__nevii Posted May 24 Share Posted May 24 (edited) The recent actions from the Texas government has made it increasingly clear that the state has it out for Harris County. Not only with the suspicious state takeoever of HISD (despite an overall decent "B" grade, with plenty of worse off elsehwere in the state), but also the recent laws that have been coming out of state legislature: SB1993 grants the Secretary of State (SoS) the authority to rerun elections "under certain circumstances" for counties with at least 2.7 million people. This bill passed Senate, and is currently in House limbo. Unfortunately, two other bills have made it past House, with only the Governor's pen awaiting... SB1750 abolishes the election administrator position for "counties with 3.5 million or more," returning duties to elected county clerk and tax asscessor. Both positions are currently (D) in Houston, so not a big deal (overreach aside), right .... https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/texas-bill-abolishing-harris-county-election-position-heads-to-governor/ Not so fast! Here's the particularly egregious doozy: SB1933, which grants the SoS the power to seize election authority (administration, voter registration) from local officials, and even suspend and replace them, with nothing more than "good causes to believe in 'problems'". The dooziest part? The bill had a last minute amendment right on the spot in House just to increase the population threshhold way up 4 million... https://twitter.com/DemocracyDocket/status/1661106078518476810 So, why such specific threshholds, hmm? Want to take a guess which is the ONLY county in Texas to fulfill said population thresholds (at least, at time of bill creations)? Moreover, are the purported "election problems" in question not possible STATEWIDE, regardless of population? Oh, and the Secratery of State is actually one of the few Texas positions that is non-elected (instead, appointed by governor) ... and there is NO BURDEN OF PROOF regarding the so-called "causes to believe" in question: clearly not a conflict of interest, right? 🙄 No matter how it is sliced, this is straight up targeting baked into legislature. Way worse than the uproar concerning the "Tennessee Three". The "F-word" not only came out of hiding, it is blatant and blaring its foghorns loud and clear... Note: this thread has political relations, but I posted it here since this forum was more active/livelier, as well as the fact that the particular forum in question (Local, State, Federal politics offtopic) was missing the option to "create a thread." Edited May 24 by __nevii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobruss Posted May 24 Share Posted May 24 You better watch out _nevii, you might be outed by the SOS for bringing this up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts