One odd thing about Texas suing other states is that it seems to call for something that I would actually like: a national, federally supported and federally enforced, set of voting standards.
I disagree (I think) with the people bringing the case about what those standards should be, but I do agree with the basis of the case: Voters in one state are harmed when voters in other states are harmed. When Texas refuses to provide on-line registration (or same-day registration, or to allow citizens who have completed their sentences after felony convictions to register, or to have enough polling places and ballot boxes near to where people live, etc, etc) it does harm to me as a voter in Connecticut—both because in practice that prevents the popular election of Democratic Senators and electors who would pass legislation that I think is superior, and because my own participation in federal self-government is intrinsically harmed when voting is suppressed anywhere in the country. My confidence in my own vote being fairly counted would be harmed by wide-spread fraud and corruption elsewhere (if it did occur, as the lawsuit doesn’t actually allege). And of course a corrupt local or state government with officials who are willing to subvert democracy in their own state is going to affect neighboring states and all states.
It’s not worth thinking about the lawsuit (I hope) but it is worth thinking about whether we as a nation would like to have that national set of voting rights and standards.
Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.
I would like to have some national set of voting rights and standards as a floor, but I also like the fact that (for example) Oregon has had universal mail-in voting because it makes it easier to show that it’s not a crazy idea. I like that Maine can experiment with ranked-choice voting, and that Harris County TX can create drive-through voting during a pandemic to facilitate voting.
I’m not sure if everything can be easily aligned to greater/lesser participation, greater/lesser ease of voting, more/fewer obstacles. It seems obvious to me that we shouldn’t ever change the rules mid-election in any direction that makes it harder to vote for people who might have made different choices if the rules had been set ahead of time, or that invalidates votes already cast, but not as obvious whether we can always tell if that would be the effect. That’s what a functional VRA and Justice Department could ascertain, but we can only get one of those back at most.