The voting rights legislation that’s being proposed is a federal takeover of the election process. Legislation can be put forward for elections, but what the Democrats are going to do would leave nothing left for states to decide. Plus, the legislation doesn’t secure an election. It makes it easier to commit fraud.
Ballot harvesting is a real thing, and it’s dangerous. Given that some people, such as people in nursing homes and the mental handicap, aren’t as cognitively aware as others are, those are going to be specific targets of any party that chooses to proxy votes. That’s not to say those individuals can’t vote, but to have political staff go to those places with the intent of gathering as many votes as they can and benefit off of the cognitive abilities of the constituents. Not only is it currently illegal, but it’s morally unacceptable.
Voting identification laws can also be left to the states. The constitutionality of voting wouldn’t affect voter identification laws. The best thing it would do is act as a verification process to ensure fraud is less likely to occur. It would also transfer a large amount of power to the federal government with undue harm to the states.
No person, no state, or territory impose voting rights suppression on anyone. But as we continue to succeed and learn, we have to adapt to the new fraudulent tactics that go into voting.
Jamelle Bouie, New York Times, said, “The clear implication of the Republican argument is that any federal regulation of state elections is constitutionally suspect.”
No, it’s not. Even as an opinion, no evidence suggests that Republicans are arguing against federal regulations in the election. The argument is based on the current Democrat-controlled federal government and the claims that the 2020 election was the most secure in history. It’s simply untrue. Was there enough fraud to overturn the 2020 election? Maybe. That doesn’t mean that the federal government should overstep its authority. It’s still the right of a state to make their elections more secure as long as they don’t suppress anyone’s vote. No state has unreasonable voting laws, which means the federal government shouldn’t overstep.
The federal-state balance is vital for the continuation of democracy. Without that and the filibuster, one party would have too much control over the entire country. They could then ensure that they always won. That’s what happens with tyranny. Crazy, right?
With any legislation, the point of passing it should be to fix a problem. If there isn’t a problem, don’t fix it unless a problem comes up. This voting rights nonsense directly results from 18 states that passed voting laws in their states, and the Democrat party is upset about it. That’s all it is. They want to make verification as difficult as possible and frame it as voting rights.