Details, details

Is this 1910 all over again?

THIS FIGHT about voting changes in another state—Georgia—for some reason has the attention of the nation. Although other legislatures are tinkering with how to count the vote, Georgia is the topic of columns, TV talking heads and even the president of the United States.

Perhaps it’s because Georgia is a new swing state, and swung in a surprising direction back in November. Whatever the reason, Georgia is always on our minds these days.

The new president and long-time Washington game-player said the proposed changes to Georgia’s voting law make Jim Crow look like Jim Eagle. Apparently somebody on his staff told him that was a good line. But details keep coming about the new law(s). And just a cursory look at the history of Jim Crow proves this is nothing of the sort.

Georgia’s so-called Election Integrity Act of 2021 is controversial. But is it oppressive? Is it discriminatory? Is it Jim Crow?

You can read the law here: arkansasonline.com/41georgia

It’s a little thick. Lawyers write to be legal, not understood. But here is a great explanation by Georgia Public Broadcasting, which, it should be noted, is not Fox News: arkansasonline.com/41voting

Under the new Georgia law, requests for absentee voting ballots have been pushed up from six months before an election to 11 weeks.

Under Jim Crow, in some counties in the South, Black people couldn’t even register to vote. For years, there were whole counties without a single registered Black person on the voting rolls.

Under the new Georgia law, somebody must return the application for an absentee ballot two Fridays before an election, not the Friday before. According to GPB: “Republican sponsors of the bill and local elections officials say this will cut down on the number of ballots rejected for coming in late because of the tight turnaround.”

Also, the signature check—which some journalists have said disproportionately affected minority voters—is replaced by a check of a photo ID. And if a body doesn’t have a driver’s license, the voter can get a state ID, free of charge. And with the right identification numbers, you can do a lot of this online.

Under Jim Crow, some people (and only some; guess who) were required to pay poll taxes and pass literacy tests.

Under the new Georgia law, drop boxes for absentee ballots (which didn’t exist this time last year) are now a part of the law, and are required in each county. The number of boxes is capped at one for each 100,000 residents, or one for every voting site. And it moves them indoors and allows folks to drop off their ballots only during working hours instead of 24/7.

Under Jim Crow, grandfather clauses allowed poor and illiterate white people to vote, but excluded Black voters.

Under the new Georgia law, times the polls are open could change in some counties. Deadlines are clearer for when votes should be counted. This comes on the heels of the last election in which there were complaints about how long it took for the vote to come in. Apparently lawmakers want future elections to be decided as close to election night as possible.

Under Jim Crow, between 1896 and 1910, not a single Black voter could be found on any voting register in North Carolina.

Under the new Georgia law, there will be changes to the State Election Board, and some politicians will play musical chairs. The legislature will probably have more power over elections. The attorney general will set up a complaint hotline. And the election board would have to clear it with lawmakers before settling election lawsuits, etc.

Under Jim Crow, if you weren’t on a voter roll, you couldn’t serve on a jury and you couldn’t run for political office. Black people disappeared from politics. And courtrooms, unless they were defendants.

THERE ARE a lot of jots and tittles to this new Georgia law. Including the infamous detail about not being able to bring water to voters in line, although that was apparently added to prevent electioneering by folks holding signs and bullhorns who would get around the poll distance requirements by carrying around water bottles. Water can be provided by the precinct itself.

The point being, finally: What Georgia’s lawmakers have done is not Jim Crow. It is not close to Jim Crow. It is the opposite of Jim Crow. Those saying otherwise diminish the enormity of the injustices of Jim Crow.

In Washington, D.C., the rule is if you say something three times, it becomes a fact. That might work in Washington, but not in these latitudes.

There will be, should be, a lot of back-and-forth about the new Georgia voting law. Especially when it comes to that part of legislative power over local elections. But normal statehouse politicking in modern America isn’t the same as the wholesale, governmentissued, undisguised racism and oppression that Jim Crow brought to the American South after the Civil War.

Those who keep making that comparison, including the president, are either uniformed or disingenuous. And we doubt they’re uninformed.