Even as some states and localities are “reopening” businesses and public spaces, it is likely that the COVID-19 pandemic will still be with us in November when Americans will elect a president, the entire membership of the U.S. House and more than a third of the U.S. Senate.

It is past time for Congress to require states to expand opportunities for voting by mail and early voting — and to help pay for those changes — so that Americans on Nov. 3 aren’t faced with a choice between protecting their health and exercising the most important right of citizens in a democracy.

That was the grim dilemma encountered by voters in Wisconsin’s April 7 election, when — despite social distancing and other precautions — dozens of voters and poll workers may have been infected at polling places. It’s vital that Congress act now to prevent voters across the country from encountering a similar situation in November, which could lower turnout as well as spread disease.

Congress included $400 million for state election systems in a coronavirus stimulus package approved in March. But that sum falls far short of what is required to make it possible for states — especially those that lack experience with extensive voting by mail — to prepare for an election in which most votes might have to be cast by that method.

The House passed a new coronavirus relief bill Friday that would give state election systems $3.6 billion to respond to the pandemic — a sum much closer to estimates by outside election experts of what will be required to conduct elections during this crisis. But Congress must act quickly; according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice, states will have to start preparing this month if they’re going to be ready for voting by mail in the fall.

It’s also important that states take precautions to protect the health of voters who will cast their ballots in person, an option that must remain for disabled voters and those with unreliable mail delivery. Generous arrangements for early voting will reduce congestion at polling places, and election officials also must be prepared to sanitize those locations to protect the health of voters and poll workers.

Shoring up election systems to respond to the pandemic should be a bipartisan cause. But while some Republican governors recognize the importance of expanding voting by mail, Republicans in Washington haven’t risen to the occasion. Some GOP senators have expressed concern about a “federal takeover of the election process.” President Trump has called voting by mail a “terrible thing,” complained that it hurts Republicans, and suggested without offering proof that expanding the practice could lead to massive fraud. (Never mind that Trump voted by absentee ballot in Florida’s primary.)

Alarmism about a “federal takeover” of elections ignores the Constitution‘s instruction that, while states are responsible for the “time, places and manner” of congressional elections, Congress may “at any time make or alter such regulations.” Congress also has legislated regulations for presidential elections. It would be shameful if Republicans refused to exercise that authority to make it easier for Americans to vote during a public-health crisis. But then, the GOP in recent years has been the party trying to make it harder to cast a ballot.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who along with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) introduced a separate bill to help states expand voting by mail, suggested that there could be negotiations with Republicans if they showed interest, though she said she would oppose any provisions that would suppress the right to vote.

Some compromises might be acceptable. While the problem of fraud in absentee voting is vastly exaggerated, occasional abuses have occurred. Some Republicans might be willing to support expanded voting by mail in exchange for a requirement that states minimize the possibility of fraud and error, including by placing limits on so-called “ballot harvesting,” the collection and delivery of multiple ballots by activists or party members. That’s a reasonable compromise.

But if Republicans in the Senate erect too many obstacles to an expansion of voting by mail and other measures to safeguard voting in this extraordinary emergency, they will face the judgment of history — and of the voters they disenfranchised or endangered. They will play politics with this issue at their peril.

Members of Congress of both parties have recognized that the COVID-19 contagion requires new thinking. If the damage inflicted on the economy by the virus justified a massive federal response, so does the threat the pandemic poses to democracy. Time is running out.

• Los Angeles Times editorial board

Recommended for you

(65) comments

David Hardee

Never Let a Serious Crisis Go To Waste,” Rahm Emanuel, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama - advocates of Saul Alinsky.

See the plot in these deceptive liberal agendas. This one is for an eventual FEDERAL ballot and eradication of the State's rights. A step on the path of getting rid of the Electoral College.

Los Angeles and Galveston are hundreds of miles apart and even further extremes in social makeup and mores. Let's keep it that way.

Anyone wanting to vote by mail can apply with an ABBM form. There must be more citizen effort to vote than simply having respiration. If you want to vote you can.

