Tag Archive for: election integrity

The Left Doesn’t Want Democracy. It Wants to Stage-Manage ‘Democracy.’

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) dealt a body blow to a voter identification ballot measure by rewriting the description after it received enough signatures to make the ballot. According to the measure’s new title in a draft voter guide released last week, Proposition 39 “prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.” It takes real determination to make an 80-20 issue sound so terrible.

California Proposition 39 is a standard voter ID measure, which would require voters to produce a government ID every time they cast a ballot or to provide the last four digits of the ID number if voting by mail. Reportedly, the proposition requires any government ID, not specifically a photo ID.

One duty of the California attorney general’s office is to write a title and summary for a proposed ballot measure. The attorney general’s office originally titled Proposition 39, “Establishes Additional Voter Identification and Citizenship Verification Requirements.”

“When Rob Bonta didn’t think we could get the signatures on Prop. 39, he provided a relatively fair ballot title,” said Assemblyman Carl DeMaio (R), the measure’s sponsor.

However, it seems that even Californians are less open to noncitizens diluting their votes than the leftist fringe would like to believe. Before the deadline, Proposition 39 collected more than 1.3 million signatures under Bonta’s original title, so that the measure qualified for the ballot.

That set alarm bells ringing in Sacramento. In 2024, the City of Huntington Beach approved a voter ID ballot measure for voting in local elections beginning in 2026. Shortly thereafter, the state government enacted a law prohibiting local governments from implementing voter ID measures. If Proposition 39 passed, it would be a rebuke to the entire progressive supermajority that has kept California elections unguarded in spite of public support for commonsense security measures like requiring voter ID.

In a matter of weeks, Bonta’s office created new language for Proposition 39, which made it sound much less desirable. The new title of the measure says it “Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification,” when its real aim is to prohibit noncitizens from voting. It further puts the entire description in negative terms. “Invalidates mail ballots that do not have last four digits of designated government-issued identification number written on envelope. Prohibits in-person voting without presenting government-issued identification.”

DeMaio slammed the new language as “a biased and dishonest” title with “pejorative, argumentative phrasing,” accusing Bonta of “rigging the election.”

Bonta has taken flak for writing slanted titles for ballot measures before. In 2025, Bonta informed California voters that a blatant gerrymander to eliminate five Republican districts “authorizes temporary changes to congressional district maps in response to Texas’ partisan redistricting.”

A fundamental weakness in ballot measures is that voters often do not see the full text on which they are voting, or the legal jargon it entails is hardly comprehensible to the ordinary voter. Thus, simplified titles and descriptions of ballot measures can play a significant role in determining whether the measures succeed or fail.

Progressives have often turned this fact to their advantage by manipulating voters with skewed descriptions for ballot measures, enabling them to sneak undesirable policies into state laws and constitutions, because voters did not really know what they were voting for.

For instance, in the 2024 election, the first full cycle after Roe v. Wade was overturned, pro-abortion activists placed pro-abortion initiatives on the ballot in 10 different states. Almost all of these passed, even in red states with pro-life laws. But opponents argued that the language for many of the ballot measures was “deceptive.” For instance, the pro-abortion ballot measure in Missouri also included an attack on parental rights and some recognition for gender transition procedures.

In 2026, Virginia Democrats proposed a similar ballot measure to place a right to abortion in the state constitution. However, the move drew a lawsuit from the Founding Freedoms Law Center (FFLC), alleging that it “completely fails to inform the voters that the proposed amendment, due to its overwhelming breadth, would overturn many significant aspects of Virginia regulatory authority.” Among other things, the lawsuit alleged, the amendment would terminate parental consent and notification requirements for minors seeking abortion or sterilization, facilitate the rape of minors, and potentially allow non-licensed, non-medical professionals to commit abortions.

American progressives pay loud, frequent homage to the idea of “democracy,” usually defined as Jean-Jacques Rousseau defined it — as the will of a majority of voters. They therefore fully endorse ballot measures, referenda, and other legislation-by-election as the most direct expression of their ideal vision of democracy.

However, the frequency with which some progressives thumb the scales on such ballot referenda suggests that they have ideals higher than democracy. Progressives fear that voters will choose the options progressives disfavor, such as when they elected Donald Trump to the presidency in 2024. Thus, they put their thumb on the scale of ballot measures with deceptive language, manipulating voters into choosing the “right” option.

Progressives don’t want real democracy, where the people choose freely and without hindrance. They want a stage-managed “democracy.” They want a system in which they provide the signals, and voters follow their lead. Progressives have an aesthetic preference for popular election, because they want to believe that they are fighting “for the people.” But, too often, when push comes to shove, progressives reveal that they will implement their preferred policies by any means necessary, even if “the people” are not ready to go along without a nudge.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New Jersey Remains Unrepentant for Noncitizens on Voter Rolls

Mamdani Slammed for ‘Reckless and Foolish’ Doxxing of Thousands of Wealthy New Yorkers

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

VIDEO: Arizona State Senator Mark Finchem on Election Integrity, Fairness, Fraud

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Election integrity, fairness, fraud are all still very active discussions across America since the discovery in November 2020 that very serious violations of election integrity were discovered.

My guest on this episode is Arizona State Senator Mark Finchem who also is the Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Election Fairness Institute.

Our conversation is to continue and expose serious issues with our elections, as well as why the Elites do not want Donald Trump around anymore, actually, they never did want him around but thought they had it taken care of in November 2020.

WATCH: Arizona State Senator Mark Finchem on Election Integrity, Fairness, Fraud

©2026 All rights reserved.

As Noncitizens Continue to Populate Voter Rolls, Experts Wonder If It’s a ‘Glitch’

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

After reports emerged Tuesday that hundreds of noncitizens illegally voted in elections and thousands more were improperly registered to vote in New Jersey, experts say that Democratic officials in the state are continuing an alarming pattern of nationwide apathy and purposeful negligence in the Democratic Party toward securing voter rolls and maintaining election integrity.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill (D) acknowledged Tuesday that 6,600 noncitizens were improperly allowed to register to vote at Motor Vehicle Commission locations in the state. The governor further stated that “fewer than 400” of those individuals actually voted in elections.

Sherrill immediately blamed her predecessor, Democratic Governor Phil Murphy, for allowing the registrations to occur and stated that she was “appalled by the reckless failures that allowed this to happen.” She further blamed the state’s software vendor that handles the registrations, saying that she will replace the vendor and has ordered the removal of names that were improperly registered to vote.

But on Wednesday, the French technology firm IDEMIA that handled the registrations pushed back against Sherrill’s claim, stating that the supposed “glitch” that allowed the noncitizens to appear on voter rolls was not due to incorrect information. “The 6,600 records submitted to the [Motor Vehicle Commission] and Division of Elections contained correct information according to the design specifications as set out by the state,” IDEMIA spokesperson Lisa Shoemaker told the New York Post. She went on to note that “at no point was a noncitizen ever marked as a citizen in the database” and that the company “does not control or manage voter enrollment.”

Experts like J. Christian Adams, who serves as president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, say that noncitizens being included on voter rolls is a multi-state problem that has been occurring for some time because of a simple loophole that has yet to be resolved.

“When you register to vote at motor voter sites like DMV … oftentimes, people want to hurry, and they hit the screen — they hit ‘Yes,’ they hit ‘No.’ But there’s a big question. It says, ‘Are you a U.S. citizen?’ What happened in New Jersey was people were marking, ‘No, I’m not a U.S. citizen,’ but New Jersey is still putting them on the voter rolls,” he explained during “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” Wednesday. “… The exact same thing happened in Pennsylvania. We uncovered this a decade ago. Pennsylvania admitted to it.”

The issue has the full attention of the Trump administration. Last week, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Markwayne Mullin sent a letter to the secretaries of state in four states warning them that tens of thousands of noncitizens are improperly registered on their voter rolls. “Through preliminary reviews of the four states’ records, DHS found that there may be as many as: 190,832 non-citizens registered to vote in California[;] 35,152 non-citizens registered to vote in New Jersey[;] 15,903 non-citizens registered to vote in Nevada[; and] 14,576 non-citizens registered to vote in Pennsylvania,” a press release stated. Mullin called on the secretaries to respond within two weeks to address the issue.

Despite the irrefutable data, many Democratic officials like Sherrill are insisting that illegitimate voter registrations are a minor issue that does not affect the outcome of elections. In an apparent effort to downplay the issue, she stated that the noncitizens in New Jersey were registered as Democrats, Republicans, and unaffiliated and were “scattered across the state.”

But as Family Research Council President Tony Perkins pointed out, “[T]here [are] at least 10 New Jersey elections that have been decided by 25 votes or fewer since June of 2023.”

“[S]ome New Jersey votes were tied,” Adams added. “The Public Interest Legal Foundation has a tied election database [with] almost 900 elections around the country that ended in a tie. So it really matters. Look, this is a retreat position that the governor is using now, because before this was discovered, it was like, ‘There’s no problem with noncitizens on the voter rolls.’ It’s what always happens here. The Left always has to keep retreating and com[ing] up with a new story. And now the new story is, ‘Oh, well, we don’t think it made a difference.’ Yeah, okay. In another era, everybody would be mad about 6,000 noncitizens on the voter rolls. They wouldn’t be making excuses, they’d be making fixes.”

Adams went on to highlight how Democratic officials in states like Pennsylvania have attempted to cover up the fact that noncitizens have been showing up on their voter rolls. “In Pennsylvania, the Public Interest Legal Foundation had to sue Pennsylvania because they admitted they had tens of thousands of noncitizens because of the same exact sort of glitch. And Pennsylvania played hide the ball. Pennsylvania didn’t want to come clean about what they did to cause the problem, what they did to fix the problem. And really, nobody has ever [been] held accountable in Harrisburg. Now it’s Trenton, now it’s New Jersey.”

Adams further argued that the ineptitude “doesn’t mean it’s a conspiracy, but it’s something we all ought to want to fix. … What’s happening instead is incompetence, glitches, stupidity, government bureaucrats, apathy.”

Still, Perkins contended that there are some on the Left who want noncitizens voting. “I think there are some places [where] there’s an incentive to do this because they can shift elections the way they want them to go.”

Adams concurred. “That’s why people like Representative Jamie Raskin from Maryland are totally proud and loud that they want noncitizens voting, so this is no longer a fringe position.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Software vendor says NJ knew 6,600 non citizens registered to vote — and approved them anyway

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

House Racks Up Dramatic Wins before Recess while Senate Works to Catch Up

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

It wasn’t easy, but Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) managed to go three-for-three on some of the heaviest lifts the House GOP has faced this year: the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the framework for reconciliation 3.0, and a short-term government funding bill. In just 48 hours, the Louisianan ran the table on bills that the media had written off as impossible. But, as Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) pointed out, “House Republicans, we almost always get our work done,” even, he added, if it isn’t always a “pretty journey.”

The trio of proposals adds to the mountain of business piling up in Majority Leader John Thune’s (R-S.D.) Senate, where he’s trying to game out which pieces of the House’s legislation he’ll actually pursue and which he’ll either punt or switch out for his own chamber’s version. All the while, the president sits impatiently, wondering whether his agenda items will actually make it out of Congress alive. “It’s like the Senate is a place that you send things when you want them to die,” Donald Trump told reporters.

While the House and Senate leaders seem to have a good working relationship, there’s no mistaking the tension over the two chambers’ gameplans. Right now, most observers point out, “Johnson and Thune seem to be on completely different planets.” And while the Senate is in session a week longer than the House, it still might not be enough to tie up what are turning out to be very critical loose ends.

Stopping a Government Shutdown

To foil the Democrats’ plans to shut down the government before the elections, Johnson managed to muscle through a continuing resolution that would keep the agencies funded through December 4 — well after the midterms. Six Democrats and Rep. Kevin Kiley (I-Calif.) joined the GOP in pushing the bill across the finish line (220-205). “This clean, short-term [CR] simply keeps the government open, protects the progress we’ve made, and preserves the path to full-year appropriations,” Chairman Tom Cole (R-Okla.) explained on the floor.

His budget counterpart in the Senate, Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) — the successor to the late Lindsey Graham — has no illusions about the lengths the Democrats will go to score political points. “They’ve completely blown up the appropriations process,” he told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “Washington Watch” this week. “I think by and large, most of them are spoiling for a shutdown, thinking that would give them an advantage in the election.” But he’s also heard that there might be enough support from Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) caucus to pass a relatively clean CR in the hopes that Democrats take over the House and can press for big spending.

