Stuff You Should Know - Selects: Are Election Laws Designed to Suppress Voting?

Episode Date: November 4, 2023

Are laws that are meant to protect the sanctity of the polling place in reality designed to make it harder for groups that traditionally vote Democrat to cast their ballots? Find out in this classic episode.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hello, I'm Chelsea Paredi. Do you feel chronic existential dread but love talking about delicious snacks? Call me! My podcast is relaunching! Do you fear wild dangerous animals to the point where you're constantly watching attack videos and reading articles about wild animal tech survivors or those who succumb to attack? Call in! We can also discuss reality shows and emergency room footage. Listen to Call Chelsea Paredi on Will Ferrell's big money players network on the iHeart Radio app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. It's JoJoCewa, host of the new podcast, JoJoCewa now. It's time to get real up close and personal.

I'm gonna be talking to you like I'm writing in a journal. You're gonna get all of the tea and all of the scoop. I'm also gonna be talking to my friends, to people I admire, to people that are trending right now. So you're gonna get like, JoJo C. Winnow, and like, now what's going on in the world? It's gonna be great, and I really hope you like it. You can listen to JoJo C. Winnow on the I Heart Radio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Hey everyone, it's Josh, and for this week's Selective chosen our episode from May 2017 on Voter Suppression. Once and while we do a topic where no matter how hard we try, it just turns out to be a one-sided thing. We don't pick those topics because they're one-sided, they just turn out that way despite our best efforts. So take a gander at this episode and see what you think about all that. Welcome to Stuff You Should Know, a production of I Heart Radio.

Hey and welcome to the podcast. Me, I'm Josh Clark, and There's Charles W. Chuck Bryant. And there's Jerry Jerome Rowan. You put the three of us together in a room, shake it up, pick out some of the chess hairs. You got stuff you should know. Oh, that was gross. I thought you'd like that.

You ready to get angry on this one? I'm trying to keep it cool, man. I woke up yesterday and said, I really want to tick off a significant portion of our listeners. So what could, what topic could we do? And I thought, voter suppression, perfect. Well, you know what, man, I've been trying to think about the, why this bugs me so much. Voter suppression obviously bugs me because it's not right.

Sure. But what really bugs me, I think, is that if you're in Washington, DC, and you're in government, like everyone knows about this stuff, and everyone talks about it frankly when microphones run around. Right. Like, do you watch the show VEEP? I love it. I've only seen season five, but man, it is so good.

Like, supposedly, that's kind of how it is. Sure. Like, when the microphones run around, they all talk about politics in very frank terms, but as soon as you get on television, or in front of a microphone, you have to tell the party lines on both sides with this rhetoric crap.

And it ends up you can't even really talk about the things. Well, no, but plus also I think one of the reasons that that is the way it is is because you got to feed the sheeple like a certain, like you said, that company line or that party line because if you really talked about what was really going on, some of the people who agree with your BS would otherwise disagree with the actual thing that's going on. You know what I'm saying? Well, yeah, and let's just go ahead and say it.

In this one, on voter suppression, historically, the Republican Party has purposely done things to try and keep certain people from voting because they probably vote Democrat. And they can't just say that. So they say, no, it's really about voter fraud. Right. That's a big problem. Right.

And Democrats want those votes. And they say it's because they just want a very inclusive democratic process. But that's not true. They want those votes because they're probably going to be Democrat votes. Right. And Democrats will do anything, including voter fraud to get people to the polls or to get those votes. That's the current, that's the argument that's going on right now.

Yeah, but you know what I'm saying? They're like, neither one of them can say those things. So they have to stand behind these two kind of bogus reasons. And it's just infuriating. Right. So the reasons, these bogus reasons, ostentibly bogus reasons are that if you take measures to make it a little difficult to vote, what you're going to do is protect the integrity of the electoral system, right? This is the, this is is the Republicans viewpoint. If you do that, then there's going to be a couple of things. One, you're going to cut down on fraud, which, again, the Democrats are just total fraudsters when it comes to voting, as far as Republicans are

concerned. Right. And then it's also going to, in some cases, sure, it's going to make it a little difficult for some people to vote. But the Republican way of thinking is if you really care about voting, you're going to do whatever it takes to get to that poll and register and vote. And if you don't, if just a couple of simple barriers will keep you from doing that, then nuts to you, man, I don't care about your vote. And T.S. for the Democrats who you probably would have voted for. That's the argument in public that you're talking about

that you're saying is bogus. When it's really these people who are having access issues to voting because of the laws of the GOP is putting up are more likely to vote for Democrats. So hence these are targeted attempts to block people from voting for Democrats. Yeah. That's the reality of it, allegedly. We should say Chuck, like there's just calling it voter suppression as kind of controversial

in and of itself. Well, yeah, no one likes to use those words because on the one side, like you said, there's like, it's not about voter suppression. It's about, like, you know, what's wrong with having to have an ID to go cast a vote? Right. I mean, on its face, it makes sense. Sure. You know, they say you have to have ID to buy alcohol if some clerk decides that he wants

to see your ID. You have to show it to him or you can't buy alcohol. What's the problem with that, you know? Well, right. And then you go to some parts of Texas and they say, well, you can use your gun license to vote, but don't use your student ID. That doesn't count. Right. So like, it's the fact that they're all very targeted. And everyone will see as we go through this, it's very targeted. Like, and we'll bring up specific cases where, you know, they find out like, oh man, leading up to the election where Barack Obama's first president selection, we saw a surge in

increase in black voters in this county. So let's go to that county specifically and introduce some legislation that's going to make it harder for them to get to the polls. Right. Specifically there. Yeah. Like it's maddening. Oh, it is. It's infuriating.

Even I was reading kind of the other side on this by a guy named David French who writes for the national review. And he was saying, even he was like, if that happens, what you just described, it should be vigorously litigated, that there's no excuse for that. For anything that's specifically targeting like minorities or the elderly, you're making it difficult for any group that to purposefully making it harder for them to vote and targeting people like that, then yeah, it should be litigated and those rules should be thrown out.

Well, that happens. It is litigated and quite often courts do say, like, you can't do this. And they say, all right, well, we won't do it again, but it worked on this election. Right. Well, one of the reasons why this were currently in the midst of a really massive wave of voter suppression laws that are sweeping the country right now, and one of the reasons why it's being allowed to go on is because just like in Citizens United, the Robert Supreme Court said, you know what, things are fine. We're just going to got an important provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

And we'll talk a little bit more about that in a minute, but it basically said, you, these states and these specific districts in these states have a history of voter suppression. And we, the federal government are going to keep an eye on you so much so that you can't make any changes to your voting procedures without the federal government approving it. Right. And in 2013, I believe the Supreme Court said, you know what, we're fine, we're post-racial, we're a black president, we don't need that anymore. And they overturned that provision of the Voting Rights Act.

