ballot-box-vote

There’s an old, and very cynical, saying that it’s not those who vote that count, it’s those who count the votes.

Now, a former Department of Justice elections lawyer who worked in the Voting Rights Section, J. Christian Adams, is warning that Democrats in the U.S. House have established as their highest priority to take control of elections – essentially to count the votes.

Adams writes at PJMedia about the proposal, the first this term in the House of Representatives, which is now under Democratic Party control.

In the bill — the text is not yet available online — there are provisions to that would enable “House Democrats, leftist groups, deep-pocketed dark money, and those who use election process rules to help win elections – or at least to cause chaos.”

“If you thought the midterm elections had problems, wait until you learn about Nancy Pelosi’s plan to terminate state control over American elections.”

The Democrats’ proposed H.R. 1 is described as an effort to “expand Americans’ access to the ballot box,” but Adams warns it’s really about centralizing elections.

“The bill is a 571-page dreamscape of wild wishes and federal mandates on states. The Constitution decentralizes power over American elections and puts states in charge. H.R. 1 would undo that,” he said.

Among its provisions:

Implement mandatory voter registration. “If someone is on a government list – such as receiving welfare benefits or rental subsidies – then they would be automatically registered to vote.”

Require states to allow all felons to vote.

Require states to have extended early voting periods.

Set up government control over political speech.

Mandate same-day voter registration.

Deny states the ability to prevent people from voting twice in the same election.

Criminalize protected political speech.

Adams warns that centralized control fosters abuse.

“Decentralization promotes individual liberty. When power over elections is centralized, it is easier for that power to be abused. When power over elections is decentralized, no single malevolent actor can exert improper control over the process. That is precisely why Democrats are so eager for Washington, D.C., to have more power over our elections,” he said.

Adams noted that leftist groups and some on the right “have fought for no-contrition re-enfranchisement for all felons.”

“Florida voters just passed a constitutional amendment that mandates felon re-enfranchisement, no questions asked, no redemption needed, no contrition necessary,” he said. “This threatens the Republican Party’s viability in Florida because the number of felons it affects far surpasses the meager margin of victory for Senator Rick Scott and Governor Ron DeSantis in 2018. Felons vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, and exponentially more felons were re-enfranchised than the GOP margin of victory in 2016 and 2018.”

He said the provision is in the proposal for a reason: “To help Democrats win elections.”

“But the biggest prize in H.R. 1 is to restore Justice Department approval powers over state election law changes, known as ‘preclearance.’ This preclearance power, struck down by the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder, is the one power that unites them all. Preclearance gave radical bureaucrats at the Justice Department Voting Section, where I used to work, the power to micromanage every single state election law behind closed doors,” he said.

“Here’s how it worked: Whenever a state wanted to make an election law change, no matter how small, it needed approval from Washington, D.C. bureaucrats at the Department of Justice. Move a polling place, change the hours the election office is open, hire a new translator, change a precinct line, or move voting from the school gym to the school library? DOJ had to approve.

“Require voter ID, allow citizenship verification, increase penalties for voter fraud, enact election integrity procedures or implement programs to clean rolls? DOJ had to approve.

“And now you see why the Left wants the power back.”

Adams noted that Democratic congressional candidate Andrew Janz was open about the plan.

Janz lost to Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., in the mid-terms.

“What I learned in my race is that you can’t begin to address the structural problems with our elections during the middle of a campaign. You need to take care of those things before the campaign starts,” Janz said in a report in The Hill.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.