I wasn’t going to write about this because I don’t want to be accused of picking on Mark Levin, but then it got mentioned, so what the heck. Levin is “outraged” that Obama is trying to “nationalize the country’s elections!” Yep. And he’s right! To the bunkers! ...... Ok, for those of you still here, let’s talk about this because Obama did something interesting and we should think about this logically.Here’s what happened. Two weeks ago, Obama signed an Executive Order establishing a Presidential Commission to deal with “election administration.” According to the Order, the Commission “shall identify best practices and otherwise make recommendations to promote the efficient administration of elections.” The commission will look at how to train and recruit poll workers, how to manage voter rolls, voting machines, ballot simplicity, English proficiency and absentee ballots.
Levin reacted angrily saying Obama used “falsehoods” about long lines “to nationalize elections” in a power grab to “further weaken our voting system at the state level.” Some election law expert even called this “a solution in search of a problem.” Are they right?
No. A commission like this has zero power. Presidents cannot make law and election laws cannot be overridden or amended by a commission like this. It takes an act of Congress to change election law and even their power is limited by various Supreme Court rulings. Thus, Obama’s commission is basically a “for entertainment purposes only” gimmick. . . like most of his agenda. So forget Levin because he doesn’t understand how our government works.
And what about this idea that this is a solution in search of a problem? Well, that’s wrong too. For one thing, this is not a solution since it’s powerless to do anything. Secondly, there is a problem here. Think back on the whining about voter fraud since 2000. The left squealed that Bush stole the election. The feds responded by giving money for electronic voting machines, which the left claimed were pre-programmed to vote for Bush. Starting around 2006, the right decided that the same voting machines were spitting out votes for Democrats. At the same time, the right became obsessed with illegal aliens and criminals stealing elections, black people voting without IDs, Black Panthers blocking polls, and so on. Blacks whine that they are kept from voting. Absentee ballots get delivered late. Etc. etc. For the past 13 years, we’ve all be screaming that we’re worse than a Banana Republic. So saying there is no problem when election integrity is vital to a democracy is pretty stupid.
Still, we should fight this, right, because Obama proposed it?
Well, let’s think about this. Right now, our election laws are about as rigged as they can possible get for the left. There are no requirements to vote. You can register anyone. You don’t need to show an ID. Liberals are constantly getting caught talking about voting multiple times and never get punished. Liberals are big on “finding” ballots to win elections, cutting off elections to stop conservatives from voting, keeping military ballots from counting, and getting recounts in liberal strongholds. What more could they possibly do to make things worse?
Moreover, when conservatives try to fix this, realize two things. First, the only states where they can fix things are states they already win, so the effort is pointless. Secondly, because those states are basically Southern states with a racist past and because conservative rhetoric has focused on “illegals stealing elections” and blacks committing voter fraud, the Democrats have been able to sell the idea that this is just conservatives trying to suppress minority votes.
Now imagine if rather than just attacking Obama’s commission, what if conservatives embraced a commission like this and forced their way onto it. Not only could they move election laws and administration to the right – since they can’t really go further left – but we could get things like Voter ID laws endorsed nationwide through the Congress without having to go state by state. That means we can reach the states we couldn’t normally touch because we aren’t even close to competitive in those states, and it means we can make this very rational change without facing the constant drumbeat that this is an attempt by Southern whites to control minority populations.
This is one of those things where conservatives need to stop thinking with their knees and work through whether or not this makes sense. It might not. I admit that. It could be there are some hidden dangers I don’t see. But from what I see right now, embracing this and joining it could only be very good for us.
Thoughts?
Oh, and obey the Hypno-toad.
38 comments:
Interesting thoughts, Andrew. I suspect, as you point out, this won't amount to much. But I agree with your central premise. The laws tend to be stacked against us, so why not jump in, and maybe come up with a few things that might help. Oh well, if we end up making any positive headway, the whole thing will probably die.
Jed, To me, it seems that we have nothing to lose by embracing this. So why not jump in and shape it in our favor.
RIP to the Iron Lady
Voter suppression isn't something voters are fond of, so few political figures openly argue for such suppression, but both parties do what they can to make voting easier for their guys and tougher for the other guys. I don't think that will change.
Conspiracy theorists whining about an utterly meaningless blue-ribbon commission is as predictable as it is pointless and stupid, but I don't see what percentage there is for Republicans in participating. The conspiracy theorists would turn on them and Congress would do nothing.
The cynic in me (which is pretty much all of me) suspects both sides prefer having the issue as a way to motivate their bases and excuse failure.
RIP Mrs. Thatcher. I almost shudder to get on Facebook and see the liberal hate.
I heard about Mrs. Thatcher. God Bless her and I hope she and Pres. Reagan are having a great reunion! Sadly it hasn't taken very long for all they did to revert back - Russia Communist Putin and the Falklands 2.0.
Andrew - As I commented this weekend, if I were a paranoid person I would think something was up. But you are spot on that if we can correct some of our voting issues, why not? I suspect that this is all for show and if any report is published that supports voter ID requirements, we will never know it.
I rather expect any Democrat commission on voting to find that for ever instance of fraud prevented by ID laws, 100,000 legitimate voters are disenfranchised, or some such nonsense as that. I'm sure their recommendations will come more along the lines of allowing more early voting further out and over the internet.
Anonymous 2016
Anthony, I think that's true that both sides want to stop the other. The point is, however, that the Democrats have managed to shift election laws in their favor, so this is a great opportunity for the Republicans to use Obama's idea to push them back to the right under the guise of a "non-partisan commission." That's always the best way to make changes.
As for the conspiracy nuts turning on the Republicans, they already have on every issue so why worry about them?
Jed, I just saw that. She was one of my favorite politicians. :) RIP
Bev, And don't forget Jimma Carter II in the White House.
T-Rav, That's why normal people don't go to places like that.
Bev, I'm pretty sure this is just for show as well. This is like Obama's "jobs commission." They'll make a big deal that they're going to do something big and there will be whispers about about stopping Republicans and rich people from keeping Democrats from voting... then we'll never from them again.
I think the best thing Republicans could do would be to adopt the idea and tell Obama they should form a huge bipartisan commission of Senators and House members and members of the Administration. Then you go in an push as hard right as possible so you get a good report. Then you pass the entire report into law with a few tweaks in our favor and you claim it was bipartisan.
tryanmax, That's probably true and that's what we'll get because this will be a Democratic commission. That's why I think conservatives need to embrace the idea and join it. See my comment to Bev. Form a bipartisan commission and then push hard for partisan ideas.
Meanwhile, Levin gets stuck on the "bipartisan commission" part, completely ignores the actual goings-on w/in the commission--let alone any results--and calls for the heads of all the "RINOs" involved. I'm not saying I don't like your idea, I'm just gaming out Levin.
Andrew - You are right. As a matter of strategy, Republicans/Conservatives should be calling Obama's bluff on these kind of Executive commissions as often and as intelligently as possible (if that is possible!). If Obama wants to be seen as 'doing something' then let's really make him do something. We really need to get our leadership to take positive steps to appear to be engaged in finding a solution and being able to take some of the credit, rather than appearing to be obstructionists.
With all of the rumblings about Obamacare coming from the left, it's time to make some hay and start capitalizing on these issues.
tryanmax, Yeah, sadly, you are correct. After all, RINO hunting is about all talk radio offers these days. But you know what? It's time to stop worrying about our idiot flank and just become a governing party.
Politics is like war and it requires an effective strategy. That means seeking opportunities to gain ground and taking them. Whining that everything is the end of the world is about as idiotic a strategy as you can possibly get, and the Republicans can no longer allow themselves to be pulled into that strategy by these people. Leadership is about doing what you need to do to succeed, not being swayed by every lunatic screaming from the woods.
RIP Thatcher. She was a great force for good.
