Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Texas Democrats block voting restrictions, but amplify dysfunction

Greg Abbott

GOP Gov. Greg Abbott threatened to defund the Texas Legislature after Democrats blocked a restrictive voting measure.

Lynda M. Gonzalez/Getty Images

Partisanship reached a boiling point in Texas over the weekend as Democratic lawmakers took a dramatic step to obstruct a GOP-backed bill that would impose severe limits on voting access.

In the final hours of the legislative session, Democrats staged a dramatic walkout, leaving the state House without a quorum and therefore unable to hold a final vote on the measure. But in doing so, Democrats have only exacerbated the polarization and dysfunction entrenched in the American political system at all levels.

Following last year's tumultuous pandemic-era election, Republican lawmakers have been pushing for stricter voting rules aimed at bolstering election security, even though there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Meanwhile, their Democrat counterparts are trying to expand access to the ballot box. The divergent narratives driven by the two parties have left little room for compromise, furthering political divisions.


While Texas' voting overhaul bill has been stalled by Democrats for now, the GOP has vowed to resurrect it during the special legislative session. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott can call for a special session as soon as this week, but he may wait until later in the summer so legislators can also tackle redistricting.

Abbott, who strongly supported the blocked voting legislation, also threatened to defund the Legislature following the Democrats' walkout. "No pay for those who abandon their responsibilities," he tweeted Monday afternoon.

Predictably, Republican leaders condemned the Democrats while reformers celebrated the walkout.

"This is a victory for all Texas voters!" Grace Chimene, president of the League of Women Voters of Texas, said in a statement. "Texans want elections to be free, fair, and accessible. They want a transparent process they can trust, where Americans have equal freedom to vote, no matter what they look like or where they live, whether in a small Texas town or one of Texas' major metropolitan areas. SB 7 is not what Texas voters want."

Much of the restrictions in the legislation were hashed out at the last minute behind closed doors since the Senate and House passed different versions that needed to be reconciled. Some of the provisions included bans on drive-through and 24-hour voting, new restrictions on vote-by-mail eligibility, new ID requirements for mail voting, limited early voting hours on Sundays, and increased authority for partisan poll watchers.

On Saturday, President Biden denounced the Texas bill, saying it's an attack on the sacred right to vote, much like the legislation passed earlier this year in Georgia and Florida.

"It's part of an assault on democracy that we've seen far too often this year — and often disproportionately targeting Black and Brown Americans," Biden said in a statement.

During the special session, lawmakers will have to start from scratch with the voting legislation, as well as any other bills that did not make it to Abbott's desk. There is concern that the next election overhaul measure could be even more restrictive than the one blocked by Democrats.

Texas is no stranger to blocked legislation. In 2013, then-state Sen. Wendy Davis, a Democrat, famously held a 13-hour filibuster to block a restrictive abortion measure. And in 2003, Democratic lawmakers fled to Oklahoma, beyond the jurisdiction of Texas state police, to block a vote on a Republican-drawn redistricting plan.

Minority party lawmakers have used the lack of a quorum as a political tactic to thwart legislation in other states as well. Earlier this year and in the two previous legislative sessions, Oregon has seen walkouts from Republicans wishing to block bills related to Covid-19 and the environment. A decade ago, Indiana and Wisconsin also saw walkouts from Democratic lawmakers.


Read More

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding
person in red shirt wearing silver bracelet holding red and black metal tool
Photo by Wassim Chouak on Unsplash

Fueling the Future: The Debate Over California’s Gas Tax and Transportation Funding

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looking at social media app icons on a phone

Gen Z is quietly leaving social media as algorithmic feeds, infinite scroll, and addictive platform design fuel anxiety, isolation, and mental health struggles.

Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Gen Z Begs Legislators: Make Social Media Social Again

Lately, it seems like each time I reach out to an old acquaintance through social media, I’m met with a page that reads, “This account doesn’t exist anymore.”

Many Gen-Z’ers are quietly quitting the platforms we grew up on.

Keep ReadingShow less
Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less