Regardless, he shook his head, “I definitely question their motives. It’s certainly not to be helpful, certainly not to be for the benefit of the American public. It’s for their own personal political power and for growing government. But it’s just possible we might get a CR because of those motivations.”

Whose CR is the better question. On Tuesday, Thune seemed to ignore the House version, opting instead to try to strike his own deal with Democrats, since he’ll need at least seven to reach the 60-vote threshold. “That is something I intend to bring to the floor for a vote before the August break,” he vowed.

The speaker seemed to give his partner latitude, telling reporters Wednesday, “I think Leader Thune believes he’ll have some reasonable Democrats in the Senate that will assist. I certainly hope that’s true and hopefully that’ll spark some in the House as well. So I think we’ll get it done.” If not, Thune has threatened to use budget reconciliation to force the government’s funding extension through on a simple majority vote.

At the end of the day, Senator Johnson wanted people to know, “Democrats are all about power. And to the extent that they can create chaos, [they will].”

Moving on Reconciliation 3.0

Speaking of reconciliation, despite a lot of hemming and hawing, House Republicans ultimately bowed to Trump’s wishes and agreed to unlock the process to a third reconciliation bill Wednesday — overcoming a lot of conservatives’ objections in the process. The budget resolution, which was an iffy prospect at best last week, squeaked through with two votes to spare after a group of hardline GOPers flipped to “yes” at the last minute.

The House’s latest gambit partially fulfills Trump’s wishes for more defense funding to fight Iran, agreeing to another $73 billion for the Pentagon, $12 billion in farm aid, and $10 billion to implement parts of the SAVE America Act. To help secure elections, Johnson’s plan would create a pot of money for states that agree to mandate voter ID and proof of citizenship at the polls.

Reflecting on the dim prospects for reconciliation earlier in the week, Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) admitted that “part of what happens with these legislative journeys is at the beginning, everybody is comparing the proposal to perfect, what they want. As the week moves on, people generally understand that they need to be comparing the proposal with some other realistic option, and that perfect is never going to happen around here,” he said. “As that happens, people across the spectrum in the House understand that what’s been proposed isn’t that bad. That’s why we’ve generally won votes Wednesday, Thursday, Friday that looked pretty bleak on a Monday or a Tuesday.”

But the journey is far from over. The Senate GOP isn’t exactly chomping at the bit to launch the fraught process. Thune has already managed expectations, insisting that he won’t move the House’s blueprint until the government funding problem is solved. “That means reconciliation won’t move in the Senate anytime soon — and passing a bipartisan stopgap spending bill could still take weeks or months of additional work,” Punchbowl News cautioned.

“I think [Thune’s] looking at all contingencies,” the speaker agreed. “…[W]e’ll coordinate on strategy, but I think there’s a lot of game to be played between now and then, so we’ll see what happens.”

Part of the hesitation on the Senate’s part has to be the terrifying prospect of a vote-a-rama right before the midterm elections. As part of reconciliation, Democrats can force an unlimited number of amendment votes on any issue they want — forcing vulnerable Republicans to take positions on a number of politically dicey issues like the Iran war, for example. And, Punchbowl adds, with the narrow margins, “it’s naïve to believe that Senate GOP leaders would be able to defeat all of them.”

Look, Ron Johnson acknowledged to Perkins, “It’s never an easy task, reconciliation. I think this one will be made easier because President Trump and the White House are really taking a leading role here. It’s a more modest; it’s a skinnier version of what a lot of people want. … Everybody’s got their own ideas in terms of what they want to do in a third reconciliation package. So this one’s going to be focused on military spending. What can we do to help farmers? And what can we do to restore integrity to our elections? Those are things that most Republicans agree on,” he noted.

Yet, they’re also, Senator John Kennedy (R-La.) observed, not exactly Schumer’s priorities. “Money for the military, and money for the farmers, and a fair chance of passing the SAVE Act — you’re not going to get it in regular order,” he argued. “And if you think otherwise, you’re entitled to your opinion, but I’ve got rocks in my driveway that are smarter.”

Another reason why Thune might hold his fire on reconciliation is that he could very well end up needing that tool to keep the government’s lights on. “I hope that’s not necessary,” he said. “We’ve had conversations, productive conversations, on both sides of the aisle on a funding resolution that would carry us past the November election.” But if not, having another reconciliation bill in his back pocket may be the only way to get the agencies the dollars they need.

Defunding Planned Parenthood

One of the major grudges pro-lifers continue to hold against Congress is its refusal to carry over the defunding of America’s biggest abortion business into a second year. After Republicans accomplished that long-awaited dream in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, stripping more than $800 million from Planned Parenthood in 2024, some corners of the party have abruptly walked away from that fight in the second and third reconciliation bills — to the dismay of grassroots conservatives. Making that sting even more, the floodgates reopened July 4, the same day America celebrated its 250th birthday.

The speaker hasn’t abandoned the idea, though, telling pro-life groups that a fourth reconciliation bill might be in play to rectify this wrong. Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) echoed that thought, insisting that reconciliation 4.0 can “do the things that are left out of this one.” Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) agreed.

The fact that it’s not a part of the current budget framework is “concerning,” Rep. Mark Harris (R-N.C.) told Perkins earlier this week. “And we’re certainly continuing to add our voice to the fact that we’ve got to do something here. I was in a meeting with the speaker just yesterday, and I do believe that he is working with a number of pro-life groups [on] that and really moving strategically as we get into the fall,” he noted. There are also things on the table “that we possibly can do that would almost change the landscape of the way Planned Parenthood is viewed,” the former pastor said without revealing details.

In the meantime, Harris stressed, “This has got to happen. The fact that we passed out of the House a one-year ban in the One Big Beautiful Bill, it got to the Senate, they cut it back to one year, and that just expired on July 4th” should mean Congress can do it again, he said. “It is at the top of our list. We’re continuing to push toward that.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

RNC Opens New Front in Election Integrity Battle Over ‘Never Residents’ Voting in 6 States

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

After a victory in the battleground state of North Carolina, the Republican National Committee has pending litigation against six other states to stop U.S. citizens who never lived in those states from voting in their elections.

The RNC has sued battleground states Arizona and Nevada; blue states such as Colorado, New Jersey, and Virginia; and the red state of Nebraska over laws allowing non-residents to vote. These cases are narrowly focused on closing state loopholes that allow people who never lived in a state to vote by absentee ballot.

“If you’ve never lived in a state, you shouldn’t be voting in its elections,” RNC Chairman Joe Gruters told the Daily Signal in a statement.

“The RNC already put a stop to this unconstitutional loophole in North Carolina, and we’re taking Nebraska, Colorado, Nevada, and New Jersey to court to do the same,” he said. “We’ll keep fighting to ensure elections are only decided by legal residents.”

The Federal Voting Assistance Program lists 38 states that allow some form of voting by residents who never lived in a state. Typically, the states allow an American residing abroad with parents living in that state to vote by absentee ballot.

“In some states, U.S. citizens who were born abroad—and have never resided in the United States—are eligible to vote absentee. If your state is not listed, contact your election office to check whether you’re eligible,” the Federal Voting Assistance Program’s website says.

The lawsuits are not related to longstanding rules that allow military personnel or diplomats to vote absentee. The RNC says it strongly supports the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, or UOCAVA. To ensure standing, the RNC is teaming with either the state party, a candidate, or both in the litigation for each state court.

An RNC official told the Daily Signal that it is reviewing other states that could be violating their own constitutions on voter eligibility. The committee already has launched more than 160 active election integrity cases across 36 states.

In June, the Wake County Superior Court struck down a North Carolina law allowing people born overseas who never lived in the state to vote in the state’s elections, a court victory for the RNC against the state’s elections board.

In Nevada, the RNC joined the state’s Republican Party and Republican nominee for Nevada secretary of state Jim Marchant in challenging a provision of the state’s law that allows certain people who have never lived in Nevada—and in some cases have never lived in the United States—to vote in the state’s elections.

The existing policy allows people to vote based on either the past residency of a parent or legal guardian. Plaintiffs assert this violates the state’s constitution, which states that voters must have “actually, as opposed to constructively” resided in Nevada to be eligible to vote.

Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar called the lawsuit “an attack on the voting rights of eligible U.S. citizens living abroad.” He also said reversing Nevada’s existing law could affect military families.

“They risk everything to defend our freedoms, including the fundamental right to vote, and Nevada has a responsibility to protect their access to the ballot and the rights of the families who serve alongside them,” Aguilar, a Democrat, told the Daily Signal in a statement.

“Children born overseas should not be punished because their parents served, worked, or were stationed outside the United States,” Aguilar added. “Nevada will not turn its back on military families simply because their service took them away from home.”

The attorneys general’s offices in Colorado, Nebraska and New Jersey declined to comment for the story because it is pending litigation. The offices for the secretaries of state for these states did not respond to inquiries for this story.

The offices of attorneys general or secretaries of state in Arizona and New Jersey did not respond. In Virginia, neither the state Board of Elections nor the office of the attorney general responded to inquiries.

AUTHOR

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is senior investigative reporter for the Daily Signal. He is the author of “The Myth of Voter Suppression: The Left’s Assault on Clean Elections.” Follow on X FredLucasWH

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Dems Fight Trump’s Push to Secure Mail-In Ballots

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

After a year-long redistricting blitz, Republicans have moved on to phase two of their election strategy: securing Americans’ ballots. After the Supreme Court delivered a surprising blow to the GOP in June, allowing mail-in votes to be counted almost a week after Election Day, there’s an understandable concern that the upcoming midterms will be ripe for fraud. While conservatives are making a desperate push for the SAVE America Act to address some of that panic, that’s not the only play in the Right’s book.

President Trump, frustrated by the tight margins in the House and Senate that are bogging down these bills, has gotten creative with the problems plaguing our elections — issuing several executive orders and rules that would close the loopholes Democrats are using to undermine legitimate voters. Of course, the courts have put the brakes on some of the White House’s ideas, including one very interesting plan to involve the U.S. Postal Service (USPS).

Piggybacking on a March 31 EO, the administration instructed the USPS to oversee and streamline the states’ mail-in ballots, putting it in charge of “standardiz[ing] envelope design for mailed ballots” and helping states use “a unique barcode to track ballots, thus significantly reducing the chain-of-custody problem” that makes it easier to cheat. “The rule would also create, for the first time, a standardized, nationwide auditing mechanism for mail-in voting,” Alabama’s attorney general’s office points out.

Part of Trump’s order also required state governments to provide their voter rolls to the federal government. “This provision will help determine adherence to federal law and facilitate law enforcement efforts,” USPS noted. “For example, the provided lists will evidence how many ballots have been mailed, and allow law enforcement officials to compare the total number of mailed ballots to the total number of received ballots to detect potential issues meriting further investigation.” If a blue state refused to comply, it wouldn’t have access to mail-in ballots.

A federal judge in Washington claimed that the order would give the federal government too much control over elections and put the order on ice. That infuriated several state attorneys general, who argue that mail-in voting has compromised election results and destroyed trust. Led by Alabama’s Steve Marshall, 13 of those AGs rallied behind the rule in a letter that emphasizes the USPS’s role in protecting ballots across the country.

“States are the leaders in regulating elections,” Marshall underscored, “and yet despite our best efforts to enact policies to deter and detect fraud, voter fraud continues to be a problem. We appreciate the federal government lending a helping hand to shore up our elections and help states provide Americans with confidence in our system,” he and his counterparts continued. “We support the Service’s proposed rule in full. It addresses real vulnerabilities inherent in mail-in voting, responds to legitimate and widespread public concerns about federal election integrity, and equips states with tools that strengthen their own oversight capabilities without displacing their authority. We urge the Service to promptly finalize the rule.”

Katherine Robertson, the chief counsel to AG Marshall, lamented that this is remotely controversial. “I think it’s very clear by the litigation against this rule so far that it has really become a red state, blue state issue,” she told “Washington Watch” guest host and former Congressman Jody Hice. “And you hate to think that election integrity is so polarizing and so partisan, but that is clearly the case. You saw a bevy of blue states immediately come in and sue. And you have to ask yourself, why is that? Why is it that the red states want election integrity, and the blue states don’t? And I think, you know, unfortunately, I think we all know the answer to that.”

As FRC Action’s Matt Carpenter told The Washington Stand, “Mail-in ballots are the main area of concern for Americans worried about the integrity of our elections. During the COVID era, we saw their use increase dramatically as emergency rules were implemented to expand access to them. Since then,” he continued, “we have seen proposals, and in some states, new laws, to enhance voter identification for those using mail-in ballots, and now we have a solid proposal to enhance the chain of custody issues at the heart of fraud with mail-in ballots. This move by Attorney General Marshall would immediately give Americans who choose to use mail-in ballots confidence that their votes will not just make it into the final count, but also will not be offset by potentially fraudulent mail-in ballots.”

Incredibly, 24 blue and purple state AGs are going to the mat to stop the USPS — or any government agency — from safeguarding the midterm elections in court. Oregon’s Dan Rayfield (D) griped that “President Trump wants to turn letter carriers into election gatekeepers,” and according to him, “that’s not a role the Postal Service was built for.”

Robertson disagrees, explaining that this is one of the powers the president has. “You know, he’s waiting on Congress to act on the SAVE Act, but he’s got tools at his disposal as the leader of our executive branch of government. And so, this particular rule is designed to utilize the authority of the United States Postal Service to strengthen the integrity of that part of voting. Obviously,” she acknowledged, “lots of ballots are cast by mail, absentee ballots, and otherwise. And so, what he’s proposed to do is to keep a national list, a national voter registry, that has to be checked before a ballot can be mailed out. And then he has proposed a barcode system that would help track ballots to ensure that they’re getting from point A to point B in a way that maintains ballot security. The states’ reaction to that — or at least the 13 states that joined our letter, is to say, ‘Thank you for being willing to do the part … that we cannot secure on our own.’”

In the meantime, multiple lawsuits over the idea are already in process in the most radically leftist states. “So there’s a long road ahead,” Robertson concedes. “[And] what’s interesting about this rule is that it is still in the comment period. This rule has not even been finalized yet. And yet, they’ve rushed in to prejudge.”

Regardless, she and others persist. “I think the goal would be to get this rule implemented and implemented quickly. But this is a fight not just for the next election. It’s a fight for future elections. … So we’re here for the long run,” Robertson vowed.

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Platner Drops Out of Maine Senate Race following Sexual Assault Allegations

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

DOJ’s Civil Rights Division Continues Its Election Integrity Offensive

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division is going on the offensive on election integrity, deploying election monitors to 12 jurisdictions as the 2026 midterms fast approach.

The push mirrors work already underway at the Republican National Committee (RNC), which has built out its own election integrity division, pressuring states to clean up voter rolls and tighten mail-in voting rules. The DOJ and RNC don’t coordinate directly, but the two are pursuing similar priorities.

Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, told the Daily Caller in an interview how her division plans to secure the 2026 midterms and beyond.

“It is our duty here at the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, and I think all of my colleagues here at DOJ and Senate-confirmed positions would agree, that we’re here to represent and protect all Americans, and do so on a nonpartisan basis, and that’s really how we focused our election work,” Dhillon said.

Since the start of the administration, the division has sued 30 states and Washington, D.C., over their failure to clean up voter rolls. In these cases, Dhillon told the Caller, they’ve found hundreds of thousands, of dead people and noncitizens still registered to vote.

Just this week, the DOJ notified 12 jurisdictions that it will deploy election monitors to their polling locations for their upcoming primaries, the Caller learned.

The jurisdictions include: Maricopa County, Pima County, and Apache County in Arizona; the City of New Bedford and City of Boston in Massachusetts; the City of Lansing, City of East Lansing and the City of Detroit in Michigan; Hennepin County and Ramsey in Minnesota; the City of Manchester and the City of Nashua in New Hampshire; and Fairfax County and Prince William County in Virginia.

“The Department sent these letters to all 50 states and the District of Columbia, asking for voluntary compliance in a timely manner with their obligations under federal law to ensure only citizens vote in federal elections,” a DOJ spokesperson told the Caller.

Some states have cooperated in cleaning up their voter rolls, Dhillon said, though there’s lingering whiplash from the Biden administration, which tried to prevent states from implementing even the most basic election integrity measures.

“States are not doing their job to remove people from the voter rolls, and I don’t blame the states — in part because sometimes they’ve tried to do it. Like Georgia passed a law after the 2020 election that improved their list maintenance, and they immediately got sued by the Department of Justice for taking people off the voter rolls. So it’s damned if you do and damned if you don’t,” she told the Caller.

The battle for election integrity recently hit a snag after the Supreme Court ruled in Watson v. RNC that states can count non-military mail-in ballots received days, and even weeks, after the polls close.

Fourteen states currently allow non-military mail-in ballots received after Election Day to count, as long as they were postmarked in time. The deadlines vary widely: Texas allows one extra day, while Washington allows up to three weeks.

“I think people who care about this issue must go to Congress,” she told the Caller. “I’m not here to advocate for any kind of legislation — of course, that would be beyond my scope as a person here at DOJ — but I think that’s where the court is really pointing people: to close this loophole about what is Election Day, Congress can fix that. So they should, in my opinion.”

The Civil Rights Division’s election work extends beyond voter rolls, as well, including redistricting cases and efforts to ensure Americans overseas can vote.

“We’ve been weighing in where we think redistricting is unconstitutionally race-based. We are in litigation in California, for example, in their Prop 50 litigation, which was explicitly drawn on race-based lines. So we’re challenging that as an intervenor, and we’re extremely active on that front,” Dhillon told the Caller.

But the division doesn’t just aim to enforce laws, though the priority, Dhillon told the Caller, her team is helping states apply those laws, providing guidance and providing our expertise.

“Here we have decades of expertise in the Civil Rights Division, and I view it as a really sacred trust. To get this right, so really proud of the work we’re doing on this front, and proud of the lawyers who come from all over the country to join this effort, and it is very important to the Department of Justice to get it right, and we’ve dedicated resources appropriately,” she said.

AUTHOR

Reagan Reese

White House Correspondent

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: Trump To Crack Down On Mail-In Voting With New Executive Order

Inside The RNC’s Push To Stop Virginia Redistricting — And Why It Still Fell Short

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Johnson Braces for a High-Stakes July with Everything on the Line

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

For House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), the nicest part about the Fourth of July was that the fireworks were on the National Mall and not in his chamber. After a tense couple of weeks of infighting, GOP leaders finally pulled the plug and sent members home early, leaving a shrinking window of opportunity to get anything meaningful done before the long August recess.

Johnson, who’s been a legislative Houdini when it comes to getting out of impossible situations, has his hands full after more than a dozen Republicans brought the House to a screeching halt, refusing to move several pieces of legislation — including the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — that were on the verge of final votes because the Senate hasn’t passed election reforms demanding proof of citizenship and voter ID. “We have the smallest margin in U.S. history,” the Louisianan acknowledged after the mutiny. “People get very emotional about things, and sometimes they make irrational decisions.”

