HR 1 Is Voter Suppression
Following Governor Brian Kemp’s signing into law Georgia’s latest election reform legislation — a bill aimed at shoring up election integrity — Democrats, led by Joe Biden, have smeared the law and Republicans generally, despicably and falsely claiming the bill is equivalent to resurrecting Jim Crow. It is anything but, yet that hasn’t stopped socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden and Democrats from disseminating the wildly false narrative.
In his attempt to “show” how “terrible” Georgia’s law is, socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden disingenuously claimed, “They pass a law saying you can’t provide water for people standing in line. … This is nothing but punitive, designed to keep people from voting.” In reality, the law prohibits electioneering, while at the same time explicitly stating, “This Code section shall not be construed to prohibit a poll officer … from making available self-service water from an unattended receptacle to [a voter] waiting in line to vote.” In other words, the truth is exactly the opposite of socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden’s smear.
Furthermore, Georgia’s prohibition against electioneering is a common feature found in many other states’ election laws. And these prohibitions have been found by the Supreme Court to be constitutional, most recently in 2018 when SCOTUS upheld a Minnesota law that prohibited anyone other than election officials and individuals waiting to vote from standing within 100 feet of a polling place.
Montana prohibits campaigns from handing out food or drink. New York bans “furnishing money or entertainment to induce attendance at polls” and also bars the passing out of “meat, drink, tobacco, refreshment or provision” worth more than a dollar. socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden’s own state of Delaware has similar prohibitions against giving gifts to voters. Is socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden smearing these as Jim Crow as well?
The real objection socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden and the Democrats have regarding Georgia and other Republican-run states that are currently developing election integrity laws is the voter ID requirement. Seemingly every Democrat from socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden to scumbag/worthless-Stacey Abrams to dinky/liar-Elizabeth Warren blasts voter ID requirements as “the new Jim Crow,” disingenuously asserting that it’s voter suppression. The great irony is that by continuing to object to this common sense and near ubiquitous reality of everyday life in America, Democrats are projecting the very racist stereotypes of black Americans they claim to be fighting against. Furthermore, nearly 70% of black Americans support voter ID laws. So, who is it that’s living with the Jim Crow mindset?
As conservative commentator Cabot Phillips observes, “What could be more patronizing than having a 78 year old white man imply that by virtue of your black skin, you are somehow less capable of carrying an ID? There’s a message being sent there, and it isn’t one of empowerment.”
Speaking of voter suppression, there is indeed a current and aggressive attempt at it, and it’s coming from Washington. It’s the Democrats’ HR 1 voting “reform” bill. Not only would HR 1 eliminate voter ID laws, but it’s an affront to federalism. As our own Louis DeBroux notes, “Democrats aim to dictate from Capitol Hill election law for every single state, county, and city. HR 1 intentionally weakens election security, creating the very lawlessness and discord that made the last election such a nightmare and guaranteeing that it’s the norm for all future elections.”
As far as a constitutional challenge to HR 1, Article 1, Section 4 stipulates, “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.” That may be construed to allow Congress to step all over the rights of states to determine their election process.
Far from moving to prevent election fraud, HR 1 would simply codify it, ensuring that Americans will have no means to check or trust the legitimacy of any future election results. The Democrats’ enabling of voter fraud through bulk-mail ballots in particular actually serves to disenfranchise legitimate voters by offsetting their ballots with fraudulent ones.
As was the case in the past with Jim Crow (a Democrat creation), today’s Democrats are similarly working to suppress the ability of Republicans to win elections. Indeed, Democrats seek to suppress the political voice of anyone with whom they disagree. ~The Patriot Post
WHO’s ChiCom Flu Cover-Up
In July of last year, as the ChiCom Virus pandemic was surging, then-President Donald Trump ordered that the United States withdraw from the World Health Organization. He cited the WHO’s well-documented collaboration with Xi Jinping’s Communist Party to cover its tracks regarding the origin and outbreak of the devastating virus. Two months earlier he had redirected U.S. WHO funds “to other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs.”
With more than 500,000 American deaths piling up, one of the first actions socialist/scumbag/liar-Joe Biden took was to restore U.S. taxpayer funding and support for the WHO. It’s no surprise that ChiCom socialist/scumbag/liar-Joe would restore the WHO to good standing, given China’s corrupt “relationship” with the “Big Guy.” If you missed all that corruption coverage ahead of the election, that’s because of Demo collusion with their Leftmedia propagandists and their BigTech suppressors, who buried it.
Last week, I referenced the ChiCom Virus timeline and those most instrumental people who exposed China’s covering up the fact the virus most likely originated in a Wuhan lab. Supporting that conclusion, former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield has now declared: “I am a virologist. I have spent my life in virology. I do not believe this somehow came from a bat to a human and, at that moment in time … became one of the most infectious viruses that we know in humanity for human-to-human transmission. Normally, when a pathogen goes from a zoonotic to human, it takes awhile for it to figure out how to become more and more efficient in human-to-human transmission. I just don’t think this makes biological sense.”
Redfield added, “That’s my … opinion. I’m allowed to have opinions now. I am of the point of view that I still think the most likely etiology of this pathogen in Wuhan was from a laboratory, [where it] escaped.”
Today the WHO is out with its COVID virus origin report, which concludes, predictably, that the disease was passed from bats to humans. In other words, it was of natural origin, not a manmade disaster, with all the liability implications. Moreover, Xi Jinping and his communist cadre are not at fault, despite Redfield’s assertion that “the most likely etiology of this pathogen in Wuhan was from a laboratory.”
One member of the WHO “investigative team,” Peter Daszak, is a staunch defender of the ChiCom version of the virus origin. In a recent interview, when asked if he and others were basically trusting China’s version of the pandemic origin, he responded, “Well, what else can we do? There’s a limit to what you can do, and we went right up to that limit.”
On 04 March, an open letter from many of the world’s most respected epidemiologists and virologists called for “a full and unrestricted international forensic investigation,” but don’t expect the socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden/ lowlife/liar-Harris regime to pursue that advice.
According to socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden’s press secretary, the report is “in the hands of U.S. government experts.” You can trust the “experts,” so no need for a liar-Psaki circle back! Meanwhile, experts Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx are busy rewriting the domestic response to the ChiCom Virus. ~The Patriot Post
Trump Slams Fauci and Birx for Revisionism
“When I saw what happened in New York City,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci during a CNN interview that aired Sunday, “it was like, ‘Oh my goodness.’ And that’s when it became very clear that the decision we made on January the 10th to go all out and develop a vaccine may have been the best decision that I’ve ever made with regard to an intervention as the director of the institute” [emphasis added].
Who knew the diminutive doc was the Decider-in-Chief and the driving force behind Operation Warp Speed — the life-saving decision to strip away traditional barriers to vaccine development and thereby conceive, create, and begin administering multiple coronavirus vaccines in just nine months rather than the usual three to five years?
Why, it’s as if this guy Fauci is trying to take credit from this guy socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden, who’s trying to take from the man who actually delivered a vaccine in record time.
That man, of course, would be Donald Trump — and he doesn’t seem inclined to sit idly by while his two underlings attempt to create a version of history more pleasing to the ear of their new boss.
As Fox News reports, “Former President Donald Trump slammed Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx on Monday, accusing the infectious disease experts of ‘trying to reinvent history’ in televised interviews detailing their roles in combating the coronavirus pandemic. Trump spoke out after Fauci and Birx, who both served as key members of his administration’s coronavirus task force, were interviewed for a CNN special titled ‘COVID WAR: The Pandemic Doctors Speak Out.’”
“Based on their interviews,” said Trump in a statement, “I felt it was time to speak up about Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx, two self-promoters trying to reinvent history to cover for their bad instincts and faulty recommendations, which I fortunately almost always overturned. They had bad policy decisions that would have left our country open to China and others, closed to reopening our economy, and years away from an approved vaccine.”
Trump then gave the two self-promoters a master’s course in self-promotion: “We developed American vaccines by an American President in record time, nine months, which is saving the entire world,” he said. “We bought billions of dollars of these vaccines on a calculated bet that they would work, perhaps the most important bet in the history of the world. Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx moved far too slowly, and if it were up to them we’d currently be locked in our basements as our country suffered through a financial depression. Families, and children in particular, would be suffering the mental strains of this disaster like never before.”
Birx, who history might remember as the wearer of colorful scarves during Trump’s Coronavirus Task Force press briefings, said she had a “very difficult” phone call with the president after she spoke candidly about the severity of an outbreak last August. During the CNN interview, she said the COVID-19 death toll should have been much lower once an initial surge had subsided. “There were about 100,000 deaths that came from that original surge,” she said. “All of the rest of them, in my mind, could have been mitigated or decreased substantially.”
To this, Trump fired back: “Dr. Birx is a proven liar with very little credibility left.”
Trump then gave Birx and Fauci something to discuss the next time they have a quiet moment together. “Many of her recommendations were viewed as ‘pseudo-science,’” said Trump, “and Dr. Fauci would always talk negatively about her and, in fact, would ask not to be in the same room with her.”
As for Fauci, Trump says he was “incapable of pressing the FDA” to get a vaccine produced any more quickly. “I was the one to get it done, and even the fake news media knows and reports this,” Trump said. “Dr. Fauci is also the king of ‘flip-flops’ and moving the goalposts to make himself look as good as possible.”
In a mud-slinger like this, no one tends to come out looking good. But Donald Trump is at least used to it — five years of battling a vicious and deeply dishonest media have seen to that. He’s also entirely within his right to tell his side of the story — especially when it seems history is being rewritten before his eyes. ~The Patriot Post
Doesn’t socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden Want Economic Recovery?
The new Commerce report looks at real gross domestic product (GDP) in all 50 states. The great news is that GDP “increased in all 50 states and the District of Columbia in the fourth quarter of 2020, as real GDP for the nation increased at an annual rate of 4.3 percent.” That ranged from South Dakota’s leading 9.9% to DC’s sluggish 1.2%.
Commerce also reported, “Finance and insurance increased 12.9 percent nationally and contributed to the increases in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. This industry was the leading contributor to the increases in 25 states including South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Connecticut, the states with the four largest increases.” The top three states, by the way, have “trifecta” Republican governments — control of the governorship and both legislative chambers. Five of the remaining seven in the top 10 are also Republican-controlled.
Notably, one sector that decreased nationwide was accommodation and food services. That sector is more impacted by ChiCom Virus pandemic lockdowns and other restrictions than virtually any other, and its decline “moderated increases in real GDP in 38 states.” It also happens to be the sector that employs a particularly large percentage of minorities, who are allegedly a priority for Democrats like socialist/scumbag/liar-Joe Biden.
“Progressives have made ending ‘systemic racism’ their most prominent cause,” writes Mario Loyola of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Yet “the past year has [revealed] the grossly regressive and racially disparate impact of heavy-handed lockdown measures.”
He explains, “Job losses have been grossly regressive against poor minorities. According to the Census Bureau, as of March 3, 2021, fully 59 percent of Hispanics reported experiencing a loss of employment income in their households since March 13, 2020. The comparable figure for blacks was also high, at 52 percent, while 41 percent of non-Hispanic whites reported a loss of employment income. This means that where lockdown measures have resulted in excessive job losses, as in California and New York, the job losses have been disproportionately concentrated among people of color.”
Herd immunity is not terribly far away due to the combination of increased vaccination rates and the number of Americans previously infected with COVID. Nevertheless, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Monday that she suffers from a “recurring feeling … of impending doom” because of a possible next wave of infections.
socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden agreed, saying, “If we let our guard down now, we could see it getting worse, not better.” When asked if some states should slow down on reopening, he simply responded, “Yes,” and walked out of the room. He’s previously derided eliminating statewide mask mandates as “Neanderthal thinking.”
Well, such “Neanderthal thinking” has led red states to better economic performance and far lower unemployment, while the Democrats’ “progressive” efforts have disproportionately hurt minorities by killing their jobs with a decimated economy. Yet Republicans are the “racists”? ~The Patriot Post
Corporate America Goes Beyond Redlining Conservatism
Regardless of what you think of South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem’s tactical retreat on protecting women’s sports — and there are good arguments both by those arguing the strategic sense of it and by those saying it was a squishy backtrack — one thing has been made clear in recent years: Big Business is willing to move beyond redlining conservatism. In fact, it’s taking a page from an anti-Semitic campaign.
The boycott, divest, and sanction (BDS) movement has long targeted Israel over measures that are intended to prevent that country’s destruction. In essence, companies are threatened with boycotts, banks and financial institutions are urged to divest from Israel, and sanctions are applied against Israel itself to coerce it into surrendering its security.
Now, the same approach is being used against conservatives.
South Dakota was particularly targeted for this by the NCAA, which threatened legal action if Governor Noem signed a “transgender” bill into law. Noem decided to ask the legislature for modifications and to secure at least protection for girls competing in high school, junior high school, or elementary school, while leaving out colleges in hopes of mollifying the NCAA. The legislation died yesterday due to the impasse.
This has happened before. Remember the battles over Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act? Salesforce’s CEO began helping employees who wished to leave the state, and other companies also threatened to boycott the state. Then-Governor Mike Pence conceded ground.
Similar demands are being made of major companies that call Georgia home, like Coca-Cola, Home Depot, and Delta Airlines, as well as Major League Baseball and the PGA Tour, over Georgia’s new election integrity law. Activists are trying to get MLB’s All-Star Game and the Masters golf tournament moved out of the Peach State to protest the fact that Georgia’s legislature actually cares about fighting voter fraud. President socialist/scumbag/ liar-Joe Biden has falsely called the law “Jim Crow in the 21st century,” and nothing sticks like the “racist” label — especially with ignorant consumers of mainstream media lies.
And that brings us to a very harsh reality for grassroots Patriots to confront: Many voters who don’t have our focus on current events tend to vote on the economy. If the economy is (deliberately) cratered, or when economic opportunities are not coming, they tend to vote out the party (i.e., Republicans) they perceive as being responsible for it. This is true whether it’s the Left fighting fracking or when a company pulls a major event over conservative policy.
In 2019, Salesforce announced that it would revoke licenses for users of its software if they sold certain legal firearms and accessories that anti-Second Amendment extremists want banned. On top of that is Operation Choke Point, a form of sanctions for companies that don’t boycott and divest promptly.
The immensely frustrating fact of the matter is that with the dominance of Big Tech and so many major corporations now taking one particular side on hot-button political issues, grassroots Patriots will have to fight smarter than ever. Part of that will be building our own versions of these enterprises, but part of it will also be making corporate America face consequences if companies continue to play political favorites or go along with redlining and this new iteration of BDS. ~The Patriot Post
The Real Anti-Asian Hate Crime
Last week, in the wake of the murder of eight people at two Atlanta massage parlors, Harvard President Lawrence Bacow felt compelled to signal his virtue. After all, he noted, six of the eight killed were of Asian descent, and that group had endured plenty of abuse during the past year as scapegoats for the deadly ChiCom Virus.
Of course, Bacow didn’t call it the ChiCom Virus; he simply called it “the pandemic,” thereby bowing to political correctness and refusing to name the geographic region associated with the origin of the coronavirus — which humans have always routinely done, whether for Spanish flu, or West Nile virus, or Middle East respiratory syndrome, or Ebola, or Lyme disease, or Rocky Mountain spotted fever, or, well, you get the idea.
“Harvard must stand as a bulwark against hatred and bigotry,” he said in a statement. “We welcome and embrace individuals from every background because it makes us a better community, a stronger community. An attack on any group of us is an attack on all of us — and on everything we represent as an institution. … To Asians, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders in our community: We stand together with you today and every day going forward.”
That’s certainly a powerful statement of solidarity. But it’s also an insincere one. Harvard, you see, discriminates against Asian Americans when it comes to admissions.
As Wencong Fa writes in The Wall Street Journal, “Harvard has been sued over its race-conscious admissions policy. The plaintiffs contend that Harvard discriminates by assigning Asian-Americans lower ‘personal ratings,’ which are supposed to denote characteristics like leadership and grit. The Princeton Review has advised Asian-American applicants to refrain from noting that they intend to pursue a career in medicine or major in math or science, lest they appear ‘too Asian.’ The Justice Department brought a similar lawsuit against Yale last year, but the socialist/scumbag/ liar-Biden administration dropped it in February.”
Fa knows all about this Ivy League discrimination. He’s an attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation, which is providing legal representation to various Asian Americans on this front.
But it’s not just the Harvards and the Yales that are singling out and punishing high-achieving Asian Americans. Take New York Mayor scumbag-Bill de Blasio, for example. As Fa notes, scumbag-de Blasio “claims the city’s transparent and objective process for admissions to [elite] specialized schools such as Stuyvesant, Bronx Science and Brooklyn Tech has led to too many Asian-American students. He called the racial composition of those schools a ‘monumental injustice.’ Mr. scumbag-De Blasio changed the admissions policy to make it harder for many Asian-American students, many from low-income families, to get in.”
Got that? To scumbag-de Blasio, it’s a “monumental injustice” when one of his city’s best schools admits too many Asian Americans.
And all along we’ve been told that the vile racists reside on the Right.
California Democrat Congressman Ted Lieu certainly wants us to believe that’s the case. At a recent hearing about the lack of Asian American representation in our court system, he exploded at Peter Kirsanow, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, for having had the temerity to note that a disproportionate number of our nation’s federal judges come from elite Ivy League schools such as Harvard and that the admissions discrimination of those schools against Asian Americans is naturally allowing fewer of them to end up on the federal bench.
“Amid all the concerns about rising anti-Asian bias,” the Wall Street Journal editorial board noted, “Mr. Lieu and progressives are desperate to squelch any debate about discrimination against well-qualified Asian-Americans by leading universities. They don’t want Americans to know that the left favors discrimination by race when it suits their political purposes.”
As we pointed out last week, leftists are lying about anti-Asian hate crimes. They’re simply trying to further divide the American people by race in an effort to secure another reliably Democrat voting bloc.
Let’s hope the American people — Asian and non-Asian alike — are smart enough to see through it. ~The Patriot Post
CAL THOMAS
Jim Crow and the Georgia Voting Law
At his news conference last Thursday, President socialist/ scumbag/liar-Biden said of Georgia’s new voting law, “It makes Jim Crow look like Jim Eagle.”
Jim Crow was not a person, but unlike most former presidents, he has a museum: The Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia.
The name came from a song written by Thomas Dartmouth “Daddy” Rice. From the museum webpage: “Rice, a struggling ‘actor’ (he did short solo skits between play scenes) at the Park Theater in New York, happened upon a black person singing (a song titled ‘Jim Crow’) — some accounts say it was an old black slave who walked with difficulty, others say it was a ragged black stable boy. Whether modeled on an old man or a young boy we will never know, but we know that in 1828 Rice appeared on stage as ‘Jim Crow’ — an exaggerated, highly stereotypical black character.
"Rice, a white man, was one of the first performers to wear blackface makeup…His Jim Crow song-and-dance routine was an astounding success that took him from Louisville to Cincinnati to Pittsburgh to Philadelphia and finally to New York in 1832. He also performed to great acclaim in London and Dublin. By then ‘Jim Crow’ was a stock character in minstrel shows, along with counterparts Jim Dandy and Zip Coon. liar-Rice’s subsequent blackface characters were Sambos, Coons, and Dandies. White audiences were receptive to the portrayals of blacks as singing, dancing, grinning fools.”
President socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden and other Democrats apparently want us to believe there has been no racial progress since then.
Democrats should display some humility when it comes to African-Americans and voting since it was members of their party who opposed civil rights legislation, defended slavery in the 19th century and promoted “black codes” in Southern state legislatures that denied many rights to former slaves. Those were elected Democrats who stood in schoolhouse doors, denying access to black children. Democrat sheriffs clubbed people in the streets during demonstrations and sicced dogs on them, among other indignities. It was also the party that required “poll taxes” and “literacy tests” for blacks, violating their right to vote.
The Georgia law leaves in place many voting options, in addition to showing up on Election Day. It eliminates signature matching, which should appeal to both parties. Vote tabulators will no longer have to subjectively decide the authenticity of two signatures.
Instead, voters will receive an ID number with their mail-in ballots or applications. Those numbers must match. In person voters who do not have an ID can easily obtain one.
How is doing a better job of ensuring ballot integrity and boosting confidence in election outcomes racist? Critics claim the new law negatively affects African American voters. Do they think Blacks are so incompetent they can’t do the minimum required in order to vote?
For years Democrats have expanded voting laws to include registration at the DMV, early voting, and absentee voting with no excuses (still allowed under the new law). The Georgia law, which is being duplicated in other states with Republican majority legislatures, seeks to prevent vote harvesting and voting by people who don’t exist, or who have moved out of state.
Today’s Democrats like to claim “voter suppression” when Republicans attempt to make sure every ballot is legitimate. We can’t afford to repeat Donald Trump’s claims of suspect voting behavior, miscounting and questions about machines and illegal voters that he alleged characterized the 2020 presidential election.
Most people are willing to accept the defeat of candidates for whom they voted if they believe the system was fair and the tabulations accurate. Achieving that end is the purpose of the new Georgia law. It’s not about Jim Crow, or for that matter, “Jim Eagle.” ~The Patriot Post
HANS VON SPAKOVSKY
On Electoral Redistricting Panels, HR 1 Would Require Racial, Gender Discrimination
HR 1, the so-called For the People Act, is a dangerous and radical bill.
It threatens the security, fairness, and integrity of our elections and restricts the First Amendment rights of Americans to freely engage in political speech and activity.
It would force state legislatures to hand over the redistricting process to unaccountable bureaucrats and institutionalizes racial and gender quotas.
It would also implement what amounts to a test to participate in redistricting that violates the associational and religious rights of the public.
People often complain about gerrymandering by state legislatures when they draw the political lines after every decennial census. But legislators at least are accountable to voters, who can vote them out of office if the voters are not satisfied with the job the legislators do.
That’s certainly not true with the appointed members of government commissions.
Yet that is exactly what HR 1 creates. It would abrogate the authority of state legislators to draw the boundary lines of congressional districts and transfer it to so-called independent redistricting commissions, which in states such as Arizona and California have not proven to be very “independent.”
The very detailed requirements for eligibility to serve on these commissions, hidden deep inside the 800-page bill, are shocking and offensive.
Are you an American who has recently changed his or her mind on which political party best supports your values, views, and principles? If you’ve done so within the past three years, you can’t serve on a commission because you are only eligible if you’ve “been continuously registered to vote with the same political party” for the three years prior to your appointment.
If you want to be considered for appointment, you have to disclose your “household income for the most recent taxable year.” Apparently, your income is somehow important to whether you are qualified to determine the political boundaries of congressional districts.
But it gets worse.
You can’t even be considered for the commission unless you disclose your “involvement with, or financial support of, professional, social, political, religious, or community organizations or causes.”
In other words, not only do you have disclose which church, mosque, or synagogue you attend, but also your support for nonprofit organizations, such as the NAACP or the NRA, NARAL or Citizens for Life.
That’s exactly the kind of information the U.S. Supreme Court told Alabama in 1958 that it could not require be publicly disclosed because it violated the constitutional rights of citizens to associate for the advancement of their beliefs and ideas.
In today’s “woke” cancel culture, forcing such disclosure would likely subject anyone who wants to be in the “selection pool” to harassment and intimidation — exactly what the NAACP feared would happen when it went to court in 1958.
Furthermore, religious tests are strictly outlawed by Article VI of the U.S. Constitution for federal offices, and the Supreme Court extended that prohibition to all state offices in 1961 in Torcaso v. Watkins through the First Amendment.
Forcing individuals to disclose their religious affiliation potentially puts them in the position of not being chosen due to their religious beliefs, which is essentially a prohibited religious test.
What possible explanation is there for the sponsors of HR 1 to put this into their bill other than to allow that to happen?
But HR 1 is even more insidious. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 bans discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. So why does HR 1 require anyone who wants to be in the “selection pool” to disclose their “race, ethnicity, [and] gender”?
It’s because HR 1 sets up what amount to discriminatory quotas for membership, that’s why.
HR 1 requires that membership on the redistricting commission be “representative of the demographic groups [including racial, ethnic, economic, and gender] … of the State.” In other words, the membership of the commission has to match the racial, ethnic, and gender proportions of the state’s population. In short, that’s a racial- and gender-quota system.
Whether a state follows this diktat would be reported to Congress. HR 1 requires the comptroller general of the United States to “submit to Congress a report on the extent to which the membership of independent redistricting commissions … meet the diversity requirements” of this statute.
There are many other objectionable requirements in this part of HR 1 on redistricting commissions.
To be a considered for appointment, you also have to disclose your “employment and educational history.” That history is not relevant to whether you are entitled to vote, and we would all be highly offended and incensed if Congress said there should be “employment and educational” requirements before you are allowed to vote.
So, where is the outrage over your job and education history being a consideration with respect to whether you, as a citizen, are allowed to be selected to draw the lines of the congressional districts you are qualified to vote in or run in as a candidate?
Moreover, this provision discriminates against spouses and family members of those who are active in politics. You cannot be on a commission if your spouse or other “immediate” family member holds public office — even if that office has nothing whatsoever to do with Congress or congressional districts.
In other words, if your wife is on the local town council, you cannot serve on a commission that draws the boundaries of congressional districts.
If you contributed more than $1,000 in total to any political candidates for any “public office or to any political action committee” in the 10 years prior to appointment, you are also banned from serving on a commission.
Again, that means that if you made a donation to someone running for dog catcher, the local school board, or your town council, and that total combined was more than $1,000, you can’t draw the lines for congressional districts.
In other words, they don’t want anyone who has actually participated in our democratic political process or is even related to anyone who participates in our political process.
Who should be outraged by HR 1 and this redistricting scheme? Answer: every American, and especially every “father, stepfather, mother, stepmother, son, stepson, daughter, stepdaughter, brother, stepbrother, sister, stepsister, husband, wife, father-in-law, or mother-in-law” excluded from the redistricting process because of their family’s political involvement or their race, ethnicity, gender, income, employment, and education.
In other words, everyone. ~The Patriot Post
Replies