We Know How the Old Dominion University Terrorist Got a Gun
Yes, This NYT Headline Is Real...and They Appear to Have a Muslim Terrorist...
We Got Some More Manpower Heading to the Middle East
CNN's Kaitlin Collins Set Up Scott Jennings Perfectly to Torch the Biden Administration
My Word, Ms. Spanberger, What Fresh Hell Is This Tweet?
Victory for President Trump’s DOGE – ACLJ Amicus Brief Affirmed
Our Long Road to War With Iran
Did We Avoid Another Terrorist Attack This Week? This Arrest in Texas Makes...
Globalize the Intifada? Authorities in the Netherlands Are Investigating Fire at Synagogue
What Can We Do About Islam in America?
More Questions Have Surfaced About Eric Swalwell's Eligibility to Run for California Gover...
Pete Hegseth Blasts Reports That the United States Did Not Plan on Iran...
All Six American Crewman Aboard Refueling Aircraft That Crashed in Iraq Confirmed Dead
Ex-Top Gun Pilot Says The Threat of Iranian Sleeper Cells 'Is Not a...
Even Obama's Former DHS Secretary Is Calling on Democrats to Fund DHS
OPINION

H.R. 1’s Federal Takeover of Elections

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
H.R. 1’s Federal Takeover of Elections
AP Photo/Steve Karnowski

Our Constitution establishes federal structure that leaves states in charge of the election process while also protecting basic voting rights. Within each state, lawmakers and election officials tailor policies and practices to meet the unique needs or desires of their own communities. Those who directly administer the voting process (typically city and county officials) are directly accountable to local communities and the voters they serve.

Advertisement

There are some working to take away the authority of individual states to preside over and run their own elections and instead cede this power to Washington bureaucrats and federal judges, upsetting the Founding Father’s carefully crafted system of checks and balances.

For more than a decade, Save Our States has opposed the National Popular Vote interstate compact (NPV), which would effectively nullify the Electoral College and impose direct election of the president. It would give voters in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and other large metro areas an overwhelming advantage in determining the outcome of future presidential elections and also push presidential candidates to ignore the needs and interests of all but the largest voting blocs. 

It would also necessitate a federal takeover of elections because (as one of the law professors who developed the NPV concept admits) it could trigger an “electoral crisis” unless there is uniformity in how every state runs elections. 

But NPV isn’t the only threat to state and local control of elections. H.R. 1, currently in the U.S. Senate after narrowly passing the House, would dramatically expand federal control over the most important aspects of elections.

The most dangerous provisions of H.R. 1 would gut key protections against election fraud. While partisans fight over what constitutes fraud and how widespread it is, there are obvious incidents of corruption as recent scandals in Patterson, New Jersey, and North Carolina’s 9th congressional district demonstrate. Policies like showing identification to vote, limiting “ballot harvesting,” and vigorously cleaning voter registration lists can curb abuses and give voters more confidence in the system. These policies are popular with the public and used in many states, but H.R. 1 would prevent states from effectively using any of these measures to deal with real corruption concerns.

Advertisement

In addition to increasing election fraud and distrust, H.R. 1 would impose significant burdens on the city and county officials who actually have to run elections. Just one example: it would require that every state allow voters to register on Election Day, even if it would cause longer waits to vote as poll workers are diverted from checking voters in to registering new voters and verifying eligibility. 

H.R. 1 may also be impossible for local officials to implement. According to a recent article at The Daily Beast (by a writer sympathetic to the aims of the bill), “…it was written with apparently no consultation with election administrators, and it shows… it comes packed with deadlines and requirements election administrators cannot possibly meet without throwing their systems into chaos.”

Among the problems: “…the bill requires states to purchase paper-backed voting machines that are compliant with the brand-new standards passed by the Election Assistance Commission only weeks ago…. the machines the bill requires don’t even exist yet.”

H.R. 1 joins NPV as a proposal that is badly conceived, poorly written, and would do irreparable harm to our federal system while decreasing confidence in election integrity. Another similarity is that opposition to both tends to be bipartisan. 

Congress should reject H.R. 1, like most state legislatures have been doing to NPV as the facts become clear.  Instead, they should look for reforms that bolster our democratic republic by respecting its federal structure and recognizing the diverse needs and the important roles played by state and local communities.

Advertisement

Sean Parnell is Sr. Legislative Director for Save Our States, an organization dedicated to defending the Electoral College.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement