We are going to tackle a pet peeve of mine in this breakdown. I know I have said in the past I don’t like it when an outlet cites itself, but what happens when an outlet cites another outlet? That either be pushing false or inaccurate information, or blatantly ignoring the actual source material.
In this case, it seems The Hill ignored the GA voting bill, opting to paraphrase The New York Times, a paper known to have strong liberal leanings and has been caught on several occasions falsely reporting events. This never sits well with me.
Why cite another outlet when the source material can be found by going to the government website and reading it?
You see how they leave out the boxes were not standard in GA? Do you notice how they leave out the boxes were a provision to ease the strain of long lines during COVID due to tight restrictions on the number people allowed in a building. The boxes were set to expire after the election. This means the boxes would not be there at all if not for the bill.
They are not getting rid of all the boxes. They are, in fact, allowing some to remain for future elections after COVID is no longer deemed a pandemic. So, they are adding to the ways you can cast a vote instead of taking the temporary provision away.
Many seem to think the number of boxes is being reduced. If you look at from the COVID provision, that would be correct. However, since they were not there before COVID, you can’t take something away that was not there historically. They are adding to the voting process, not taking away from it.
If you wish to see more about the bill it is linked in this article.
Article cited in the post: