University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case • Hacker News Board

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#241

Post by xenophonf » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:05 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #221

baldeagle wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make districts competitive. As long as the measure (votes in an election district) can be shaped such that winning the primary (initial election to determine the rep. for each party) basically promises a win in the general (an election where one rep from each party competes), polarization will go up and moderation will go down. Once districts are competitive, reps will face more pressure to the will of the people, as…

How would this work in deeply red or blue states? If you redraw the districts in California to put all the red voters together, that district will be competitive, but you have gerrymandered all the other districts to be blue forever. I think districts should represent sections of the geographic population. Its fine for a district to be uncompetetive if the general population in that region have a strong lean one way…

In practice, it means establishing non-partisan redistricting commissions, taking that power away from the legislature or the political parties:

https://www.nonprofitvote.org/nonpartisan-redistricting-citi...

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#242

Post by elliekelly » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:07 PM UTC

zackmorris wrote: post #172

Probably what's going on is that someone on the board of trusties gets money from the political establishment in Florida and is worried that they'll lose it if the voting barriers are fixed and different leadership is elected. This has similarities with the shenanigans pulled by Sinema and Manchin around the Build Back Better plan. Political horse trading to advance the agendas of special interests, at great expense…

The chair of the board is a GOP mega-donor & “adviser”. Search “Mori Hosseini” for plenty of examples of he and his company getting cozy with the Desantis administration.

His company’s political contributions: https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/ici-homes/summary?topnumcyc...

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#243

Post by stonogo » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:07 PM UTC

pyronik19 wrote: post #89

sonotathrowaway wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest threat to democracy has occurred from people who espouse language just like this, in several recent instances: the insurrection attempt on January 6th, where conspirators attempted to use violence to overturn a free and fair election, in Michigan, where factions of that same ideology planned the kidnapping and public execution of democratically elected leaders, and spates of domestic terrorism across the…

If you think the last election was above board I have a bridge to sell you.

Nobody wants to buy a bridge, we want you to provide evidence for your assertions.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#244

Post by Lendal » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:08 PM UTC

_-david-_ wrote: post #164

alistairSH wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GOP has the majority of state governors. GOP has the majority of state legislatures. Both of the above are currently drawing Congressional districts based on the latest census data. Both of the above are currently rolling out voting rules that are nominally about preventing fraud (of which there is zero evidence of anything widespread) but will impact the ability of people to vote.

You should look at Democratic states. Illinois looks quite gerrymandered as well. I think Maryland (maybe?) was quite bad as well. This is a bipartisan thing. It just so happens that Republicans have the majority of states.

You can be for reform while at the same time benefiting from the current system. If you don't have power, it doesn't matter what your opinions are. If the playing field isn't level, you still must either play on it or forfeit. If you decide to play, it doesn't mean you want the field to remain as it is.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#245

Post by zsmi » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:08 PM UTC

deepsun wrote: post #209

lotsofpulp wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am deducing it based on the fact that if one person is threatening someone by talking to them in person with no one else around, then he said she said accusations will not be sufficient to convict one of witness tampering in a criminal trial.

But how then verbal intimidation was proven in an age before audio-recording?

My guess is recording laws probably grew from eavesdropping laws so perhaps in some situations you could setup an eavesdropper to serve as a collaborating witness.

Or they could've attempted to intimidate you while you were in a crowd.

Otherwise it would be on reputation alone, just like now.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#246

Post by rmah » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

zackmorris wrote: post #172

Probably what's going on is that someone on the board of trusties gets money from the political establishment in Florida and is worried that they'll lose it if the voting barriers are fixed and different leadership is elected. This has similarities with the shenanigans pulled by Sinema and Manchin around the Build Back Better plan. Political horse trading to advance the agendas of special interests, at great expense…

The data is already public. An easy to use interface, not so much.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#247

Post by curryst » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

elliekelly wrote: post #10

I have a colleague who does environmental litigation. (Think Erin Brockovich.) They have a big civil case against a large energy company in a southern, “energy-friendly” state. They had an expert witness all lined up - a professor at the (public!) state university. Well this expert happened to be up for tenure and was (allegedly) told in no uncertain terms that, should they testify as an expert witness in this case,…

It's because government power has creeped to a degree where it's no longer feasible to inflict any kind of punishment, so accountability is impossible. We basically have the options of complaining on the internet, complaining in person at a protest, or full on violent revolt.

They've removed all the options to revolt in a way that harms the government without you needing to be ready to die for the cause.

Something like 10% of people fought in the Revolutionary War. I couldn't find easy stats on what % of the population participated in pro-Civil Rights Movement protests, but I'm curious if anyone has them.

Both BLM and antivaxxers seem to have enough popular support that the government should be having difficulty controlling them. They don't seem to be having that difficulty, though. BLM is still around, but the change has been fairly slight. The government was able to largely ignore it. The antivaxxers remain to be seen, but I suspect all the restrictions will be effective in enforcing compliance.

Citizens no longer have a way to protest that the government really needs to care about.

You can't refuse to pay taxes. They'll just seize your accounts. And you can't just use cash, because I can't pay a lot of my bills in cash.

You can't refuse to comply, because they'll just cut your legs out from under you. No more job, no more driver's license, no more traveling, etc, etc.

I certainly wouldn't try the Boston Tea Party today. You'd be in jail before you could even tell anyone what you'd done.

I don't know what the solution is, but I don't think the government derives its power from the will of the people anymore. At some point, it very much feels like that flipped, and the people derive their power from the will of the government.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#248

Post by rayiner » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:15 PM UTC

ianai wrote: post #36

elliekelly wrote: post #10

I have a colleague who does environmental litigation. (Think Erin Brockovich.) They have a big civil case against a large energy company in a southern, “energy-friendly” state. They had an expert witness all lined up - a professor at the (public!) state university. Well this expert happened to be up for tenure and was (allegedly) told in no uncertain terms that, should they testify as an expert witness in this case,…

Agree. With all the anti-democratic practices being rolled out across the states it’s pretty scary to imagine things even a year from now and a long time forward. Life threats against election officials and all the way up to Senators. Gerrymandering. Even the SCOTUS is biased. Seems civics in the US are about to be rigged for one party rule.

With due respect, the media has worked Democrats up into a froth over nothing. These "anti-democratic practices" are literally just a partial rollback of unprecedented COVID-related loosing of voting rules. E.g. the Florida law at issue here requires voter ID and guarantees a week of early voting: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-facts-on-floridas-election-...

Canada also requires voter ID, and Canadian federal elections feature four days of early voting: https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=vote&d...

In many countries, like France, elections are still held (gasp!) entirely in person on election day.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#249

Post by rayiner » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

president wrote: post #211

ianai wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. With all the anti-democratic practices being rolled out across the states it’s pretty scary to imagine things even a year from now and a long time forward. Life threats against election officials and all the way up to Senators. Gerrymandering. Even the SCOTUS is biased. Seems civics in the US are about to be rigged for one party rule.

Serious question, does anyone have any insight into how we got into this mess? It seems like the past few years has seen a whirlwind of anti-democratic rule at almost every level of government - state, local, and federal.

We got into this mess because the activist wing of the Democratic party doesn't know how to accept a win.

For example, in 2019, Pennsylvania did a bi-partisan electoral reform allowing widespread mail-in voting: https://www.governor.pa.gov/newsroom/governor-wolf-signs-ele...

What did Democratic activists do then? They sued to gut every compromise in that bi-partisan bill, including provisions that are common in mail-in voting systems all around the world, like requiring ballots to arrive by election day.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#250

Post by hodgesrm » Mon, Nov 01, 2021, 5:20 PM UTC

president wrote: post #211

ianai wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. With all the anti-democratic practices being rolled out across the states it’s pretty scary to imagine things even a year from now and a long time forward. Life threats against election officials and all the way up to Senators. Gerrymandering. Even the SCOTUS is biased. Seems civics in the US are about to be rigged for one party rule.

Serious question, does anyone have any insight into how we got into this mess? It seems like the past few years has seen a whirlwind of anti-democratic rule at almost every level of government - state, local, and federal.

Well, to begin with, the the United States has never been completely democratic even at the best of times. If you run the clock back 50 years+ full rights were denied to many minorities. This was not microaggressions. It was full out refusal to treat people equally based on race.

For example, my first grade class in Alexandria, Virginia was in a segregated school. It was appropriately named Robert E Lee Elementary. Alexandria desegregated in 1966 and I went to school two blocks down the street instead of across town.

For more on how uneven progress in rights has been I highly recommend "The Republic for Which It Stands - The United States during Reconstruction and the Gilded Age, 1865-1896" by Richard White. [0] It's a weighty tome but helped me see through a lot of the myth-making about American Democracy. Also, at least some of the issues dividing the nation seem like replays of disagreements that were never resolved after the Civil War.

[0] https://history.stanford.edu/publications/republic-which-it-...