In a high-stakes electoral integrity case, the US Supreme Court has decided in favor of Arizona ballot-harvesting ban and that doesn’t violate the federal Voting Rights Act. Arizona has mail-in voting or in-person for nearly a month in advance of election day with two restrictions. The Supreme Court upheld the two restrictions requiring in-person ballots cast on election day be done in their precinct, and mail-in ballots cannot be collected by anyone other than an election official, a mail carrier or family member or caregiver.

Oregon Secretary of State, Shemia Fagan, said “The Supreme Court has kicked away the foundation of the Voting Rights Act, effectively allowing the disenfranchisement of American voters, especially those who’ve historically been prevented from exercising this sacred right.” She continues by saying, “Oregon continues to lead by breaking down barriers to voting, while many other states continue to make it harder to vote. Congress must pass the For the People Act (HR 1) to strengthen voting rights and access for all Americans.” Is the Secretary of State referring to this constitutional nation?

FreedomWorks Consultant, Mike Melillo, describes HR 1 as an attempt to federalize elections taking away voter ID state laws, requires states to have voter rolls ready six-months prior to election day, engages a three-judge panel in DC to review redistricting with overruling powers, no state control over eligibility to register to vote, and restricts states from making rules about mailing out ballots. It’s designed to censor speech requiring organizations to report donor names, and prohibits organizations from contacting their representatives by broadening the definition of lobbying. It also adds DC as a state in regards to representation in Congress. Melillo states, “It is unconstitutional for the federal government to mandate states on elections.”

Janice Dysinger, President of Oregonians for Fair Elections, sees them trying to break HR 1 into smaller bills since there is resistance in the Democrat Party in DC. She draws attention to the Oregon legislature, “Democrats put forward several bills in the 2021 Legislature each of which were components of HR-1. These included ballot harvesting, same day voter registration, allowing late voting, allowing inaccurate voter registrations to stay on the voter rolls, allowing our ballots to be opened as soon as they are returned back from the voter which is nearly 3 weeks ahead of the election day, allow Department of Revenue to submit taxpayers to register voters automatically, allow felons to register and vote from Prison, allow 16 and 17 year-olds to vote, and rank choice voting options (which is weighted ballot counting).”

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Dysinger is encouraged, “out of these terrible ideas, only two bills passed. HB2681, which will allow voters to stay on the active voter rolls even if their address is wrong and they haven't voted for any length of time. It used to be 5 years and then it was extended to 10 years, now it is forever. The other bill is HB3291 which allows ballots to come in by mail up to 7 days after the election. It says in the beginning of the bill that they need to have a postal indicator on them, but if you look further in the bill it says it will be assumed that they were mailed by election day if they come in by the 7th day after the election.”

Oregon also had a case of ballot-harvesting gone awry when Defend Oregon (connected to Our Oregon) collected ballots from voters on Election Day but didn’t turn in 97 ballots on time. They received a $94,750 penalty for mishandling ballots though they claimed they made an honest mistake. The group is required to submit their procedures for collecting ballots and track and store them, and how they train volunteers.

The Arizona case seems to put a wrinkle in HR 1 by supporting state laws on elections. But Oregon continues to make voter fraud a challenge that is hard to overcome.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2021-07-03 07:50:37

Last Update: 2021-07-03 09:35:35