These pandering liberal politicians want a citizenry that grovels and has no initiative, Federalism is the progressive liberals utopia. Liberal is the political word for nothingness. No borders, no discriminate thinking, mores are whatever you like, don't judge, perversion and addictions are society's fault and the village will raise or allow you to kill your baby.

There is a slippery slope and we are on it.

Iris M Crow

Thanks David for stating the facts.

The article is definitely FAKE NEWS!

Ray Taft

There is NO WAY (ZERO!) that Mail-In Ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent.

Mail boxes will be robbed, ballots will be forged & even illegally printed out & fraudulently signed. Democrats will only count the ballots marked for Democrats. Ballots for Republicans will disappear and not be counted.

The Governor of California is already cheating by sending Ballots to millions of people, anyone living in the state, no matter who they are, or how they got there, and even those who have been dropped from the roles. Postal workers report multiple ballots stacking up in mailboxes waiting to be stolen and fraudulently returned.

That will be followed up with Ballot Harvesting - Democrats telling people, many of whom have never even thought of voting before, how, and for whom, to vote. Even paying them to vote as they’re told.

It would be an all-out Rigged Election in favor of cheating Democrats and the end of democracy. No one who wins a fraudulent election would need to be obeyed by the ripped-off populace. Chaos and widespread civil disobedience will ensue.

Emile Pope

Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.

Mayor: What do you mean, "biblical"?

Dr. Raymond Stantz: What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor, real wrath of God type stuff.

Dr. Peter Venkman: Exactly.

Dr. Raymond Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!

Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...

Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave!

Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!

Mayor: All right, all right! I get the point!

Who ya gonna call?

Carlos Ponce

"Who ya gonna call?" REPUBLICANS to fix the problem! Don't worry, Emile, "Things are getting better" - President Richard Starkey in "The Postman".

Iris M Crow

Thanks Ray for telling it like it is!

The article is definitely FAKE NEWS!

Carlos Ponce

I suggest reading the article about mail in ballot fraud in Harris County:


Retired teacher and citizen journalist Colleen Vera alleges mail in voter fraud with ties to Democrat Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.

Carlos Ponce

And from Bailey's favorite NPR:

"Election experts say Trump is partially correct, that there is slightly more fraud in mail-voting than in-person voting."

"Where there is fraud in the system, it really seems to be in mail balloting," said Lonna Atkeson, a political science professor at the University of New Mexico. "There's some, there's not a lot. I think there's a little bit."


Do away with mail-in balloting for the elderly, handicapped and those away from their home state? No. But limit it to those already prescribed by law. Increasing the number increases the fraud potential.

Jim Forsythe

At a White House press briefing in early April, Donald Trump denounced mail-in balloting as "horrible" and "corrupt." It led a reporter to remind the president of an inconvenient detail: he voted by mail in the most recent election cycle.

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany has voted by mail in every Florida election she has participated in since 2010. 12 out of 12 times.

If you want to vote in one state, even while living and working in a different state, Team Trump is comfortable with you casting a ballot through the mail. If you want to avoid a deadly pandemic and prefer to cast a ballot from the safety of your own home, Team Trump is apparently convinced you're participating in some kind of nefarious scheme.

If one is using mail-in balloting, how can they say it has to be causing major fraud?

Carlos Ponce

"If one is using mail-in balloting, how can they say it has to be causing major fraud?" Jim, under CURRENT LAW, Trump is entitled to vote by mail. He's OVER 65. He was out of his state of registration for to vote in person. Pointing out Trump's vote by mail is a red herring argument. They have enough problems with the current load of legal mail ins . By tossing it open to anyone of voting age you increase the problem inviting more mistakes to be made.

Did you check the link to the mail in ballot harvesting in Harris County, Texas?

Jim Forsythe

How many people have been convicted of mail-in ballot voter fraud in the last 2 years? If one complains about the mail-in ballot, but he and his workers use it, it t's is more of the do as I say. and not as I do. Why is it more important, a person that's out of state votes versus one that would be risking being exposed to a virus? One has the potential of a person becoming sick or worse.

In the 2016 election, how many cases of fraud were proven? Out of 136,639,786 votes cast in 2016, how many cases of fraud were proven?

Who has a problem with the load of mail-ins? If mail-in voting is to much trouble, they can always use computer voting.

Colorado, Oregon, and Washington state -- have all-mail voting systems in place. They do not find it's to much trouble.

Carlos Ponce

"How many people have been convicted of mail-in ballot voter fraud in the last 2 years?" Quite a few with more pending. Wait and see.

Jim Forsythe

Quite a few is how many? Cases pending are not convictions.

Carlos Ponce

"Quite a few is how many?" TOO MANY!

Jim Forsythe

And that number would be?

TOO MANY! is not an answer, just a dodge.

Of all the Millions of votes cast, how many people have been convicted of mail-in -ballot fraud?

Carlos Ponce

"Of all the Millions of votes cast,...." Any number of just convictions would be misleading, Jim. You would have to look at each case to see how many charges of voter fraud each person was convicted of. Even that would be misleading. There was a woman suspected of hundreds of fraudulent mail-in votes but they only sought a trial on a few. Why pursue the rest when the prison time would go into the next century? Just convict her on the most obvious. Now multiply that by each conviction.

Jim Forsythe

And that number would be? TOO MANY! is not an answer, just a dodge.

This is the same kind of response the President gives when asked what convicted person he is talking about.

If you can not find out how many people were convicted of mail-in-voter fraud, just say so. The number is low, so look hard.

Let me help you with a case. The former head of Colorado's GOP was indicted and convicted of mail-in voter fraud when he filled in his estranged wife's mail-in ballot, signed her name, and mailed it in. So the only conviction in Colorado for Voter fraud was committed by the head of the GOP

To make it easy on you, list all that have been convicted in Texas of mail-in-voter fraud.

Suspected is not convicted, and the number of convictions and counts they are convicted of is easy to find.

Carlos Ponce

Poor Jim doesn't quite get it! Supposed Jim Forsythe harvested 100 ballots. Out of those the Grand Jury felt a dozen were sufficient to go to trial. Jim hires an excellent attorney who plea bargains it down to just 8. Jim is found guilty. The eight counts will put him away for an adequate amount of time.

Let's see. ONE person convicted on EIGHT counts but with ONE HUNDRED fraudulent votes that don't go to press or records since grand jury material cannot be looked at.

Bottom line, the number of convictions will not tell us the complete picture.

Jim Forsythe

Since you do not want to answer, this try it a different way. How many people were convicted of mail-in ballot fraud, ballot harvesting?

Carlos Ponce

Once again, Jim doesn't get it. Without access to the grand jury material one cannot arrive at the number of fraudulent mail-in ballots. The number of convictions and charges will prove insufficient.

Jim Forsythe

How many people have been convicted of mail-in ballot fraud, ballot harvesting?

Carlos Ponce

Look it up.

Jim Forsythe

You are the one that keeps saying many, many people have committed mail-in-voter fraud. This is your chance to prove your point.

Carlos Ponce

Look it up. You're the one who wants to know.

Jim Forsythe

The answer is very, very few.

So there must be a different reason why some people do not want people to be safer, spend less time voting.

More and more states, Republican and Democrat are going to mail-in-voting because of these and other reasons.

Trump's home state allows it.

Some states are also allowing voting by computer.

Carlos Ponce

"Election experts say Trump is partially correct, that there is slightly more fraud in mail-voting than in-person voting."


Carlos Ponce

"Trump's home state allows it." Do you mean Florida?

"The voter must affirm that an emergency exists that keeps the voter from being able to vote at his or her assigned polling place."

Jim Forsythe

"There is slightly more fraud" is how many cases?

Is it one? If not, what is the number?

Joe Mancuso

It's interesting that Carlos quoted this article twice in this thread, but neither time did he include the full quote from https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/07/829323152/fact-check-is-mail-ballot-fraud-as-rampant-as-president-trump-says-it-is.

Quotes from Carlos:


Carlos Ponce May 27, 2020 11:49am

"Election experts say Trump is partially correct, that there is slightly more fraud in mail-voting than in-person voting."

"Where there is fraud in the system, it really seems to be in mail balloting," said Lonna Atkeson, a political science professor at the University of New Mexico. "There's some, there's not a lot. I think there's a little bit."


And, later Carlos requoted the first sentence again.


Carlos Ponce May 29, 2020 1:16pm

"Election experts say Trump is partially correct, that there is slightly more fraud in mail-voting than in-person voting."


However, if you read the article, you'll see that Carlos left out one sentence from the paragraph he was quoting.

The sentence that Carlos left out comes immediately after the sentence that starts with "Election experts..." and immediately before the sentence that starts with "Where there is..." and is as follows:


"But they caution that both can be done safely and securely, and that election fraud is extremely rare in all instances."


Now, why would Carlos leave just that sentence out when he's arguing that mail-in voting is so bad. Doesn't really support your argument, does it Carlos!

Now, I know that you'll once again respond that I'm "Leftist Joe" or "Liberal Joe", that I'm a Trump hater, or that I'm in favor of abortion, or dare me to tell you who I voted for or some other deflection or name calling, so I thought I'd save you the trouble and just go ahead and list those out for you.

Carlos, you don't get to pick and choose just the sentences that support your argument.

Carlos Ponce

Trying to make it short since many of the Liberal forum posters complain my posts are too long. But notice I include the link so you can see the entire statement in context.

Carlos Ponce

Jim posts, "Is it one? If not, what is the number?" Ask NPR. It comes from their article.

Joe Mancuso

Really, that's the best you could come up with!

And I do appreciate that you provided a reference so that I could determine that you were cherry picking!

And I really doubt that 21 more words would have made a difference, except that it would have nullified your use of the article to back up your argument.

You do realize that when you get caught doing this, it casts a shadow on every post that you make or have made.

I didn't think that a Christian conservative would attempt to mislead everyone just so it would look like his argument was correct. Shame!

Carlos Ponce

The truth isn't good enough for you? And there were more than 21 words on that web page. More than one paragraph on that web page.

Joe Mancuso

The truth is always good enough for me, you just didn't supply the whole truth.

And the 21 words were from the only sentence that you left out when you cherry picked the other 3 sentences. Poor attempt to deflect. Just admit it, you got caught cherry picking.

And I really thought that you could come up with something original instead of once again resorting to "the Liberal forum posters." Last resort when you can't argue a point, use name calling!

Most people get it. Some don't. Try harder or have someone explain it to you.

Carlos Ponce

"you just didn't supply the whole truth" Not true. since I provided a source link, everything was there.

Joe Mancuso

Yeah, you keep trying to tell yourself that. Shameful!

Carlos Ponce

Liberal Joe strikes out again!

Emile Pope


JD Arnold

I thought I heard it reported somewhere that the Texas supreme court ruled that anyone wanting to claim the corona virus as a disability thereby electing to vote by mail may do so and it cannot be challenged. Am I wrong on this?

JD Arnold

From an all republican State Supreme Court "When voters cite disability to request an absentee ballot, they're not required to say what the disability is. The voters simply check a box on the application form, and if their application is properly filled out, locals officials are supposed to send them a ballot. The state ultimately conceded that officials can't reject those voters." I understand that this decision is headed to the federal 5th circuit appeals court and ultimately on to the Supreme court. (source Texas Tribune).

Carlos Ponce

The lines you cite are not in the latest Texas Supreme Court decision. What is there is:

"Under the Texas Election Code, qualified voters are eligible to vote by mail only in five specific circumstances. One is if the voter has a 'disability' as defined by statute."


Texas Statute Sec. 82.002. DISABILITY. (a) A qualified voter is eligible for early voting by mail if the voter has a sickness or physical condition that prevents the voter from appearing at the polling place on election day without a likelihood of needing personal assistance or of injuring the voter's health. (b) Expected or likely confinement for childbirth on election day is sufficient cause to entitle a voter to vote under Subsection (a).


If you have the Wuhan Coronavirus during election time you qualify for mail-in. Being afraid of contracting the disease is a mental not physical condition. Being afraid of contracting the virus simply means you take the same precautions you would take going shopping.

JD Arnold

Thanks Carlos, so called news reports can be misleading.

Bailey Jones

Here's good interview with someone who actually knows what they're talking about - the Republican Secretary of State who oversees Washington's mail in voting system.


Carlos Ponce

"KUOW news editor Gil Aegerter was poking around on the Washington state elections website when he noticed something strange: You can print out a ballot for anyone, as long as you know their birthday. To demonstrate, he pulls up a ballot for Secretary of State Kim Wyman, who is in charge of elections in Washington.

'It’s pretty easy, a few clicks of the button and I’m there,' Aegerter said.

But Kim Wyman said she's not worried.

'For someone to be able to download one of those, or 10 of these, is kind of irrelevant,' she said.

That's because a signature is required when you return your ballot, which is checked against a copy of your signature that's kept on file. Wyman calls it security 'at the back end.'

Aegerter pulls a copy of Wyman's signature online. Wyman's still not worried.

She points out that forging a ballot would be illegal and could be prosecuted as a Class C felony. I assure her Aegerter didn't go that far."

So Kim Wyman says people won't forge a signature because it's against the law.[rolleyes]

Well someone from Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee's camp hired a previously convicted forger to do precisely that.

Will people not speed because it's against the law too?

Carlos Ponce

Kim Wyman found: "They voted for someone else who had passed away, or they voted more than once. And that was 142 people out of 3.2 million ballots cast."

That's 142 THAT WERE CAUGHT![scared] How about those who weren't caught?

David Hardee

Bailey - out of respect I read the article.

The INTERVIEW produced 2 significant points relevant to mail voting. 1. the turnout for Washington state is in the top 7% of state turnouts - Not the top 7th - just in the top 7% of grouping. 2. the Secretary informed that additional logistics, equipment, and cost of mail-voting will add significantly more personnel and complications.

To those that want to make it so that those unwilling to make an effort to vote able to get a ballot mailed to these lazy and or uninterested citizens I say - "those lazy or uninteresteted citizens if they did return a ballot the quality of their vote is not worth the effort.

Please take a minute and visualize the logistics of mailing out ballots - maintaining names and address files - or do we just mail to all addresses as OCCUPANT and how many OCCUPANT at that address. Some protection from copying with watermarks and a serial number control over duplicates etc. etc.

If you ever managed a project you immediately visualized all the design elements and the implementation steps.

Vigilance to both voter fraud and voter suppression are done, currently. To date neither have been proven to have affected an election out come. Keep up the vigilance till a CITIZEN ID is established and voter ID can be automated with all the economies and protections are easy.

Bailey Jones

David, I'm sorry that you and Carlos don't believe that Texans are smart enough to create a safe and effective mail in voting system, like Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah and Washington have already done. Except for poor Hawaii, all of these states have greater voter turnout than Texas. I happen to believe that the state that put men on the moon, created a fracking industry that turned the oil industry on its head, and leads the country in wind power, is capable of creating the world's finest and most secure mail in voting system and become the nation's leader in voter participation. Can it be done by November? No, of course not. But it can be done. We know more pandemics are coming - let's get started.

Carlos Ponce

They turn a blind eye to mail-in voter fraud in Washington State but "The state of Washington admitted yesterday that it has lost hundreds of millions of dollars to bogus unemployment claims."


So they'll commit fraud for unemployment but not for voting? Seems like they're pleading the Schultz: "I see nothing, I hear nothing. What mail-in ballot fraud?"

Bailey Jones

"They turn a blind eye to mail-in voter fraud in Washington State" - first of all, do you have any proof for this or are you just parroting your president's lies? Secondly - are you saying that the Republican party in Texas - which would be the force behind any electoral change - is also turning a blind eye to voter fraud? Or that they will begin to turn a blind eye to voter fraud if we have mail in ballots? Or that they are just too stupid to create a fraud proof mail in voting system?

Carlos Ponce

The president is not lying.

Bailey Jones

"The president is not lying." - just you, then?

David Hardee

Bailey – After exposure over 80 years on this earth I recognize when the effort to conclude has been exhausted. Here is my last effort in this thread. I will be anxiously awaiting your retort. Thank you for engaging.

I was responding to issues raised by you and others to 1. Voter fraud - 2. Voter suppression – Currently anyone who wants a ballot can get one. Ergo no suppression exists. Also, no voter fraud has been proven to have affected election results. Consequently, no emergency exists. Further, I stated Texas can and will along with all the country developed a more efficient, easier, efficient, and SECURE voting system when the Citizen ID is in effect.

Do you agree: - that those who do not vote are self suppressed by laziness or lack of interest since if they wanted a ballot they can get one? And no evidence voter fraud has affected election results?

Curiously the list of 5 example states with MAIL VOTING you represent as better than Texas – 4 of the 5 are DEMOCRATIC in electoral votes. Also those 4 states legalized recreational marijuana should Texas also follow their lead.

Lowering standards to provide the lazy with voting representation (value) is not going to improve society. It only makes society PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL and lazier. Should we declare laziness a disease or fault of the village and setup and exemption in the Constitution along with gender confusion and sexual orientation?

Bailey Jones

I was ready to engage with you until I got to "Lowering standards to provide the lazy with voting representation". We're done.

Jim Forsythe

You can add these 10 states to the ones that are using mail-in-ballots. Other states may follow.

Governors in Delaware, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, and North Dakota have said voters will receive vote-by-mail ballots for primary elections in June and July, and California Governor Gavin Newsom said earlier this month all California voters will receive vote-by-mail ballots for the general election in November

Michigan became the latest state to allow all voters to vote by mail during November's presidential election

Ohio, the state's primary was changed to allow all voters to cast their ballots by mail. Similarly, state officials in Maryland sent paper ballots to all registered voters.

80% of Arizona voters already receive their ballots by mail.

Carlos Ponce

Not Texas.

Jim Forsythe

If mail-in ballots are not needed, why did the Texas Supreme Court rule remotely and not in person? Voters can stand in long lines being exposed and that's OK, but the Texas Supreme Court can not meet in person. Also, they ruled no jury trials until at least Aug. 1 because of the possible exposure to the coronavirus.

"The Texas Democratic Party, which has filed state and federal lawsuits to expand mail-in voting during the pandemic, criticized the ruling by the all-Republican court, noting that it followed oral arguments held in an online forum last week – instead of inside the Supreme Court’s Austin courtroom – over concerns about coronavirus exposure.

In addition to canceling in-person oral arguments, the Supreme Court issued an emergency order Tuesday extending requirements that most lower-court hearings be held remotely over concerns about the coronavirus. The order also banned jury trials until at least Aug. 1."

Carlos Ponce

"If mail-in ballots are not needed, why did the Texas Supreme Court rule remotely and not in person?" Following the lead of SCOTUS.

Jim Forsythe

So they hide behind a screen and said you do not need to worry because we feel your need to be protected but stand in line anyway.

Its OK if you get sick, but not us.

Carlos Ponce

They're hearing judicial arguments, not voting, Jim. DUH!

See you at the polls in July! Are you voting for Royce West or MJ Hegar to run against Republican John Cronyn?

Jim Forsythe

Carlos, you know very well when the election is. You can not wait until then to prepare for voting by mail for all. If we start in the near future we can.

If they can not hear judicial arguments in person, why should they expect people to vote with the possible exposure? If no jury trial should happen why should a person be forced to vote in person with the risk of becoming sick? This is easy to fix, just let all vote by mail.

Carlos Ponce

Jim posts, "Carlos, you know very well when the election is." Yes, the next time the polls open on Tuesday July 14th. Early voting runs from June 29 to July 6.

Democrats will be selecting candidates for:

U. S. SENATOR - Royce West or Mary “MJ” Hegar

RAILROAD COMMISSIONER - Chrysta Castañeda or Roberto R. “Beto” Alonzo

JUSTICE, 14TH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT, PLACE 7 - Cheri Thomas or Tamika “Tami” Craft

But you already know that since you are up on everything! [innocent] So the question for you is Royce or MJ?

Republicans will be voting for a candidate for:

JUSTICE, 1ST COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT, PLACE 5 - Terry Adams or James Lombardino

The Chronicle recommends Terry Adams but I'm going to examine each candidate.

Jim Forsythe

We do have mail-in balloting in Texas, just not for all.

Carlos Ponce

Let's keep it that way.

Ted Gillis


Carlos Ponce

MJ is a former military pilot and much cuter than Royce. She will be a more formidable opponent for John Cronyn. But her views are still Leftist.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.