Archive for March, 2021

AMD’s DLSS-alternative doesn’t need machine learning to work – PC Gamer

After much pining, AMD PC enthusiastsas well as console gamers, potentiallywill finally be getting FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) this year. That's the red team's answer to Nvidia's DLSS, and could mean ray tracing isn't the restrictive force it is right now for the Radeon RX 6000-series cards. There's been no word as to an exact release date but, at some point in 2021 those harbouring an RDNA2 graphics card will be able to enjoy the new, resolution-based performance improving techwith no need for machine learning.

FSR is AMD's equivalent to Nvidia's DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling) which uses AI to sharpen up frames and stabilise frame rates at higher resolutions, and is essentially what allows GeForce cards to deliver decent performance when using ray traced lighting effects. Though, as AMD's VP of graphics, Scott Herkelman, explains in his recent talk with PCWorld, "you don't need machine learning to do it."

Herkelman admitted there's still some work to be done, but it's coming along well. He explains that the company has made an effort to involve it's followers in the design process, giving them a chance to really influence the direction the company goes with the technology.

This dedication to open development may have hampered the process in terms of speed, but it it means developers are more ready and able to collaborate to improve the tech.

Despite AMD's focus is on getting FSR out to PC gamers first, it should also be rolling out as a cross-platform technology. Meaning this isn't just going to benefit PC gamers, but console gamers too thanks to AMD components being packed inside the likes of the PlayStation 5 and Xbox series X and S.

There was some potential for the FSR feature to have released alongside the Radeon RX 6700 XT, but it seems AMD is waiting for the entire lineup to be availableI use that term looselybefore hitting us with the new tech.

Still, the list of general FidelityFX-supporting games is growing, showing that the forerunner features for FSR are being taken seriously by developers. And, with each step, AMD comes closer to rolling out this impressive-sounding technological development.

Original post:
AMD's DLSS-alternative doesn't need machine learning to work - PC Gamer

Machine Learning Deployment Is The Biggest Tech Trend In 2021 – Analytics India Magazine

What good is an ML model if it isnt fast? doesnt scale? isnt accurate enough? takes weeks to deploy? and costs too much?

Having machine learning in a companys portfolio used to be an investor magnet. Now, the market is bullish on MLaaS, with a new breed of companies offering machine learning services (libraries/APIs/frameworks) to help other companies get their job done better and faster.

According to PwC, AIs potential global economic impact will be worth $15.7 trillion by 2030. And, as interests slowly shift towards MLOps, it is possible that these companies, which promise to scale and accelerate ML deployment, might grab a bigger piece of the pie. Last week, OctoML raised $28 million. The Seattle-based startup offers a machine learning acceleration platform built on top of the open-source Apache TVM compiler framework project. The $28 million Series B funding brings the companys total funding to $47 million.

Image credits: OctoML

90% of machine learning models dont make it to production.

For OctoMLs CEO, Luis Ceze, there is still a significant gap between building a model and making it production-ready. Between rapidly evolving ML models, wrote Ceze in a blog post, ML frameworks and a Cambrian explosion of hardware backends makes ML deployment challenging. It is not easy to make sure your model runs fast enough and to benchmark it across different deployment hardware. Even if your determined machine learning team has hurtled through this gauntlet, they still have to go through a whole different set of challenges to package and deploy at the edge, explained Ceze.

A good performance in ML models requires long hours of manual optimizations. These long hours will then translate into hefty cloud bills. Added to this is the model packaging which varies with devices and platforms. According to Ceze, there are no modern CI/CD integrations to keep up with model changes.

What good is an ML model if it isnt fast? doesnt scale? isnt accurate enough? takes weeks to deploy? and costs too much?, questioned Ceze as he made a case for OctoML.

OctoML addressed these pain points with their open-source machine learning compiler framework Apache TV, which according to the team, has quickly become the go-to solution for developers and ML engineers to maximize ML model performance on any hardware backend. With OctoML we are establishing the first Machine Learning Acceleration Platform that will automatically maximize model performance while enabling seamless deployment on any hardware, cloud provider, or edge devices, said Ceze.

Be it MLOps or XOps, these services are designed to ease the developers of technical debt that these mega ML models accumulate with changing complexities. Apart from OctoML, there are a few other startups that have succeeded in convincing the investors. Lets take a look at couple of them:

Funding till date: $10 million

The team at Verta is building software for data science teams to address the problem of model management how to track, version, and audit models used across products. Verta MLOps software supports model development, deployment, operations, monitoring, and collaboration enabling data scientists to manage models across their lifecycle. So far, the company has $10 million in funding and it promises to make robust, scalable, mature deployable models a reality.

Funding till date: $38.1 million

Image credits: Algorithmia

Were obsessed with helping organizations get ML models into production because thats the only way they can generate business value, said the team at Algorithmia. Their enterprise MLOps platform manages all stages of the production ML lifecycle within existing operational processes, so you can put models into production quickly, securely, and cost-effectively. Unlike inefficient and expensive do-it-yourself MLOps management solutions that lock users into specific technology stacks, Algorithmia automates ML deployment, optimizes collaboration between operations and development, leverages existing SDLC and CI/CD systems, and provides advanced security and governance.

Algorithmias funding (Source: Crunchbase)

Today Algorithmias services are used by over 130,000 engineers and data scientists, including the United Nations, government intelligence agencies, and Fortune 500 companies.

Its [MLOps] going to be an essential component to enterprises industrializing their AI efforts in the future, said Diego M. Oppenheimer, Algorithmias CEO in a recent interview with GitHub.

Funding: $14.5 million

Databand brings in the similar flavor into the ML ecosystem. The team Databand is trying to solve the problems that arise due to increasing data workloads. The company founded by Josh Benamram, Victor Shafran and Evgeny Shulmanhelps helps data engineering teams catch data pipeline issues and trace the impact of those problems across end-to-end data flows. Databands platform includes an application for visualizing pipeline metadata, and an open source library for integrating with your Python, Java, Scala, or SQL data processes. Data pipeline monitoring is a key aspect of machine learning deployment. We can clearly see how targeting even a niche aspect of the whole ML deployment can land big investors.

Image credits: Gartner

Modern day software companies are in the process of or have already embraced machine learning as a key tool. Now they are at a crucial juncture where they can either leverage the MLOps services offered by these startups or build everything on their own. But, there are not many reasons why an organization looking to transition to ML will take the pain of MLOps. As companies look to leverage ML minus the deployment headache, niche players like OctoML will continue to pop up. Even the latest Gartner survey lists scalability and acceleration of machine learning deployment as two driving forces that will continue to trend this year. According to Gartner, XOps a variant of MLOps that deals with efficiencies in data, machine learning, model, platform will try to implement best DevOps practices and ensure reliability, reusability and repeatability.

Continued here:
Machine Learning Deployment Is The Biggest Tech Trend In 2021 - Analytics India Magazine

Experts on how Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning will impact India’s national security – Economic Times

To initiate a dialogue on technological developments in the aerospace and defence landscape and to create an innovative roadmap for India's defence ecosystem, Economic Times Digital is hosting a one of a kind Defence Summit bringing experts and commentators together.

Maroof Raza, Media Commentator on Global, Military & Security issues will open the ET AeroDef Summit 2021 and shed light on how Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning will impact national security. Eminent speakers and industry experts like Deepak Hota, Former CMD, BEML, Anuj Prasad: Partner (Head - Aerospace and Defence), Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas and Major General Rohit Gupta, SM (Retd) Head Aerospace & Defence, Primus Partners will share their insights on initiatives like Make In India and how India can become a self-reliant military superpower.

Commodore Anil Jai Singh, IN ( Retd); Senior Vice President, Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems India, Ratan Shrivastava, Aerospace & Defence Expert, and MD, BowerGroupAsia (India) Ltd) and Abhishek Verma, Partner and Lead (Aerospace and Defence), KPMG will deliberate on Indias military prowess and share insights on the future of defence and warfare.

Discussion points

Excerpt from:
Experts on how Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning will impact India's national security - Economic Times

Democratic Party | History, Definition, & Beliefs | Britannica

History

The Democratic Party is the oldest political party in the United States and among the oldest political parties in the world. It traces its roots to 1792, when followers of Thomas Jefferson adopted the name Republican to emphasize their anti-monarchical views. The Republican Party, also known as the Jeffersonian Republicans, advocated a decentralized government with limited powers. Another faction to emerge in the early years of the republic, the Federalist Party, led by Alexander Hamilton, favoured a strong central government. Jeffersons faction developed from the group of Anti-Federalists who had agitated in favour of the addition of a Bill of Rights to the Constitution of the United States. The Federalists called Jeffersons faction the Democratic-Republican Party in an attempt to identify it with the disorder spawned by the radical democrats of the French Revolution of 1789. After the Federalist John Adams was elected president in 1796, the Republican Party served as the countrys first opposition party, and in 1798 the Republicans adopted the derisive Democratic-Republican label as their official name.

In 1800 Adams was defeated by Jefferson, whose victory ushered in a period of prolonged Democratic-Republican dominance. Jefferson won reelection easily in 1804, and Democratic-Republicans James Madison (1808 and 1812) and James Monroe (1816 and 1820) were also subsequently elected. By 1820 the Federalist Party had faded from national politics, leaving the Democratic-Republicans as the countrys sole major party and allowing Monroe to run unopposed in that years presidential election.

During the 1820s new states entered the union, voting laws were relaxed, and several states passed legislation that provided for the direct election of presidential electors by voters (electors had previously been appointed by state legislatures). These changes split the Democratic-Republicans into factions, each of which nominated its own candidate in the presidential election of 1824. The partys congressional caucus nominated William H. Crawford of Georgia, but Andrew Jackson and John Quincy Adams, the leaders of the partys two largest factions, also sought the presidency; Henry Clay, the speaker of the House of Representatives, was nominated by the Kentucky and Tennessee legislatures. Jackson won the most popular and electoral votes, but no candidate received the necessary majority in the electoral college. When the election went to the House of Representatives (as stipulated in the Constitution), Claywho had finished fourth and was thus eliminated from considerationthrew his support to Adams, who won the House vote and subsequently appointed Clay secretary of state.

Henry Clay, mezzotint by H.S. Sadd, after a painting by J.W. Dodge, 1843.

Despite Adamss victory, differences between the Adams and the Jackson factions persisted. Adamss supporters, representing Eastern interests, called themselves the National Republicans. Jackson, whose strength lay in the South and West, referred to his followers simply as Democrats (or as Jacksonian Democrats). Jackson defeated Adams in the 1828 presidential election. In 1832 in Baltimore, Maryland, at one of the countrys first national political conventions (the first convention had been held the previous year by the Anti-Masonic Movement), the Democrats nominated Jackson for president, drafted a party platform, and established a rule that required party presidential and vice presidential nominees to receive the votes of at least two-thirds of the national convention delegates. This rule, which was not repealed until 1936, effectively ceded veto power in the selection process to minority factions, and it often required conventions to hold dozens of ballots to determine a presidential nominee. (The partys presidential candidate in 1924, John W. Davis, needed more than 100 ballots to secure the nomination.) Jackson easily won reelection in 1832, but his various opponentswho derisively referred to him as King Andrewjoined with former National Republicans to form the Whig Party, named for the English political faction that had opposed absolute monarchy in the 17th century (see Whig and Tory).

Andrew Jackson, oil on canvas by Asher B. Durand, 1800. Under Jackson, the Democratic Party held its first national convention in 1832.

From 1828 to 1856 the Democrats won all but two presidential elections (1840 and 1848). During the 1840s and 50s, however, the Democratic Party, as it officially named itself in 1844, suffered serious internal strains over the issue of extending slavery to the Western territories. Southern Democrats, led by Jefferson Davis, wanted to allow slavery in all the territories, while Northern Democrats, led by Stephen A. Douglas, proposed that each territory should decide the question for itself through referendum. The issue split the Democrats at their 1860 presidential convention, where Southern Democrats nominated John C. Breckinridge and Northern Democrats nominated Douglas. The 1860 election also included John Bell, the nominee of the Constitutional Union Party, and Abraham Lincoln, the candidate of the newly established (1854) antislavery Republican Party (which was unrelated to Jeffersons Republican Party of decades earlier). With the Democrats hopelessly split, Lincoln was elected president with only about 40 percent of the national vote; in contrast, Douglas and Breckinridge won 29 percent and 18 percent of the vote, respectively.

