This is a remarkably irresponsible article. One wonders what the goal is here. To ferment an armed uprising? Civil disturbances which would make the 1960’s pale in comparison?

As the United States becomes more diverse and Republicans see their grip on maintaining a white nationalist country slip away

No person who understands this nation believes that the Republicans are a “white nationalist” party.

Gerrymandering, literacy tests, poll taxes, exact match, closing polling stations, requiring IDs, and disenfranchising the formerly and currently incarcerated are just a handful of ways that elected officials have ensured that black and brown and poor Americans are kept from expressing their rightful political opinions, and continue to be considered second class citizens.

An interesting list. There are several different types of allegations represented there, let’s aggregate them.

  1. “Gerrymandering” is (recently) a slanderous term for the Constitutional right of each state to apportion their districts as they see fit. It is ignorant to believe that it is the purvey of one party alone. Massachusetts, for example, is 35% Republican by popular vote. The number of GOP representatives in their House delegation? Zero, for the past two decades.
  2. Literacy tests and poll taxes are illegal and have been for half a century. This is a straw man designed to inflation the emotions of the ignorant.
  3. Until recently, both parties have believed that a felony should rightly disenfranchise an individual from voting. However, one party now sees felons as a new identity group for their tent; it is irresponsible to suggest that allowing felons to vote is anything but a craven political maneuver.
  4. Exact match, closing polling stations, and requiring ID’s does not prevent anyone from voting. It is telling that whenever challenged to come up with a substantive list of people who wanted to vote and have been denied because of any of these vehicles, you hear the sound of <crickets>.

Finally, it must be mentioned that measures which make voting less convenient for the poor affect white people in almost the same numbers as minorities; about 45% of the poor people in the country are white, after all.

I sense that the author of the article knows all these things, but doesn’t care. Facts should never get in the way of the preferred narrative.

they need to stop playing defense and make sweeping changes to our voting system following November’s midterm elections.

Let’s do so. The first changes we need are to bring our elections up to UN standards. There are several things we need to do, therefore:

  1. National Photo ID requirement. Positive visual ID is an international standard; the SCOTUS has ruled that as long as the ID is freely available, it does not represent an impediment to voting.
  2. Remove all partisans from the voting process. The US is unique in that at almost every stage of the vote gathering, movement, and tabulation processes, partisans are involved. The problem is not limited to a candidate being also the state Sect. of State.
  3. Establish clear national standards on how voting machines can and can not be networked, how votes can be audited, how recounts are managed, how deadlines are enforced, and a host of other things which today are left up to the states and in many cases, the county. (Looking at you, Broward.)
  4. Establish clear chains of custody of all votes, designed to keep ballots out of the hands of partisans. Hire Brinks to pick up all the votes and count them, if you have to.

In 1965 President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law, aiming to finally put an end to rampant discrimination against African-American voters across the country.

Yes. And all these provisions are still in place, which render two of the items in your list of complaints above moot.

But in 2013, the conservative majority Supreme Court, in Shelby County v Holder, decided that the two most important provisions of the Voting Rights Act — the requirement to attain approval before making changes, and the formula for deciding which localities fell under this provision — were declared unconstitutional, allowing jurisdictions free reign over voting practices for the first time since 1965.

False. What Shelby DID do was remove court micromangement of elections in certain jurisdictions which had a history of discrimination. It did not give them the ability to discriminate.

Since that decision, there has been widespread closing of polling stations, especially in neighborhoods with minority populations who disproportionately vote Democratic. The vast majority of the jurisdictions once under federal supervision are in states with GOP leadership. Poll closures lead to increased travel time and longer polling lines, hours in some places.

Yes. Closing of polling stations does not disenfranchise anyone. The government is not required to put a voting machine outside of your house to make it easy on you.

The Supreme Court decided not to block North Dakota’s restrictive voter ID law, which is likely to disenfranchise thousands of Native Americans.

Yes, we’ve heard that. However, voter participation among Native Americans in the S.D. elections was up rather substantially, so that appears to have been a bit of whining.

The most glaring example is the lack of a national holiday for our voting day, not to mention holding it on a weekday.

That would be an awfully good idea.

How many Americans legitimately have the option to take time off from work to go vote? Throw in lack of access to transportation, polling places being far away, lines taking hours, and to the average working American it’s just not feasible.

Now we’re back to blurring the between the ability to vote, and how convenient it is. Don’t do that.

His office has stalled more than 53,000 voter applications, which includes a disproportionately high number of black voters for not having an “exact match” on documentation, and purged over 100,000 more voters for not voting in past elections.

He did so according to well defined state law; those laws have been in place for decades. It is disingenuous to use the term “his office” to mislead; “his office” was following the law of the State of Georgia, both in the “exact match” and the voter purge (90% of which were purged because they were dead.)

Following the midterms, they need to reinstate an expanded federal Voting Rights Act that requires oversight for every locality and state’s voting practices. We need to implement automatic voter registration at 18, move election day to a weekend and make it a federal holiday, offer mail in or smartphone votes for those who can’t or don’t want to vote in person, allow the current and formerly incarcerated to vote as elections affect them too, and offer some kind of monetary incentive.

  1. Added oversight, auto voter reg, election day a holiday or weekend — all good ideas.
  2. Mail/smartphone/internet voting has huge chain of custody and security issues. Bad idea.
  3. Incarcerated — a topic for debate. There are pros and cons to the matter.
  4. Monetary incentive or penalty — nutso idea. Prima facie.

Free markets, free minds. Question all narratives. If you think one political party is right and the other party is evil, the problem with our politics is you.