The following is adapted from a talk delivered at Hillsdale College on September 20, 2021, during a Center for Constructive Alternatives conference on “Critical American Elections.”
‘Sixteen years ago, in 2005, the Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform issued a report that proposed a uniform system of requiring a photo ID in order to vote in U.S. elections. The report also pointed out that widespread absentee voting makes vote fraud more likely. Voter files contain ineligible, duplicate, fictional, and deceased voters, a fact easily exploited using absentee ballots to commit fraud. Citizens who vote absentee are more susceptible to pressure and intimidation. And vote-buying schemes are far easier when citizens vote by mail.
Who was behind the Carter-Baker Commission? Donald Trump? No. The Commission’s two ranking members were former President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, and former Secretary of State James Baker III, a Republican. Other Democrats on the Commission were former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and former Indiana Congressman Lee Hamilton. It was a truly bipartisan commission that made what seemed at the time to be common sense proposals.
How things have changed. Some of the Commission’s members, Jimmy Carter among them, came out last year to disavow the Commission’s work. And despite surveys showing that Americans overwhelmingly support measures to ensure election integrity—a recent Rasmussen survey found that 80 percent of Americans support a voter ID requirement—Democratic leaders across the board oppose such measures in the strongest terms.
Here, for instance, is President Biden speaking recently in Philadelphia, condemning the idea of voter IDs: “There is an unfolding assault taking place in America today—an attempt to suppress and subvert the right to vote in fair and free elections, an assault on democracy, an assault on liberty, an assault on who we are—who we are as Americans. For, make no mistake, bullies and merchants of fear and peddlers of lies are threatening the very foundation of our country.” Sadly but predicably, he went on to suggest that requiring voter IDs would mean returning people to slavery.
But the fact is that the U.S. is an outlier among the world’s democracies in not requiring voter ID. Of the 47 countries in Europe today, 46 of them currently require government-issued photo IDs to vote. The odd man out is the United Kingdom, in which Northern Ireland and many localities require voter IDs, but the requirement is not nationwide. The British Parliament, however, is considering a nationwide requirement, so very soon all 47 European countries will likely have adopted this common-sense policy.
When it comes to absentee voting, we Americans, accustomed as we are to very loose rules, are often shocked to learn that 35 of the 47 European countries—including France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden—don’t allow absentee voting for citizens living in country. Another ten European countries—including England, Ireland, Denmark, Portugal, and Spain—allow absentee voting, but require voters to show up in person and present a photo ID to pick up their ballots. It isn’t like in the U.S., where a person can say he’s going to be out of town and have a ballot mailed to him.
England used to have absentee voting rules similar to ours in the U.S. But in 2004, in the city of Birmingham, officials uncovered a massive vote fraud scheme in the city council races. The six winning Labor candidates had fraudulently acquired about 40,000 absentee votes, mainly from Muslim areas of the city. As a result, England ended the practice of mailing out absentee ballots and required voters to pick up their ballots in person with a photo ID.
Up until 1975, France also had loose absentee voting rules. But when massive vote fraud was discovered on the island of Corsica—where hundreds of thousands of dead people were found to be voting and even larger-scale vote-buying operations were occurring—France banned absentee voting altogether.
On the topic of buying votes, I should point out that we in the U.S. did not always have secret ballots. It wasn’t until 1880 that the first state adopted the secret ballot, and the last state to adopt it was South Carolina in 1950. Perhaps surprisingly, when secret ballots were adopted, the percentage of people voting fell by about twelve percent. Why was that? Prior to the adoption of the secret ballot, lots of people would get paid for voting. In those days, people voted by placing pieces of colored paper in the ballot box, with different colors representing different parties. Party officials would be present to observe what color paper each voter put into the box, and depending on the color, the voter would often get paid. Secret ballots put an end to this practice.
France learned in 1975 that the use of absentee ballots led to the same practice—it allowed third parties to know how people voted and pay them for voting a certain way. This same problem is now proliferating in the U.S. in the form of “ballot harvesting,” the increasingly common practice where party functionaries distribute and collect ballots.
Defenders of our current voting rules point out that in lieu of absentee voting, some European countries allow “proxy voting,” whereby one person can designate another to vote for him. And while it is true that eight of the 47 European countries allow proxy voting—meaning that 39 do not—there are strict requirements. In five of the eight countries—Belgium, England, Monaco, Poland, and Sweden—proxy voting is limited to those with a disability or an illness or who are out of the country. In Poland, it also requires the approval of the local mayor, and in Monaco the approval of the general secretariat. In France and the Netherlands, proxy voting has to be arranged through a notary public. Switzerland is the only country in Europe with a relatively liberal proxy voting policy, requiring only a signature match.
How about our neighbors, Canada and Mexico? Canada requires a photo ID to vote. If a voter shows up at the polls without an ID, he is allowed to vote only if he declares who he is in writing and if there is someone working at the polling station who can personally verify his identity.
Mexico has had a long history of election fraud. Partly because its leaders were concerned about a drop in foreign investment if it wasn’t perceived to be a legitimate democracy, Mexico recently instituted strict reforms. Voters must present a biometric ID—an ID with not only a photo, but also a thumb print. Voters also have indelible ink applied to their thumbs, preventing them from voting more than once. And absentee voting is prohibited, even for people living outside the country.
Those who oppose election integrity reform here in the U.S. often condemn it as a means of “voter suppression.” But in Mexico, the percent of people voting rose from 59 percent before the reforms to 68 percent after. It turned out that Mexicans were more, not less, likely to vote when they had confidence that their votes mattered.
H.R. 1, the radical bill Democratic Party leaders have been pushing to adopt this year, would prohibit states from requiring voter ID and require states to allow permanent mail-in voting. And mail-in voting, I hardly need to point out, is even worse, in terms of vote fraud, than absentee voting. With absentee voting, a person at least has to request a ballot. With mail-in voting—as we saw in too many places in the 2020 election—ballots are simply mailed out to everyone. With loose absentee voting rules, a country is making itself vulnerable to vote fraud. With mail-in voting, a country is almost begging for vote fraud.
If the rhetoric we hear from the Left today is correct—if voter ID requirements and restrictions on absentee (or even mail-in) voting are un-democratic—then so are the countries of Europe and the rest of the developed world. But this is utter nonsense.
Those opposing common sense measures to ensure integrity in U.S. elections—measures such as those recommended by the bipartisan Carter-Baker Commission in 2005—are not motivated by a concern for democracy, but by partisan interests.’https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/ensuring-election-integrity-anti-democratic/?utm_campaign=imprimis&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=182212930&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8-oiRBN0Vykw1B9dlrIYbtAK_LAmaky9raOG5YdLgk5xMLiozqnRM1g8YlXKP9fOTmlK8bzIfCnFdRYYWxqEVGHReQTw&utm_content=182212930&utm_source=hs_email
Even the Marxist Left get it right sometimes.
Need some good NEWS?
‘As a 22-year-old college grad working a nine-to-five job in advertising, Morgan Zegers wanted more. So she took a chance. That’s what one does in America, after all.
In 2019, Zegers quit her job and launched her nonprofit, Young Americans Against Socialism, or YAAS, a nonprofit dedicated to exposing the truth about socialism and communism while educating millennials and Generation Z on the benefits of classical liberalism and capitalism.
She did not tell her parents, and says she felt “very nervous” and knew there were “no guarantees.”
“Am I going to get paid one day?” “Is this going to fail after a week?” These questions and more filled her mind, she says, but she pushed forward. Then things started to happen, with appearances on Fox & Friends, Glenn Beck’s radio program and a speech at the national Tea Party rally.
She quickly knew she had made the right choice.
“You can work in a job that doesn’t make you feel fulfilled, and that will feel like you are slowly being waterboarded everyday. Or, you can choose to follow your passion,” Zegers told The College Fix in an interview.
Today, Zegers, 24, is a guest on a plethora of podcasts and has become a Turning Point USA darling and a frequent contributor to The First TV and Newsmax. YAAS, meanwhile, uses social media as a major tool in reaching young people.
On social media, add up her and her organization’s followers on various platforms such as Instagram, YouTube and Twitter, and it’s well over several hundred thousand and growing.’https://www.thecollegefix.com/meet-gen-zs-industrious-commie-fighting-warrior-morgan-zegers/
Who loves America?! Perhaps, we should ask; “What recent President loves America?”
‘You’d think it’d be reasonable to assume that, when in office, all presidents loved America. Raised hearing tales of such greats as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Teddy Roosevelt, I certainly thought so. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the case in the modern era.
