Tag Archives: voting

Dishonest Businesses

Posted on by
Reply

Here are two.

Major League Baseball responded to calls to boycott the state of Georgia over a controversial new voter-ID law by moving the All-Star game out of the Peach State.
But teams still requires fans to show photo ID to pick up their tickets from the Will Call booth.

Congresswoman Nancy Mace (R, SC) showed an example of MLB’s dishonesty (she was too polite to be as blunt as me):Of course, MLB management, so far, has shied away from answering multiple requests for an explanation of its photo ID policy for ticket retrieval.

Here’s another example [emphasis added].

Coca-Cola has released a statement condemning Georgia’s new voting legislation, but the company requires valid ID to be admitted to its annual meeting of shareholders.
“At the entrance to the meeting, we will verify your registration and request to see your admission ticket and a valid form of photo identification, such as a driver’s license or passport,” the company wrote in reference to its 2020 annual meeting of shareholders, held before the coronavirus pandemic.

That example illustrates even greater dishonesty—shareholder meetings are all about voting. Coca-Cola demands photo IDs for its voting, but the company demands no such identification be allowed for our nation’s voting.

In my view (where have I heard that phrasing before?) it’s impossible to do any further business with these enterprises until there is a broad and deep turnover of the persons sitting in management chairs. They’re too dishonest, and how can we trust the integrity of their products and services as long as the management teams running their productions are so dishonest?

Questions for Biden

Posted on by
Reply

Mollie Hemingway has quite a few over at The Federalist. Read them all.

I have a couple more:

Joe—can I call ya Joe?—you’ve said the new Georgia voting law is Jim Crow on steroids because, in part, it closes voting polls at 5pm. Quote the paragraph in the law that does that.

Joe, you’ve said the new Georgia voting law is too restrictive and suppressive of voters. Compare Georgia’s voting law with Delaware’s on:

  • number of days for early voting
  • no excuse absentee ballots (compare with New York’s voting law, too)

Joe, identify the party that invented Jim Crow laws.

Jim Eagle and Joe Biden

Posted on by
Reply

Georgia has just enacted a law reforming and improving its voting processes. The reforms include such things as expanding weekend before Election Day voting from one Saturday and Sunday to two Saturdays and a county-level option to add a second Sunday. Instead of a hazy, subjective signature-matching bit of guesswork on absentee ballots, the State now requires a State-issued (for free) ID. It makes drop boxes mandatory, but they’re available only in in-person voting areas, they’re kept locked after hours, and they’re always under surveillance. The State now allows no-excuse absentee ballot voting.

This expansion of voter access and increased protection of the sanctity of an eligible voter’s vote is what President Joe Biden (D), in his…something…has termed “un-American,” “sick,” “pernicious.” He says, “This makes Jim Crow look like Jim Eagle.”

It would be sad, were it not so insulting and racist. This is, after all, Biden (along with his Progressive-Democrats, who with their silence if not their own hue and cry, agree with him) playing the race card (and thereby demonstrating their own racism), which they do because they can’t make a rationale argument for any of their policies.

And: for those keeping score at home, Jim Crow was a creation of the Democratic Party, as was the KKK, which Biden’s partner in the administration said was the equivalent of today’s ICE.

For those keeping further score at home, Georgia’s voter law compares with Biden’s home State of Delaware, which requires a shorter in-person voting period than does Georgia’s reformed law, to the point that Delaware does not allow in-person early voting at all. Delaware doesn’t allow no-excuse absentee ballot voting.

Another Model for Election Integrity Legislation

Posted on by
Reply

A short time ago, I posted a model out of Georgia that that State was enacting to protect the integrity of its election process, including its role in Federal elections. Here’s another model, this one from Arizona. This one, a collection of separate bills (what an innovation: small bills covering a single subject, instead of one huge, unreadable “omnibus” bill):

  • HB2792, which will prohibit the mass mailing of ballots to voters who have not requested one—and enforce the provision by making it a class five felony to violate it
  • HB2569, aims to prohibit the private funding of election activities. … Zuckerberg-funded nonprofits in turn “influenced the process for how elections go,” [State Representative Jake (R), who led the legislation’s passage,] Hoffman said. “And that is a bridge too far … that is something that we absolutely do not want.”
  • Other measures prohibit same-day voter registration, require hand count audits to be statistically significant with a 99% confidence level, and prevent government officials from modifying statutorily prescribed election deadlines—as was seen in many states ahead of last November’s election. [And which was a plain violation of our Federal Constitution.] The bill adds a class 6 felony for any violation of the latter provision.

The legislation now is in front of the Arizona Senate.

Imagine that—States in our federal governance structure moving to protect the sanctity of a citizen’s vote.

The Left’s Assault on the Sanctity of Each American’s Vote

Posted on by
Reply

That assault is embodied in the Progressive-Democratic Party’s HR-1 bill that the House passed on cynical Party lines and sent along to the Senate. The extent of the assault was laid out by Hans von Spakovsky, one-time Federal Election Commission Commissioner ande former counsel to DoJ’s Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, in a Sunday Fox News editorial.

  1. It would eviscerate state voter ID laws that require a voter to authenticate his identity. Indeed, it would force states to allow anyone to vote who simply signs a form saying that they are who they claim they are.
  2. It would make absentee ballots even more insecure than they already are. Not only could states not apply any ID requirement to absentee ballots, they could not enforce any witness signature or notarization requirement.
  3. It would worsen the problem of inaccurate registration rolls. HR 1 severely restricts the ability of states to take the basic steps necessary to maintain the accuracy of their voter rolls, such as comparing their lists with those of other states or using the US Postal Service’s National Change of Address System to find individuals who have moved.
  4. It would take away your ability to decide whether you want to register to vote. Instead, it requires states to automatically register individuals who interact with state agencies.
  5. It would force states to allow online registration, opening up the voter registration system to massive fraud by hackers and cybercriminals.
  6. It imposes onerous new regulatory restrictions on political speech and activity, including online and policy-related speech, by candidates, citizens, civic groups, unions, corporations and nonprofit organizations.
  7. It would authorize the IRS to investigate and consider the political and policy positions of nonprofit organizations when they apply for tax-exempt status. (Sort of like ex-President Barack Obama’s (D) IRS did.)
  8. It would set up a public funding program for candidates running for Congress. This would force taxpayers to subsidize (by a 6 to 1 ratio of taxpayer dollars per individual dollar) the political campaigns of individuals they may vehemently disagree with and wouldn’t vote for in a million years.

And don’t count on Senator Joe Manchin (D, WV) to stand in the way of eliminating the filibuster so the Senate Progressive-Democrats also can pass this on a Party-line vote. We’ve seen the value of his word regarding Republican input.