H.R. 1, clearly designed to favor the Democratic Party, passed the U.S. House of Representatives recently, and is now under consideration in the Senate. Among the many provisions of the bill that would only make voter fraud easier and more likely is the provision banning states from requiring a photo ID before a person casts a vote. Instead, the bill stipulates that states accept a signed statement from individuals as the only proof necessary that the person voting is who he claims to be.
However, a new Rasmussen Reports poll conducted March 14-15 indicates that the overwhelming majority of Americans continue to favor photo-ID laws for voting. In fact, support for such laws has increased since 2018. Then, 67 percent of those surveyed agreed that a person should be required to produce photo identification before voting.
Now, the Rasmussen poll found that 75 percent of respondents support photo-ID laws. A mere 21 percent opposed them.
That the disdain for photo ID laws is largely a partisan matter is demonstrated by the fact that 87 percent of Republicans favor such laws, while 77 percent of Independents and other party members support photo ID. A smaller percentage — 60 percent — of Democrats polled said that they support photo ID. Significantly, while this is a smaller percentage than Republicans and Independents, even a strong majority of Democrats favor photo ID.
Thirty-six states have some form of voter ID laws, but H.R. 1 proposes to nix them.
The principal argument that opponents make against photo ID laws is that they somehow discriminate against black voters and other minorities, but 60 percent polled rejected that assertion. Only 31 percent polled agreed that such laws discriminate. Not surprisingly, 51 percent of Democrats held that photo ID laws are discriminatory.
Yet, 69 percent of blacks and 82 percent of other minorities in the poll expressed support for such laws.
Rasmussen also found that those under 40 were actually more likely than those over 40 to support photo ID laws. This is probably because those under 40 are accustomed to routinely showing a photo ID in conducting all sorts of business. The most commonly used form of photo ID used, both in voting and in conducting business, is, of course a driver’s license. But those states that require photo ID allow other forms of government-issued photo ID, including passports as well as membership cards for many American Indian tribes. An individual can also obtain a photo ID for free from his state government if, for example, he does not have a driver’s license. Exactly how requiring something that is routinely used in all manner of daily business other than voting could be discriminatory is not usually explained, but instead is just asserted.
The 2020 presidential election has caused millions of Americans to question whether the election was conducted fairly. Sixty-one percent of Republicans do not believe that Joe Biden actually won the election. One would think that because of this, Congress would, if anything, be moving to reassure Americans that our election process is fair.
Instead, Democrats in Congress are attempting a federal takeover of America’s elections, usurping this authority from the states. There is nothing in the Constitution that gives Congress the authority to do what the Democrats are attempting.
None.
It is obvious that the Democratic Party leadership in Congress wants to institutionalize the opportunities for Democrats to win elections through a questionable law that increases their vote totals, even if it makes the outcome of the election untrustworthy. H.R. 1, among other provisions, would remove the requirement for a witness signature or notarization of an absentee ballot, require states to accept and count absentee ballots received up to 10 days after election day, prevent state election officials from verifying the addresses of registered voters, protects illegal aliens from prosecution if they are registered to vote, allow 16- and 17-year-olds to vote, mandates early voting, and requires states to redraw their congressional district boundaries via “independent” commissions rather than by the state legislature. This last provision has been pushed by former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder.
In other words, the purpose is to create a permanent Democratic Party majority in Congress.
In addition to its clear unconstitutionality in general, H.R. 1 even proposes to criminalize the publication of “misleading information” about the election! A person found guilty of this could face five years in prison. This is no different than the Sedition Act passed by Congress in 1798, which was designed to shut down opposition to the government. It clearly violates the First Amendment’s protections of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, just as the Sedition Act did in the late 18th century. One would think that the U.S. Supreme Court would strike down this unconstitutional law, but who knows? States need to be prepared to nullify this proposal in any case.
It is discouraging that a majority of members of the House of Representatives would actually support such an unconstitutional bill, but it is encouraging that a substantial majority of Americans polled by Rasmussen reject a key provision of the bill, which proposes to ban the photo ID laws of 36 states — photo ID laws that make it more difficult to commit election fraud.