And it's allowed, again, this massive wave of voter suppression laws to be passed in this country. Man, we're already riled up. It's tough not to be, you know? What were you going to say? Should we take a break? No, not a break. I was going to say it should we just go back and talk about history a little bit.

Yeah, let's, man. Because the history is much easier little bit. Yeah, let's, man, because the history is much easier to stomach. Yeah, right. Okay, so and you put this article together with our own article on a bunch of other good stuff. Yes, nice work. Thanks. But you point out that various stutately that it's not in the Constitution, the right to vote. This has been left up to the states over the years, even though we've had, you know, amendments since then that obviously allowed certain people

to write to vote. It wasn't just originally included like, hey, everyone can vote. Everyone has the right to vote in this country. Right, and no, originally the only group that the that citizens of the United States could vote for was the House of Representatives. The Senate and the President, and the President still, this is the case, were elected by an electoral college, right? Correct. So eventually they added Senate seats for people to be able to directly vote for. But in the first presidential election in 1789, the one that were George Washington,

one who was elected to the presidency, the first presidency of the United States, like 6% of the population in the US at the time were eligible to vote, and that was it. Yeah, there was only white men and freed African-American slaves in just four states. I saw six states. I was really surprised to see that, but yeah, who owned property.

Right. That was a big one. Right. So that left like eight guys. Right. They were allowed too, but yeah, you had to own property. And that was the big division at first, even apparently more so than by race, it was by whether you

were a landowner or a property owner, right? Yeah, and you had to be 21. There were certain religious restrictions too. So, like you said, that ended up 6%. 6% of the population could vote. That's right. I mean, I'm going to cut them a little slack on the first election, say that they were trying to get it together.

Right. But 6% is an alarming low number, but they probably thought that was the 6% of people that mattered. I guess it's more inclusive than the 1%. But it's still pretty low. We're in the single digits here. But like you were saying, a class distinction was really kind of the biggest deal. Class distinction was really kind of the biggest deal. And that changed a bit when war veterans who fought for independence from Britain stepped up and said, hey, a lot of us are not landowners

and we helped free this country. Can we vote? And little by little, states said, all right, you don't have to own property. It's 1850 and let's just say all white males can vote in some African American males, but definitely not women. Right. Now, yeah, just give us another seven decades or so. Okay.

We're just trying to keep our heads from spinning, overletting people who don't own property vote. Exactly. So, the, and that bizarre, did you know that the first group to agitate for voting rights was white men who didn't own land? No. War veterans? I didn't know that either.

So, something really big happened in the middle of the 19th century that changed things as far as voting went. That was the Civil War. Yeah. And the 13th Amendment that ended slavery, followed by the 15th Amendment that granted suffrage to all men in the United States. Yeah, regardless of race color or previous condition

of servitude. But again, not women. Right, and it should have said dot, dot, dot supposedly. Because that 15th Amendment is what unleashed sort of the first like like before there was just voter suppression they were like no you just can't vote and now they said well you can vote and so they had to be creative with their voter suppression. Right and at first there was a period of reconstruction in the south after the Civil War where the federal troops, they, I guess it was led still by General

Ulysses Grant, if he wasn't president by now, where the federal troops were occupying the south under martial law, right? Yeah. And they were enforcing the 15th Amendment and other laws that had come into effect after the Civil War. And it was like, like, people could hold office. They could vote. They could live in this transition period from slavery into freedom. And they were doing it under the auspices of the Union Army. But then the Union Army withdrew. Pretty prematurely, I think of the 1870s, early 1870s, and it went from the reconstruction

south, which ended up last in just a few years, to what became known as the Jim Crow South, which was basically slavery by any other name than slavery. Yeah, that's when the Dixie Crats, which were conservative Democrats, I guess conservatives of the day, that's when they started to get creative and said, all right, well, we have this new 15th Amendment. So let's try and think of a lot of ways,

even though the law says that black men can vote, that we can keep them from doing so. So how about a literacy test? And not only just a literacy test, but maybe one only in English, so that way there's no way an immigrant can vote if they can't read English. Or maybe some poll taxes where you have to pay like a dollar to register to vote. But in like 2016 money, that was like $800. Actually looked it up. It's $9,000. And the early 1900s that looked up like Texas it was a dollar 50 to register and that would be

like $43 today. Yeah. But you know for a poor person who is maybe waffling on whether or not to bother voting, charging them $43 is probably gonna seal a deal. And George actually had a cumulative tax apparently for many years where every year, like if you were 40 years old, every year from the age of 21 that you weren't registered to vote, you would have to pay per year when you first registered to vote.

Oh wow. So that was clearly targeting like a freed slave and as 50s would then have to pay accumulative tax from the age from 21 up to 50. And again, that just basically meant no one was going to register. Well, there were a lot of grandfather clause laws too, which basically said that if you were registered to vote prior to the 15th amendment or your grandfather was registered to vote prior to the 15th amendment, you You were eligible now under these Jim Crow laws, but most black people in the South were not registered to vote nor were their grandparents prior to the 15th amendment. So that basically just stripped them of their voting rights automatically as well.

And you mentioned the literacy test too, Chuck, did you look into those at all? Yeah, I mean, some of them somewhere like, like recite the US Constitution. I can't get it. Some of them, some were like 20, 20 pages long and they would be administered by white Democrats. And again, Democrats at the time were the party of conservatives. We should do an episode on that when the parties switched names. We've chatted about that before. So it would be left up to this poll worker who is administering the literacy test.

It would be left up to their judgment whether the person passed or failed. Yeah. Like it was up to them. It wasn't an objective test. It was a subjective test. Yeah. And so the end result of this is in 1940, 1940, not 1840. These suppression campaigns worked so well that only 3% of eligible voters,

African American southerners were registered to vote by 1940. And you know, it's probably one of the worst parts about that is that I'll bet in 1940 that the average white person considered black people politically disengaged in this country because of statistics like that. Oh, right. So they're like, oh, they don't even vote. Yeah, they don't even care about politics. Right.

Right. Three percent of them are registered to vote even, you know? Yeah, and this wasn't limited to the South, kind of up north and nationwide, there were things going on. Notably, there was a, for naturalized citizens, it was very long residency requirements, basically to try and keep immigrants from voting for a long time. Especially the Chinese, apparently. Do you know that?

I did not. There was an 1882 law. It was pretty on the nose. The Chinese Exclusion Act. And it said, if you're Chinese and you're an immigrant, you're not allowed to become a citizen, which meant they couldn't vote. And this was on the books in the United States until 1943. Yeah, this stuff is an ancient history. That's why it's so shocking, you know.

So 1920 comes along and women were finally given the right to vote. Thanks to the 19th Amendment. And you mentioned the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which finally got rid of the Jim Crow voting laws officially in the South. But that didn't mean that suppression and intimidation didn't still go on. No, you know, like whenever the federal government decided that it needed to lend a hand and assist the black population of the southern states

in gaining their citizenship, that there would be a huge backlash to that. And initially it meant the formation of the clan. And then after the Civil Rights Act, the clan again experiences huge resurgence in popularity and membership, and acts of white terrorism just became the norm. And now that we're looking back on it,

we think of the Civil Rights Movement. When I think of that, I don't think of it as actually agitating for civil rights. I think of it as agitating for full citizenship and equal treatment under law and everything that makes up civil rights. But you don't think of it as like really at the basis what the civil rights leaders were agitating for were things like protection of their voting rights. Right.

Access to the polls just says any white person would enjoy. And that very famous march from Selma to Montgomery, did you see that movie, Selma? Nah, Selma, it's the Great movie. Have you seen either 13 or 13th? No, no, I'm dying to see that one too. Dude, that one, that's amazing. It's just amazing. It's really well done.

And the stuff they're talking about is just so eye-opening. It's great. Like it's one of those ones you'll watch more than once, I'm sure. But that march from Selma to Montgomery was a march for voting rights. And it actually helped usher in this voting rights act of 1965 because the Alabama state patrol, I believe, I'm like horseback with batons and whips and night sticks and tear gas just ruthlessly beat these unarmed peaceful protesters in the street of Selma. And it was all captured on on national television and broadcasts

and it really changed the mood of the nation as far as that goes and it actually was supremely counterproductive to people who were against black voting because it helped protect black vote by by the federal government through the voting right act in 1965. Yeah another thing that came with that act was an official ban on any, quote, test or device, in quote, de-qualify voters on the basis of literacy, education, or fluency in English. And then it took all the way until 1966 until poll taxes were banned, which was kind of way later than I thought. Well, it was like the next year.

Well, no, I mean, just period. Oh, yeah. Now, this Jim Crow laws were basically done away with after a century. Yeah. As they were around for a century, in one form or another. Unbelievable. Yeah. And then finally, during Vietnam, they finally lowered the age, voting age to 18 in 1971

post-Vietnam because veterans were like, hey, I can be drafted and shot and killed for my country, but I can't vote. And they all went, yeah, that's a good point. It is a good point to argue that one. You want to take a break? Yeah, man. All right, we'll be right back and talk about the 11 voter suppression techniques. S-W-Y-H-E-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W-O-W existential dread but love talking about delicious snacks. Call me! My podcast is relaunching! Subscribe and treat yourself to sound effects like this. And this, have you ever been attacked by a bear? Yeah.

And moments like this. I have an apple sweet in front of the space here. No. And my whole leg, from my knee down in my foot, burnt into a squal, was a big bubble. And this, kale chips are delicious. They're too oily when I go. They shouldn't be soft at all. It should be really crispy.

That's what I said every single time. You are yelling at me. And this, do you want to go to the Clipper of Game with me tonight? Do you have 25 references of mutual friends that can tell me that you're not a murderer? Um. And this.

Hold on, I got to open some peanut butter pretzels. Listen to Call Chelsea Parradi on Will Ferrell's Big Money Players Network on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. It's JoJoCewa, host of the new podcast, JoJoCewa Now. Godwin May, I am so excited to finally be starting my podcast, Jojo Siwa Now. I feel like I've grown up in front of the world. You know, the first time the world saw me publicly

was at nine years old. Now, it's time to get real up close and personal. You're gonna see why I am the way I am now. You're gonna see who I am now. And it's gonna be pretty fun. It's gonna be like an inside look at what I've been up to in the last three years. It's basically like, I'm gonna be talking to you like I'm writing in a journal. You're gonna get all of the tea and all of the scoop.

I'm also gonna be talking to my friends, the people I admire, the people that are trending right now. So you're gonna get like JoJo Siwa now and like now what's going on in the world. It's gonna be great, and I really hope you like it. You can listen to JoJoCewa now on the IHR radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Hi, this is Jazzalyn Robin and we're the host of reasonably shady on the Black Effect podcast network. I absolutely love our podcast. Yes, it has been so much better than I expected. Yes, because we get to share our lives with everyone. They get to learn about us. This is the podcast that you want to listen to just

to feel like you're in the living room with your girlfriends, you're driving in the car with your girlfriend, you're having that good girlfriend talk. And sometimes we say things that like you want to say, but you can't say out loud. We're like speaking your mind for you, but you're scared to say it, but we're gonna say it. We do hot topics, we talk about reasonable and shady things.

So get into it. Get into it and join us every Monday for ReasonBullyelie Shady and be sure to tune into the latest season of the Real Housewives of Potomac. Subscribe to Reason-Belie Shady on the I-Hard Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, chak, this is voter fraud is what the argument is for a lot of these, especially with ID. So is that like, is voter fraud real? So I mean, everything I came across that strike me is legitimate, although I'm not sure how legitimate, like say a conservative might find it, but like the Brookings institution

to me, it's definitely left leaning, but I would also say that it's quite a legitimate think tank. Right. But the studies that have come across all say, no, it's not really a thing. Like, it's basically a specter. It's a potential possibility, but it's in actuality, it's not a thing. And one thing I saw was that, I'm not sure where this one came from, but 86 convictions out of 300 million votes cast in the last few elections. I would say that's probably about 10 to 12 elections.

There's only been 86 convictions for voter fraud. And the other issue with this specifically, specifically with voter ID laws, is that most of those cases of fraud where people have actually been convicted of voter fraud were mail-in ballots. And so like a voter ID card is not going to do anything for that. Because you don't produce ID to mail in a ballot. So the idea that there is a big problem with voter fraud is ostensibly not real, although of course Trump is going to, he's carrying out an investigation and he's formed a commission.

I'm very curious to find out what they find. But even if it were a real thing from the pattern that we're seeing, the voter ID laws aren't going to help anything anyway. So far as it actually makes a difference in an election outcome, it is negligible. No, and I have to say, there are, it's not like the people who say, especially rank and file GOP members, right, not necessarily like high elected officials, but just like the average GOP party member. It's not like there are lunatics for believing that there's such a thing as widespread voter fraud, right? Like this is a big drum that's beat on the conservative side in conservative media, but there's also like instances

in the past that can be pointed to saying like, see, see, this is what they do. Like, Acorn definitely didn't help anything. Right. Acorn was a community organizing group that had been around since I think the 80s and they were dedicated to getting lower income, minority, people who traditionally had trouble accessing the polls or voting, getting them registered and getting them to vote, right? So they were very much aligned with the democratic viewpoints of universal access,

universal participation in elections. And they were very much a left-leaning organization. They were associated with Obama very famously. And then equally famously, they were this disgraced organization because they were accused of voter fraud, of voter registration fraud to be specific. And the way that this happened was they would send out people to canvas neighborhoods and they would give them

a quota. And if they met their quota, then they would say get paid a bonus or something like that. Right. So these a corn workers were given, and these were just the same people who were also maybe on the next Tuesday coming by your house to see if you wanted to donate to the Sierra Club too, right? Right. They were given an incentive to create fake registrations. And a lot of them did. And when these investigations were launched in multiple states into ACORN and voter registration fraud, it was found that these people weren't trying to pave the way for fraud at the polls,

but that they were creating fake registration forms very frequently duplicate registration forms for the same person to get paid for work they hadn't done to get paid from Acorn. That was the extent of it. So Acorn ended up disbanding, but they left a huge, huge blemish on the argument from the liberal side saying, we don't engage in voter fraud. You're crazy for even thinking that. Now forever, conservatives, especially people who aren't, who are, you know, let's just say conservatives, can point to Acorn for the rest of the time and be like, look, you guys

did that. So yes, there is such thing as voter fraud in my mind. And you can't persuade me otherwise. And as long as there's that kind of division, you're not going to be able to persuade anybody if there's no such thing as voter fraud. Yeah. It's a good point. All right.

Should we talk about the 11 techniques? I'm pretty tired, man. I don't know. Yes. All right, number one. Number one on our list. Voter caging. Who was that?

Was that your car? Oh, no. Sort of a KC case. Oh, I hear it. Sort of top 40 guy. That was pretty good. Did you ever hear that great outtake when he had to read the dead dog letter? sort of a Casey case of me. Oh, I hear it. It's top 40 guy. That was pretty good. Did you ever hear that great outtake

when he had to read the dead dog letter? Yeah. Pretty wonderful. That taught me to just shut up when a mic's hot. Was it dead dog? Was that it? I don't remember something. Or dead mom or something.

Or dead mom or something. It was a pretty funny outtake. Oh man, God bless him. All right, voter caging is when you send mail unforetable, that's really a mouthful. Mail which cannot be forwarded. That's too unvedic. Send that mail to an address that is on the voter rolls

Send that mail to an address that is on the voter rolls. And then when it's not, when it's return undelivered, basically, they challenge and say, this person no longer lives at this address, so they can't vote. Right, which in and of itself is not scientific. It's not illegal. It's when you target, say, Democrats, I think specifically minorities, it becomes illegal. You can't target any minority group, but I believe you can target the opponent's party,

like registered party members. But the whole point is, is you're saying this person doesn't live there or else they would have gotten their mail. And because they don't live there, their vote can't count. It should be purged from the rules. Right. Very famously happened in 1958, when the sluritor was sent to 18,000 registered Democrats, and then again in 1981, when Republicans sent thousands of letters to minorities, blacks and Latinos, and New

Jersey. And that one actually calls such a stir that the RNC got together with the DNC and said, you know what, I'm going to consent here with a consent decree, and we're not going to do it anymore. Right. They didn't just do that. The goodness of their hearts. The DNC sued the RNC for that 1981 election because there was a lot of dirty stuff. And to this day, the RNC, if it does any, if it undertakes any voter suppression techniques, wants to create any changes in voting

regularity, it has to get approval by the courts first. Correct, but that doesn't stop it from happening because now it's just third party groups can do it now. Yeah, because they're not part of the RNC efficiently or the DNC. Right. And so it still happens. Yeah. What about these flyers? And so it still happens. Yeah. What about these flyers? So these kind of fall into a larger category of misinformation campaigns, right?

Right. You got flyers, you got robo calls. These are just so brazen. They really are. Like literally robo calls that say, hey, your democratic candidate is basically already one. So you just stay at home and relax tomorrow. Yeah. Or don't forget to vote on November 5th, Latino voter, even though election days, November

4th. Yeah. And, you know, I was about to say, how did they get away with it? But it says right in here, who is it? The co-director of the Voting Rights Group advancement project? It's basically, they're usually anonymous. So, how do you go after someone

who you wait around at mailboxes? You could arrest the mail carrier, I guess. Oh, I didn't even think about that. I was thinking that they were just dropped in the mailboxes, but I guess they are mail. All right. These guys with these handlebar moustaches and black capes come in I guess they are mail. All right. These guys with these like handlebar moustaches and like black capes come and handle them.

So basically there's no way to trace this stuff. So as a minority in a minority neighborhood, you might get a flyer and a robo call saying a wrong date like you said or don't bother your candidates one or You know mail mail your absentee votes to this address, which is incorrect Yeah, and this is like really really underhanded stuff super illegal stuff But again, you can't unless you can trace it back to somebody who specifically and purposefully carried out this This campaign. Yeah. What you can't do anything about it except go public and say, no, no, no, don't listen

to that. Yeah. Well, because what happens is you get a Hispanic voter on the nightly news that says, I got a call that said I could vote by phone and half the people watching that probably think, well, I like this guy probably didn't even understand that phone call. So it's chalked off as that. When in fact, he really did get a phone call

saying he could vote by phone. Yeah, well, yeah. That happened in Nevada in 2008. I think that it, sorry, Nevada. I it'll always be Nevada to me. I'm sorry, Nevada. I know it drives you guys. Bat poop, but it's always be Nevada to me. I'm sorry Nevada. I know it drives you guys fat poop, but it's true. Yes, Nevada

Nevada What else Chuck? This is a big one. I got one you ready. Yeah felony disenfranchised where felon disenfranchisement yeah So there used to be apparently the the Greeks are the ones who came up with this, but it was really codified in the West through medieval Europe, where if you were a convicted bad guy, you would would undergo what was called a civil death, right? Yeah. And you were just all right? Yes. So much so chuck, that you could be murdered by another person, and you were no longer protected by the law.

So the other person would get away with it, it's got free, right? Yeah. One of the things that you lost was any kind of representation you might have or being able to participate in in any kind of community processes, right? Sure.

That carried over to the United States, but it really started to gain ground right after reconstruction during the beginning of the Jim Crow period where a lot of state legislatures enshrined in their state constitutions that if you were convicted of a felony, you lost your voting rights. And in some cases, you lost them forever. You had to appeal to the governor to restore them. Some states said you lost them while you're in prison. Other states said you lost them after, say, if you were paroled, whenever your sentence

was fully finished, but to some degree, felons lost their right to vote. And it stuck around. Yeah. You know, I got the current stats here. Okay. There are only two states right now that allow an incarcerated felon to vote. Do you know what those are? One is Vermont. Yeah.

Is the other, I want to say New Hampshire, but I don't know that that would be an obvious guess, but Maine. So close. Crazy Maynors. It's that Canada rubbing off on you. Voting rights restored automatically upon release DC Hawaii Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah. You're like the FedEx guy from the eight. Rights restored automatically once released from prison and discharge from parole. Probeationers can vote. California, Colorado, Connecticut, New York restored automatically upon completion of sentence, including prison, parole, and probation, and a bunch of other ones.

That's good. How about this? Everyone but these last two. Okay. Voting rights restored dependent on type of conviction or outcome of petition to the government, Alabama, Delaware, Mississippi, Nevada, Tennessee, Wyoming, and only restored through individual petition to the government, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, and Virginia.

So the ones that you did not hear were upon completion, including prison parole probation. So people might say, don't do the crime, right? Sure. So if you, like on the one hand, it makes sense. Like you've given up some sort of civil liberties because you did commit some horrible heinous crime. Other people say, well, maybe once you've done your time, you should get your rights back. The problem is, is in the United States, there is a real racial disparity between people who are convicted of felonies, who

are black, and everybody else, right? Yes. So, overall, 7% of the United States African American population as a whole does not have the right to vote because of a felony conviction. For the rest of the United States overall, just 1.8%. That's including all, every other race, right? So there's, out of the gates, there's disproportionately more convicted felons among the African-American population in the United States than everybody else, right? But then when you start boiling that down to voting rights on a state level, it becomes painfully clear that this certainly seems strategically targeted these laws.

In Florida, one in four of Florida's black residents in 2016 couldn't cast a ballot because they were disenfranchised for being felons. One in four. Florida was one of the ones that, uh, one of the four states where you had to have an individual petition, uh, approved by the government. Right. So one quarter, and that's not saying one quarter of the, uh, the voting population of African Americans in Florida.

That's, that's the whole population, right? And since African Americans have traditionally voted Democrat, any law that says, you're a felon, you can't vote. You can just leave it at that and make your own surmises about it. Right. Surmises? your own surmises about it. Right. Surmises? So word now. Surmations. Surmations. That's what I was looking for. Voter ID laws, that's sort of obviously a big one because it's probably when you hear most about in the news. As of this year, 32 states have laws requiring or requesting ID when voting. West Virginia is coming in 2018. So that would make 33 states. And we mentioned Texas earlier, that's one of the states where they say like, oh, well, you can use your gun permit, but you can't use your college student ID,

even though the state has issued both of those. Right, because if you're a student, you're possibly more likely to vote Democrat. If you are a gun owner, you're probably more likely to vote GOP. Right, and if you're talking nationally, 11% of Americans don't have current state-issued photo IDs. There's a lot of reasons why. Maybe you're elderly or disabled or both and you can't

drive. So, A, you don't need a driver's license. B, you have a hard time getting to the DMV just to get an ID, like a non-driving ID, state issued ID, to vote. And once again, historically, these people might be more apt to vote Democrat. So it's hard to not look at it along those lines. Right. And a lot of people say, well, there was this commission back in, I think 2005, American University sponsored a bipartisan commission to look into voter ID laws, right? Yeah. Whether they suppressed voting, whether they would prevent fraud. And it was led by former Reagan chief of staff, James Baker, and former president Jimmy

Carter, right? Two opposite sides of the coin. Yeah, but two statesmen, you could make the case. Sure. So, what they found is that both groups concerns were valid. Yes, voter ID could prevent voter fraud. Yes, voter ID laws would suppress voting. So they suggested the government on the right, specifically, yeah, minorities, women, the elderly and the disabled are the ones who are most likely to be affected by voter ID laws.

And the poor. Right, yes, sorry. The elderly, the poor, women, the disabled, and minorities. Yes. All five of those groups tend to vote Democrat too. So voter ID laws could be enacted to prevent fraud, said this commission. But if you're going to do that, you need to basically give out IDs and you have to make access to these IDs extremely easy. And so, Texas, who has a very strict ID law, you have to show a photo ID to vote and only specific ones, said, okay, well, then we'll undertake this. We'll give away free IDs,

but you've got to produce some documents to get the ID. So, for example, you might need to produce a birth certificate. If you don't have your birth certificate, you have to go get a copy of it. And if you were born before 1950, then you have to go to wherever, whatever county you were born in, because they're not computerized records, you have to go to wherever, whatever county you're born in because they're not computerized records, you have to go to the county clerk's office, get it, pay $42 for the copy, and then come back and get your ID. And hopefully, you also remembered the other two pieces of documentation that you have to bring with you to get this free ID. And this investigation, actually, I think it was a court case found that in the 15 months leading up to the 2014 midterm elections

Texas's free voter ID registration drive managed to issue just 297 IDs for the entire state over a 15 month period. Well, and this whole thing with you have to go to the county where you were born If you're basically elderly, Right, like, if you were driven across Texas. Well, plus, if you're poor, remember that poll tax? You calculated the dollar 50 poll tax in Texas. It came out to be about $40 something dollars. Well, it costs $42 to get a copy of your birth certificate

to get that free ID. Some people say that's a modern poll tax. Almost down to the penny. That's a modern poll tax. If you were poor, if you're broke, if you have trouble making ends meet 42 bucks is a lot. Yeah. And if you're on the fence about voting, like you really want to vote. And that's if you can get there to begin with. Right. So you should born and love it, but I live in San Antonio. Right. And I don't have a car. So all of these things, like these are two,

a person who believes if you really want to vote, you're gonna make it through hell and high water, two vote. Yeah. All of these excuses that we've just thrown out are just falling on deaf ears, right? Yeah. But if you really step back and put it into context and really think about it from a

realistic point of view, like these are hardships. This is tough stuff. And if you're a voter and you really want to vote, it could dissuade the average person from doing that. From everything I've read, it is really easy to overlook how difficult it can be to get an ID for people who already have an ID and use them every day. And you've probably had one ever since their parents took them to the DMV when they were

16 to get their first driver's license. It's really easy to act like it's not a big thing to get an ID. When in reality, the poorer, the more disabled, and the more minority you are, the harder it actually is. Yeah. There was a study in 2014 by Rice University and not to pick on Texas, but this, you know, it's Rice University. I think Texas brought this on them, so. In the University of Houston, Texas's 23rd congressional district found that 12.8% of registered voters who didn't vote

cited lack of required photo ID. So almost 13% didn't vote. And they said this because I don't have the proper identification and only 2.7% of those people actually didn't have the right identification. So a full 10% had the right ID and didn't vote because they didn't think they did, which, and you know what, we'll take a break

and talk about it after this. But the reason that's not happening is because of things like billboards and poll watchers and other intimidation techniques. So we'll talk about that right after this. S-W-Y-E-O-W-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O Cuckass does relaunching! Subscribe and treat yourself to sound effects like this! And this! Have you ever been attacked by a bear? Yeah.

Yes! And moments like this! I have an applause for sleeping around the space here. No! And my whole leg, from my knee down in my foot, burnt into a squall, was a big bubble. And this, kale chips are delicious. They're too oily when I go. They shouldn't be soft at all.

It should be really crispy. That's what I said every single time. You are yelling at me. And this? Do you want to go to the Clipper of Game with me tonight? Do you have 25 references of mutual friends that can tell me that you're not a murderer? And this.

Hold on, I got to open some peanut butter pretzels. Listen to Call Chelsea Paredion, Will Ferrell's Big Money Players Network on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. It's JoJoCewa, host of the new podcast, JoJoCewa Now. Godwin, I am so excited to finally be starting

my podcast, JoJoCewaNow. I feel like I've grown up in front of the world. You know, the first time the world saw me publicly was at nine years old. Now, it's time to get real up close and personal. You're gonna see why I am the way I am now. You're gonna see who I am now. And it's gonna be pretty fun.

It's gonna be like an inside look at what I've been up to in the last three years. It's basically like, I'm gonna be talking to you like I'm writing in a journal. You're gonna get all of the tea and all of the scoop. I'm also gonna be talking to my friends, to people I admire, to people that are trending right now. So you're gonna get like JoJo Siwa now

and like now what's going on in the world. It's gonna be great. I really hope you like it. You can listen to JoJo Siwa now on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. From Wall Street to Main Street and from Hollywood to Washington, the news is filled with decisions,

turning points, deals, and collisions. I'm Tim O'Brien, the senior executive editor for Bloomberg Opinion, and I'm your host for Crash Course, a weekly podcast from Bloomberg and I Heart Radio. Every week on Crash Course, all bring listeners directly into the arenas where epic upheavals occur, and I'm going to explore the lessons we can learn when creativity and ambition collide with competition and power. Each Tuesday, I'll talk to Bloomberg reporters around the world, as well as experts and big names in the news.

Together, we'll explore business, political, and social disruptions, and what we can learn from them. I'm Tim O'Brien, host of Crash Course, a new weekly podcast from Bloomberg and I Heart Radio. Listen to Crash Course every Tuesday on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. All right. So I set that up with the study from Rice University, uh, 13% in the 23rd Congressional District in Texas did not vote because they didn't think they had their right ID, even though 10% of that 13% did have the right ID and just didn't vote, uh, because

they were, I don't know, misinformed by a billboard and scared to go to a polling place. Yeah. Has that ever happened? Sure, tap. And there's been plenty of billboards that have like prison bars or something on them. It says like voter fraud is a felony. And apparently these billboards that are sponsored by dark money groups that have no direct ties to say

like the GOP or the campaigns of a candidate, are they sprout up? They tend to sprout up in poorer neighborhoods, minority neighborhoods, neighborhoods that are more likely to be intimidated by billboards like that rather than just laugh at them and flip them off. It's apparently the jury's out on whether they have an effect or not, but it is intended to be voter intimidation. Yeah, they use threatening language. Like you said, like someone behind bars, and all of a sudden, let's say you're a newly naturalized

citizen or you are a felon that's now out and cleared your parole and everything, and you see those bars and you're like, well, I'm going to take a chance and go into vote because I might be locked up. And again, the disingenuous argument number 8,092 is, well, if you're not a criminal, you got nothing to worry about. Right. Which is completely disregards the psychological impact that something like bars and crime and felon

have on a person seeing a billboard that's shouting that at them. If you actually are, you know, fight your way through that and say, you know what, I'm gonna vote anyway. I'm not scared of the billboard. And you might show up to your polling place to find what's known as a poll watcher who are there to scout out potential voter fraud,

what has generally in many cases amounted to intimidation squads, kind of right there at the front door. Yeah, do you remember? I said that thenc got in a lot of trouble for the nineteen eighty one election for a bunch of stuff uh... yeah this is another one one of the things that they had in this nineteen eighty one i believe new jersey election was called the national ballot security task force

and it was basically off-duty cops wearing guns wearing blue armb, patrolling polling stations, who were basically ostensibly looking for voter fraud. But the court sided with the DNC's contention that they were meant to intimidate voters who were likely to vote for Democrats. Why just because they were there with guns? Yeah.

Like, you don't want some dude just walking around like looking at you, watching you, you know, what are you doing here? Kind of thing like, no, it's not, it's not what, the polling station doesn't belong to one group. It belongs to everybody and no one should be made to feel like they're a threat or they are not welcome at this polling station. It's not that guy's polling station. He doesn't have any right to walk up and down with a gun intimidating people. What a despicable thing to do with your time. Yeah. I mean, how about

this? The conservative group, True the Vote, their national elections coordinator, he was, he was, you know, talking about poll watchers. He said that he wanted voters to quote, feel like they are driving and seeing the police following them. Yes, that's not how you're supposed to feel when you go vote. No, at the polling precinct. Like that's a quote. Yeah. He wanted them to feel scared. And that was in 1981. That was from the 2016 election. Oh yeah, yeah, that kind of old one. No. So it's not, it hasn't just been, say, GOP leaning voters who have done poll watching, there was a very famous case in the 2008 election in Philadelphia where the new Black Panther Party for self-defense, which as we pointed out in our Black Panther episode, is not affiliated with the Black Panthers.

They're kind of like this new offshoot group that took over the name. I think they were arrested for voter intimidation for basically doing the same thing, but with the police baton, rather than say a gun. Yeah. Yeah, I don't care who you are or what side you're on. Don't intimidate voters at the polls. No. I don't know if I could, if I said that clearly enough yet, that's a disgusting thing to do.

Josh is going to come after you. Yeah, I'm watching you. Early voting is one thing that you say, and you're writing here that I agree with, that like who could argue with early voting because it works. People love it, voters like it, elected officials like it. It's been a really big success in the states that do it. Like, almost a third of this past election, people early voted, me included. Right.

So like everyone should love this, right? Sure, yeah, and it really, really works. It gets voter participation up. And like you said, the lines are not long. There's not like long waits on election day. And yet, despite that, despite everybody basically loving early voting, there have been cutbacks since 2011 in eight states, rather than this decades-long trend, which had been leading up to, you know, the, I think, 2008 election, which is when it really came on,

there's been cutbacks rather than continuing forward with getting early voting out there. And these eight states are, except for West Virginia, GOP governored states. And the reason why people who are critics of these laws or changes to the rules point out. The reason why that these are being done is because in the 2008 election, this early voting was used by far and away more by African-American voters who voted for Obama and the Democrats than white voters and specifically white GOP voters, right? Something like 70% of early of African Americans in the 2008 election voted early compared to like 50% of white voters in the 2008 election. I'm not sure what the breakdown was for Democrat to GOP, but I'm quite sure it was lopsided in favor of the Democrats

in that, right? So that happened. And then all of a sudden, the midterm elections of 2010 were just a bloodbath for the Democrats and swept GOP governors and legislatures into power. And as a result, early voting was cut back under new laws that were introduced in these new sessions. Yeah. And Sunday voting was a big deal too. Historic black churches have had a big, a great success story in organizing this campaign called Souls to the Poles, where they would get their church members to the polling stations on Sundays to vote.

It's been a big success. And so what happens when there's a big success for a minority group organizing and getting registered is states pushback Ohio and Florida specifically banned voting on Sunday That the Sunday before the election. Sorry. Not just any Sunday Yeah, and that's when these the black churches had organized a vote for the Solstead the polls campaign and it made a big deal and more than 18% of Floridian who voted on the last Sunday of early voting in 2008 did not vote at all in 2012 because, well, maybe not just because

they weren't allowed to vote, but that right was taken away from them. And so 18% didn't vote in 2012. So you do the math. Yeah. Yeah, and I mean, that's a significant amount of voters in Florida alone. And again, it's targeted. Like they do the research and they find out the data on where these votes come in from. When are they being cast?

Who is casting them? And now let's put in as many laws let's bend the law however we can to try and keep those people from voting yeah like there been there was who is the guy there was a legislator in Pennsylvania that was that bragged during the Romney election like hey our voter suppression our voter suppression techniques are going to give this to Romney. Right. This is a legislator. Yeah, that's true. So, you know, it's funny to some people listening right now, we sound paranoid.

So early voting is suppressed, and as a result, it can lead to voter suppression as well, right? Yeah. You've also got voter registration. We already talked about acorn registering people, but typically voter registration drives like the Soul of the Poles campaign have an effect on Democrats votes. So curtailing those can lead to, can lead to a suppression of votes among Democratic voters, right? Yes. And we've been picking on the GOP, basically, this whole time. Dude, I went all over looking for instances of Democrats doing robo calls

and using intimidating billboards. And I didn't find it. They're just not out there. If they are. Specifically, Robo calls when they deliver misinformation. Right. Or send out deliberately misinforming flyers or supporting laws that end early voting. I didn't find it anywhere. This all seems to be at least in this current incarnation,

a GOP-led wave of voter suppression laws, right? There is one type of voter suppression that Democrats do favor though, basically across the board and around the country. And it's called off cycle election scheduling. Yeah, that's when, if you may notice that there'll be an election and you're like, what, there's an election coming up.

Well, why haven't I heard anything about it? It's because it might be for the city council or the local, you know, it's very much local, locally based. And Democrats, they know that those are not very heavily voted. You know, it's a very low voter turnout for that. So if it's a referendum on something

that has to deal with the teachers or a specific union or something, they know about it and they're really gonna turn out to vote and basically have that one in the bag. Right, and teachers unions and city workers unions and basically any unions typically are democratic leaning, right? Democrat leaning. So through this off cycle election scheduling, by cutting down on voter participation, they're increasing the impact that these Democrat leaning groups have on

that vote, right? Well, yeah, because everyone wants a consolidated elections, like you pull people, you pull people. Sure. And everyone will say, you know, I'd kind of really rather just vote on everything all at once. Right. But this idea of controlling local elections, especially local school boards, leads to accusations of controlling, developing minds of America's children. So, Republicans have taken notice of this strategy, and this is from this great article from

Eaton Hirsch from 538. And he talks about a political scientist named Sarah Anziah, who was studying this. And she found that between 2001 and 2011, over 200 bills aimed at consolidating elections, getting rid of off-cycle elections, were floated across the country, half of them specifically focused on moving school board election dates, but only 25 became law.

Most of the time, the bills were sponsored by Republicans and killed by democratic pushes. So there is definitely voter suppression techniques. And apparently, the Democrats will say, well, you know what? People who aren't that informed aren't going to turn out for these off-cycle elections anyway. That's good. And people say, wait a minute, wait a minute. That's the same criticism. The same justification that the GOP uses

to justify their voter suppression techniques. And you're using it for yourself. So that really sucks when people do that. What is that called hypocrisy? I think that's a word. So this is all still happening. I mean, a lot of these examples are kind of throughout history. This is still going on.

And especially after the 2000 election and this most recent one, it's pretty clear that like a few thousand votes can swing in election. And so this stuff matters. To fight it and whoever's trying to suppress votes, it can make a difference. Right. And so specifically, well, there's this one study that found after that huge surge. So you remember after the 15th amendment was passed, where... Oh, I remember.

So the black population of men at least suddenly had the right to vote. It threatened the status quo. So the status quo, the establishment, went to come up with new loopholes and issues to make barriers to voting, right? Yeah. After the 2008 election, there was a huge surge in African-American voting, threatened the status quo. So the establishment came up with new loopholes, right? And there was a study from the University of Massachusetts.

It should be totally disregarded because that's an elite academic education and therefore liars. But they did a study that the more states saw increases in minority and low income voter turnout, the more likely it was to have laws floated that pushed back on voting rights, that cut voting rights during this 2013 study. And apparently there is this wave of voter ID laws specifically that just hit the country after the 2010 elections, there's 2010 bloodbaths. The country was suddenly just flooded with state and local bills that sought to require voter ID, right?

And it came out of nowhere seemingly. Somebody, this group called News 21, like a journalism student who did an investigation under the auspices of the Carnegie Night Journalism Foundation, they traced this back to Alec, the American Legislative Exchange Council. And they deserve a podcast themselves. Sure. For sure. But basically they're a group that was founded, I think, back in the 70s or 80s that brings

together elected officials in the United States who pay something like $100 and dues every two years with corporations that pay thousands and thousands of dollars in dues every year. And they get them together and they say, hey, what do you need to make business easier for you? Oh, well, it would be great if we could get the Democrats to not vote quite so easily. So let's come up with some voter ID laws. They come together, they draft model legislation.

And then the Alec members go back to their various state legislatures or national legislatures and say, hey, I've got an idea. Here's a bill. Let's pass it. And so from this 2009 meeting in Atlanta, actually, a draft voter ID legislative model was produced, and it suddenly just appeared everywhere around the country starting in about 2010. Yeah. So apparently that's what's going on right now. That's behind this current wave of, especially voter ID laws, but also voter suppression laws

that are going on. Like the history in this country of voter suppression is pretty shameful, but it's even more shameful that we're doing it again, it seems. Yeah, North Carolina is a pretty good example of recent years in 2013. They, there was a law that led by the GOP that did a bunch of things, it eliminated same day voter registration, cut a full week of early voting. A barred voters from casting a ballot outside their home precinct. They said you could no longer straight ticket vote.

And then they got rid of a program that would pre-register high school students who would be voting age by election day. Scrap. Right. High school students that wanted to vote that would would pre-register them, said no. Too dangerous. Yeah. So, and had one of the most strict voter ID requirements in the country, this one actually

went to court, and it was struck down, and the judge ruled that it quote, I'm sorry, that the intention to suppress African American voters was quote, with almost surgical precision. And the court noted that lawmakers first studied which racial demographics use which voting methods then move to eliminate those favored by black residents. So like they actually found out they did these studies and looked at the data and said, all right, this is how black people are voting in North Carolina. So let's try and make that much more difficult for them to do so. I think the judge that overruled or struck down that, those, that basket of laws also said

that it read like it was written in 1901. Yeah. So North Carolina got panced in front of everybody because I guess they were too aggressive, but plenty, plenty of other states were able to pass new laws of varying strictness as far as voting suppression goes since 2011. Well, North Carolina just got panced this week for the racial gerrymandering. Yeah, gerrymandering is another episode we need to do too. Yeah. So, um, what, the whole thing comes down to, I think we said earlier to Chuck is with these

laws, right? There's, there's kind of a litmus test that's emerged are, are the results of these laws more likely to be to, to prevent voter fraud or to suppress votes. And ironically, it seems like it's going to be Donald Trump's commission that could conceivably put an end to this debate with what they find with the voter fraud investigation, which seriously, I cannot tell you how interested I am in finding out what they find and hearing all the grizzly details from it. You think it'll be on the note or on the up and up?

I don't know, but I don't know. If it's not, we'll hear all about it. I can tell you that. Yeah. I don't know, man. I'm just, I'm very curious to see what they, what they find or even if it just falls away. I think the worst thing for this would be if it's just allowed to just, just fall to the wayside. Because I mean, if we can get it out in the open and discussed and investigated and all that kind of stuff, I mean, who knows? Maybe they, maybe they did. What if they legitimately found that massive voter fraud was a huge problem?

Well, then sure, maybe we should have voter ID laws. Who knows? But if they find that that's not the case, then we can say, all right, this law is going to suppress votes. There's no such thing as massive voter fraud. So this law should be struck down. Just let people vote. Yeah. You know, I agree. Like who is one person to say, you know, that they're not as up on politics and they don't really take the time so they shouldn't be allowed to vote. I mean, that is so anti-American. You have to be an elitist to think like that.

Like that's an elitist thinking, regardless of what your party affiliation is. Yeah. You got anything else? No Well, this is probably the last one will ever be allowed to record so it's been nice Chuck. Yeah, I've enjoyed working with you Been nice, Jerry If you want to know more about voter suppression laws, you can type those words in the search bar at howstuffworks.com And since I said voter suppression,

it's time for listener mail. Yeah, and you know what? Before I do listener mail, for listeners who are upset at us right now, like, send us in a thoughtful, researched email of reputation. You know, that's what I want to see. Yeah, because I like to think like, give me some proof of stuff.

Yeah. All right. Mm-hmm. I'm gonna call this a fan theory. Oh, this is a good one. That you picked out. Yeah. Josh, I really enjoyed your show guys

on the crazy fan theories thought of Chair One that came up with a couple of years ago. It involves, to kill a mockingbird, go set a watchman, which was the famous sequel to that book. And back to the future part one, and back to the future part two, which was the very famous sequel to back to the future part one. Right.

I added that. Nice. Did you know that the Courta House steps in the movie adaptation of Mockingbird, the very same as the Courtaill House in the back to the future movies? I did not know that did you. Well, I didn't. I've been on the Universal Lot and walked those steps though.

So I was just like in my mind, I was thinking, well, it's just a movie lot, dude. So he says, aside from it being on the universal lot, the reason for this has to be that both T'Kill and Mockingbird and back to the future take place in the same town. Oh, that's not true. No, but still. To kill with a chuck. To kill a Mockingbird to fix the town in the 1930s and the trial that exposes the deeply racist tendencies among its people, this is why in 1955, it would have never occurred to a black malt shop worker, I believe Goldie. Was that not right?

Future Mayor Goldie. That he could one day become mayor until some guy from the future accidentally suggests it. This is falling apart for me already. I love this idea. And back to the future two, Marty steals a sports almond act from 2015, which winds up in Biff's hands in 1955, creating an alternate timeline from that point forward. Some 20 years after the killer mockingbird, Scout returns home and goes to a watchman,

but it's set in the alternative timeline, which is why at least one character, Atticus Finch, seems very different. Because it's like racist in the sequel. Yeah, and it's Marty McFly's fault. Ghosts head of watchman was written in 1957. It is the Tequila Mockingbird of the alternate timeline. Tequila Mockingbird was published in 1960, is the version of the book written

in the timeline Marty fixes when he burns the Almanac at the end of Back to the Future 2. I'm completely lost on that one. And he says, how fitting that GoSeta Watchman was published in 2015. And that bit of fan-theory-ishness is brought to you by Brian McBourney. Nice job, Brian, that was outstanding. It did have its holes. There's a little rough around the edges, but you're using your noodle and I like it. Yeah, that's better than Angel of Lansbury

is a serial killer. It is. If you want, again, touch of this, like Brian did and send us a really cool fan theory, you thought of yourself that holds up. You can send us both Ann Jerry, Ann Nol, and Frank the Chair, an email to Stuff Podcast at HowStuffWorks.com. And as always, join us at our home on the web, StuffYouShadNo.com. Stuff You Should Know is a production of I Heart Radio. For more podcasts, my heart radio, visit the Chelsea Paredi.

Do you feel chronic existential dread but love talking about delicious snacks? Call me! My podcast is relaunching! Do you fear wild, dangerous animals to the point where you're constantly watching attack videos and reading articles about wild animal tech survivors or those who succumb to attack? Call in! We can also discuss reality shows and emergency room footage. Listen to Call Chelsea Paredion, Will Ferrell's Big Money Players Network on the iHeartRadio

app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. It's JoJoCewa, host of the new podcast, JoJoCewa Now. It's time to get real, up close and personal. I'm gonna be talking to you like I'm writing in a journal. You're gonna get all of the tea and all of the scoop. I'm also gonna be talking to my friends, to people I admire,

the people that are trending right now. So you're gonna get like, JoJo Siwa now and like, now what's going on in the world. It's gonna be great. And I really hope you like it. You can listen to JoJo Siwa now on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,

or wherever you listen to podcasts. Hello beautiful people. I'm Saida Garrett, award winning singer-songwriter and passionate knitter. And now, host of the Up-A-D knitter podcast, Celebrity Hobbies Uncovered. I'll be spilling the tea on the hidden talents of your favorite stars. Tune in to the Up-A-D knitter podcast, Celebrity Hobbies Uncovered. With me, Saida Garrett, for a stitch of inspiration and pearls of laughter.

Subscribe now on the iHeart Radio App and Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.