About Voting Rights...
Our focus must first be on the integrity of the ballot - without which the government itself has no legitimacy
The shark-jumping Democrats, prone as they are to manipulate the meaning of words to distort and hide their true intent, want you to believe that voting rights are under siege throughout the land. Nothing could be further from the truth. Today it is far easier to register to vote and to cast a ballot than at any time in our nation’s history - a substantial fact that is borne out by reviewing election participation. And just common sense.
I find it hard to fathom how anybody could find it difficult to register or to vote. The rules are published months, years in advance, the instructions are everywhere. And if the 6th grade literacy required to understand these rules is too much, there are abundant voter assistants a phone call away to walk you through the process. It has never been easier to register or vote than it is today.
No, you cannot simply show up on election day and cast a ballot. Yes, you have to register some time in advance, in most locations. Yes, you must have something that shows you are resident in the voting district. In what universe wouldn’t you have to do these things? Well, in the Democrat Imaginarium (google it) where anybody denied a ballot for any reason is a direct result of Bull Connor (ironically a Democrat) thuggery.
The “Freedom to Vote Act” is yet another Democrat attempt at an end run around democracy. The Act codifies 30 separate voting rules which all uniquely favor Democrats in one form or fashion - and contradict Supreme Court rulings in several specific cases. It would essentially outlaw voter picture ID requirements, either for registration initially or for voting. It would outlaw proof of citizenship or even residency in order to vote - opening the canvass to literally anyone who chooses to request a ballot - or even, theoretically, those who don’t. In theory, a local board of elections could simply mail out ballots to every citizen “of age” - with the provisional concept that “of age” means anyone 16 years of age or older. It would make mandatory the “Covid emergency provisions” of mailing out ballots unaccountably - meaning those never requested by voters - permanently. Nearly every provision of this Act would be open to abuse and defy accountability - shredding the integrity of the ballot itself. This is an Act that only those with a bare, incumbent majority could seek in order to permanently cement in their lock on power.
Democrats like to talk about making voting “easy” but the gimmicks they advocate are really only intended to enable widespread fraud - making it next to impossible to discover. If Democrats wanted to earn the genuine respect of voters, they’d advocate policies that are better for American citizens as opposed to ideas that inevitably maintain their incumbency through cheating. Remember when Barack Obama told whining Republicans they should “go out there and win an election”? Well, they did. So now the Democrat strategy is to make sure Republicans never win another one!
The truth is, there has always been a tension between “easy” voting processes and the integrity of the ballot. Our constitutional framers foresaw the balancing of this tension, as they have so many other tough issues, by relegating the “times, places and manner” to the state legislatures within the Elections Clause, Article 1, Section 4. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that Congress may override state regulation of elections, but only where the states refuse to follow Constitutional mandate, or where states attempt to openly subvert the federal government - by not holding congressional elections, for example. The “times, places and manner” are clearly delegated to the states to decide among themselves.
So what about the effect of voter identification laws on participation? Is this a constitutional issue? Is this a place where the Congress would have authority to step in? Why don’t we first examine the results these laws have had on voter participation, rather than presume that any regulation on voter participation will inevitably be bad?
A 2020 CATO Institute study carefully examined the impact of voter identification laws as proposed in ten states who had enacted such laws. I encourage you to read that study, to understand the methodology and basis for their findings:
Results indicate that there is little scope for strict voter identification laws to affect voter turnout. This finding stems directly from the extremely small number of votes cast by individuals without IDs, even in settings where such votes are explicitly allowed and counted. Specifically, we show that a voter identification law would reduce turnout by no more than 0.06 percent in Florida and 0.2 percent in Michigan. This suggests that at least in these two states, very few voters without IDs choose to vote even when they can.
So at worst, these voter identification laws have a negligible impact on participation. More importantly, these laws have a net positive impact on the integrity of the process. I don’t know about you, but I’m certainly more motivated to vote if I know my vote won’t be cancelled by a hundred fraudulent votes!
From my perspective, any policy that detracts from the integrity of the canvass will be abused. Not might be or could be - but is absolutely guaranteed to be abused. Meaning authentic ballots will be canceled by cheaters. If we cannot maintain ballot custody accountability - such as with mail out ballots, where it is a certainty that some or many of those ballots will be intercepted and voted and returned by third parties - then election integrity is diminished. Why take time off from work, stand in line for hours and vote in person, when you know that vote will be cancelled out dozens of times by some paid “volunteer” who has harvested hundreds, even thousands of fraudulent ballots? And while this current practice benefits Democrats (who clearly believe the ends justify the means), what’s to stop Republicans from getting in on the act? And then with both Republicans and Democrats cheating wholesale in each election, would any elected official be considered legitimate?
Our government’s legitimacy depends on the integrity of the ballot, not the extent to which we make voting “easy”. If a tiny handful of voters encounter difficulty in voting - in one election - but the integrity of all elections is bolstered, then that’s a very small price to pay, I’d think.
For the record, if we must have federal standards in place for federal elections (presidency, House and Senate races) then let’s look at integrity first. States that refuse to enforce federal standards should risk their candidates not being seated in Congress or their electors not being counted toward the presidency. The integrity of the election process is more important than the extent of the canvass. Extending the canvass (making it "easy to vote") inherently jeopardizes vote integrity. And so long as the rules apply equally to everyone, there can be no challenge to the "fairness" of the rules. These are my proposed rules for federal elections:
1. Registration for voting shall require a valid picture identification and shall be received no later than 30 days before election day. Requests for registration that arrive after this date shall be recorded as invalid due to timeliness.
2. Election Day shall be one day only, with polls open from 7am to 7pm locally. No judge, federal or local, shall have authority to extend or adjust the hours of federal elections. Polling stations which violate the approved hours of operations shall have all votes discarded.
3. In person voting shall be required except for requested absentee ballots for reason of illness, infirmity or genuine absence (military duty, business).
4. Verified, valid voter picture ID shall be required for all voting, in person or absentee.
5. Absentee ballots shall be mailed out no earlier than 30 days before the election, with bipartisan review/approval of every absentee ballot application.
6. Absentee ballots shall be cast only by the voter who requested the ballot, and must be signed by the voter and witnessed, with envelope signed and sealed by the voter, under penalty of fraud. Absentee ballots shall be mailed through US postal service so as to be received by close of the polls on election day. Ballots received after close of polls, regardless of postmark, are discarded and destroyed immediately.
7. Only paper ballots shall be used to vote. Paper ballots shall be retained for no less than the duration of the positions on the ballot (i.e., six years for Senate, four years for presidency, two years for House) and shall be safeguarded and stored in tamper proof containers.
8. Vote counts shall be completed by the state within 24 hours of polls closing.
9. Vote challenges or requests for recount shall be requested within 48 hours of polls closing and only permitted in cases where the difference in count is less than one percent of the total vote.
10. Absent a challenge or request for recount, states shall certify their respective vote counts within 48 hours of polls closing. Recounts and vote challenges shall be completed and certified within 72 hours of polls closing.
This would be my “starter set” of federal regulations for voting. Obviously, Democrats would find ways to cheat these procedures and so we’d need to constantly evolve new measures to prevent fraud.
You may have your own ideas on how to bolster the integrity of our elections as well. The point being, the focus must first be on the integrity of the ballot - without which the government itself has no legitimacy.
8. Vote counts shall be completed by the state within 24 hours of polls closing.
That seems a bit generous. If the polls close at 7pm locally (#2, above), shouldn't every state be able to complete their count by, say, 7am?