argue that it is a fact.
Holy Moley. Is that a serious statement or do you genuinely not understand how ridiculous that reads?
The claim that the current system is working perfectly is the reason people say the law isn’t necessary. They aren’t opposing ideas. The first logically leads to the second. Are you really so hellbent on looking for “gotchas” in peoples’ comments that you don’t get that?
That is your OPINION.
Since I have seen no evidence that anyone has claimed that the current system is 'working perfectly', it looks to be contrived.
There is no evidence of the first.
The second stands on it's own merit.
You're so hell bent on putting YOUR words in other peoples mouths that you've quickly devolved to your MO of personal comments. Well done AGAIN.
Nope. I told you. It’s a fact.
Well, I have, so I know what I have said is true.
But perhaps, you are like me and you are willing to concede that there are changes that could be made to improve systems of voting - improving accuracy, reliability, and public trust. If not, then we’ll put you in with the “working perfectly/no need for change” crowd.
Well if you insist, prove it.
Prove there's a 'crowd'.
I see you won’t answer.
I see that YOU didn't ask a fucking question.
Now stop deflecting and prove it.
Such language! Do you imagine it makes you sound more compelling or smart? In fact, the opposite is true.
Anyway, I didn’t say it was a question. I said you didn’t answer. I proposed two points of view for you and you ignored that part of the comment.
I don’t take orders from you, nor do I respond to lies about me deflecting when I’m not. Discuss the topic or you will be dismissed.
I don't give a fuck what your opinion is about my use of language.
I have no intention of allowing you or anyone else to 'propose' limitations on my point of view.
Why tap dance. You can't prove your posit.
The 'topic' is your inability to prove what you said is true.
Why tap dance?
My statement is clear Tacos. Your 'two points of view' lack imagination and attempt to set limitations that I reject.
That speaks volumes
ell me Vic, how do you feel about the law making it illegal to provide a drink of water to someone standing in line to vote, in Georgia, for hours under the hot sun?
I'm all for it. No electioneering. Stacy Abrams be damned!
Wait, WHAT? Your seed clearly states that they CHANGED the early voting hours to DIFFERENT hours, especially in rural areas [SURPRISE!]. They are NOT restoring the election rules. PERIOD, full stop.
The polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. I think that is reasonable and btw, according to the Constitution it is the decision of the Georgis State Legislature, not some liberal judge or Stacey Abrams sister.
In addition is the matter of all that absentee voting, which Stacey Abrams is so invested in. Absentee voting in the state of GA went from 5% of the vote to 30% of the vote. In 2016 with about 5x less absentee ballot signatures to verify, 6.4% were rejected, yet in 2020 with so many absentee ballots allowed (supposedly because of covid) there was only, an unbelievable 0.4% rejected. That has yet to be explained.
Now we won't be leaving it up to some poll worker to determine the credibility of a signature. We simply match a driver's license.
They are NOT restoring the election rules. PERIOD, full stop.
First of all, your LINK explains it clearly, I suggest you READ it.
Secondly, THREE state wide recounts and multiple county hand recounts were conducted and NO irregularities were found by Georgia's Republican leadership. What MORE do you want Vic?
Yet WHAT are they 'simply; matching Vic? Hint: It isn't a photo since voter rolls do NOT include a photo, DO they Vic?
They are matching a SIGNATURE, from the DL to the existing signature from the voter's registration.
So they sure as hell ARE 'leaving it up to some poll worker to determine the credibility of the signature'.
MAJOR FAIL.
Oh and BTFW, as I have stated multiple times, I could have a DL with any photo and signature I want in less than an hour. It's pure fantasy to pretend that a DL ensures the 'credibility' of someone's identity.
Per Biden the law is "Jim Crow on Steroids"
Biden manages to be equally offensive and dishonest. He's lucky the MSM is nothing more than his PR department.
Nope, Georgia couldn't possibly pass a racist law. They never have. /s
They didn't with this one. Biden and the media lied.
There is no valid excuse for not having a valid photo ID.
What state requires a photo ID for a fishing license? Indiana doesn't. Hell, we can get a license by mail. We DO however mandate a SS #.
Looks like the Dems won. A Georgia State Rep will introduce two bills to change it's laws:
One, “The President Joe Biden Jim Crow on Steroids Voting Act,” would replace Georgia’s new election law with Delaware’s much more restrictive provisions. Instead of up to 19 days of early voting and no-excuse voting by mail, the state would permit no early voting or absentee voting without an excuse, i.e. unless you’re sick or will be absent from the state on Election Day. The other bill, “The Senator Chuck Schumer ‘Racist Voter Suppression’ Voting Act,” would replace Georgia’s new law with New York’s electoral laws instead. That means nine days of early voting instead of 19 and, again, a requirement that voters have an excuse in order to obtain an absentee ballot.
This is insane. Voting is actually easier in a conservative southern state than it is in liberal northern states. But people just step in front of microphones and declare “Jim Crow has returned” with no evidence - and no sense of irony, either. But because it’s Georgia, I guess, it must be so.
I can’t believe MLB took away the All-Star game when this is the situation.
Why would you ever support any of the teams that represent 'secular progressive coastal elites' Xx?
Well gee Xx, perhaps it would behoove you to recognize that the need for early voting is infinitesimal in a state that has UNIVERSAL mail in voting, drop boxes all over the state AND drive up voting.
Tell you what Xx. Post a picture to long lines outside of ANY Colorado polling place since 2014. I'll wait...