Reid To Effectively Shutdown FEC?
Tags: Democrat Culture of Corruption, Harry Reid, President Bush.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
Senate Democrats, lead by Harry Reid, are trying to strong-arm President Bush by refusing to clear a slate of appointees to the Federal Election Commission.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) just announced that the Senate will not clear four new appointees for the Federal Election Commission, meaning the panel that acts as a watchdog on political campaigns cannot function during the critical election-year period.
Reid is blaming the White House for refusing to withdraw to allow a majority vote on the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky for a seat on the commission. Republicans want von Spakovsky approved as part of a slate of four FEC nominees or they will refuse to consider any of the nominees.
Von Spakovsky was recess appointed by President Bush to the FEC, but his term expires at the end of the year. Democrats have refused to allow his nomination to move forward, arguing that his actions while at the Justice Department disqualified him for the post. Bush, though has not backed down, and the matter has been at an impasse for the last four months.
Now, with the Senate moving toward adjournment until mid-January, Reid signalled that Democrats will not move any FEC nominations if they include von Spakovsky, meaning the commission will only have two of its required six members. Reid said he offered the GOP a straight majority vote on all the FEC nominees, including von Spakovsky, but the White House refused to accept that offer.
How convenient that the FEC could be effectively shutdown during a presidential election year. Is this merely a case of Democrats trying to flex their muscles and appease their extreme liberal base, or is it also a way to protect Democrat candidates in an election year?
Funny isn’t it, just the other day Harry Reid was complaining about Republican obstruction…
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Matt Margolis is co-author (with Mark Noonan) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at The Buffalo Bean. Follow Matt on Twitter.
56 Responses to “Reid To Effectively Shutdown FEC?”
Caucus of Corruption
BTW sleepy, the Federal Attorney refused to investigater the voter fraud in New Mexico and Washington, even though local prosecutors have.
That’s the answer to your question. Now please answer mine.
“Why are you assuming that only the poor and minority Democrats, who would’ve voted Democrat, were suppressed?”
First of all nobody claimed that it was ONLY poor, and minority democratic voters that would be affected. Only that that demographic of voters would be dispraportionately affected by the Voter ID laws.
A study done in November of 2006 by the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York School of Law found that,
“…as many as 11 percent of Americans—more than 21 million individuals—do not have a current, government-issued photo ID. Elderly, poor and minority Americans are more likely to lack government-issued ID. Polling results suggest six million elderly Americans do not possess a government-issued photo ID, 15 percent of voting-age citizens earning under $35,000 a year do not possess such ID and fully 25 percent of voting-age African Americans do not possess this ID.”
The elderly, the poor, and the minority historically are Democratic voters. And I won’t get into right now, but we know from real data that these voters turn out LESS in states that have restrictive voter ID laws.
Combine that with the fact that there has never been a widespread problem of voter fraud the law is a naked attempt to supress minority, and poor voter turnout.
Of course, in the end your question is pretty pointless. Does it really matter who is being supressed? Voter supression IS voter fraud. Nobody’s vote should be supressed.
phnx,
“It is not surprising that in states where election fraud has been alledged, ie New Mexico, Wisconsin, and Washington, the laws are apparently easy to circumvent.”
Really? Well then why don’t you show me where a real prosecutable case of voter fraud would have been prevented if we passed voter ID laws. Because the reality is that the type of fraud that voter ID laws would prevent, largely, doesn’t exist.
“Face it… a segment of leftists just want to subvert our democracy…you apparently are one of them.”
Yet, all you can come up with is the ACORN incidents. Incidents in which ACORN registered fake voters. Fake voters that can’t vote. Because they don’t exist.
Because in case you didn’t notice. You kind of actually have to exist in order to go to the polls.
The ACORN workers were making up peoples names so they could get paid more, not so they could rig an election.
This is nothing more than a Republican attempt at hyping voter fraud, that simply doesn’t exist on any meaningful scale.
“BTW sleepy, the Federal Attorney refused to investigater the voter fraud in New Mexico and Washington, even though local prosecutors have.”
I can’t speak for New Mexico, but I live in Washington State, and I can say without a doubt that your assertion that the US Attorney’s office in WA didn’t investigate allegations of voter fraud is demonstrably false.
Here is what US Attorney John McKay had to say on the subject a hearing before the House of Representatives.
“McKAY: It is very true that the controversy surrounding the 2004 governor’s election was one that had a lot of public debate. I was aware that I was receiving criticism for not proceeding with a criminal investigation. And, frankly, it didn’t matter to me what people thought. Like my colleagues, we work on evidence, and there was no evidence of voter fraud or election fraud. And, therefore, we took nothing to the grand jury.”
Furthermore the Seattle Times reported that,
“McKay insists that top prosecutors in his office and agents from the FBI conducted a ‘very active’ review of allegations of fraud during the election but filed no charge and did not convene a federal grand jury because ‘we never found any evidence of criminal conduct.’ ” The Times also reported: “McKay also wanted to make it clear that he pressed ahead with a preliminary investigation, despite the hesitation of Craig Donsanto, the longtime chief of the Election Crimes branch of the Department of Justice, who ultimately concurred with McKay that no federal crimes had been committed in the election.”
In fact the US Attorney’s office in WA DID investigate allegations of voter fraud, and came to the conclusion that there was NO evidence of it.
Quite simply put, they didn’t prosecute voter fraud, because it didn’t happen. And thats true no matter how much you want to believe otherwise.
“A photo ID is required to board a plane, cash a check, and open a bank account. Its even required to get welfare benefits. So much for your bogus bullsh*t.”
Last time I checked boarding a plane, cashing a check, or opening a bank account was a privelege. Voting is a right. In other words, if you actually think these things are comparable… you are an idiot.
Second, what isn’t bullshit are the real numbers. Numbers like this.
“The Eagleton Institute research is supported by findings from a poll conducted by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law in November 2006. Their poll, “Citizens without Proof,” found that as many as 11 percent of Americans—more than 21 million individuals—do not have a current, government-issued photo ID. Elderly, poor and minority Americans are more likely to lack government-issued ID. Polling results suggest six million elderly Americans do not possess a government-issued photo ID, 15 percent of voting-age citizens earning under $35,000 a year do not possess such ID and fully 25 percent of voting-age African Americans do not possess this ID.”
And this,
“Just last month, the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University presented new research findings to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission that suggest Latinos, Asian Americans and African Americans are less likely to vote as a result of increasingly restrictive voter ID requirements. The Eagleton study examined the 2004 election and concluded that in states requiring voters to present an ID at the polls, voters were 2.7 percent less likely to vote than in states where voters were merely required to state their names. Latinos were 10 percent less likely to vote, Asian-Americans 8.5 percent less likely to vote and African Americans 5.7 percent less likely to vote. Since the research depended on the November 2004 Current Population Survey (CPS), a data set that has been criticized for its small sample size of minorities, it may actually understate the impact of ID requirement on minority voters.”
Combine that with the fact that the type of fraud that voter ID laws would prevent, really doesn’t exist on any kind of meaningful scale, the law does much more harm than good. But that’s really the point isn’t it?
When all you’ve got to use as evidence is the ACORN Non-Scandal (which is fraud on the same scale as petty shoplifting) then you know you don’t have much.
uaydvkub
uaydvkub
Financial Freedom & The Time To Enjoy It! Part 1 – The Right Mindset
Developing a positive mindset is essential when starting your work from home business.