But the conservatives’ frustration over the party’s inability to move the SAVE America Act has put the speaker and his Senate counterpart, Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), in a legitimate bind, experts warn. With just eight legislative days on the calendar until Congress’s summer break, the backlog of work is at a breaking point. Already, the revolt on the House floor forced leaders to scrap their plans to move forward with the NDAA and other key items of their to-do list.

“I think we have squandered away an opportunity to do something great for the Fourth of July,” Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) lamented when the troop bill became a casualty of the hardline conservatives’ uprising. “The American people gave us Donald Trump and a unified Congress, right?” he said. “We have both chambers, and … we’re squandering time away,” he warned. “We ain’t going to be able to get it back.”

By Wednesday, key members were hunkered down in the speaker’s office, hashing out ways to end the stalemate. The only way to get elements of the SAVE America Act through the Senate without Democrats’ help is reconciliation, but, as Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) noted, that’s a tricky process and time is short. “After this recess, if it doesn’t happen in the first couple of days, then I think it’s in real trouble,” he acknowledged. Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) agreed. “The closer we get to November, the more difficult it is.” But, he added, “I’m not ready to say we can’t do it.”

Of course, there are other reasons to pursue reconciliation — including the billions of dollars the president is requesting for the Iran war. “Safeguarding elections, along with stopping fraud and supporting our troops and dealing with the residual unaffordability that has hung over from the Biden administration’s failed policies, are all wrapped up in a Reconciliation 3.0,” Arrington stressed.

The sticky part about including elements of the SAVE America Act is that reconciliation is a budgetary tool, so the GOP will have to find a way to thread that needle. Johnson thinks Republicans have found a way to address part of that problem by creating a grant program that incentivizes states to adopt stricter election rules. “[I]f they come to their senses, and they want to avail themselves of election integrity proposals and ideas and policies, they can draw down from a federal fund and use those funds,” he explained. “We’re willing to invest heavily in that.”

Arrington thinks the carrot approach might actually work for blue states that refuse to require things like proof of citizenship and voter ID. “I haven’t seen many Democrats [who] didn’t jump when you dangled some money in front of them. So there is the hope that if you put some incentive money, states led by Democrats might just engage in implementing these safeguards. But if they don’t, it will be just another way to delineate what Democrats stand for and what Republicans want to try to do to make this country safer, stronger, and more prosperous.”

The package of election reforms continues to be a massive sticking point for Trump, who not only refused to sign a bipartisan housing affordability bill that passed both chambers but also held up significant nominations in protest. He even mentioned the legislation during his late-night keynote address at the celebration on July 4. “America is back, and we want to keep America great,” Trump insisted. “And we will do so by approving the SAVE America Act, which means all voters must show voter ID. All voters must provide a little thing called proof of citizenship. And there will be no mail-in ballots except for illness, disability, military deployment, or travel.”

It’s an ambitious play — but given the state of the GOP’s margins, the only one. No matter which path leadership takes, a lot hangs in the balance. At the end of the day, Johnson emphasizes, the SAVE America Act is a top priority for every Republican. “We passed it three times in the House. We’re going to try one more time on a budget reconciliation bill.”

The genius of Johnson’s speakership has been resolving his party’s (often volatile) differences. “I’ve got to work with all of them,” he told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on Saturday’s “This Week on Capitol Hill,” “get them all together. …But these are high stakes,” the Louisianan admitted. Not only did a dozen of his members stall one of the most important bills of the year in the NDAA, but they also sabotaged the limited time the House has left to accomplish things. “We’ve got to keep the engine moving here,” the speaker emphasized. “So when we bring them back after this short break for July 4th, we’ll get right back to it,” he vowed. “I’ll get them on board. We’ll move it forward.”

The party’s struggles, Johnson downplayed, are typical. “Just another day here.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

A Tale of Two Pressure Campaigns

A ‘Miracle’: CCP Releases Pastor Ezra Jin

More Than 10% of All Food Stamp Payments Are in Error, Ag Dept. Report Claims

RELATED VIDEO: Victor Davis Hanson: Socialism Is Targeting the Foundations That Made America Great

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

EXCLUSIVE: DOJ Arrests Illegal Alien For Voting In Federal Election

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Federal authorities arrested and charged an illegal alien in New Jersey for voting in a federal election, the Daily Caller has learned.

Marian Charitun, a 62-year-old from Slovakia, was charged with illegally voting in a federal election as well as making false statements while applying for U.S. citizenship, according to information shared with the Caller. Charitun allegedly registered to vote in New Jersey and falsely stated that he was a U.S. citizen when doing so. He then went on to vote in the 2022 midterm elections, according to the information provided to the Caller. 

Charitun also applied for U.S. citizenship and allegedly claimed he never voted in a federal election, the Caller learned. Charitun never obtained citizenship as his voting history was discovered during the application process and he was denied, an official told the Caller.

If convicted, Charitun could face a maximum of one year in prison. The count of voting by an alien in a federal election carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison. The count of unlawful procurement of citizenship or naturalization carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

This case was brought under the United States Attorney’s Office’s Election Integrity Task Force. 

In May, four green card holders living in New Jersey were separately charged with illegally voting in federal elections and falsely claiming they never did such a thing while applying for U.S. citizenship, officials said.

The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE America) Act, which would require proof of American citizenship to register to vote and photo identification to vote in federal elections, has stalled in Congress with no clear path forward.

While some studies have found that illegal aliens voting in elections is rare, others have shown that it can still impact the results of elections.

Speaker Mike Johnson told Fox News on Sunday that House Republicans could put the SAVE America Act into a reconciliation bill.

“This time we’re going to try to put it on a reconciliation bill, and the reason that’s so important, Maria [Bartiromo], as you know, is it prevents the necessity of 60 votes in the Senate,” Johnson said. “The Democrats want no part of this, and remember, this is very basic stuff.”

“We’re just going to make sure you have to have proof of citizenship to register to vote and then show an ID when you turn out at the ballot box,” he added. “These are 90-10 public opinion issues, and more than 70 percent of Democrats want to do it, but not the Democrats in the House and Senate, and so we’ve got to go around them.”

AUTHOR

Reagan Reese

White House Correspondent

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: Mike Lee Explains How LBJ Broke A Filibuster And What It Means For The SAVE America Act

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Critically Thinking about Getting to the Truth: Part 2

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Please read Part 1, before proceeding.

To give readers an idea about the high degree of difficulty in getting to the Truth on almost anything, I drafted up five question on important (and different) societal issues, where I know the answer:

  1. When taking into account ALL economics, is industrial wind energy actually a low cost source of electricity?
  2. Is Climate Change really an existential threat to our civilization?
  3. Is there strong evidence that legitimately puts the results of the 2020 Presidential election in doubt?
  4. Is corrupted curricula — particularly in Science — a primary reason why the US K-12 education system is doing so poorly?
  5. Were the COVID-19 vaccines “Safe and Effective” as advertised?

I then posed these questions to five common sources of information. To make it easier for readers, I listed what I believe to be the correct answer in the first column, as well as a url to a brief explanation as to why.

Here are the results: Internet/Schools Accuracy Comparison Test.

The disappointing conclusion is that common sources of information are frequently wrong, particularly on politically sensitive issues. I was particularly surprised that Duck-Duck did not do better than Google.

Out of curiosity I read some articles comparing Google to Duck-Duck. Not surprisingly they were mostly about “features” and interface (e.g., here), rather than accuracy. I did find one that compared accuracy and it decided (like me) that it was a draw (see here). Once again this emphasizes the extreme importance of being a Critical Thinker!

But what about AI, which is now all the rage? Is this the silver bullet giving us what we desperately want: a simple, easy, reliable source for Truth?

To get a good idea, I then posed these same questions to the five most popular AIs, as well as AlterAI.

Here are the results: AI Accuracy Comparison Test.

The surprising conclusion is that ALL of the more popular AIs are frequently wrong.

Actually it shouldn’t be surprising, as most AIs are programmed to give you the MOST PLAUSIBLE answer on questions like I asked, NOT the MOST ACCURATE one. Read that again!

Further, the majority of AIs determine plausibility by reporting to you the consensus view of what is on the Internet — so they have the same vulnerability as Search Engines do!

A few AIs determine “plausibility” differently. Their exact algorithm is a naturally a trade secret, but the key distinction is that raw consensus is NOT what they use to determine plausibility.

For example, AlterAI also searches the Internet, but it pays little attention to the frequency a similar Internet article or argument appears. In other words, since they know that the raw consensus numbers on the Internet are easy to manipulate (especially with AI, e.g., see here), they downplay that part.

Instead they attempt to assess the merits of the argument. That is a profoundly significant difference. You can clearly see the difference in the results by its answers to my five random technical questions.

Once again this is emphasizing the importance of being a Critical Thinker.

The AI Takeaway

Every AI has some value. For example, they can ALL answer a question where the facts are indisputable — like tell you what the capital cities are for each of the fifty States. This has value as it is information that almost no one has bothered to memorized. (Note that a competent search engine could also provide that answer.)

Where things get interesting with AI, is when it is asked a question where the information has been purposefully and popularly clouded or misrepresented by special interest parties (i.e., politics). In effect we are in a swamp, continually dealing with important daily life matters where the Internet has facilitated the proliferation of misinformation.

There are no tests for competence or honesty to post material on the Internet! Worse, there are no meaningful consequences for dishonest or incompetent material to be posted…

So the question is: how do we determine the Truth about such matters as COVID, Climate, Energy, Education, Election Integrity, etc., etc?

As shown, a search engine is basically useless as it will just regurgitate what snake oil salespersons and a dysfunctional mainstream media have planted for public consumption.

Both of those sources have a great disdain for the competence of the public, as they are keenly aware that our K-12 school system is purposefully churning out lemmings instead of Critical Thinkers. Knowing that they are dealing with brainwashed parties gives them the confidence that they can lie and misrepresent information at will, with no consequential repercussions.

The Bottom Line —

So, are the popular AIs objective and competent sources for telling us the TRUTH on important controversial social issues? Absolutely not.

This video is worth watching if you want a semi-technical discussion of AIs. Among other good points it makes is that dealing with an AI, you are NOT dealing with a rational party. It is mechanically just guessing probabilities…

Further, this expert says that AI is basically a glorified spreadsheet. As with any spreadsheet, the data on it makes a world of difference.

Even though AlterAI is not perfect, it is far superior to its competitors.

©2026   All rights reserved.

Sample References:

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I urge all readers to subscribe to AlterAI — IMO the absolute best AI option for subjective questions.

I will consider posting reader submissions on Critical Thinking about my topics of interest.

My commentaries are my opinion about the material discussed therein, based on the information I have. If any readers have different information, please share it. If it is credible, I will be glad to reconsider my position.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

C19Science.info is my one-page website that covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info is my one-page website that lists multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

WiseEnergy.org is my multi-page website that discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from climate to COVID, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2026 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time!)

Report: China Hacked U.S. Voter Databases in 2020 to Fraudulently Obtain Mail-in Ballots

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

A startling new report surfaced this week revealing that China’s communist regime hacked into U.S. voter registration databases in 2020 and planned to use the information to produce thousands of fake American driver’s licenses in order to obtain mail-in ballots, with the purpose of casting fraudulent votes for former President Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.

Just the News reported Monday on the recent reemergence of a highly redacted formerly classified memo produced by the National Intelligence Council in April 2020, which stated, “[Redacted] Chinese intelligence officials analyzed multiple U.S. states’ [Redacted] election voter registration data, [Redacted] to conduct public opinion analysis on the 2020 US general election.” Two years after it was produced, the memo was quietly declassified by former Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines.

But even after it was released, Just the News noted that the memo failed to gain attention, in stark contrast to the aftermath that occurred in March 2024 after it was discovered that Beijing had hacked into the U.K.’s databases and accessed the personal files of millions of Brits, causing widespread outrage. Now, the rediscovered memo could have significant implications for U.S. lawmakers as they consider the SAVE America Act, a bill currently being debated in the Senate that would require potential voters across the nation to present identification and proof of citizenship before being allowed to vote in federal elections.

The data that was reportedly obtained by Chinese Communist Party (CCP) operatives included driver’s license data and partial Social Security numbers, which can be used to make absentee ballot requests and to cast fraudulent ballots in person. According to Just the News, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is currently “working to declassify raw reports” on the CCP’s breach “for potential public dissemination.”