Other than Trump, the last one to certainly love America was Reagan. From his days as a young adult to his last days in office, he was a striver that constantly worked to better America. In his youth, he testified in HUAC, helping that body find out which Americans were communists. Later, as president, he fought for America with all his might.
But then came a long period of darkness. HW might have loved America in his youth, but, by the time he was president, it would have been hard to say that he truly believed in American exceptionalism. When given an opportunity to have Yeltsin denounce communism once and for all, as Dianna West recounts in American Betrayal, he refused to do so; he felt uncomfortable with the whole situation. Similarly, he involved us abroad without completing the job, raised taxes, and didn’t even begin to fight the culture war. Frankly, it’d be hard to say he remained a patriot by the time he entered office, much less left it.
Then came Clinton. He didn’t, and still doesn’t, care about anything but power and pleasure. Hence why he shifted in the wind, adjusting his policies to remain popular, while also raping women and having sexual relations with an intern in the Oval Office. Clinton put his personal gratification over the majesty of the state, there’s no way he loved the country. Plus, he signed NAFTA, which was devastating to the American worker.
Then came George W Bush. He let illegals flood into the country, squandered our blood and treasure abroad, and let China rise at a breakneck pace. Worst of all, he kept sending more and more troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, wasting their lives in “nation-building” projects in a region stuck in the Dark Ages. He valued the lives of Iraqis and Afghanis over the lives of US soldiers, valued letting in illegals over protecting American sovereignty, how could he be said to love America?
Then there was Obama, the worst of all. His policies, from weakness abroad to socialism at home, proved devastating to America. Worse yet, they were certainly rooted in a profound dislike of the American system and American exceptionalism. While there might be some who disagree with me about the others, hopefully every conservative can agree that Obama didn’t love America.
But after all that we finally got Trump. After years upon years of presidents squandering our power and treasure, wasting the lives of soldiers and ruining the lives of workers, helping China and Iraq rise while letting America crumble, we finally got a president that did everything he could to make America a better place. Unlike HW he cut taxes. Unlike Clinton he put America above himself. Unlike GW he didn’t send troops to die for no apparent reason. And, unlike Obama, he made America stronger, not weaker. Trump truly loved America.
Biden is a dolt. It’s impossible to know what he thinks because he doesn’t think about anything except what pudding he’s having for dinner.’https://genzconservative.com/trump-loved-america/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=occupied-america-racist-anti-racism-and-the-contradictions-of-american-life_199
I encourage you to listen to Vivek’s whole speech on this subject and then share. Perhaps what he says will WAKE UP that Woke friend!
ID for everything BUT voting!? These people are nuts!!
‘Earlier today, Mitch McConnell blasted the “Outrage Industrial Complex” over the lemming-like response to Georgia’s voting integrity reforms.
“Our private sector must stop taking cues from the Outrage-Industrial Complex,” McConnell added. “Americans do not need or want big business to amplify disinformation or react to every manufactured controversy with frantic left-wing signaling.”
It turns out McConnell is right and in fact, a new AP-NORC poll released Friday shows an overwhelming amount of American support requiring identification to vote.’https://www.zerohedge.com/political/majority-americans-reject-democrats-election-integrity-outrage-support-voter-ids?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter
‘Something is very wrong with Joe Biden—mentally, medically, strategically—or all three.
Of course, he’s long been known as a tone-deaf gaffe-meister. Swearing on live mics. Patronizing politically. As head of administration transparency for Barack Obama, Biden closed the meetings.
Last year, as a candidate for the Democrat nomination, Joe spent much time looking lost in his own Delaware basement. All presidents since 1952 have used teleprompters, few more than Biden’s boss, Obama, who once comically used one standing in the dusty poop of a rodeo arena.
Those machines can be tricky, and the user is expected to appear to speak spontaneously and genuinely from the heart while robotically reading aloud every single word written by someone else scrolling before your eyes. Recall 2016 when Hillary Clinton, likely the worst modern presidential candidate, went on autopilot and even read aloud her parenthetical script directions “(PAUSE FOR APPLAUSE).”
Biden did overcome a childhood stutter. No easy task, but essential for politicians since the invention of radio. Biden’s problems, however, aren’t stuttering. He often appears confused, lost, unsteady, unprepared. Last fall he clearly had no idea what he wanted to say, so at times gave the teleprompter operator on-camera directions—“No, go back.” At one appearance Biden lost track of where he was, standing with his back to the camera.
He shunned spontaneous contact even with cooperative reporters, hardly taking questions. Aides, cupping his elbow for leverage, steered the 77-year-old (now 78) briskly through crowds. Before reducing personal appearances, Biden rambled, often without a point beyond being heard. One time when Jill Biden was speaking and gesturing, Biden put her hand in his mouth. Presumably, he was being silly, but it was a bizarre, worrisome action. Last month she interrupted one joint interview to finish her husband’s wandering answer.
Biden’s campaign days often ended by 9 a.m., while 73-year-old Donald Trump was doing four or five major rally speeches in multiple states daily. You might argue Biden’s absence was strategic to give an imploding Trump the full media spotlight. But it’s not the image of a sharp, fully competent chief executive confident and eager to lead the free world on the world stage.
At one town hall in Iowa, Delaware resident Biden asked audience members how the infrastructure was there in Ohio. Easterners do seem susceptible to confusing Iowa and Ohio. But that’s a dumb mistake casting doubt on mental acuity if you’re campaigning to be president of all Americans. Especially four years after your coastal party lost the election by ignoring most of the Heartland.
In office, Biden has been no model of action beyond photo-op signings. While a masked Kamala Harris stands stoically behind him, the oldest man to become POTUS sits at an empty impromptu desk with an immense presidential seal and his notes. On one Zoom conference with Democrats Biden offered to take questions. Boom! The video feed was instantly terminated. At another event the president couldn’t remember his defense secretary’s name, standing right next to him. While memory losses can occur ordinarily, they are also early signs of dementia, according to medical studies.
When Biden did get out of the White House, he had last week’s disastrous trip up the stairs of Air Force One, where he stumbled not once, not twice, but thrice. As my colleague Nick Arama and others have chronicled here, inept aides, who might have credibly dismissed the awful image as something that happens to everyone sometimes, blamed the wind. The wind? The President of the United States, who must face Xi Jinping, Kim Jung-un, and those murderous mullahs, was felled by the wind? This’s the best line Biden’s band of experienced aides can devise?
You saw much media attention last week on Biden’s exclusive network interview with a handpicked former Bill Clinton aide. It was taped Wednesday but not broadcast until Thursday. What you likely missed in the avalanche of adulation was a tiny italic note on ABC’s transcript—“Edited for Clarity.”
So, in those intervening 24 hours, Joe Biden’s potential confusions, mumblings, mistakes were edited for clarity? Seriously? By whom? Former presidential aides had never heard of such a thing. ABC didn’t answer an email request for clarification. But media does not clean up a president’s words for him. White House officials do not allow anyone else to play with presidential words. And you don’t let the White House change what’s on tape either, certainly not without a full public explanation.
Thursday’s scheduled live news conference should preclude such tinkering.
More importantly, exactly what did Biden confuse? Americans have a right to know without sympathetic media covering for him. And what might that reveal about his mental state? Most Americans know some elderly, even care for them. They understand old folks accidentally fall, forget daily details, confuse names. They’re sympathetic. It’s called aging; it happens to those of us who survive.
But elderly grandparents do not have the nuclear launch codes. They cannot send loyal sons and daughters in harm’s way for decades in distant lands on mission-creep operations. During his almost daily media encounters, Trump underwent nonstop scrutiny. He said and did many controversial things in those 1,461 days. But No. 45 launched no new military conflicts.
Biden has not held a solo news conference in his first two months, a modern record. Another dodgy piece of circumstantial evidence raising concerns about his cognitive condition among ordinary Americans, who may disagree on policies but covet confidence in any leader. Not to mention worried allies and opportunistic adversaries, who may see an opening.
Reminder: In 1962 the world came closest to Armageddon when the Soviet Union moved nuclear missiles into Cuba after Premier Nikita Khrushchev determined that John Kennedy was a weak president.
Biden’s first news conference is Thursday. But by seeking to hide what has become obvious infirmities, aides have not served him well so far. And media seem reluctant to press that issue hard. This has now gone beyond politics. The concerns must be addressed forthrightly.
Don’t hold your breath, though. Political coverups are just too tempting. Ask Andrew Cuomo.’https://redstate.com/andrewmalcolm/2021/03/22/a-detailed-and-disturbing-overview-joe-biden-looks-seriously-unwell-n347977