Control of elections is a clear-cut issue. The Constitution declares so in Article I and II.
Article I, Section 4, Clause 1:
- The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Article II Section 1 Clause 2:
- Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Many Democrats are pointing to the last phrase of Article I as justification for Congress to adapt and pass sweeping laws to usurp state control of elections. They want to federalize the election process by doing away with regulations requiring Voter ID or any restrictions for mail-in ballots or ballot harvesting. All of these regulations contribute to election credibility. Republicans contend that removing these restrictions could lead to widespread corruption or fraud in our future elections.
Why is the matter of elections so crucial for Democrats? Democrats feel (emotions, not facts) that any restriction on elections inhibits participation. They cannot answer why there were 150 million votes cast in the 2020 election, which was over 20 million more than the 2008 election of Barack Obama. If restrictions inhibit turnout, why were so many more ballots cast in 2020? No answer, but no number of votes is enough for Democrats.
The arguments on Voter ID and Mail-In Ballots are weak. An ID is required for nearly all activities, from cashing a check, starting a job, buying alcohol, and even renting a car. Obtaining an ID is also a very easy and, in most cases, free task. Mail-in ballots became popular in 2020 due to COVID restrictions. Without pandemic concerns, the widespread use of mail-in votes should not be a significant concern. The Democrats are so motivated to increase the number of votes that they have considered reducing the voting age to 16. Another consideration is extending voting rights to undocumented immigrants. If either or both of these considerations were to become Law, Democrats would never lose another election.
What is the future of HR 1, the so-called For The People Act? This bill, which originated in the House of Representatives, calls for sweeping changes in Federal Elections Laws and the shift from state control to federal control. As long as the Senate is split 50-50 and the Democrats cannot muster 60 votes in favor of HR 1, this bill and movement are dead. Thus the reason the Democrats are trying hard to eliminate the Senate Filibuster and make passage of a bill in the Senate require a simple majority. Conservatives and traditionalists will work hard to ensure the Senate does not become an extension of the House. The 60 vote rule is in place to work towards debate and compromise. Elimination of the filibuster renders the Senate virtually obsolete. I am not sure anyone wants to see that happen, but who knows. Guess we have to take a peek at the Democrat Master Plan for Transformation of America. Would you please tell me that does not exist?
If all of this were not confusing enough, Joe Biden announced he is asking the Justice Department to attack the laws being passed legally by states like Georgia and Texas. He is calling it the Jim Crow situation, the worst attack on Democracy since the Civil War. Hyperbole is not becoming of the office of the President, but Biden and Harris use it freely. Then again, nobody accused either Biden or Harris of being Presidential.