A Phony Compromise on Voting
Election integrity depends on stopping Democrat attempts to slightly water down HR 1.
Bulk-mail ballot fraud is the Democrats’ strategy for electoral victory from here until kingdom come. They know that if every American receives a ballot in the mail without even having to request one, and if those Americans don’t have to show ID to vote, and if Election Day permanently becomes Election Month(s), Democrats will come away with more votes. Keep that in mind every single time you hear a news report about election laws, whether about Dems “expanding” voting rights or Republicans “restricting” them.
That brings us to Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Because Donald Trump won the state by 39 points, Manchin is very motivated to prove that he’s a “moderate.” That’s the calculation on his roadblock to the Bernie Sanders spending bonanza, and it’s his gambit with objections to HR 1, the Democrats’ massive election power grab.
The Freedom to Vote Act is another Orwellian-named bill that is ostensibly a compromise among Democrats, and it’s led by Manchin and fellow Democrat Senator Amy Klobuchar. Supposedly, it’s an attempt at a more palatable version of the For the People Act (HR 1). But it keeps most of the core provisions of the larger bill and can’t seriously be called a compromise.
Most egregious is that the bill shares HR 1’s constitutional problems. Article I, Section 4 vests the power of election law with the states. Both Democrat bills usurp that authority by overturning the laws of numerous states. Mail ballots with no excuses required, as mandated by Democrats, would overrule laws in 16 states. Automatically enfranchising felons upon leaving prison would undo laws in 27 states. Every state also would be required to count mail votes that arrive late. We know the U.S. Postal Service always delivers on time, but this could mean a week-long delay in results for many elections, which always sows distrust in the result.
One difference with Manchin’s compromise is that it wouldn’t outlaw voter ID, but it would expand to the point of meaningless the definition of ID — it would include “a bank card,” “a utility bill,” and “any other document containing the individual’s name,” so long as any government body issued that document. Can you imagine the chaos of election workers trying to determine the veracity of myriad forms of “identification”? More likely is that, when the line is out the door, just flashing a piece of paper will get you a ballot.
This federal interference would no doubt have ramifications in down-ballot state and local races, too — another constitutional issue.
Manchin has tried to get Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on board with at least voting on his “compromise” bill, but McConnell recently called it “a solution in search of a problem” and indicated that the GOP minority “will not be supporting it.” Republicans should hold that line, because it’s not just their party’s political future on the line. The integrity of American elections in perpetuity is at stake.
Start a conversation using these share links: