Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

After Mail-In Midterm Mess, Gov. Lombardo Now Backs Bill To Restore Integrity To Nevada’s Election System
The Federalist ^ | 04/07/2023 | Shawn Fleetwood

Posted on 04/07/2023 9:52:09 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

Lombardo introduced SB 405, which would implement voter ID requirements and commonsense reforms to Nevada’s unsupervised mail-in voting system.

After his Democrat predecessor’s expansion of mail-in voting left Nevada’s elections in complete disarray, Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo is backing legislation designed to restore integrity to the state’s electoral system.

Last week, Lombardo introduced SB 405, which would implement voter ID requirements and commonsense reforms to Nevada’s unsupervised mail-in voting system. Under the bill, citizens would be required to show “proof of identity” in order to vote in person, which includes “a document or identity card” issued by Nevada, the United States, “or a federally recognized Indian tribe.” Residents voting by mail would be mandated to write their “driver’s license number or identification card number” or the “last four digits of [their] social security number” on their ballots.

Under current state law, “active registered voters are not required to provide identification.” Instead, election workers “compare signatures from voters as they cast a ballot to the signature on file from registration.” Voters in need of a state-issued form of ID would be permitted to acquire one free of charge from the Nevada DMV.

“We require people to have a valid form of identification to get on a plane, to operate a motor vehicle, or to purchase alcohol or cigarettes but not to cast a vote in an election. This is illogical,” Lombardo said during his State of the State address earlier this year. Recent polling has shown strong support among Nevadans for voter ID requirements.

Other changes included in SB 405 are provisions placing safeguards on Nevada’s expansive and unsupervised mail-in voting system. As The Federalist’s Victoria Marshall previously reported, the state, then run by Democrats, “originally allowed a temporary expansion of vote-by-mail during the 2020 general election over coronavirus concerns,” but “made it the permanent law of the land” in 2021 by “requiring election officials to send out mail-in ballots to all of the state’s registered voters.”

SB 405 would not only repeal Nevada’s automatic vote-by-mail system by requiring voters to request their mail-in ballots, it would also mandate that such ballots be received by county clerks before polls close on Election Day in order to be counted. State law currently allows mail-in ballots to be “postmarked by Election Day and … arrive at an elections office up to four days later to be counted,” according to a local news outlet.

The proposed bill would also place limits on ballot harvesting, the practice whereby third parties collect mail-in ballots from voters. SB 405 stipulates that “it is unlawful for any person to return a mail ballot other than the voter or, at the request of the voter, a person authorized by the voter.” An individual authorized to return a voter’s ballot would be required to sign a form under penalty of perjury confirming he has permission to do so and submit a report to the secretary of state that includes a list of “each voter on whose behalf the person returned a mail ballot.” Said individuals would furthermore be prohibited from returning more than 30 ballots per election.

The introduction of SB 405 came the same week the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) released a report detailing the catastrophic failure of Nevada’s automatic vote-by-mail system in the 2022 midterms. According to data from the Nevada secretary of state’s office, 95,556 ballots were sent to undeliverable addresses, 8,036 were rejected by election officials, and 1.2 million ballots were never returned to be counted.

For perspective, Democrat incumbent Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto defeated Republican candidate Adam Laxalt by 7,928 votes — fewer than the 8,036 ballots rejected upon receipt by election officials.

While significant, Lombardo’s efforts to enhance the integrity of Nevada’s elections are likely to face resistance from Nevada Democrats, who control both chambers of the state legislature. Following SB 405’s introduction, Democrat Assemblywoman Daniele Monroe-Moreno resorted to accusing Lombardo of “rolling back voting rights” and “emboldening election deniers.”


Shawn Fleetwood is a Staff Writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Nevada
KEYWORDS: 2000ballots; 2000donations; 2000mules; ballotfraud; electionfraud; integrity; kabukitheatre; mailinvoting; nevada; votefraud; voterfraud

1 posted on 04/07/2023 9:52:09 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Call me sceptical. Once RATs acquire power they don’t let it go. It is all those demonic puppets live for.


2 posted on 04/07/2023 9:56:27 PM PDT by Nateman (If Mohammad was not the Anti Christ Mad Moe definitely comes in as a Strong second..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Funny and i didn’t read the article but the only thing that will prevent this is audits. So the process can be angels collecting ballots, if you can’t audit the process it really doesn’t matter what the process is.


3 posted on 04/07/2023 9:58:19 PM PDT by kvanbrunt2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

IIRC NevaDUH dem legislators have a super in the senate and nearly one in the assembly. So........


4 posted on 04/07/2023 10:07:29 PM PDT by rktman (Destroy America from within? Check! WTH? Enlisted USN 1967 to end up with this? 😕)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

When I voted in Las Vegas in the 2012 Presidential Election, almost every person on line to vote was black or Hispanic which is unusual because the polling location was in a predominantly white area.The person in front of me had a Dominican passport. And the entire parking lot, with the exception of my vehicle, had cars with plates from California.


5 posted on 04/07/2023 10:12:22 PM PDT by thegagline (Sic semper tyrannis! Goldwater in 2024)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Some activist judge will throw it out.


6 posted on 04/07/2023 10:14:54 PM PDT by TBP (Decent people cannot fathom the amoral cruelty of the Biden regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kvanbrunt2

And having redress in the courts if there are problems.

The courts have said people don’t have standing to sue for election procedures before the election because there is no aggrieved party. You can’t sue during the election. And they won’t touch it after the election because they don’t want to get involved in the outcome.


7 posted on 04/07/2023 10:21:27 PM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom (I don’t like to think before I say something...I want to be just as surprised as everyone els)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Perhaps, but the law getting discussed sounds an awful lot like the system we have in Florida that has really worked well the last 2 elections.

You can vote by mail, but the voter has to request a ballot and show proof of ID to do do, the ballot has to be received by the Supervisor of Elections on or before election day.

Yes, some judge could throw out the law but similar laws are in place in multiple states already.


8 posted on 04/08/2023 12:47:03 AM PDT by srmanuel ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ProtectOurFreedom
The courts have said people don’t have standing to sue for election procedures before the election because there is no aggrieved party. You can’t sue during the election. And they won’t touch it after the election because they don’t want to get involved in the outcome.

Unless somehow a Republican has the advantage. THEN and ONLY THEN will the courts get involved.
9 posted on 04/08/2023 5:11:16 AM PDT by Dan in Wichita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson