Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Sen. Mike Lee’

There’s Only One Reason Democrats Oppose Requiring Proof of Citizenship to Vote


BY: M.D. KITTLE | JULY 10, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/10/theres-only-one-reason-democrats-oppose-requiring-proof-of-citizenship-to-vote/

Sign instructing voters where to vote.

Author M.D. Kittle profile

M.D. KITTLE

MORE ARTICLES

As the Republican-controlled House is expected to take up a bill Wednesday aimed at making sure only U.S. citizens vote in federal elections, President Joe Biden is signaling he would kill the measure should it miraculously survive the Democrat-led Senate. Biden isn’t likely to need the veto pen. Democrats will, however, be forced to explain why they oppose the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which requires documentary proof of citizenship to vote for president and members of Congress. 

And while they have gotten plenty of cover from corporate media in asserting that foreign nationals — including illegal aliens — are rarely ever caught voting in federal elections, such explanations may not sit well with U.S. voters who overwhelmingly support prohibitions on noncitizens voting in federal elections. Most Americans, too, according to polls, are deeply concerned about the tsunami of illegal immigrants that has swamped U.S. communities on Biden’s watch. Exactly why the Biden administration has kept the border door wide open isn’t lost on anyone who has been paying attention for the past three and a half years. 

“Democrats say it’s already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. That’s true. It’s also illegal for someone to illegally enter our country, but that hasn’t stopped millions and millions of people,” U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis., told me Tuesday during an interview on the “The Vicki McKenna Show” in Milwaukee and Madison. 

‘Petri Dish’ for Noncitizen Voting

Steil, the chairman of the House Committee on Administration, which passed H.R. 8281 in May, wants to remind anyone who will listen that Democrats already support foreign nationals voting in local elections, as they are allowed to do in Washington, D.C. Most House Democrats earlier this year voted against a measure that would have barred illegal immigrants and other noncitizens from voting in local elections in the nation’s capital. The bill is deemed dead on arrival in the Senate. 

Not surprisingly, just 28 of the 500-plus foreign nationals voting in last month’s D.C. primary elections registered as Republicans, according to The Washington Post. 

Steil said Democrats want to use noncitizen voting in local elections, currently allowed in a handful of states, as a “Petri dish” to test on the American people. 

“In a period of time that we know that millions of legal and illegal immigrants in the country are not eligible to vote in federal elections, it’s important to enforce the laws on the books,” the congressman said. 

Honor System

As it stands under the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, commonly known as the “motor voter law,” voters may simply check a box on the federal form affirming they are U.S. citizens and meet other eligibility requirements. Democrats prefer the honor system. In opposing the SAVE Act, they have noted the tough penalties for foreign nationals who lie about their citizenship status in registering to vote: a fine, up to five years in prison, or both, according to federal code. 

But Democrats know it is difficult to track false claims of citizenship, a longtime problem. A 2014 story by WHYY, a Philadelphia public radio station, reported on a fact that remains a significant issue in the Biden presidency a decade later: “Illegal immigrants lie to get asylum status in U.S.” 

But they certainly wouldn’t lie to vote in federal elections, Democrats insist. 

“We all know, intuitively, that a lot of illegals are voting in federal elections. But it’s not been something that is easily provable,” Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said at the May 8 press conference in introducing the SAVE Act. 

‘The Only Reason’

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has introduced a similar measure in the Senate. He cut to the chase in a post Tuesday on his X account. 

“The SAVE Act would prevent non-Americans from illegally voting, protecting the votes of American citizens. The only reason to oppose it is because you want non-Americans illegally voting,” Lee wrote. 

Biden, meanwhile, is pushing Democrat legislation loosening voter integrity laws.  

“The President has been clear: he will continue fighting to protect Americans’ sacred right to vote in free, fair, and secure elections,” the White House said in its opposition statement to the SAVE Act. 

But how “free, fair, and secure” are U.S. elections without documented proof of citizenship? 

Biden and his fellow Democrats in D.C. appear to be backing a losing issue. A national poll conducted last year for Americans for Citizen Voting by RMG Research Inc. found that 75 percent of respondents opposed allowing foreign nationals to vote in their local elections. A recent poll found 68 percent of North Carolina voters supported a state constitutional amendment barring foreign nationals from voting in elections. North Carolina voters will vote on the citizens-only question on November’s general election ballot. 

“This is a moment in time that we should all realize that we should maintain U.S. elections for U.S. citizens and requiring documentary proof of that citizenship is how you actually enforce the law,” Steil said. 

Matt Kittle is a senior elections correspondent for The Federalist. An award-winning investigative reporter and 30-year veteran of print, broadcast, and online journalism, Kittle previously served as the executive director of Empower Wisconsin.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Americans Worked Too Hard for Equal Voting Rights for Noncitizens to Disenfranchise Us


BY: KERRI TOLOCZKO | JULY 09, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/09/americans-worked-too-hard-for-equal-voting-rights-for-noncitizens-to-disenfranchise-us/

Hand reaches for "Vote" pin

Author Kerri Toloczko profile

KERRI TOLOCZKO

MORE ARTICLES

The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) states it is unlawful for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. It is also unlawful to steal a car. That is what locks are for. Until the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE Act) of 2024 was proposed, the NVRA had no locks — no way to ensure that only American citizens vote in U.S. elections.

The glaring loophole in current voting law is that it does not require documentary proof of citizenship for registration. There is also no specific authority provided to state secretaries of state or local elections officials to access federal databases to confirm that there are no noncitizens on state voter rolls. The SAVE Act is designed to cure these deficiencies.

A House Floor vote on the Congressional SAVE Act (H.R. 8281) is scheduled for Wednesday, July 10. Sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, the legislation closes the loophole in federal law that enables foreign nationals — noncitizen resident aliens and illegal immigrants — to register to vote.

The U.S. is experiencing a massive wave of illegal immigrants due to the Biden administration’s seemingly deliberate abandonment of any reasonable form of border protection. We have nearly 22 million noncitizens (legal and illegal) living in our country, and that number is climbing. Public debate about noncitizen voting is rightly focused on illegal immigrants and the willingness of state agencies (particularly DMVs) to register anyone to vote as long as they are breathing.

But this story has another angle yet undiscussed — what does history tell us about who noncitizen voting disrespects and insults the most?

In the first U.S. presidential election in 1789, only white male landowners were able to cast a vote. African Americans, women, and naturalized citizens did not enjoy that same automatic and safe path to the ballot box. And now, in 2024, noncitizen voting threatens to steal the political voices of citizen voters who had to fight to get to the ballot box.

The right to vote for African American men did not come until 1868 and 1870 under the 14th and 15th Amendments, but casting those votes was not just fraught with danger and blatant racism for former slaves, but for future generations of black Americans. Disgraceful Jim Crow laws that kept blacks from voting through poll taxes, literacy tests, beatings, and even mass killings are a shameful part of our history that was not fully addressed until the passage and enforcement of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Women in America also had to fight for the right to vote. The American suffragist movement was led predominantly by fearless Republican-associated women – black and white. Many of their names remain an honored part of our history – Sojourner Truth, Harriet Tubman, Susan B. Anthony, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. They were the subject of ridicule, mockery, and even beatings before earning the right to vote in 1919 under the 19th Amendment after a nearly century-long fight, and to the chagrin of Democrat President Woodrow Wilson who thought their efforts “obnoxious.”

Today’s new voters find the path to naturalization expensive, time-consuming, and frustrating. Our country has approximately 24 million naturalized citizens, and in 2023, just over 878,000 new citizens took their Oath of Allegiance. Many are from war-torn or despotic countries offering no chance for prosperity and liberty, and they worked hard to get here through legal channels. They hold their citizenship responsibilities dear and take them seriously.

Total government fees alone to become a citizen approach $4,000 a person. On top of that, there is no government answer to how long the process takes other than at least five years of residency before application. Ask any recently naturalized citizen about the process and they would note it can take over a decade, thousands of dollars (often including immigration attorney fees), and endless frustrating calls to the government’s “we can’t be bothered to answer” line.