The election of 1860 is regarded by most political observers as the first of the countrys three critical electionscontests that produced sharp yet enduring changes in party loyalties across the country. (Some scholars also identify the 1824 election as a critical election.) It established the Democratic and Republican parties as the major parties in what was ostensibly a two-party system. In federal elections from the 1870s to the 1890s, the parties were in rough balanceexcept in the South, where the Democrats dominated because most whites blamed the Republican Party for both the American Civil War (186165) and the Reconstruction (186577) that followed; the two parties controlled Congress for almost equal periods through the rest of the 19th century, though the Democratic Party held the presidency only during the two terms of Grover Cleveland (188589 and 189397). Repressive legislation and physical intimidation designed to prevent newly enfranchised African Americans from votingdespite passage of the Fifteenth Amendmentensured that the South would remain staunchly Democratic for nearly a century (see black code). During Clevelands second term, however, the United States sank into an economic depression. The party at this time was basically conservative and agrarian-oriented, opposing the interests of big business (especially protective tariffs) and favouring cheap-money policies, which were aimed at maintaining low interest rates.

In the countrys second critical election, in 1896, the Democrats split disastrously over the free-silver and Populist program of their presidential candidate, William Jennings Bryan. Bryan lost by a wide margin to Republican William McKinley, a conservative who supported high tariffs and money based only on gold. From 1896 to 1932 the Democrats held the presidency only during the two terms of Woodrow Wilson (191321), and even Wilsons presidency was considered somewhat of a fluke. Wilson won in 1912 because the Republican vote was divided between President William Howard Taft (the official party nominee) and former Republican president Theodore Roosevelt, the candidate of the new Bull Moose Party. Wilson championed various progressive economic reforms, including the breaking up of business monopolies and broader federal regulation of banking and industry. Although he led the United States into World War I to make the world safe for democracy, Wilsons brand of idealism and internationalism proved less attractive to voters during the spectacular prosperity of the 1920s than the Republicans frank embrace of big business. The Democrats lost decisively the presidential elections of 1920, 1924, and 1928.

The countrys third critical election, in 1932, took place in the wake of the stock market crash of 1929 and in the midst of the Great Depression. Led by Franklin D. Roosevelt, the Democrats not only regained the presidency but also replaced the Republicans as the majority party throughout the countryin the North as well as the South. Through his political skills and his sweeping New Deal social programs, such as social security and the statutory minimum wage, Roosevelt forged a broad coalitionincluding small farmers, Northern city dwellers, organized labour, European immigrants, liberals, intellectuals, and reformersthat enabled the Democratic Party to retain the presidency until 1952 and to control both houses of Congress for most of the period from the 1930s to the mid-1990s. Roosevelt was reelected in 1936, 1940, and 1944; he was the only president to be elected to more than two terms. Upon his death in 1945 he was succeeded by his vice president, Harry S. Truman, who was narrowly elected in 1948.

Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, the supreme Allied commander during World War II, won overwhelming victories against Democrat Adlai E. Stevenson in the presidential elections of 1952 and 1956. The Democrats regained the White House in the election of 1960, when John F. Kennedy narrowly defeated Eisenhowers vice president, Richard M. Nixon. The Democrats championing of civil rights and racial desegregation under Truman, Kennedy, and especially Lyndon B. Johnsonwho secured passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965cost the party the traditional allegiance of many of its Southern supporters. Moreover, the pursuit of civil rights legislation dramatically split the partys legislators along regional lines in the 1950s and 60s, with Southern senators famously conducting a protracted filibuster in an ultimately futile attempt to block passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Although Johnson defeated Republican Barry M. Goldwater by a landslide in 1964, his national support waned because of bitter opposition to the Vietnam War, and he chose not to run for reelection. Following the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, the party nominated Johnsons vice president, Hubert H. Humphrey, at a fractious convention in Chicago that was marred by violence outside the hall between police and protesters. Meanwhile, many Southern Democrats supported the candidacy of Alabama Governor George C. Wallace, an opponent of federally mandated racial integration. In the 1968 election Humphrey was soundly defeated by Nixon in the electoral college (among Southern states Humphrey carried only Texas), though he lost the popular vote by only a narrow margin.

From 1972 to 1988 the Democrats lost four of five presidential elections. In 1972 the party nominated antiwar candidate George S. McGovern, who lost to Nixon in one of the biggest landslides in U.S. electoral history. Two years later the Watergate scandal forced Nixons resignation, enabling Jimmy Carter, then the Democratic governor of Georgia, to defeat Gerald R. Ford, Nixons successor, in 1976. Although Carter orchestrated the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel, his presidency was plagued by a sluggish economy and by the crisis over the kidnapping and prolonged captivity of U.S. diplomats in Iran following the Islamic revolution there in 1979. Carter was defeated in 1980 by conservative Republican Ronald W. Reagan, who was easily reelected in 1984 against Carters vice president, Walter F. Mondale. Mondales running mate, Geraldine A. Ferraro, was the first female candidate on a major-party ticket. Reagans vice president, George Bush, defeated Massachusetts Governor Michael S. Dukakis in 1988. Despite its losses in the presidential elections of the 1970s and 80s, the Democratic Party continued to control both houses of Congress for most of the period (although the Republicans controlled the Senate from 1981 to 1987).

(From left) Egyptian Pres. Anwar Sadat, U.S. Pres. Jimmy Carter, and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin signing the Camp David Accords at the White House, Washington, D.C., September 17, 1978.

In 1992 Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton recaptured the White House for the Democrats by defeating Bush and third-party candidate Ross Perot. Clintons support of international trade agreements (e.g., the North American Free Trade Agreement) and his willingness to cut spending on social programs to reduce budget deficits alienated the left wing of his party and many traditional supporters in organized labour. In 1994 the Democrats lost control of both houses of Congress, in part because of public disenchantment with Clintons health care plan. During Clintons second term the country experienced a period of prosperity not seen since the 1920s, but a scandal involving Clintons relationship with a White House intern led to his impeachment by the House of Representatives in 1998; he was acquitted by the Senate in 1999. Al Gore, Clintons vice president, easily won the Democratic presidential nomination in 2000. In the general election, Gore won 500,000 more popular votes than Republican George W. Bush but narrowly lost in the electoral college after the Supreme Court of the United States ordered a halt to the manual recounting of disputed ballots in Florida. The partys nominee in 2004, John Kerry, was narrowly defeated by Bush in the popular and electoral vote.

Aided by the growing opposition to the Iraq War (200311), the Democrats regained control of the Senate and the House following the 2006 midterm elections. This marked the first time in some 12 years that the Democrats held a majority in both houses of Congress. In the general election of 2008 the partys presidential nominee, Barack Obama, defeated Republican John McCain, thereby becoming the first African American to be elected president of the United States. The Democrats also increased their majority in the Senate and the House. The party scored another victory in mid-2009, when an eight-month legal battle over one of Minnesotas Senate seats concluded with the election of Al Franken, a member of the states Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party. With Franken in office, Democrats in the Senate (supported by the chambers two independents) would be able to exercise a filibuster-proof 6040 majority. In January 2010 the Democrats lost this filibuster-proof majority when the Democratic candidate lost the special election to fill the unexpired term of Ted Kennedy following his death.

The Democrats dominance of Congress proved short-lived, as a swing of some 60 seats (the largest since 1948) returned control of the House to the Republicans in the 2010 midterm election. The Democrats held on to their majority in the Senate, though that majority also was dramatically reduced. Many of the Democrats who had come into office in the 2006 and 2010 elections were defeated, but so too were a number of longtime officeholders; incumbents felt the sting of an electorate that was anxious about the struggling economy and high unemployment. The election also was widely seen as a referendum on the policies of the Obama administration, which were vehemently opposed by a populist upsurge in and around the Republican Party known as the Tea Party movement.

The Democratic Party fared better in the 2012 general election, with Obama defeating his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney. The 2012 election did not significantly change the distribution of power between the two main parties in Congress. While the Democrats retained their majority in the Senate, they were unable to retake the House of Representatives. The Republicans retook the Senate during the 2014 midterm elections.

In the 2016 presidential race, Democrats selected Hillary Clinton as their nominee, the first time a major party in the United States had a woman at the top of its presidential ticket. Despite winning the popular vote by almost three million ballots, Clinton failed to take enough states in the electoral college, and the presidency was won by Republican Donald J. Trump in one of the largest upsets in U.S. electoral history. Moreover, the Republican Party maintained control of both chambers of Congress in the 2016 election. In the midterms two years later, however, Democrats retook the House in what some described as a blue wave.

Hillary Clinton at a campaign rally, 2016.

Despite being conducted during the coronavirus global pandemic, the 2020 federal election generated the largest voter turnout in American history, with more 150 million ballots cast. Democratswho voted early and by mail more often than Republicans didhanded Obamas former vice president, Joe Biden, a victory over the incumbent, Trump, in the presidential election. Biden won the popular vote by some five million votes and triumphed in the electoral college vote by holding on to the states captured by Clinton in the previous presidential contest and winning back the blue wall states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin that had been lost to Trump in 2016. The Democrats attempt to retake control of the Senate hinged on two runoff elections to be held in Georgia in January 2021. The party held on to control of the House of Representatives, but its majority shrank significantly.

Read the original here:
Democratic Party | History, Definition, & Beliefs | Britannica

Democrats Begin Push for Biggest Expansion of Voting Since 1960s – The New York Times

Democrats began pushing on Wednesday for the most substantial expansion of voting rights in a half-century, laying the groundwork in the Senate for what would be a fundamental change to the ways voters get to the polls and elections are run.

At a contentious hearing on Capitol Hill, Democratic leaders made a passionate case for a bill that would mandate automatic voter registration nationwide, expand early and mail-in voting, end gerrymandering that skews congressional districts for maximum partisan advantage and curb the influence of money in politics.

The effort is taking shape as Republicans have introduced more than 250 bills to restrict voting in 43 states and have continued to spread false accusations of fraud and impropriety in the 2020 election. It comes just months after those claims, spread by President Donald J. Trump as he sought to cling to power, fueled a deadly riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6 that showed how deeply his party had come to believe in the myth of a stolen election.

Republicans were unapologetic in their opposition to the measure, with some openly arguing that if Democrats succeeded in making it easier for Americans to vote and in enacting the other changes in the bill, it would most likely place their party permanently in the minority.

Any American who thinks that the fight for a full and fair democracy is over is sadly and sorely mistaken, said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader. Today, in the 21st century, there is a concerted, nationwide effort to limit the rights of citizens to vote and to truly have a voice in their own government.

Mr. Schumers rare appearance at a committee meeting underscored the stakes, not just for the election process but for his partys own political future. He called the proposed voting rollbacks in dozens of states including Georgia, Iowa and Arizona an existential threat to our democracy reminiscent of the Jim Crow segregationist laws of the past.

He chanted Shame! Shame! Shame! at Republicans who were promoting them.

It was the start of an uphill battle by Senate Democrats, who have characterized what they call the For the People Act as the civil rights imperative of modern times, to overcome divisions in their own ranks and steer around Republican opposition to shepherd it into law. Doing so may require them to change Senate rules to eliminate the filibuster, once used by segregationists to block civil rights measures in the 1960s.

Republicans signaled they were ready to fight. Conceding that allowing more people to vote would probably hurt their candidates, they denounced the legislation, passed by the House this month, as a power grab by Democrats intent on federalizing elections to give themselves a permanent political advantage. They insisted that it was the right of states to set their own election laws, including those that make it harder to vote, and warned that Democrats proposal could lead to rampant fraud, which experts say has never been found to be widespread.

This is an attempt by one party to write the rules of our political system, said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, who has spent much of his career opposing such changes.

Talk about shame, he added later.

Some Republicans resorted to lies or distortions to condemn the measure, falsely claiming that Democrats were seeking to cheat by enfranchising undocumented immigrants or encouraging illegal voting. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said the bill aimed to register millions of unauthorized immigrants, though that would remain unlawful under the measure.

The clash laid bare just how sharply the two parties have diverged on the issue of voting rights, which attracted bipartisan support for years after the civil rights movement but more recently has become a bitter partisan battleground. At times, Republicans and Democrats appeared to be wrestling with irreconcilably different views of the problems plaguing the election system.

Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, the top Republican on the Senate Rules Committee, which convened the hearing, said states were taking appropriate steps to restore public confidence after 2020 by imposing laws that require voters to show identification before voting and limiting so-called ballot harvesting, where others collect voters completed absentee ballots and submit them to election officials. He said that if Democrats were allowed to rush through changes on the national level, chaos will reign in the next election and voters will have less confidence than they currently do.

The suggestion piqued Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota and the committee chairwoman, who shot back that it was the current elections system an uneven patchwork of state laws and evolving voting rules that had caused chaos at polling places.

Chaos is what weve seen in the last years five-hour or six-hour lines in states like Arizona to vote. Chaos is purging names of longtime voters from a voter list so they cant go vote in states like Georgia, she said. What this bill tries to do is to simply make it easier for people to vote and take the best practices that what weve seen across the country, and put it into law as we are allowed to do under the Constitution.

With Republicans unified against them, Democrats best hope for enacting the legislation increasingly appears to be to try to leverage its voting protections to justify triggering the Senates so-called nuclear option: the elimination of the filibuster rule requiring 60 votes, rather than a simple majority, to advance most bills.

Even that may be a prohibitively heavy lift, though, at least in the bills current form. Liberal activists who are spending tens of millions of dollars promoting it insist that the package must move as one bill. But Senator Joe Manchin III, a centrist West Virginia Democrat whose support they would need both to change the filibuster rules and to push through the elections bill, said on Wednesday that he would not support it in its current form.

Speaking to reporters in the Capitol, Mr. Manchin said he feared that pushing through partisan changes would create more division that the country could not afford after the Jan. 6 attack, and instead suggested narrowing the bill.

Theres so much good in there, and so many things I think all of us should be able to be united around voting rights, but it should be limited to the voting rights, he said. Were going to have a piece of legislation that might divide us even further on a partisan basis. That shouldnt happen.

But it is unclear whether even major changes could win Republican support in the Senate. As written, the more than 800-page bill, which passed the House 220 to 210 mostly along party lines, is the most ambitious elections overhaul in generations, chock-full of provisions that experts say would drive up turnout, particularly among minorities who tend to vote Democratic. Many of them are anathema to Republicans.

Its voting provisions alone would create minimum standards for states, neutering voter ID laws, restoring voting rights to former felons, and putting in place requirements like automatic voter registration and no-excuse mail-in balloting. Many of the restrictive laws proposed by Republicans in the states would move in the opposite direction.

The bill would also require states to use independent commissions to draw nonpartisan congressional districts, a change that would weaken the advantages of Republicans who control the majority of state legislatures currently in charge of drawing those maps. It would force super PACs to disclose their big donors and create a new public campaign financing system for congressional candidates.

Democrats also said they still planned to advance a separate bill restoring a key enforcement provision in the Voting Rights Act of 1965, after a 2013 Supreme Court ruling gutted it. The ruling paved the way for many of the restrictive state laws Democrats are now fighting.

In the hearing room on Wednesday, Republicans ticked through a long list of provisions they did not like, including a restructuring of the Federal Election Commission to make it more partisan and punitive, a host of election administration changes they predicted would cause mass chaos if carried out and the public campaign financing system.

This bill is the single most dangerous bill this committee has ever considered, Mr. Cruz said. This bill is designed to corrupt the election process permanently, and it is a brazen and shameless power grab by Democrats.

Mr. Cruz falsely claimed that the bill would register undocumented immigrants to vote and accused Democrats of wanting the most violent criminals to cast ballots, too.

In fact, it is illegal for noncitizens to vote, and the bill would do nothing to change that or a requirement that people registering to vote swear they are citizens. It would extend the franchise to millions of former felons, as some states already do, but only after they have served their sentences.

Though few senators mentioned him by name, Mr. Trump and his false claims of election fraud hung heavily over the debate.

To make their case, Republicans turned to two officials who backed an effort to overturn then-President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.s election victory. Mac Warner, the secretary of state of West Virginia, and Todd Rokita, the attorney general of Indiana, both supported a Texas lawsuit late last year asking the Supreme Court to invalidate the election results in key battleground states Mr. Biden won, citing groundless accusations of voting improprieties being spread by Mr. Trump.

On Wednesday, Democrats balked when Mr. Rokita, a former Republican congressman, asserted that their proposed changes would open our elections up to increased voter fraud and irregularities like the ones that he said had caused widespread voter mistrust in the 2020 outcome.

Senator Jon Ossoff, a freshman Democrat from Georgia, chastised the attorney general, saying he was spreading misinformation and conspiracies.

I take exception to the comments that you just made, Mr. Rokita, that public concern regarding the integrity of the recent election is born of anything but a deliberate and sustained misinformation campaign led by a vain former president unwilling to accept his own defeat, Mr. Ossoff said.

Mr. Rokita merely scoffed and repeated an earlier threat to sue to block the legislation from being carried out should it ever become law, a remedy that many Republican-led states would most likely pursue if Democrats were able to win its enactment.

You are entitled to your opinion, as misinformed as it may be, but I share the opinion of Americans, Mr. Rokita said.

Sixty-five percent of voters believe the election was free and fair, according to a Morning Consult poll conducted in late January, but only 32 percent of Republicans believe that.

Follow this link:
Democrats Begin Push for Biggest Expansion of Voting Since 1960s - The New York Times