Replies

1) Motor Voter was early in Bill’s presidency. HAVA was in Bush’s presidency. But Bush and the Republicans naively let Sen Chris Dodd control its writing and administration, even though Republicans had a majority in everything at that time. So the 2 major Fed dictates on elections are unrelated to each other.

2) Show me where the Constitution gives the Feds control of state elections? Only under an extremely loose interpretation of the 13th, 14th, 15th. Some election districts allow non-citizens to vote in local elections. That is in the 10th Amendment.

3) Give me an example of where Fed interference in local affairs has worked out for the good.

4) So prosecute offendors, yes. But no Feralization of local control of the process.

4) So prosecute offendors, yes. But no Feralization of local control of the process.

But let's just say that one thing the Feds could do is to have EVERY State throw out ALL voter registrations after the May elections. Then big national news you must re-register before the next Nov election. It will be everywhere that you must re-register.

Take your voter card from last year and it will be easy'peasy.

Do NOT allow motor voter, ACORN or other left wing groups to register "Mickey Mouse". And anyone who does register another person must sign their name on each card of those they register under a felony penalty if attesting they are a citizen or a person (no pets either) legally able to vote.

And WHERE is the purple finger? that would cut down on multiple voting from polling place to polling place!!!

1)...So the 2 major Fed dictates on elections are unrelated to each other.
Whether they are related was not in issue until you just introduced it. But now that you bring it up, both of your “Fed dictates” were created by our state representatives in DC and are quite related. Both measures provide the states with statutory assistance to resolve the issue of noncitizen voting. Moreover, the second of your “Fed dictates” created the obligation of each state to alert the feds if a noncitizen attempts to register or vote.

2) Show me where the Constitution gives the Feds control of state elections?
I would if that were my argument, but you know it isn’t.

...Some election districts allow non-citizens to vote in local elections.
A handful of states allow noncitizens residing in political subdivisions to vote in local, non-federal elections, but once more that is beside the point. None of those states or any other state allows voting by noncitizens in a state-wide or federal election as a matter of state constitution or state statute. In fact, the voters in such states have uniformly rejected attempts to expand noncitizen voting to state elections.

At this point, one could well ask, “So what is the problem?” Most would respond, “The problem is when various states do not enforce their laws regarding noncitizen voting it has a adverse impact on the entire nation.”

3) Give me an example of where Fed interference in local affairs has worked out for the good.
If we change the phrase to read "involvement in state affairs" in order to make the question relevant, I will refer you to every prosecution under various fed election statutes.

4) So prosecute offendors, yes. But no Feralization of local control of the process.
Once again, nowhere do I argue for such control. The issue between us is whether the solution is solely a state matter. I argue the states have given themselves, at home and in DC, all the tools they need to enforce the solution, and that a meaningful number of states have failed to exercise the political will to do so. Clearly this is important at the national level because the votes of those in conforming states are devalued by the lack of political will in California, Colorado and other non-conforming states to adhere to the law.