It is indisputable that foreign nationals are being unlawfully added to the voter rolls through Motor Voter at state DMVs and other registration drives. President Biden’s Executive Order 14019 demands that agencies amp up their voter registration efforts for anyone seeking federal government assistance — with no carve out for illegal immigrants.

Based on Census information and current noncitizen statistics, some researchers estimate that “roughly 1.0 million to 2.7 million non-citizens will illegally vote in the 2024 presidential and congressional elections unless stronger election integrity measures are implemented.”

Could unlawful foreign citizens’ ballots skew election results? Maybe. Placed in strategically important voting jurisdictions, yes. But in the current national debate about noncitizen voting, we cannot forget the critical role the past holds.

Hard-earned votes should not be negated by unlawful ones. It’s not a question of math. It’s a question of integrity, national sovereignty, common sense, and civil rights.

America doesn’t always get it right at the start gate. Full voting rights for all Americans took centuries. But eventually, we course corrected. Full, unfettered access to the ballot box for all citizen voters is now available.

Noncitizens’ unlawful votes would stomp on that progress and the suffering that went with it. Even one citizen’s political voice silenced by a fraudulent vote is one too many. The SAVE Act is what is needed to guarantee that the government takes an active role in ensuring only citizens vote. 

Kerri Toloczko is Executive Director of Election Integrity Network, a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to protecting all ballots of all American voters through citizen action and adherence to law.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Not A Single Democrat Witness In Congress Agreed Only Citizens Should Vote In Federal Elections


BY: BRIANNA LYMAN | MARCH 12, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/03/12/not-a-single-democrat-witness-in-congress-agreed-only-citizens-should-vote-in-federal-elections/

Witnesses testify at Senate Judiciary Hearing

None of Democrats’ witnesses in a congressional hearing Tuesday could say resolutely that they believe only citizens should be able to vote in a federal election.

During a Senate Judiciary Hearing on the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee asked the witnesses to provide a basic “yes” or “no” answer to a series of questions about non-citizens voting.

“Do you believe that only citizens of the United States should be able to vote in federal elections?” Lee asked each of the witnesses.

“We don’t have a position about non-citizens voting in federal elections, we believe that’s what the current laws are, and so we’re certainly fighting for everyone who is eligible under current law to vote,” Executive Director of The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Damon T. Hewitt said.

“That’s a decision of the state law but I want to emphasize –” President of Southwest Voter Registration Education Project Lydia Camarillo said.

“It’s a decision of state law as to who should vote in federal elections?” Lee interjected.

“States decide who gets to vote in various elections, and in federal elections I believe that we should be encouraging people to naturalize and then vote,” Camarillo said.

“Okay but you’re saying that the federal government should have no say in who votes in a federal election?” Lee pressed.

“I don’t have a position on that,” Camarillo responded.

Director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project Sophia Lin Lakin told Lee, “Federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections and our focus is on enabling all eligible voters to be able to vote and cast their ballot.”

Only two witnesses, counsel at Public Interest Legal Foundation Maureen Riordan and Manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at the Heritage Foundation Hans von Spakovsky said they do not believe non-citizens should be able to vote. Both were Republican witnesses.

Lee then asked all the witnesses whether “people registering to vote should provide documentary proof of their citizenship in order to register to vote.” Hewitt replied the real question is how asking people to provide proof of citizenship affects them.

“I think your first question kind of answers the second. Based upon the applicable rules, federal or state elections, what have you, we know we have to follow those rules. The question is what is the impact of those rules?” He said in response.

Camarillo called the question “redundant” and said, “It’s already being asked.”

Current federal law stipulates voters must simply check on a form that they are a U.S. citizen, but they do not have to provide any proof.

Lakin flat-out argued asking people to prove they are U.S. citizens to vote amounts to discrimination: “Documentary proof of citizenship or requirements are often discriminatory,” she said.

Riordan and Spakovsky agreed voters should be required to prove they are citizens. Lee said he was troubled that not every witness could simply answer “yes” to both of his questions.

The John Lewis Voting Rights Act seeks to federalize all elections by stripping states and local jurisdictions from making changes to their elections without approval from federal bureaucrats. If the legislation is passed, the U.S. Justice Department could essentially take over an election if its left-wing allies claim minority voters are being harmed by something as simple as requiring an ID or proving citizenship to vote.

A federal judge recently ruled Arizona’s law requiring individuals to prove U.S. citizenship in order to vote in a statewide election is not discriminatory and could proceed after leftists lodged a series of suits.

“Arizona’s interests in preventing non-citizens from voting and promoting public confidence in Arizona’s elections outweighs the limited burden voters might encounter when required to provide” proof of citizenship, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist.

Author Brianna Lyman profile

BRIANNA LYMAN

VISIT ON TWITTER@BRIANNALYMAN2

MORE ARTICLES

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Tea Party Responds to Obama: We Won’t Stop Protesting


State of the Union 2014 // http://www.nationaljournal.com/state-of-the-union-2014/tea-party-responds-to-obama-we-won-t-stop-protesting-20140128

In his State of the Union response, Sen. Mike Lee tells Americans his group is ready to protest bad policy in 2014—again, on its own.

(Andrew Burton / Getty)

January 28, 2014
“Obamacare—all by itself—is an inequality Godzilla”

The rift between establishment Republicans and tea partiers has been growing steadily since the government shutdown last fall. In his response to the State of the Union address, Sen. Mike Lee may have stretched it a little bit wider.

“I’d like to speak especially to those Americans who may feel they have been forgotten by both political parties,” said Lee, before carving out the tea party’s congressional agenda for 2014.

The senator followed the Republican Party’s official rebuttal from Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers—which struck a more harmonious tone—illustrating the GOP’s growing divide. “The Republican establishment in Washington can be just as out-of-touch as the Democratic Establishment,” Lee said.

The bulk of Lee’s response focused on the centerpiece of Obama’s own remarks, income inequality, albeit with a very different flavor. “Where does this new inequality come from? From government,” Lee said, later calling the health care law “an inequality Godzilla that has robbed working families of their insurance, their doctors, their wages, and their jobs.”

Lee listed several pieces of forthcoming Republican-penned legislation on income inequality, including his own bill that would simplify the tax code.

He didn’t directly mention the government shutdown, which has been attributed to tea-party pushback against Obamacare, but unapologetically hinted at it: “Unfortunately, in recent years, we have had no choice but to engage in a number of protests against our current president’s Washington-centered agenda.”

“Protesting against dysfunctional government is a great American tradition,” Lee said, and the tea party’s policy fights—against Obama, Democrats and other Republicans—sound far from over. Lee likened the group to the original Tea Party, the big loud one in Boston, as being crucial for change. But sometimes compromise is key. “As Americans we must always be willing to fight the Boston-type battles—boldly calling out bad policy whenever we see it—but we must do so with an eye toward Philadelphia, maintaining a positive focus on the kind of nation we want to be and become,” he said.

Such “protests,” however, have chipped away at the tea party’s public image. Pew noted in an October poll that just 53 percent of Republicans see the tea party favorably, while 27 percent hold an unfavorable view. Among tea partiers, Sen. Ted Cruz’s favorability rating was at 74 percent at the height of the shutdown crisis in October. Among non-tea-party Republicans, that number was 25 percent.

The senator’s remarks don’t just set this year’s agenda for the tea party—they outline a plan for its members ahead of midterm elections, too. His words on compromise are likely aimed at House tea partiers, reminding them to hold onto their seats in the GOP-controlled House. And his remarks about protesting “bad policy” are aimed at outside candidates, pushing them to get aggressive in their Senate campaigns. For tea partiers, 2014 is about wrangling power back from Democrats in the Senate.

See the entire SOYU response by Sen. Mike Lee here. (Click on image to view video);

Mike Lee

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Tag Cloud