Democrats are suppressing the vote too

Democrats have been screaming about Republican efforts to suppress the vote, primarily in Red States. Democrats are 100% correct in doing so. It's a danger to democracy.
However, what isn't being talked about is how the Democrats are also trying to suppress the vote. It is equally a danger to democracy, but slightly different. Instead of directly attacking voter participation like Republicans, Democrats are suppressing the choices of candidates.

A pared-down version of the For the People Act, S.2747 would eliminate public funding for presidential campaigns by terminating the Presidential Election Campaign Fund — a post-Watergate era reform meant to reduce big donor influence in presidential races by providing an alternate public funding source for campaigns.
For over 30 years, this reform was embraced by major and minor party presidential candidates alike. But in recent cycles, only Green Party nominees qualified for presidential primary matching funds.

Neither Republicans and Democrats use presidential primary matching funds and general election grants because by using them they have to agree to limit the amount of private funds candidates can spend.

These matching funds have been critical in helping Green Party presidential candidates pay for expensive petition drives to meet onerous state ballot qualification requirements established by Democrats and Republicans — a use affirmed by the Federal Election Commission. In many states, being on the ballot and achieving a certain result for president is even required for minor parties to retain ballot status. Without these funds, the Green Party would disappear in many states.

Exit polls in 2016 showed that 61 percent of those voting for Green presidential nominee Jill Stein would have stayed home if she was not on the ballot. Green and other minor party candidates bring more voters to the polls. Party suppression is a form of voter suppression.

So who proposed this S.2747?
Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, and six of the seven cosponsors are Democrats.

This is the first nationwide voter suppression measure by the Democrats, but they've been doing it on the statewide-level for about a decade, in the form of the nonpartisan blanket primary (aka "Jungle Primary"). It's a primary election in which all candidates for the same elected office, regardless of political party, run against each other at once, instead of being segregated by political party.
Blue States such as Washington and California have been using this for around a decade. The effect has been clear.

Since the adoption of Top Two, no third party candidate has ever advanced to November in a primary where both major parties fielded at least one candidate. This year, fewer than one in seven Californians will have a chance to vote for a non-major party candidate in any statewide or congressional race in November 2014. Top Two “[wipes] out political diversity and choice” and “disenfranchises” thousands of Californians who identify with third parties, according to Michael Feinstein, a spokesman for the Green Party. Gale Morgan, the vice chairman of the Libertarian Party of Northern California, noted that “the top two primary is making it difficult” for his party to compete.

Not surprisingly, Senate Chuck Schumer has called on other states to adopt the Jungle Primary system because it is "a means of reducing the extremism".
Centrist Democrats in Florida, Arkansas, and elsewhere are pushing to adopt the Jungle Primary system, even while pretending to "hate it".

When push comes to shove, the Democratic Party simply uses the courts to get the Green Party off the ballot. That's what Texas, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin Democrats did in 2020. Montana Democrats did the same in 2018.

Share
up
13 users have voted.

Comments

edg's picture

The Democratic Party favors legal immigration from poor countries in hopes the immigrants will vote Democratic once they become citizens. The Big Business Bloc of the Party favors it as a way to bring in lower cost workers who, hopefully but not mandatorily, also vote Democratic. The Party also support illegal immigration and avidly works to convert illegal immigrants into Democratic citizens. If the current estimated 11 to 33 million undocumented immigrants transform into citizens, this ensures a permanent Democratic majority for decades to come.

I wonder why Republicans hate immigration.

up
2 users have voted.

@edg
Republicans hate immigrants, therefore immigrants don't support them back.

But that's a tangent to this essay, and doesn't address my point.

up
6 users have voted.
edg's picture

@gjohnsit

You covered your point thoroughly. I was raising the opposite point. Forgive me for participating. I won't ever again.

up
0 users have voted.

@edg
I have no idea how I offended.

up
1 user has voted.

@edg
about why Republicans hate immigrants, but I'll say it - because the Democrats have openly sacrificed the working class to pander to upper middle class bigotry.
Well I've got news for the quisling Dems - go to any corner grocery store and I'll show you a Libertarian; there's always at least one behind the counter, which means in five years there'll be at least four Republicans. And the guy that mows your lawn and the cleaning lady will be too busy at their third jobs to vote.

up
11 users have voted.

On to Biden since 1973

Lookout's picture

...not once but twice through suppression and bald faced cheating like in the case of DWS who even destroyed ballots so they couldn't be recounted.

And their ways of eliminating candidates on the debate stage...except for Bloomberg who they allowed despite not cutting their absurd criteria.

So it is a new twist on an old story.

up
11 users have voted.

“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

@Lookout
They are looking to make the rigging permanent and systemic, not just a matter of corruption.

up
9 users have voted.
Lookout's picture

@gjohnsit
permanent and systemic corruption... from the two parties (which are one party) to the lobbyist owned reps.

I appreciate those who think there is hope to reclaim democracy, but I'm no longer holding that hope.

More power to you.

up
9 users have voted.

“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

@Lookout

permanent and systemic corruption... from the two parties (which are one party) to the lobbyist owned reps.

That's a spot on take.
But this is another step towards even less democracy.
I think that it's important to note the milestones in the slow death of our democracy, our empire, and our capitalist system. They all seem to be going away at the same time (although democracy is way out in front).

up
7 users have voted.

@gjohnsit for either party is when they lose, they need money to regain office and power. The midterm election results are almost always guaranteed.

up
8 users have voted.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

snoopydawg's picture

for 3rd parties to get funding too? I don’t remember where I read that, but it solidifies the two party syndrome.

But for decades democrats have been limiting voting in their voting places by not supplying enough voting machines so that people don’t have to stand in line for up to 10 hours. I remember seeing that way back during Clinton’s tenure and then it kept repeating in every election. It’s almost like they want people to get frustrated and give up and go home.

Oh well, for every dem voter that drops out of voting for democrats there will be 2 republicans that will. Chuckles Schumer. But why vote to give democrats all 3 branches of government when they let republicans set their agendas anyway? And of course they always have a rotating villain to block the bill by voting with republicans to do so. How people haven’t caught on to this scam is beyond me. They will be quite happy to lose 1 or both houses this next midterm. If they actually wanted to be in power they would uphold their campaign promises. Right Obama? Yeah you got slaughtered and then Trump beat Hillary out of your 3rd term.

up
12 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

Bisbonian's picture

@snoopydawg ; that's what I was trying to express a few days ago. Manchin and Sinema, for now, but you can expect someone else to take their role, if either of these two are voted out.

up
2 users have voted.

"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X

snoopydawg's picture

@Bisbonian

Manchin is just the newest Lieberman who was the new Ben Nelson who during Clinton was the Joe Lieberman and Joe Manchin. In the house there’s always one rotating villain who votes with republicans or votes present. As you say there will always be a someone in the democrats that fills the role. Took me too damn long to see that.

up
1 user has voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

pswaterspirit's picture

Of looking the other way while the titans of industry import people from less prosperous countries to drive down the wages of the working class.
It has almost always lead to violence. Here on the west coast it was the Chinese who were brought here willingly to work on the railroad. Unwittingly undercutting the power balance between the labor and the companies they worked for. Glad for a job and money in their pockets they would work for a fraction of the pay a person who was established here and had a family to feed needed to survive. These days it is folks from south of the border somewhere lured by a dream to have enough to give their family a better life. Same thing. The people who come either by choice or by force are not the problem. It is the people who use them to push down wages so they can line their own pockets and the government that looks the other way and pretends not to notice they are breaking laws that cause the problem.
There are no clean hands on either side of the political aisle in this.

up
9 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@pswaterspirit

foreign workers come here to take American jobs. Guess who sponsored that bill? None other than Kamala Harris and of course most democrats voted for it. Jerry Nader, Nadler called immigrants ‘infrastructure.' One republican asked him to confirm that he meant infrastructure. He confirmed it. But the reason why congress lets them take American jobs is because they have to because it is mandated by the trade agreements that are in place. It’s for that same reason we can’t ever have MFA. Government has traded it away. But there is no rule stating that congress can’t have the best health care available to them. They of course would never agree to put restrictions on themselves. They have doctors that make house calls and lots and lots of other sweet perks. I’m not certain, but I think they keep it after they retire or are kicked out of office.

Remember during Trump that ICE raided a factory where immigrants were trying to form a union where 600,000 people were arrested and many were deported? This happened while the parent’s kids were at school. They came home to find no parents. I’ve often wondered what happened to the kids. Shudder. But the callousness of people who see other people as disposable.

up
6 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

@snoopydawg
And when I say "Republican" I mean "reactionary".

I distrust any ideology or party that bashes immigrants for the very simple reason that historically the people attacking immigrants were almost always looking for scapegoats.
While the trope of "illegal immigrants coming to vote in America" sounds about as likely as the black woman in Chicago owning all of those cadillacs while collecting welfare.

Now I do realize that there is a grain of truth in illegals taking domestic jobs. So many in the working class have a reason to fear illegal immigration.
But let's be realistic on this as well: illegals are not coming to America to take our GOOD jobs.
Illegals take jobs like farming, cleaning, child care, food services, landscaping, and construction. Only construction can pay well.
As for all those good paying jobs that no longer exist? Our corporate masters sent them overseas. Illegals didn't have anything to do with it.

Finally, consider how illegal immigrants are the most politically weak (along with the homeless) group in America. So if you are looking around for what is wrong in this country, I'd start with whoever is making the decisions.
Blaming illegals for everything sure looks like punching down to me.

up
5 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@gjohnsit

I distrust any ideology or party that bashes immigrants for the very simple reason that historically the people attacking immigrants were almost always looking for scapegoats.

Nope. Not what I wrote in the least. There have been many stories about workers having to train their foreign worker replacements who work at less pay. Harris did sponsor that bill and I’ve commented on it a few times and pointed it out the day she did that.

Nader saying that immigrants were considered infrastructure doesn’t mean I’m bashing immigrants. It’s just reporting on what was said.

600 k migrant workers were arrested by ICE and lots of kids came home from school to find no parents. Shudder. I was heartbroken reading that story.

If you are applying party to me then you are flat out wrong. I would also think that from my many comments through the decades that it would be obvious where I stand on this issue. It’s nowhere near what you are implying.

If it’s this:

But the reason why congress lets them take American jobs is because they have to because it is mandated by the trade agreements that are in place.

I should have been clearer here. I don’t mean immigrants, I meant foreign workers. I don’t think that is right. But again congress has no choice unless they break trade agreements.

Or maybe I have been a Republican all these years and have fooled y’all about it…

up
3 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

@snoopydawg
I've wasted too much time in the comments section of Zerohedge, where all of the problems in the universe can be attributed to immigrants.
It's caused a knee-jerk reaction in me.

up
3 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@gjohnsit

I accept. I am all for accepting refugees and supporting them since many come here because of our interference in their countries. We owe it to them. The best way to cut down on immigration is to stop destroying people’s countries and everything else we do by meddling in them.

up
4 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

@snoopydawg

The best way to cut down on immigration is to stop destroying people’s countries and everything else we do by meddling in them.

This is what frustrates me about conservatives.
If you criticize American foreign policy and point out our awful record, they will call you "Blame America First" or "hating America" or some such BS.
At the same time, they panic about refugees from those same nations washing up on our borders.
So the logical response to not wanting refugees on our borders, is to not make them refugees in the first place, which would mean to stop doing what we are doing with our foreign policies.

up
3 users have voted.

that the republicans called all out war on them. So instead of fighting back to protect their constituencies, they make restrictions on voters to get the outcome they want. Just to protect themselves.
All this to be a member of the brass ring club, paid far beyond your worth and so far above us we look like ants to them. Of course, they have people to look down on us and report back to them, they don't have time for that. As long as you're in the Demican Republicrat club it's all good.

up
7 users have voted.

and the growth of the Populist Party in the late 1800's. The Democrats played a big role in the demise of the populist movement.

https://www.ushistory.org/us/41e.asp

And, as Thomas Frank noted in his book on the history of the Democratic Party, the values of populism were also killed by Democrats.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/how-democrats-kille...

up
6 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

@Fishtroller 02

"I beat the socialist".

up
7 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin