During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on voting rights, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked Georgia activist Stacey Abrams about her state’s controversial new election law.
Video transcription
JOHN CORNYN: My first question is for Miss Abrams. Miss Abrams, this is the Georgia election law that Jones spoke about – is it racist legislation?
STACEY ABRAMS: I think there are components of it that are really racist, because they use racial animus as a means of targeting the behaviors of certain voters in order to eliminate them – or limit their participation in elections.
JOHN CORNYN: So you think the Georgian legislature has made deliberate attempts to suppress the minority vote?
STACEY ABRAMS: Yes.
JOHN CORNYN: Georgia has a no-vote provision in that law. As Miss Jones said, I certainly believe in her written statement that Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and New York have no absentee votes. Are the voting laws in Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and New York racist?
STACEY ABRAMS: I would say they are behind the eight ball and need to be improved. And that is why I support the provisions of the voting rights for the People’s Law, which would extend the access to the vote of the absent without excuses. But as I explained earlier, this is how these behaviors are targeted. The state of Georgia targeted communities that used these resources for the first time for their benefit. And so, after 15 years of Republican-dominated use of absentee voting, he suddenly changed his mind about utility, processing, timeliness, and ability …
JOHN CORNYN: So you think … excuse me. We only have five minutes to ask questions, so if you would answer my question. So, just to be clear, you think that Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and New York, which have more restrictive votes in their absence, you think those election laws are racist.
STACEY ABRAMS: Senator, I’m answering your question. Your question is …
JOHN CORNYN: No, Miss Adams, you get along. Could you answer yes or no?
STACEY ABRAMS: I’m not. Sir, I’m not upset. I state very precisely that I believe that restrictive voting laws should be addressed by the People’s Act. I think Georgia’s decision …
JOHN CORNYN: So to be clear, whether they’re racist or not, you just … you think they need to be changed because you don’t agree with them, right?
STACEY ABRAMS: No, that’s not what I said.
JOHN CORNYN: K
STACEY ABRAMS: I said that those laws that were changed in 2021 in response to increased use by people of color – laws that were implemented by Republicans 15 years ago and were perfectly satisfied with the usefulness of those laws until they were successfully used by people of color – intention matters.
JOHN CORNYN: And you think …
STACEY ABRAMS: And the intention behind these laws …
JOHN CORNYN: Think so–
STACEY ABRAMS: –material in the state of Georgia.
JOHN CORNYN: Do you think voter identification requirements are racist?
STACEY ABRAMS: No, sir. I’ve always said that – in fact, I’ve written a book about it –
JOHN CORNYN: Don’t restrict this …
STACEY ABRAMS: – that they support voter identification.
JOHN CORNYN: Doesn’t that restrict voting, the requirement for a voter ID?
STACEY ABRAMS: I support voter identification. What I object to are the restrictive forms of voter identification that limit who is allowed to use their identifications and that create an increasingly narrow text …
JOHN CORNYN: And Georgia offers a– so you can use a free ID or a utility bill or something. So you don’t think Georgia law restricts voting because of the voter identification requirement if I …
STACEY ABRAMS: That’s not what I said, sir. What I have said is that the absentee ballot requirement that now adds the voter ID to an exceptionally rare use, as it will now push nearly 200,000 voters who do not have access or do not currently have those ballots. identity in the process.
JOHN CORNYN: So, the ballot …
STACEY ABRAMS: And they are disproportionately black people.
JOHN CORNYN: Sometimes he is racist, other times he is not racist?
STACEY ABRAMS: Intention always matters, sir. And that is the purpose of this conversation. This is the point of Jim Crow’s narrative, that Jim Crow did not simply look at activities. He looked at the intention. If you forget the behavior. And it targeted behaviors that were disproportionately used by people of color.
JOHN CORNYN: Did you know that Gallup says that 69% of black voters support electoral identity and 75% of voters in general?
STACEY ABRAMS: Sir, I am among those who support the electoral identity. I never objected to voter identification. I oppose the adaptation and narrow narrowing of the permissive capacity …
JOHN CORNYN: So do you agree with the voter ID in some circumstances and not in others?
STACEY ABRAMS: That’s not what I said, sir. I said–
JOHN CORNYN: No, you said it on purpose. So the unintentional ballot is okay?
STACEY ABRAMS: No, sir. I did not say that.
JOHN CORNYN: Good–
STACEY ABRAMS: Senator–
JOHN CORNYN: Mr.–
STACEY ABRAMS: –I’m glad to answer your questions.
JOHN CORNYN: Miss Jones …
STACEY ABRAMS: But if you’re going to …
JOHN CORNYN: “I have a question for you in the time left.”
STACEY ABRAMS: – characterizes my answers differently, which is inappropriate.