Posted on 11/01/2024 9:41:11 AM PDT by alancarp
That's all well and good, but it's being largely ignored with respect to the evident Citizenship requirement. This proposal -- yeah, I know: it obviously has no shot with Democrats -- is crafted to require integrity in the election process... with teeth to back it up. It is intended to provide a means to enforce the 26th along with providing permanent protection for elections.
Constructive suggestions welcomed.
Well written .
It would be a useless amendment. The ones enforcing it would dictate the terms, and we’d have what we currently have if that were the Dems.
An amendment that set the voting age to 24, allowed only property owners to vote, forbade those on the dole a vote.
Too many amendments already. We need to erase a few. One gave us prohibition another repealed it if I’m right.
“ability to vote in any state or Federal elections is a privilege”
Your amendment says privilege but there are multiple references in the constitution to the right to vote.
Elections are not federal.
The Feds cannot tell my town how to run its election.
Seems redundant if we have the 26th amendment already?
It’s a good dream list, but the problem isn’t law, it is the lack of education and its empowerment of the crooked media.
From what little I know, this is not well written.
Try passing this as an act of Congress first.
You cant legislate patriotism. It just wont work.
Agree, though I’d argue a ‘right’ with restrictions (such as age, living in a particular jurisdiction, etc.) becomes a privilege. Additionally, the ‘right’ has morphed through the years: starting with free males only at least 21 years of age, then adding all males, then adding women, and finally adding those 18+. I therefore liken it to the ‘privilege’ of driving a vehicle.
All that said, I’d happily change that if it could get done.
Nothing stipulates the definition of “citizen”.
I'd argue that they already do in some basic ways: no jurisdiction allows 14 year old to vote, for instance. We're _supposed_ to enforce citizen-only rules, too. Adding a uniform set of basic integrity requirements would level the playing field nationwide... that's the intent.
Thought about that.. I believe it's covered sufficiently by existing laws... and the 26th amendment doesn't expressly define it, either.
“I believe it’s covered sufficiently by existing laws”
It isn’t. Anchor babies are not supposed to count in the 14th.
As noted, the citizenship portion of the 26th is being ignored; the intent here is to give it teeth.
Would be much easier, for sure.
Fair. I originally was gonna add sections for this definition and to also iron-clad-enforce that requirement on Federally elected officials (President, VP, AND Congress), but I got way too long-winded on the rest of it.
Forgot No mail-in ballots and paper ballots retained.
Any amendment such as this has to include a provision giving any state standing to bring an action under it, even against another state.
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.