This, of course, fuels the conversation around changing the rules of filibuster or doing away with filibuster all together. The progressives posing as centrist Democrats will stop at nothing to push their revisionist, socialistic policies through in an attempt to rewrite the rules that created 250 years of the most successful democracy in history. The danger in their succeeding cannot be overstated- they intend to create a system that enables them to stay in power by hook or by crook, completely disregarding the majority of citizens for whom freedom is a priority.
Rather than pontificate and point fingers about HR1's extensive follies, here are four select excerpts that show readers what's really in the bill and how they link together to codify voter fraud.
1) No challenge rule- Election officials cannot challenge a ballot accompanied by a sworn statement that the voter is eligible.
``SEC. 303A. PERMITTING USE OF SWORN WRITTEN STATEMENT TO MEET IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
``(a) Use of Statement.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (c), if a State has in effect a requirement that an individual present identification as a condition of receiving and casting a ballot in an election for Federal office, the State shall permit the individual to meet the requirement--
``(A) in the case of an individual who desires to vote in person, by presenting the appropriate State or local election official with a sworn written statement, signed by the individual under penalty of perjury, attesting to the individual's identity and attesting that the individual is eligible to vote in the election; or
``(B) in the case of an individual who desires to vote by mail, by submitting with the ballot the statement described in subparagraph (A).
The word "shall" is the critical word in this section; in legal terms, it means MUST. Thirty-four States have voter ID laws and this provision will usurp all of them. This means every county clerk must accept a signed, written statement declaring voter eligibility and accept the ballot, irrespective of citizenship and other voter eligibility requirements. The ability of fraudulent voters to insist on participating is no longer open to legal challenge.
2) Electronically transmitted blank ballots
SEC. 305. ACCESS TO VOTER REGISTRATION AND VOTING FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES.
``(a) Treatment of Applications and Ballots.--Each State shall-- `(1) permit individuals with disabilities to use absentee registration procedures and to vote by absentee ballot in elections for Federal office;
``(2) accept and process, with respect to any election for Federal office, any otherwise valid voter registration application and absentee ballot application from an individual with a disability if the application is received by the appropriate State election official within the deadline for the election which is applicable under Federal law;
``(3) in addition to any other method of registering to vote or applying for an absentee ballot in the State, establish procedures--
``(A) for individuals with disabilities to request by mail and electronically voter registration applications and absentee ballot applications with respect to elections for Federal office in accordance with subsection (c);
``(B) for States to send by mail and electronically (in accordance with the preferred method of transmission designated by the individual under subparagraph (C)) voter registration applications and absentee ballot applications requested under subparagraph (A) in accordance with subsection (c); and
``(C) by which such an individual can designate whether the individual prefers that such voter registration application or absentee ballot application be transmitted by mail or electronically;
``(4) in addition to any other method of transmitting blank absentee ballots in the State, establish procedures for transmitting by mail and electronically blank absentee ballots to individuals with disabilities with respect to elections for Federal office in accordance with subsection
This is positively scary. The accepted security practice for creating a ballot includes special paper, special ink and timing marks on the ballot. Some of the better ballot tabulating equipment look for these. For pre-election accuracy certification, clerks will load "slugs" into the machines that do not comply with paper/ink/timing mark requirements. Good machines reject the fake ballots. This law would enable regular at home printing and photocopying. Combined with the sworn statement, clerks would be forced to accept any and all ballots.
Furthermore, absentee and vote by mail ballots currently require security envelopes. There is no provision in HR1 for this security feature. For states that have ballot drop box locations, the opportunity for drop box ballot stuffing is enormous if HR1 passes.
3) Internet voter registration
SEC. 1002. USE OF INTERNET TO UPDATE REGISTRATION INFORMATION.
(a) In General.--
(1) Updates to information contained on computerized statewide voter registration list.--Section 303(a) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (52 U.S.C. 21083(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Use of internet by registered voters to update information.--
``(A) In general.--The appropriate State or local election official shall ensure that any registered voter on the computerized list may at any time update the voter's registration information, including the voter's address and electronic mail address, online through the official public website of the election official responsible for the maintenance of the list, so long as the voter attests to the contents of the update by providing a signature in electronic form in the same manner required under section 6A(c) of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.
Clean voter rolls are sacrosanct. They are integral to the integrity of the voting system. It will be very easy for nefarious actors to overload the system with fake registrations.
4) Voter roll maintenance will be difficult
``SEC. 8A. CONDITIONS FOR REMOVAL OF VOTERS FROM OFFICIAL LIST OF REGISTERED VOTERS.
``(a) Verification on Basis of Objective and Reliable Evidence of Ineligibility.--
``(1) Requiring verification.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a State may not remove the name of any registrant from the official list of voters eligible to vote in elections for Federal office in the State unless the State verifies, on the basis of objective and reliable evidence, that the registrant is ineligible to vote in such elections.
``(2) Factors not considered as objective and reliable evidence of ineligibility.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the following factors, or any combination thereof, shall not be treated as objective and reliable evidence of a registrant's ineligibility to vote:
``(A) The failure of the registrant to vote in any election.
``(B) The failure of the registrant to respond to any notice sent under section 8(d), unless the notice has been returned as undeliverable.
``(C) The failure of the registrant to take any other action with respect to voting in any election or with respect to the registrant's status as a registrant.
Once registered, it's practically illegal under HR1/SR1 to unregister anyone. Combine that with it's illegal to question a voter, illegal to deny a ballot and wide-open registration procedures, and the "F" word is codified. Of course, these are not the only ills in HR1/SR1. There are many others. However, to be fair, there are a few positives in the bill, like paper ballots and risk limiting audits. Unfortunately, two parts cyanide one part sugar a healthy recipe does not make!
Since HR1/SR1 is probably doomed to filibuster, the public should brace for the well-worn accusations of racism and voter suppression. The cancel culture, supported by the formerly main stream media and the large internet corporations, trots this tired and unsupported accusation out every time a discussion on the merits is made. Unfortunately, the work around for the progressives' agenda is already in the works.
Much of the bill is already being reconstituted and run piece meal through the political machinery. This is obviously a favorite ploy of progressive politicians: keep ramming pieces of the bill through until the intent is accomplished. This piece meal process is where the real fight will occur.
Everything that fair minded and freedom loving citizens value is at risk. Of course let the progressives beware-should the American people lose a sound and secure election system, the Democrats may find themselves howling mad when 50 million disabled absentee Republican voters flip California! The real risk is the loss of trust in the integrity of the voting system.
Remember, we do not vote in fair, open and honest elections to determine the winners- we vote in them so that the losers accept a peaceful transfer of power.If this ends, so will the "United" States, as individual states will have no choice but to separate themselves from unlawful Federal power grabs.