- Monday, October 24, 2022

If Republicans take control of one or both houses of Congress in November, they should aggressively move on an honest elections reform plan to fend off past Democratic legislation that would have reestablished and nationalized the old-school political machines.

A new Republican majority in Congress could push sensible bills that have already been introduced and that could go a long way in blocking a future proposal like the Democrats’ latest elections bill, the Orwellian “For the People Act” (HR 1). That bill, blocked by a Senate filibuster, would have effectively banned voter ID laws, would have expanded the corrupt practice known as ballot harvesting, and mandated Election Day registration.

I’m generally leery of the federal government intervening in election administration, which should be the purview of state and local governments — the federal government’s primary responsibility on voting rights is to enforce the 14th and 15th amendments. 

Several of the GOP proposals take aim at ballot harvesting, the practice of allowing political operatives to collect and distribute mass quantities of absentee ballots, and a longtime favorite tactic of Democrats — which is linked with their desire for more mail-in voting. HR 1 would have expanded ballot harvesting in every state. Since this practice opens the door for both voter intimidation and ballot tampering, eliminating it would certainly be a federal priority.

In 2020, Rep. Rodney Davis, Illinois Republican, introduced a bill to amend the Help America Vote Act to prohibit federal funds from the Election Assistance Commission from going to states that allow wide-scale ballot harvesting. The proposal has reasonable exceptions for mail carriers and caregivers — but not for shady political operatives hauling bundles of ballots.

Mr. Davis lost his reelection bid this year in a primary. But another GOP member could take up the same proposal. 

The Save Democracy Act was sponsored by Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana, chairman of the Republican Study Committee. It was largely a pushback against HR 1 but should be introduced again if Republicans reclaim the majority.

The bill, limited to federal elections, would promote citizenship and identification-verified voter registration. It would require voters to request an absentee ballot and end unsolicited absentee ballot requests. The bill would require votes to be submitted by the end of Election Day and would also allow representatives from each presidential campaign to observe the vote count.

The bill actually stops short of the 2005 Carter-Baker Commission report’s call for national voter ID — that’s when voter ID was considered bipartisan — before Democrats began calling it “voter suppression.” 

The same report of the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform chaired by Democratic former  President Jimmy Carter and GOP former Secretary of State James Baker also said, “Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud,” and called for limits on ballot harvesting.

Rep. Claudia Tenney, New York Republican, founder and co-chair of the House Election Integrity Caucus, has proposed the “End Zuckerbucks Act,” amending the Internal Revenue Code to prohibit tax-exempt organizations from providing direct funding to official election organizations or paying for election administration.

The bill derives its name from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, who poured about $400 million from his fortune in 2020 into liberal nonprofits that spent the money disproportionately on Democratic-leaning areas. But it would affect any private donors that intervene in local election offices.

Mr. Zuckerberg has sworn off funding future elections after the blowback of what critics viewed as a billionaire oligarch bankrolling election administration.

This proposal would be appropriate, as Congress has the authority to address the law on tax exemption. This still leaves the actual administration of elections to the states.

Yet Democrats will almost certainly lie, and shout “voter suppression,” as they have since they unsuccessfully challenged the Indiana voter ID law in the Supreme Court in 2008.

Democrats are not only historically the party of Jim Crow but also the party of the old corrupt machines such as Tammany Hall in New York and the Daley machine in Chicago, both notorious for voter fraud. And like Tammany Hall and Jim Crow of the past, modern Democratic legislation such as HR 1 was designed to warp election laws to make it easier to win. If Republicans gain a majority, they have to fight back.

Such commonsense legislation as reinforcing ID requirements, blocking ballot harvesting, and keeping private dollars out of election administration, would likely have broad public support, just as voter ID laws have consistently polled about 80% approval across all demographics.

The GOP could at least force President Biden and congressional Democrats to explain their opposition to what would be broadly popular measures that make sense to most Americans. That’s a debate well worth having.

The Republican-proposed bills would go a long way in restoring the public’s trust in elections and preventing the prospect of fraud without restricting anyone’s right to vote. And when, once again, the public sees such laws don’t suppress voting — Democrats would have a difficult time making a case for the rise of a new machine in a future Congress.

• Fred Lucas is the author of “The Myth of Voter Suppression: The Left’s Assault on Clean Elections” and the manager of the Investigative Reporting Project at the Daily Signal.

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide