THE FOCUS (2/2/2021)
The First Bill in the House by Democrats to Create a Permanent One-Party Rule
Democrats are about to introduce their first bill in the House: H.R.1 which they label it “For the People Act of 2021“. The 791 page bill is really not about the people. It’s all about power for Democrats. The bill will destroy America. Why? Because it is geared toward creating a permanent one-party rule by the Democratic Party by making voting very susceptible to fraud and bias toward the Democratic Party’s advantage.
Let’s take a look at some of the provisions in this first installment of this report. The next installment will discuss the mandatory early voting and nationwide mail-in voting introduced in the bill.
Internet-only registration with electronic signature submission.
Banning the requirement to provide a full SSN for voter registration.
Nationwide ‘Motor Voter’ registration.
16 year olds required to be registered to vote.
Nationwide same-day registration.
Banning voter ID.
Prohibiting attempts to clean voter rolls or voter lists.
All felons and ex-felons can vote.
1. Internet-only registration with electronic signature submission
This potentially can increase the possibility of “phantom” or not real voters. Even unemployment insurance benefit, which was overwhelmingly filed online and has some security mechanism in place, is heavily suffered from fraud. As reported here, almost 30% of unemployment insurance benefit in California (amount to $31B) went to fraudsters.
2. Banning the requirement to provide a full Social Security Number (SSN) for voter registration
Essentially anybody can register to vote. SSN (9-digit number) is the basic identification number that every American citizen has (all legal immigrants and many illegal immigrants also have SSN).
To be fair, the bill is saying something about this: “…to the extent that the application requires the applicant to provide a Social Security number, may not require the applicant to provide more than the last 4 digits of such number”.
However, without requiring the full information of basic ID to register to vote, one can register by giving any four-digit numbers which are not necessarily tied to their SSN. If applying for any loans or dealing with taxes required a full information of SSN, why not doing the same manner when registering to vote, given the information is shared to the state election agency which administers the voter data and election, and not to some shady private entity.
3. Nationwide ‘Motor Voter’ registration
(2) DEFINITION.—The term “automatic registration” means a system that registers an individual to vote in elections for Federal office in a State, if eligible, by electronically transferring the information necessary for registration from government agencies to election officials of the State so that, unless the individual affirmatively declines to be registered, the individual will be registered to vote in such elections.
There is no proof of ID (citizenship) required to register via “Motor Registration”. This will open flood gates to a massive voter fraud where people who are not legal to vote may register to vote. Motor voter registration is how thousands of illegal immigrants/voters became registered voters or voters’ party affiliations were switched without their consent in California.
4. 16 year olds are required to be registered to vote
(d) Treatment Of Individuals Under 18 Years Of Age.—A State may not refuse to treat an individual as an eligible individual for purposes of this part on the grounds that the individual is less than 18 years of age at the time a contributing agency receives information with respect to the individual, so long as the individual is at least 16 years of age at such time. Nothing in the previous sentence may be construed to require a State to permit an individual who is under 18 years of age at the time of an election for Federal office to vote in the election.
In another part of the bill, the children voters are also stressed.
“(k) Acceptance Of Applications From Individuals Under 18 Years Of Age.—
“(1) IN GENERAL.—A State may not refuse to accept or process an individual’s application to register to vote in elections for Federal office on the grounds that the individual is under 18 years of age at the time the individual submits the application, so long as the individual is at least 16 years of age at such time.
If voting registration and voting day are two years apart, this law makes sense. However, as we shall see in the next section, the Democrats are also pushing for same-day registration in which a person is allowed to register to vote on election day. Here, the Democrats essentially want to lower the voting age to 16. How about the minimum age for tobacco and alcohol consumption? The federal minimum age of sale of tobacco and alcohol products is 21! And somehow, we want our teenagers to decide the future of the nation.
The reason the Democrats are pushing to lower the minimum voting age from 18 to 16 years old is because overwhelmingly this group of voters will vote for Democrats. In 2020, about 65% of voters aged 18 to 24 years old voted for Democrats.
According to estimates by US Census Bureau, there were about 8.5 million American teenagers aged 16 and 17 years old in 2019. Assuming a voter turnout of 50% (In 2020, the voter turnout for aged 18-29 was estimated between 52 and 55%), lowering the voting age to 16 could add 2-3 million of new Democratic voters in 2022 and 2024.
5. Nationwide same-day registration
“(1) REGISTRATION.—Each State shall permit any eligible individual on the day of a Federal election and on any day when voting, including early voting, is permitted for a Federal election—
Some states have previously adopted this policy, but the Democrats now want it to be implemented nationwide. This is absolutely a ridiculous law. It could create congestion as well as potential for voter fraud during election day.
Voters must be required to register at some reasonable time prior to election day to give the election officials as well as political parties and candidates competing in elections an identical set of voter list. Without it, election officials can have all the temptations in the world to manipulate the election results to the advantage of a certain political party or candidate.
One evidence of voter fraud in Michigan in the 2020 presidential election was that there were 174,384 absentee ballots counted without having corresponding voter registration numbers for corresponding precincts, which is illegal according to state law. Had both political parties along with the state election commission been armed with identical lists of registered voters prior to election day, this type of fraud would have been be easily identified and denied.
Having an identical set of voter list at some period prior to election day is neither racism nor partisan. It is certainly not a completely strange idea. In fact, the idea behind it is in order to facilitate a honest, transparent, and fair election. Many countries have been adopting it, including Germany and Indonesia.
In Indonesia for instance, the General Election Commission first compile the Temporary Voter List several months prior to election day. The List will then be updated to produce the Final Voter List about one to two months before election day. The determination of voter data for both Temporary and Final List always involve the public as well as the political parties participating in the election and related local, regional, and national election agencies.
Is it too much to have the same thing in the US? Why are the Democrats so against this idea?
6. Banning voter ID by replacing it with ‘I totes promise I’m not a degenerate rigger’ note
“(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;
This should not be complicated. Requiring a proof of ID to vote is common sense. All Americans have social security cards as a basic ID (if they lost it, they can ask for the replacement easily). According to SS Administration: "Getting a replacement Security number (SSN) card has never been easier. As long as you’re only requesting a replacement card, and no other changes, you can use our free online services from anywhere."
Along with a driver license, they can use it as an ID to vote. If a person does not have a driver license, the state election commission can then issue voter registration cards which can be used as an ID along with the SSN when they go to the polling station.
For comparison, in Germany, during election day, voters go to the appropriate polling station or precinct by taking:
Voter registration card (Wahlschein).
Proof of residency (Anmeldung).
Proof of identity (passport or driving licence).
That means, voters in Germany must register at some point before election day (NOT the same day), and then they received their voter registration card confirming their eligibility to vote. They must also bring the proof of their identity and residency.
The US must adopt the election policies implemented in the two countries above. All parties involved in the election along with the related agencies or commission must have the same set of final voter list. Otherwise, this is an easy invitation to voter fraud.
Secondly, the idea of requiring voter ID has nothing to do with racism. However, the Democratic Party has been adamantly against voter ID requirement. The Republican Party, the proponent of voter ID requirement, has frequently been labelled racist.
The Democrats are fighting through the Court to ban the voter ID requirement. For instance, a federal court blocked North Carolina’s voter ID requirements (voters must show a proof of ID to vote) that were set to go into effect in 2020. The president of the North Carolina NAACP chapter said that the voter ID requirement is “to impede the right to vote of African Americans and Latinos in this state.”
How is it going to impede the right to vote? I am sure the same "voters" will not have any trouble and problem showing their IDs to buy cigarettes and alcoholic beverages, which is required by law. Requiring individuals to show picture identification—a minimal burden—is a valid way to prevent fraud.
The reason given by the opponents of voter ID requirement is along the line given by this study that shows strict identification laws have a negative impact on the turnout of racial and ethnic minorities in primaries and general elections.
In states with strict ID laws, Hispanic turnout was 7.1 percentage points lower in general elections and 5.3 percentage points lower in primary elections compared to states without such laws.
There was no significant difference between turnout of African Americans in strict voter ID states and their counterparts in non-strict states in general elections. But in primaries, African American turnout was 4.6 percentage points lower in states with strict lD laws.
Turnout among Asian American voters in strict ID states was 5.4 percentage points lower in general elections and 6.7 percentage points lower in primaries.
Notice that the voter turnout among blacks is not statistically different whether they have to show their voter ID or not during the general election. The researchers further offer two possible explanations for the effects of strict voter ID laws. One is some people simply lack the required ID. For example, Blacks, Latinos, and the poor are more likely to lack transportation to ID-issuing offices that are often miles away, particularly in rural areas of the South.
However, the other explanation given by the authors, which is related to past history, is rather amusing:
"Where and when these laws are passed, members of certain groups might feel unwelcome at the polls," they write, pointing to previous research. "This is especially true for racial minorities, who have been the subject of election-related violence at different points in American history, but it could also affect those on the political left and potentially even younger socioeconomically disadvantaged."
So, because of past history, we should not require people to show their ID to vote. If that’s the case, when will this is going to stop? Or, are we going to be permanently hindered by the past? If one doesn’t want to show his or her ID to vote, how can we verify that the person is actually the one is listed on the voter registration or eligible to eligible to vote at all?
7) Prohibiting attempts to clean voter rolls of non-residents
“(1) REQUIREMENTS FOR CHALLENGES.—No person, other than a State or local election official, shall submit a formal challenge to an individual’s eligibility to register to vote in an election for Federal office or to vote in an election for Federal office unless that challenge is supported by personal knowledge regarding the grounds for ineligibility which is—
Essentially the public or even the political parties cannot challenge the accuracy of the voter list. Why do the Democrats make it so difficult to challenge the voter list? Because that improves the transparency. Unfortunately, the US voter list is badly outdated. A new report by the Pew Center on the States in 2012 finds that:
Approximately 24 million—one of every eight—voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.
More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters.
Approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.
Before the 2016 election, Trump has made this rather obscure report public. However, the leftist media along with its factcheck division attacked him for pointing that out and suggesting Trump just made a bogus voter fraud claim. Of course, if the election is 100% in-person, that would hardly be a problem. However, when the proportion of ballots sent via mail rapidly increased as in the 2020 election, that could easily create an opportunity for fraud.
Instead of attacking Trump for stating the obvious, the media should have done its job by investigating the number of dead voters in the last several elections. Of course, they will not do it because it will not make Democrats good.
Along with ballot harvesting, which is also introduced in the bill and will be discussed in the next report, an outdated and badly inaccurate voter list can provide a great opportunity for voter fraud.
8) All felons and ex-felons can vote
(1) NOTIFICATION.—On the date determined under paragraph (2), each State shall notify in writing any individual who has been convicted of a criminal offense under the law of that State that such individual has the right to vote in an election for Federal office pursuant to the Democracy Restoration Act of 2021 and may register to vote in any such election and provide such individual with any materials that are necessary to register to vote in any such election.
Democrats want to make felons eligible to vote. This is not surprising. According to a new study published in the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, most convicts vote Democrat. In the three states the study analyzed (New York, New Mexico, and North Carolina) convicts overwhelmingly identified with the Democratic Party. Almost 62% of convicts in New York are registered Democrats and only 9% are Republican; 52% in New Mexico are Democrat, with just over 10% as Republican; and 54.6% are Democrat in North Carolina, and 10.2% are Republican.
As of 2020, an estimated 5.17 million voting age population in jail who were not eligible to vote due their felony convictions. If two-third of them are likely to vote for Democrats, that could give them a few million extra votes.
Democrats are working hard to make it easier to commit fraud in elections. In the absence of intense scrutiny by the media and the unwillingness of the court to hear election fraud cases, any party profiting from this scheme will try exploit the loopholes for their maximum advantage. And one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to believe that these new proposed rules, which will very likely become law soon, are not made to benefit the Republican Party. It is designed to significantly help create a permanent one-party rule, that is a perpetual control of the US governments by the Democratic Party. Nothing democratic about it. Of course, the radical left institution, but pretending non-partisan, such as Brenan Center for Justice is adamantly support this proposed bill.
And wait until you see mandatory early voting, mail-in ballot, and ballot harvesting proposed by the Democrats in the bill.
Previous "THE FOCUS"