Bev, Exactly! If Obama wants to play these games, then we need to get better at them and outmaneuver him. We need to take the tools he tries to create and use them to our own advantage. Screaming about how Obama is trying to end the world just reinforces the idea to the left and the middle that Obama is doing something worthwhile and it keeps us from advancing any of our own ideas.
Anthony, Agreed. She really changed the world for the better. Few people can say that.
Andrew, I completely agree. Ironically, I think there is ample room on the radio airwaves for a real strategist to talk strategy. Every self-professed conservative I know loves to talk strategy.
tryanmax, I think that's what Rush was when he started. He used to talk all the time about the various ideas coming out of the think tanks and how the Republicans should play one issue or another.
So I think there is definitely an audience for that, especially as no one caters to that audience anymore -- basically, they just sell anger.
Andrew, you're telling me, I....wait, what?
T-Rav, LOL! Yes, most normal people don't go listen to the waves of anger being tossed back and forth.
Btw, Annette Funicello died today at the age of 70.
I'm actually surprised she was only 70.
Have I ever mentioned that I got to meet Margaret Thatcher at Angelo State University in 1993? Admirable and intimidating lady...
rlaWTX, I'm not sure. I recall someone mentioning that they had met her at a college. Odds are, that was you! :)
Wow. I bet that was quite an experience. Especially for a NORMAL PERSON!!!!!
LOL! I can see that someone is not taking my "normal people" comment too well. Look at it this way... normal sucks, right?
One thing to keep in mind, Obama would never propose something he wasn't in absolute control over.
I've seen Thatcher speak, I was amazed just how genuine/real she was. It was part of some woman's speaking symposium(I don't remember exactly), but she filled half of the ASU activity center(athletic arena). One of the apparent big feminist names (we would all know her, I don't remember which one, like it's really important). Got a classroom, not a lecture hall a classroom. I didn't go to the little show, like I want to hear some old hag complain she isn't as important as as the first woman PM of one of those countries feminists would complain about. LOL.
T-Rav - I'm insulted too. I am NOT normal and will fight to the...well, not death, that just too extreme, but I will be very annoyed!
For those of you had the opportunity to be in the presence of Mrs. Thatcher, I am truly jealous.
Max, That is very true, which is why the Republicans would need to handle this carefully by demanding a bipartisan commission that includes representatives of the House and Senate. It would look politically bad for Obama to propose this and then run away as soon as the Republicans said "but it needs to be bipartisan and include the people who can actually make changes." And if the Republicans do this right, they can end up stacking the deck of the new commission.
Bev, It would have been nice to meet her, that's for sure. I would have liked to have met Reagan too.
Fine... be insulted. LOL! Frankly, I don't think any of us are really "normal."
Andrew - I just watched "Iron Lady" a few weeks ago. I was annoyed that they made her seem delusional throughout the movie as a plot device. But what was amazing is how many times someone tried to blow her up and she just kept going. What a steely spine that woman had!
I doubt she would ever had said "What difference does it make" if one of her Ambassadors was murdered...
Compared to the voices in my head, I am very normal.
Personally, I would have like to meet Reagan, Thatcher, and John Paul II. Call it "The Anti-Communist Hat Trick." Well, there's still Walesa.
I'm finding myself wanting to write the Reps leadership off. They seem to want to play with Obama. After all they are the political class, if you want to be cool in political class. You only play the Dem way.
After watching some of Lady Thacher's speeches today. Talk about leadership, or should I say we need some adults in Washington.
T-Rav, That would be a cool group to meet. I would add Churchill too, on my list of people to meet.
Max, Thatcher was a hell of a leader. We definitely don't have that today.
On the Republicans, a couple definitely want to be his friend, but not the leadership. The leadership has pretty much resisted everything he wants.
Bev, I've never seen it. I don't like political hatchet jobs and that's what it struck me as.
As for the Ambassadors... well, they are Obama donors so it's hard for me to care.
Post a Comment