Posted on 03/19/2021 6:07:02 AM PDT by Kaslin
There aren't a lot of people who tell the truth about voting rules. As the Senate takes up the bill the House just passed to drastically amend the rules that govern our elections, it seems like a good time to step back and examine what's really going on. For some reason, the truth is missing from almost all the reporting, both in the liberal press and in conservative media.
Both Republicans and Democrats approach debates over the rules and systems for our elections with the same fundamental belief: Making voting easy helps Democrats, and making voting harder helps Republicans.
This premise is grounded in historical fact. For many years, older and higher-educated voters have turned out to vote in higher numbers on average than younger and lower-educated voters. Republicans used to be dominant with older and more educated people. This led to a common and still enduring belief among both Republicans and Democrats that Republican voters are more committed to getting their vote in and will therefore turn out in higher numbers, even in a strict system. The belief is the same on the other side: Democrats are less likely to turn out to vote on average, so systems that make voting easier are more likely to motivate marginally interested Democrats than Republicans. Again, there isn't a ton of debate about this premise. Both parties believe it.
The first obvious point is that with all the voting realignment we are seeing, it's no longer as clear that all these preconceived notions will hold true. Highly educated people are now voting Democrat more than they used to, and working people are voting Republican more than they used to. Many Republicans talk openly of becoming the party of the working class American. If they succeed, it could be Republicans who benefit from increasing voter turnout in the future.
The second point is that we like to pretend our debates about voting are detached from politics. If you want to understand just how politically motivated all politicians are when it comes to voting rules, just look at the shape of congressional districts. Politicians have drawn the lines in ways they think benefit their party, and they are the single most interested parties when it comes to our elections. Yet they get to make the rules. For some reason, the press plays along as we debate issues such as voter suppression and voter security. Those issues matter a lot, but every politician is thinking as much or more about getting more members of their own party elected as they are about the real merits of our voting policies. This is why Democrats openly push policies that will decrease the security of our elections. If your goal is more voters no matter what, then security is an afterthought, if it's a thought at all. This is also partly why Republicans talk so much about security. Fewer voters helps Republicans. They know that.
The reality is we are going to change the way we vote as technology advances. For Republicans, constantly trying to impede this is not a good long-term strategy. Virtually every part of our country has been made more efficient through the use of technology, yet many of our counties still vote with hole punches through paper. That's not going to last. Putting aside privacy concerns, there's probably no more secure way to vote than with our phones and a biometric key such as a fingerprint or eye scan. That sort of thing is coming, and when it does, a lot more people will likely vote. Republicans should be prepared for that day.
Democrats' desire to pretend security concerns don't exist at all is fueling a total lack of confidence in our system. At a time when people are already showing a historic lack of trust in our leaders and our leading institutions, trust in our elections is paramount for our country's stability. Huge numbers of Democrats did not trust the outcome of our 2016 election, and even more Republicans felt that way in 2020, yet Democrats in the House just passed a bill that would completely undercut whatever confidence currently exists in our election system. The bill is now in the Senate. It's a disaster.
The problems with the Democrats' partisan election "reform" bill are too numerous to go through here, but the Daily Caller and others have summarized them well.
One provision in particular gives away their partisan motivations. The bill would ban states from requiring voters to show an ID when voting or even when requesting absentee or mail-in ballots. Thirty-six states have ID laws in place that this federal law would preempt. Even aside from the fact that our Constitution puts states in charge of these issues, why would you ever want to ban IDs for voting? Isn't that an invitation for voter fraud? Proponents of the ban say ID requirements suppress the vote, especially in minority communities -- but we require identification for so many things in our day-to-day lives that it would be impossible to get by without one. You couldn't cash a check, rent a car, buy beer or wine or do hundreds of other tasks without one. To pretend that a simple security measure like identification is somehow voter suppression is to give away your partisan motivation.
We need a voting system that lets any eligible voter who wants to vote do so conveniently, and we need systems in place to assure voters that our elections are fair. The Democrats' proposed partisan voting law misses this balance altogether.
Just imagen if 15 and 16 year old’s were allowed to vote.
That would be true if, and only if, strong qualifications for the privilege of voting were in place.
On our current road, making it easier for anyone to vote with no qualifications for the franchise are merely the road to ruination.
Put ANY immoral issue on the ballot, and the perverted (’Rats especially, of course) will vote in droves.
It worked with marijuana, and there are 50 US state flags that could stitch on a marijuana leaf in support. Start with a few legalized states, and the ‘Rats will hold majority power forever.
Are brothels next?
During the years of the Vietnam War, the age of voting was lowered from 21 to 18, to equate the age of voting to the age of dying for your country.
To reduce the voting age to 16, would equate the voting age to the of gullibility, as demonstrated by all the bernie and AOC brats.
“When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
The new election paradigms are all but given be it at the state or federal level. The question becomes can conservatives and the GOP adapt with better ideas and effort?
“Highly educated” does not mean smart.
It means they went to some college where they wasted four years or more in b***s**t courses like wimyns studies, pronoun selection, and political “science”.
They are as dumb as dirt, with apologies to dirt.
There is literally one national election every 4 years for one office (well, two really): President and Vice President. That is the ONLY time the entire nation votes in a national election.
Each and every other election - Senators, Reps, Governors, State offices, local offices - are at the State level.
Why the Federal Government thinks it can run all those local elections is an affront to the concept of protected States Rights.
Sure, if there are overriding Constitutional issues - mostly involving protected classes - the Federal Courts can respond and legislation can be passed; but to dictate the method of voting for thousands of state and local elections annually to “protect” voters’ rights for one vote every 4 years is an extreme overreach.
Unfortunately, when they do away with the filibuster (only a matter of time), HR1 too might pass...
Excellent point.
Actually, even presidential elections are state functions. We don’t have federally administered elections. Each state allows the people to express their choice for president and, in turn, sends a slate of electors to DC who are the ones who elect the president and vice president.
My native language is German, I speak, read and write in English as you can see.
That is excellent. Welcome to the voting booth.
Now graduates of Baltimore schools on the other hand...
He might have point about the demographics but much of this has nothing to do with demographics but rather with enabling election fraud.
Yes, and then pedophilia, that is the end game. Those perverts that are not satisfied with heterosexual relationships, cannot be satisfied with homosexual relationships and they aren’t, it always go beyond, to perversion with children.
allowing cities to keep voter registration rolls and not show ID means that organizations can control, buy, and sell the city vote. If people move apartments every 4 years, organizations can vote for them in every place they lived and registered. Black people vote sometimes as high as 90% for a candidate. But they are not voting under their name. They are going to vote over and over as other people. Now with mail in ballots they are out of a job. Because people can simply mail in those ballots. Democrats would lose maybe 20% of the city vote and the college town vote if registered voters rolls were cleaned and IDs were required. You need an ID to cash a check,. You need an ID to buy liquor or go to a bar. These people have IDs.
No, make it an effort. Not insurmountable, but noticeable. More than getting out of bed in the morning. About what is needed to make your own cup of coffee. Get your butt over to a polling station with a photo ID and if your name is not on the pre-approved and vetted voting roll, walk your butt back home you lazy dog. Does the word “planning” mean nothing to you?
Let's get this straight. Voting rules need to be implemented by the state legislatures, per the US Constitution. The voting rules need to be simple and with one goal: one legal vote for every citizen of voting age that wants to vote. It is not about technology. It is not about increasing voter turn out. It is not about non-partisanship, unity or any notion of "democracy". It is solely about voting in representative republic and insuring that fraud does not occur.
This is the system that I would like to see: It begins with identifying legal voters. This requires photo IDs, signatures, advanced registration. It means illegal immigrants/aliens do not get ID in this country. It means that a photo ID is only valid if US citizenship is proven when obtaining the ID. Voter registration is not the day of the election. It is done ahead of time. I do not care if it is a week, a month or year ahead of time. The point is to identify and register legal voters. Registration should occur at the county/parish level of government and no third party can register a voter. It should be individually motivated. US citizenship is verified as part of the registration process.
Voter registration information, ID and signature are matched when voting in person. Signatures at the voting place are matched with the signature in voter registration books. Photo IDs are matched to the face of the person voting. When it comes to voting in-person I will go as far as painting an indelible dye on the forehead of people who have already voted so it clear that they have already voted. This stops people going from one polling place to another to vote twice.
There is very little room for absentee ballots and absolutely no room for mail-in ballots. They smell like fraud ready to happen and that in itself dictates the vigilance. Solve the problem simply. No mail-in ballots, period. Absentee ballots should only allowed by those with valid reasons that submit a sworn and notarized affidavit stating the an allowable need for the absentee ballot. Voting should occur on a single day, in-person, during the hours stated by law. Not before, not after, not in drop boxes, in-person, at a polling place. Just like it has occurred for over 200 years.
Personally, I do not trust technology. It can and will be manipulated. I do trust written ballots. That is a ballot filled out by the hand of the voter on paper. If a voter is physically unable to fill out a ballot, he may have the assistance of a family member or friend who is also registered to vote.
No provisional ballots: If you can't get your voter registration correct and cannot arrive at your correct polling place, then no ballot for you. Advanced registration eliminates the need for provisional ballots.
I trust observers from the public, not government. Hand count every vote, with every legally cast ballot physically passing the hands of election observers from any and all parties, or lack of party. Anyone will be allowed to observe the vote counters. If you want technology, here's the place for it. Live-stream the vote count. Record the entire counting process.
It looks like this: each ballot is placed clearly in front of a camera. Another camera, synchronized with the a timestamp of the ballot camera records each voter counter and records the audible recognition of the vote count. Lastly, an third camera, also with timestamp synchronization with the other two cameras records the vote tally being recorded. The audio/video should be streamed to the Internet for anyone to see. It is also stored on the Internet for replay. Do this at the precinct level, so there is no fraud occurring during the change of custody the physical ballots as they move to the county/parish courthouse.
Vote totals are transmitted from the precinct to county/parish courthouse, and then to the state's secretary of state's office. The vote count is verified by precinct observers when it is included in the tally at the the country level and at the state level. Technology can be used in this case; a simple website that has vote tallies enumerated by precinct.
The physical ballots sealed in a secure box at the voting precinct are retained for inspection, audit and recount purposes for eternity. The video/audio recording is stored in another sealed and secure box. They move from the precinct to the county courthouse with chain of custody being documented. Sealed ballots are stored in vault. They can only be removed from the vault and unsealed by court order.
Kind of like GA banning Sunday voting.
This is a good article that gets to an important point; the Republicans can't continue to rely on tamping down the Democrat vote. They've got to work on getting to majority status.
Right. Popular vote for president is a choice by state legislatures. They could flip a coin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.