526
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

An Arizona lawmaker who signed on to be a “fake elector” for Donald Trump after the former president lost his bid for a second term has introduced a bill that would allow members of the statehouse to overturn future election results that they don’t like.

The bill, formally known as Senate Concurrent Resolution 1014 and sponsored by state Sen. Anthony Kern, seeks to bypass the popular vote altogether.

“[I]t is the responsibility of the Arizona Secretary of State to certify elections, including elections for President of the United States, but the sole authority to appoint presidential electors is granted to the Legislature,” the four-line bill reads. Therefore, it concludes, “[T]he Legislature, and no other official, shall appoint presidential electors in accordance with the United States Constitution.”

Giving the legislature absolute power to control Arizona’s electoral college votes, regardless of who won the popular vote, would disenfranchise millions of Arizonans.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 22 points 5 months ago

I highly doubt this would ever pass its clearly just insane. It's basically asking for a civil war in Arizona to start...

[-] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I'm not saying it's not batshit insane, but is it any worse than the "where's your papers, brown person?" "Immigration" law from the same state?

I wouldn't put it past Arizona Republicans to pass this.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Yes, it's worse. One authoritarian policy is bad, but the scope of the damage is limited. The damage caused by undermining democracy enables an unlimited amount of authoritarian policies.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Hmm, good point. When you put like that, I agree.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

They can't pass anything alone. This is performative bullshit for fascists.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Gee, I distinctly remember a certain group doing similar "Papers, please" stops awhile back. And they held a lot of similar views, too..... Hmm

[-] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago
[-] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Whether it would pass is beside the point. The fact that a lawmaker had the inclination, let alone the audacity, to introduce it in the first place -- and especially that he hasn't immediately been forced to resign as a result -- is 1000% a severe indictment of how diseased our society has become.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I wouldn't put that above us. This state is so red they could effortlessly pull off the mental gymnastics necessary to turn this into a win for the people. Anyone on Lemmy that lives in Arizona needs to start protesting on the weekends. Make this the second city that doesn't sleep, because our legislature can't keep the boards on their windows intact.

this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
526 points (98.7% liked)

politics

18138 readers
4119 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS