Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

And to be clear, there's no reason it can't work to have multiple voting methods! If you can make it all work, that's great. Some states do, even though others suck at it year after year. But multi method voting does create administrative challenges of its own — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

You may recall, for ex, back in 2016 that the Arizona dem primary was horrible, as the state cut back on in-person options in part bc mail had been increasing steadily... then they crushed (no electoral gain, just bad administraiton) https://t.co/oM5ZE26Rsu — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

For one, there's just a basic resource overstretch problem. For another, optimizing resources can be more challenging when the way voters can turn out varies so much — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

As a consequence, there are lot of the states with all three voting methods that manage to have awful lines, while there are (or were pre-20) states without advance voting but very few lines — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Expanding/adding convenience voting is usually accompanied by a reduction in the availability of in-person/election day voting. In the extreme, you get a state like Washington that's nearly all mail but just a single in-person site per county https://t.co/M7HZekbLIf — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @ERN_Reformers: "The new Georgia election law risks making election subversion easier. It creates new avenues for partisan interference… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@rickhasen certification sems like an analogous one time act? — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@elizabeth2nan https://t.co/SRwcSpwmoM — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

HR1 includes both kinds of provisions (there's a requirement for lines under 30 minutes iirc). But yet again, it's overlooked--and the proposed narrower versions of the bill don't include this kind of basic protection — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

What I am really convinced of, though, is that long lines really matter, and the reformers may be making a mistake by focusing on expanded voting options (say, assuring no-excuse mail voting) as opposed to protecting the fundamentals (making sure there aren't long lines) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

What I am really convinced of, though, is that long lines really matter, and the reformers may be a mistake by focusing on expanding voting options (say, assuring no-excuse mail voting) as opposed to protecting the fundamentals (making sure there aren't long lines) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

I won't go into depth to try and game it all out. There are too many provisions of debatable and cross-cutting effects to confidently ascertain whether more or fewer people will stand in long lines — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

An example in the positive direction: expanding early voting days and the provision requiring that large precincts with long lines (over an hour) either add staff, add machines or split apart. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

When it comes to the effect on in-person voting, there are provisions cutting in both directions. An example in the negative direction: ending the Fulton County bus voting stations, which could directly alleviate a problem — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

What I implied is that new the law probably doesn't increase the length of lines, and could just as easily shorten lines. I am not implying that lines don't matter to turnout (the article, in fact, says long lines affect turnout), or to human beings https://t.co/VED8HrBgCz — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@SeanTrende i was trying not to be a pedant (for a change)! *cough cough* — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @rickhasen: This @Nate_Cohn piece is a must-read, on the analytically distinct question of whether new laws like Georgia's allow for the… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

It is reasonable to whether a bill oriented at protecting democracy might have a better chance of passage than one trying to reform it https://t.co/VO2rOR8ioL — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @alexhazanov: This is a very smart thread. I think Nate makes a very good case that both HR1 and much of the reaction to the Georgia law… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@OklahomaPerson depends on the composition of the body that's responsible for clearing certification in federal elections. can be nonpartisan, etc — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Yes, but not for reasons that are relevant here. Congress could pass a law adding a layer of federal preclearance for decertification https://t.co/DxFaW1KRYa — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

As a result, the proposals for a slimmed down HR1 don't usually even include the provisions in HR1 that are relevant for protecting against election subversion — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

As a result, the proposals for a slimmed down HR1 don't even include the provisions in HR1 that are relevant for protecting against election subversion — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

But tbh I don't see much evidence that folks are even thinking about this issue. HR1 was written pre-2020, and the post-2020 fight over voter access has received 99% of activist attention — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

But tbh I don't even much evidence of thinking about this stuff, in part because HR1 was written pre-2020 but also because the fight over voter access has received 99% of activist attention — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

VRA section 5 requires preclearance for certain states; HR1 could add a layer of federal authorization/pre-clearance for invalidating ballots or decertifying results in federal elections — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

HR1 requires nonpartisan commissions for gerryrmandering; It could require nonpartisan election administration or certification. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

Other aspects of voting rights law offers some possible directions https://t.co/FE9sADPFDr — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

RT @awprokop: I wrote about Democratic debates over the policy and strategy of HR 1 / S1, the For the People Act. https://t.co/is9iY36fn3 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@nintendobenzo @JoshEsrick understanding them together in a single picture has, in practice, just meant one of the two being ignored — PolitiTweet.org