Category Archives: voting

That Time Has Long Since Come

Posted on by
Reply

The Trump administration wants a new rule that would achieve two ends governing how the 2030 census counts persons present in the US and how those counts are used.

The Commerce Department, which oversees the census, proposed not to count most immigrants toward the population used to apportion seats for the House, unless they have become citizens or hold permanent resident status. The proposed new calculation would exclude immigrants in the country illegally, which various analyses estimate total about 15 million.

And

In addition, the proposed rule would prohibit the Census Bureau from including race or ethnicity questions on the census form sent to all households, saying such data is “immaterial” to the constitutional mandate to conduct an actual population count. That would eliminate the most complete counts of the country’s Black, Hispanic, Asian and Native American populations, ending a key source of information used in civil and voting rights enforcement.

The time for this rule has long since come, and it needs to be enacted promptly, with no further delay.

Illegal aliens have no business voting in American elections—they are not Americans, and as they’ve demonstrated by their illegal entry and subsequent insistent dodging of immigration authorities, they have no intention of becoming citizens or even legal residency. This is especially the case since for years, they’ve been able to voluntarily leave for their home contracts, collect a significant cash stipend on arrival, and then return to the US and enter legally.

It’s also plainly obvious that race or ethnicity have no place in our voting rules. This is borne out by our 14th Amendment and Supreme Court rulings explicitly eliminating race and ethnicity from voting special treatments. In the end, too, the only ethnicity that matters in eligibility for voting is American ethnicity. Beyond that, all American voters are the same under our Constitution and our statutes. Segregating us into groups for voting district construction would be irrelevant were the segregation not openly racist.

“Serious Legal Error”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson claims the Supreme Court made when it lifted an injunction against President Donald Trump’s (R) Executive Order requiring, among other things, HHS to collect States’ voter registration rolls and the Post Office to work out procedures for not delivering mailed ballots to recipients who are not on those rolls. Her beef is that

the ruling could create election chaos and leave states trapped between filing legal challenges too early or too late.

And

“The Court does a disservice to all concerned by distorting Article III standing and ripeness principles to issue a ruling that contributes to pre-election chaos instead of quashing it,” she wrote.

This is fatuous. If there is any uncertainty associated with drawing too close to Election Day, it’s not from Supreme Court, or any lesser court, ruling, it’s from the steady drumbeat of quibbling lawsuits from Leftists who want the ineligible to vote and from others pushing unserious boundary and corner cases just to see what trouble they can cause.

The majority dealt with that, whether they realized it or not by ruling the suit in the present case out of bounds because they’d suffered no injury because no procedure had yet been set up that caused or would cause injury.

Jackson wasn’t done.

Jackson said the decision “lets another shoe drop in the Kafkaesque nightmare that our precedents have been steadily creating for certain plaintiffs who seek to bring election-related challenges.”

We’re supposed to believe that a lawyer so highly trained and so talented that she became a Supreme Court Justice is unable to work her way through a couple of clearcut rulings. This from a Supreme Court Justice who’s already confessed she’s not capable of saying what a woman is.

But she still wasn’t done.

“When the Government’s obvious goal is to interfere with the Plaintiff States’ practices and prerogatives in a manner that the Constitution does not authorize,” Jackson wrote….

Here she is, claiming to be able to read minds.

Good grief.

Sloppiness in Voter Registration Rolls

Posted on by
Reply

A letter writer in Friday’s WSJ Letters section offered this as a way to correct/reduce error rates in State voter registration rolls.

…federal officials should focus on providing funding to enable more consistent reviews of voter registrations.

No. Elections may be national in scope, but they’re run by each State. The Federal government has no business funding what the States should paying for themselves. If there’s a funding shortfall vis-à-vis voter registration, the States need to reallocate their spending, not use their own sloppiness as an excuse to draw more outside taxpayer dollars.

The Feds do have a role and a responsibility here, though. That would be better achieved by cutting Federal transfers to States that choose not to take accuracy in voter registrations seriously.

US Election Security

Posted on by
1

And less-than-dedicated State election officials. An example of that lack of dedication is provided by Nevada’s Progressive-Democratic Secretary of State, Francisco Aguilar:

I feel like I’m in a UFC chokehold. Everything we do has to be perfect.

Well, yeah—with our elections at risk of tampering by foreign entities, of contamination by folks not eligible to vote voting anyway, by sloppy and repeated vote counts, and on and on, perfection in the process and the counting after the process is a requirement.

It’s true that perfection isn’t achievable, but working—hard—toward it certainly is, and that effort leads to constant improvement in election security. If Progressive-Democrats worked as hard toward that level of performance as they do against moves to improve our election security, we’d have far fewer illegal voter registrants and far less illegal voting and far lower “ordinary” error rates to the point that even the illegal vote conspiracists would have no beef, and the only conspiracists remaining would be the Left’s and Party’s with their voter suppression conspiracies.

Corruption, Thy Name Is…

Posted on by
Reply

The lede lays it out in no uncertain terms.

Arizona’s largest county suffered a significant breach of its election data in the days before the 2020 presidential election when a self-described hacker foiled security and obtained 633,000 voter registration files but the Biden Justice Department and local prosecutors declined to bring charges even after the FBI got the suspect to confess, according to declassified documents made public Thursday by the White House.

And this:

FBI Director Kash Patel sent a letter to that task force this week stating the bureau spent “significant resources” but could not get the US Attorney’s Office in Phoenix, the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, the Maricopa County Arizona Attorney’s Office or the Pinal County, Arizona Attorney’s Office to bring charges despite an admission from the alleged hacker.

The Left and their Progressive-Democratic Party politicians insist that our election system is entirely secure and there’s no need for a SAVE Act to secure it. Never mind that the hacker suspect described just how “secure” the Maricopa County setup was (and is?):

The suspect, who described himself as a “hacker or tinkerer,” told the agents that he first discovered the vulnerabilities in Maricopa’s website about two months earlier, in September 2020. “He noticed his voter ID appeared in the URL” after entering his own voter information and “tested the vulnerability by entering several seven-digit numbers into the URL path resulting in access to different voter registration information,” the agents wrote.

That lack of security is so bad it has to be deliberate. The software designer, tester, and their supervisors, along with the Election Monitor chief all need to be on trial for that criminal negligence.