Policy Issues / Election Integrity

POLICY BRIEF: H.R. 1 and the Permanency of Systemic Voter Fraud

by CRA Staff

February 28, 2021

Synopsis: In the wake of an election marked by unprecedented concerns over ballot and voter integrity, Congress is preparing to take up radical legislation that would usurp states’ authority when it comes to managing their own elections. In effect, H.R. 1 (unironically titled the ‘For the People Act’) would impose federal control over our elections and make systemic voter fraud permanent.

The legislation—chock full of unconstitutional mandates aimed almost exclusively at the consolidation of power—is a direct threat to core institutions necessary for Americans to continue to live freely. It is a full- frontal assault by D.C. power brokers on the sovereignty of every state and the agency of free citizens.

What’s in the Legislation?
H.R. 1, as currently drafted, comes in at almost 800 pages—an immediate warning sign that the bill is less about “the people” and more about “the special interests” and entrenched political class supporting it.

The stated purpose of the legislation is “to expand Americans’ access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, strengthen ethics rules for public servants, and implement other anti-corruption measures” to “fortify our democracy.”

However, an analysis of the bill indicates that many of its provisions, if implemented, would accomplish the precise opposite of its stated aims, and permanently enshrine the federal ruling class as the sole arbiters of America’s elections at all levels of government—undermining the system of federalism and striking at the heart of the protections of American liberty.

The bill would immediately strip states of their ability to regulate their own voter registration and voting process rules, creating an immediate crisis of confidence in the integrity of future elections.

Some alarming provisions include forcing states to implement early voting, automatically registering all individuals (including non-citizens) to be able to vote, forcing online voter registration, mandating states to practice same-day voter registration, rendering state voter ID laws moot, expanding fraud-prone vote-by-mail as a permanent feature of our elections, and forcing states to accept absentee ballots up to 10 days after an election so long as the ballot was postmarked on Election Day.

• The bill creates new taxpayer-funded grants to states to push minors into “participating in the political process.” It also creates a new federal initiative to encourage minors to register to vote long before they turn 18 years old.
• Further, the bill creates an entirely new bureaucracy of poll workers trained and funded by federal tax dollars—expanding the reach and control of the federal bureaucracy into monitoring and overseeing voting precincts across America.
• The legislation violates the First Amendment by imposing greater regulations and restrictions on citizens, unions, nonprofits, and civic organizations when it comes to exercising their speech and involvement in elections—a clear legislative effort designed to undermine the landmark free speech victory in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission.
• The bill also creates a de facto intimidation provision over nonprofits, forcing organizations to disclose otherwise private donors amid ravenous left-wing mobs fixated on harassing and ‘canceling’ those with views they deem heretical to their ‘woke’ ideological orthodoxy.
• And as if the bill could not conceivably slap law-abiding citizens and American voters in the face any harder, it also violates the Fourteenth Amendment. The ability of states to regulate the voting rights of felons is a specifically enumerated power under Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment—a power that the Supreme Court reaffirmed in Richardson v. Ramirez in 1974. Simply put, Congress has no authority to impose such a statute.

This is hardly an exhaustive list of all the measures in H.R. 1 that pose a danger to free and fair elections. Indeed, there are many other dangerous provisions in the bill including:

• A report to advance D.C. statehood
• An “independent” study on media literacy and online political content consumption that—combined with recent Big Tech censorship of right-leaning entities and figures—should set off alarm bells for free speech supporters
• Federal resources provided to the political campaigns of those running for office—a policy that perversely incentivizes politicians to permanently fund their campaigns with government resources
• Commissions created to control redistricting—stripping state legislatures and ultimately voters of the ability to control how their congressional districts are drawn

The Ballot Access Myth
Nearly every state—and the federal government—engage in some form of taxpayer-funded advertising campaign encouraging eligible citizens to register to vote. The notion that Americans lack access to the ballot box is a myth.

Currently, 40 states and the District of Columbia provide for some form of online voter registration with Oklahoma currently implementing their online registration initiative.

Some 43 states offer in-person early voting with Delaware to become number 44 in 2022.

A surprising 21 states plus the District of Columbia have laws allowing for same-day voter registration. Additionally, every state offers some form of absentee ballot option—with 34 states allowing an absentee ballot to be requested without an excuse.

Data shows that voter participation has largely held steady or trended upward over the past two decades— with eligible voter participation in presidential election cycles eclipsing 60 percent in 2004, 2008, and hitting nearly 67 percent in 2020.

The provisions in H.R. 1 designed to expand “access” instead expand the likelihood of fraud and interference in our elections. Specifically, the bill mandates that states accept an individual’s “signed statement” swearing that they are who they say they are when showing up to vote—a provision that all but eliminates existing state voter ID laws.

Section 1621 of the bill mandates permanent vote-by-mail in every state—a voting method that researchers at MIT’s Election Lab agree leads to greater frequency of voter fraud. Indeed, the bipartisan Carter Baker Commission found voting by mail is “likely to increase the risk of fraud.”

Such measures would lead to greater distrust in election outcomes—an issue of increasing concern to large swaths of Americans. A January sampling of registered voters revealed nearly 35 percent believe the 2020 election results to be untrustworthy—including 40 percent of self-described independents.

‘Big Money’ in Politics
The primary thrust of H.R. 1 to rein in so-called ‘big money’ in politics is a provision designed to constrict the ability of citizens to band together to support and donate to candidates or causes they believe in.

Requiring nonprofits and other civic groups to disclose their donors—a voluntary act of speech by citizens— would stifle participation and inarguably lead to harassment, doxing, and intimidation of private citizens simply seeking to express support for a set of policies or causes.

Viewed another way, the bill would effectively legalize the IRS targeting scandal and expand its scope far beyond entities formerly associated with the Tea Party—instead targeting a wider swath of citizens for scrutiny simply for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Additionally, the expansion of federal funding for candidates—which includes a program providing an astounding 600 percent federal match for private donations—only creates a perverse incentive for officials to leech more and more government resources to keep them in office. This provision would mandate that taxpayers help fund campaigns of candidates they oppose, and in some cases be responsible for paying a second income for politicians who pay themselves a salary from their campaign.

Much of this money would come from the laughably titled “Freedom from Influence Fund,” a mocking Orwellian moniker that would have citizens pretend the United States Federal government exerts no influence at all.

Unethical Reform
The bill states that part of its purpose is implementing ethics ‘reforms.’

A central component of this includes the creation of a commission that could compel judges to defend and explain their legal decisions when it comes to election law.

This is combined with the creation of a new “code of conduct” for judges—the details of which are left intentionally vague despite the new mandate imposed on the national Judicial Conference.

Instead of creating accountability, this new commission would act in practice as a bureaucratic inquisition capable of intimidating judges into abandoning neutral readings of the law and fostering an environment of harassment regarding election outcomes.

These policies would inevitably undermine trust between communities and the judges they entrust to provide a fair and impartial interpretation of the law. If political commissions can intimidate judges into potentially abandoning their oaths of fidelity to constitutional principles and the rule of law regarding electoral processes, the social fabric necessary for a healthy society to function will continue to deteriorate.

Additionally, H.R. 1 prohibits state election officials from participating in federal elections, removing the issue entirely from the hands of voters in each state.

Corruption on Steroids
Among its myriad of proposals allegedly aimed at thwarting corruption is a proposal to create independent commissions to control redistricting. This proposal—long a dream of far-left activists—would deny the ability of citizens in the 50 states to determine how their districts are drawn and who should oversee redistricting.

The creation of an unaccountable and unelected body of bureaucrats effectively strips voters of their ability to control their own representation—a fundamental assault on a key pillar in our federal system designed to undermine the very essence of what it means to be a citizen.

The financing of an “independent” study looking at online political content consumption in Section 4210 of the bill includes alarming language that would scrutinize and render judgment on commentary and information created and shared by private citizens. Such a move is little more than the pretext to justify widespread censorship of viewpoints deemed undesirable by the entrenched political class.

Furthermore, the bill would alter the composition of the Federal Election Commission to have a 3-2 membership. In a two-party system, this all but guarantees the independent agency designed to oversee campaign finance law will become little more than a partisan cudgel to enact the agenda of the party in power.

Concluding Assessment
The “For the People Act” is designed for one singular purpose: consolidating power in the hands of an elite political class and stripping power away from free citizens. The bill’s near total usurpation of state control over election processes is masked by a media claiming it is a “democracy reform” bill.

Such neutered language is intentionally designed to deceive the public as those in power move rapidly to permanently secure control over voter behavior and election outcomes.

While these policies may indeed churn out more raw vote totals, the price tag is steep:

• Increased likelihood of voter fraud as non-citizens would automatically be registered More corruption as existing election integrity checks are weakened or eliminatedUnconstitutional mandates imposed on states
• Consolidation of power in the hands of unelected federal bureaucrats A weakened and potentially cowed judiciary
• Even greater marginalization of citizens
• Deepened distrust of election outcomes

For those dedicated to restoring America, securing the integrity of elections, and preserving the culture and liberties of the American people, the deceptively-named “For the People Act” is just one of an increasing number of threats that must be fought.