Skip to content

Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
  • The Feed
Menu

“[Bipartisan Group of] Local Election Officials in Georgia Oppose G.O.P. Election Bill”

Posted on March 30, 2022March 30, 2022 by yellowdogrising

NY Times: “A year ago, when Georgia Republicans passed a mammoth law of election measures and voting restrictions, many local election officials felt frustrated and sidelined, as their concerns about resources, ballot access and implementation went largely ignored.

This year, Republicans have returned with a new bill — and the election officials are pushing back.

A bipartisan coalition of county-level election administrators — the people who carry out the day-to-day work of running elections — is speaking out against the latest Republican measure. At a legislative hearing on Monday, they warned that the proposal would create additional burdens on a dwindling force of election workers and that the provisions could lead to more voter intimidation.

“You’re going to waste time, and you’re going to cause me to lose poll workers,” said Joel Natt, a Republican member of the Forsyth County board of elections, referring to a provision in the bill that he said would force workers to count hundreds of blank sheets of paper. “I have 400 poll workers that work for our board. That is 400 people that I could see telling me after May, ‘Have a nice life,’ and it’s hard enough to keep them right now.”

Among other provisions, the bill would expand the reach of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation over election crimes; limit private funding of elections; empower partisan poll watchers; and establish new requirements for tracking absentee ballots as they are verified and counted.

The bill passed the Georgia House this month, roughly two weeks after it was first introduced. Initially, the State Senate appeared set to pass the measure at a similar speed. The state’s legislative session ends on April 4, giving lawmakers less than a week to pass the bill.

But county-level election officials worked behind the scenes, in letters and phone calls to legislators, expressing their concerns about the bill and dissatisfaction that they had not been consulted in the drafting process.”

Archives

  • May 2025 (27)
  • April 2025 (58)
  • March 2025 (45)
  • February 2025 (52)
  • January 2025 (55)
  • December 2024 (33)
  • November 2024 (55)
  • October 2024 (56)
  • September 2024 (53)
  • August 2024 (46)
  • July 2024 (72)
  • June 2024 (38)
  • May 2024 (41)
  • April 2024 (49)
  • March 2024 (54)
  • February 2024 (44)
  • January 2024 (54)
  • December 2023 (41)
  • November 2023 (46)
  • October 2023 (53)
  • September 2023 (41)
  • August 2023 (50)
  • July 2023 (49)
  • June 2023 (52)
  • May 2023 (54)
  • April 2023 (59)
  • March 2023 (71)
  • February 2023 (42)
  • January 2023 (61)
  • December 2022 (48)
  • November 2022 (56)
  • October 2022 (62)
  • September 2022 (38)
  • August 2022 (51)
  • July 2022 (50)
  • June 2022 (60)
  • May 2022 (66)
  • April 2022 (67)
  • March 2022 (74)
  • February 2022 (54)
  • January 2022 (56)
  • December 2021 (59)
  • November 2021 (37)
  • October 2021 (58)
  • September 2021 (54)
  • August 2021 (54)
  • July 2021 (55)
  • June 2021 (59)
  • May 2021 (61)
  • April 2021 (61)
  • March 2021 (79)
  • February 2021 (67)
  • January 2021 (28)

Paid for by the Yellow Dog PAC and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.