We are in a competition of models with autocracies, and we are trying to show the world that American democracy and democracy writ large can work, can effectively deliver the will of the people. And to the extent that we are not updating, refurbishing, revamping our own democratic processes and procedures to meet the needs of the modern moment, then we are not going to be as successful in making that case to the rest of the world — China, to Russia or to anyone else. And so there is a national security dimension to this today, just as there was through the decades of the Cold War.
He hits the nail on the head and echoes an argument that Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) made in a recent podcast interview with former Obama adviser David Axelrod. “When you listen to Donald Trump talk now, when you hear the language he’s using now, it is essentially the same things that the Chinese Communist Party, for example, says about the United States and our democracy,” she said. “When he says that our system doesn’t work … when he suggests that it’s, you know, incapable of conveying the will of the people, you know, that somehow it’s failed — those are the same things that the Chinese government says about us. And and it’s very dangerous and damaging.”
Unfortunately she does not follow that to the logical conclusion: We need to fend off attacks against our voting system. While the national security argument may be lost on Republicans, all Senate Democrats should agree that defending the sanctity of elections — the infrastructure of democracy — should be a nonpartisan goal. Since H.R. 1 runs into predictable opposition from Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), Democrats must come up with some alternate means of fortifying democracy.
First, as the Justice Department’s website affirms, “the Voting Rights Act permits federal observers to monitor procedures in polling places and at sites where ballots are counted in eligible political subdivisions.” The administration should therefore deploy monitors to any jurisdiction in which the apparatus of vote tabulation is controlled by partisan actors instead of nonpartisan voting officials. It will then be in a position to document voting procedures, debunk specious fraud claims and pursue cases against attempts to falsify returns or induce public officials to do the same.
Second, Congress should allocate substantial funds to ensure the smooth operation of elections, purchase reliable machines and hire trained election personnel. As Republicans have noted, private donors had to scrape money together to ensure voting ran effectively in 2020. With adequate federal funding that issue can be eliminated.
Third, a savvy reporter in Monday’s briefing had this exchange with White House press secretary Jen Psaki:
Q: A number of the bills that have passed Republican legislatures and are pending before Republican legislatures take the voting and the counting of votes and the running of elections out of the hands of nonpartisan officials and put them in the hands of Republican state legislatures. …The For the People Act does not address the issue of counting the votes and rigging or ignoring the counting of votes if a Democrat wins. How much of a concern is this to the president? And what — what’s he going to do to highlight this and find a solution?Psaki: Well, Andrew, it’s a really important issue to raise. And as you’ve noted, there are pieces of legislation — putting the federal effort aside — that are moving their way through state legislatures, which would make it part- — a partisan — in some scenarios, in some cases, put the hands in the power of a partisan decision-making body or individual. And clearly that’s concerning.We noted in the announcement about the vice president’s role — is that her effort would be focused partially on federal legislation and moving that forward, seeing what path — the path looks forward — looks like moving forward, but also working with voting rights groups, working with state activists, working with others to see how we can address these challenges. ...Q: Would the president support Congress amending the Electoral Count Act?Psaki: I — I’m happy to see if there’s any specific statement of administration policy we have on that particular piece.
The reporter’s diagnosis is correct. In response, a group of Democrats and Republicans could collaborate on proposed revisions to the Electoral Count Act of 1877 to remove the potential for any future House of Representatives to overturn the results of the electoral college. Reaffirming that the results of the popular vote, not a state legislature’s preference, are determinative and that the House serves a purely ministerial role would serve the interests of democracy and prevent another 2020 debacle. Since voters may refuse to vote for Republicans in 2022 based on the justifiable fear that they might throw the 2024 election, House and Senate GOP members should want clear rules that make such maneuvering impossible.
Fourth, in addition to putting Manchin to the test of finding 10 Republicans to break the filibuster on H.R. 4, known as the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, Democrats are going to need to be strategic on voting reform. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) had it right:
Democrats do not have the votes for all of H.R. 1′s provisions, but by isolating specific items on which there is broad support (or at least Manchin’s support), Klobuchar may find a basic set of voting standards that even some Republicans support. For example, her own Honest Ads Act had Republican co-sponsors. Republicans generally support a paper trail for post-election auditing. And in exchange for standardizing voter IDs (and allowing documents such as utility bills or student IDs to be used as proof of residency), Republicans might countenance standardized use of mail-in voting, drop boxes and early voting.
Finally, Congress should pass Sen. Ron Wyden’s (D-Ore.) bill introduced last year (shortly to be re-introduced) requiring that the wait time for voting in person not exceed 30 minutes. The bill, Wyden’s office in 2020 explained in a statement, would require states to “file public plans detailing how they will ensure voters can cast ballots with waiting times of less than 30 minutes and require audits by the Election Assistance Commission to determine how many voters face longer waits. The bill includes $500 million to help states reduce voter wait times.” It also provides “a private right of action of $50 for voters forced to wait for longer than 30 minutes, with an additional $50 for every hour after that. Penalties would increase if a court determines long lines were the result of intentional voter suppression or reckless disregard for election plans.”
By all means, Democrats should put H.R. 1 on the floor. But they need a Plan B. Rather than hoping Manchin will see the error of his ways, Democrats should move on H.R. 4, allocate sufficient funds to run elections competently, reform the Electoral Count Act, explore a more limited list of reforms and act to reduce wait times. Meanwhile, the Justice Department can get to work on ensuring the votes in 2022 and beyond are tabulated properly and secure from GOP attempts to rig the results.
Jennifer Rubin is getting her own weekly live chat, where she’ll answer questions and respond to comments from readers on the news of the week every Friday at noon. Submit yours to her first chat, launching on June 11, here.
Read more:
"Opinion" - Google News
June 08, 2021 at 06:45PM
https://ift.tt/3w5Q9MS
Where voting rights go from here - The Washington Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
No comments:
Post a Comment