In June of last year, FBI Director Kash Patel made public an intelligence report from 2020 that warned the CCP was planning to mass-produce fraudulent U.S. driver’s licenses to obtain mail-in ballots, which the communist regime planned to cast for Biden, since he was considered more favorable to Beijing’s interests. According to a report from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) from July 2020, the CCP’s plan seemed to be taking shape as CBP officers “seized 1,513 shipments with fraudulent documents — a total of 19,888 counterfeit US drivers’ licenses” at the Chicago O’Hare International Airport, with “the majority of these shipments … arriving from China and Hong Kong.”

Experts like author Gordon Chang, who serves as a distinguished senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute, say they are not surprised by reports of the CCP’s hacking efforts to subvert U.S. elections.

“They are in virtually every network in the United States that they want to be,” he told The Washington Stand. “So of course they’re messing in our elections. This should not be considered news. This is something we should have been acting on a long time ago.”

Chang went on to observe that legislation like the SAVE America Act will help to strengthen election integrity but argued that more fundamental reforms of the U.S.’s election processes are needed.

“The SAVE America Act will help, of course, but only marginally,” he contended. “It basically relates to people who actually show up and vote, so maybe it’ll help. Maybe China could manipulate voting rolls and orchestrate people to show up. But I don’t think that’s the issue. I’ve always thought that we should have paper ballots. We shouldn’t have election stuff online. It’s just an invitation to have the Chinese or others mess with our elections. The Taiwanese run nearly flawless elections because they just use paper ballots, and they count the votes in front of everyone. Why can’t we do this?”

Chang concluded by emphasizing that while U.S. networks could be better defended from CCP cyberattacks, “ultimately our election machinery should not be online. And if it takes a couple days more in order to determine who the winner is, well, that’s fine, because that’s the cost of having election integrity.”

“This is just us opening up our electoral system to interference not only by domestic parties, but by foreign parties as well,” he added. “So this is on us.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Trump Threatens Not to Sign New Legislation until Senate Passes SAVE America Act

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

As foreign conflict rages on and Congress is locked in a feud over Homeland Security funding, President Donald Trump is hammering Senate Republicans to pass the SAVE America Act. In a Truth Social post on Sunday, the president thanked elections activist Scott Pressler for explaining in a Fox News interview the importance of passing the legislation and how it can be done without dismantling the filibuster. Passing the SAVE America Act “must be done immediately. It supersedes everything else. MUST GO TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE,” the president said. He vowed not to sign further bills until the SAVE America Act is on his desk.

The president also urged senators not to accept a “watered down” version of the bill, but to ensure that key provisions are included: mandatory photo ID to vote and proof of citizenship to register to vote, eliminating mail-in ballots except in a few circumstances, and amendments barring biological males from competing in girls’ sports and halting gender transition procedures from being carried out on children. The bill was approved by the House of Representatives early last month.

In the Fox News interview Trump referenced, Pressler touted poll results showing that over 80% of American voters support the election integrity provisions of the SAVE America Act, such as photo ID and proof of citizenship. “When in American history have 84% of Americans ever come together on an issue before?” Pressler asked. He noted that 76% of black voters, 82% of Hispanic voters, 85% of white voters, 95% of Republican voters, and 76% of Democrat voters support the SAVE America Act’s election integrity provisions. “I ask for Senate leadership, I ask for members of Congress — if you want to do right by the American people that duly elected you into the seats that you are in right now, when we gave Republicans the opportunity to lead and be the adults in the room, pass the SAVE America Act into law,” he urged. Pressler also anticipated that passing the bill will likely produce “a surge of voters com[ing] out in the midterm elections.”

“The Republicans MUST DO, with PASSION, and at the expense of everything else, THE SAVE AMERICA ACT — And not the watered down version. This is a Country Defining fight for the Soul of our Nation!” the president said in a Truth Social post last week. He also called on the Senate to “focus on, exclusively if necessary, THE SAVE AMERICA ACT!!! It’s what everyone wants!!!” With midterm elections looming, the president has also warned senators that the SAVE America Act is “all people care about!!!”

As noted, the SAVE America Act was passed by the House on February 11, but has been stalled in the Senate for nearly four weeks. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-N.D.) has agreed to bring the legislation to the floor for consideration but has yet to schedule a vote. At issue is the filibuster; Senate Democrats have signaled their intention to block the legislation via the filibuster. In recent decades, the “silent filibuster” has become the norm, wherein a senator or party indicates an intention to filibuster, without actually having to filibuster, and the contended bill is simply not brought before the Senate. While Trump and others have suggested eliminating the filibuster entirely in order to push through GOP legislation, others have suggested reverting to the traditional “talking filibuster,” which they admit may be time-consuming but would likely allow Republicans to pass crucial legislation without annihilating Senate traditions and legislative safeguards.

Under traditional Senate rules, the filibuster can be used to delay or prevent the passage of legislation, relying on the Senate’s allowance for unlimited debate. In order to end debate, 60 senators are required to invoke cloture. While the GOP has a majority of 53 in the Senate at present, not all Republican senators have agreed to support the legislation’s passage. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) is the clearest example, but others have expressed reluctance to enforce the talking filibuster in order to pass the legislation, claiming that the procedure is too time-consuming.

“The talking filibuster issue is one on which there is not, certainly, a unified Republican conference, and there would have to be,” Thune said after a Senate GOP meeting late last month. “If you go down that path, you’re talking about the need to table what are going to be numerous amendments and an ability to keep 50 Republicans unified, pretty much on every single vote. And there’s just not, there isn’t support for doing that at this point.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washinton Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Poll: Americans Fear Noncitizens Influencing U.S. Elections

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The National Voting Rights Act nominally makes it illegal for noncitizens to vote in American elections, but the NVRA’s requirement that voters check a box affirming that they are citizens is easily circumvented and difficult to enforce. The SAVE America Act, recently passed by the House of Representatives and now stalled in the Senate, would rectify this issue, requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote and purging noncitizens from voter rolls. While Democrats deride the legislation as racist, surveys show that Americans actually support measures to ensure that noncitizens do not vote in and influence the outcome of our elections.

The latest poll, from Rasmussen Reports, found that a majority of likely voters are concerned about noncitizens voting in American elections: 55% of voters say that it’s likely that noncitizens vote in American elections (including 32% who say that it’s very likely), while roughly one third (34%) of respondents say that it’s either not very likely or not at all likely that noncitizens cast ballots in American elections.

Previously, a Pew Research Center survey found that 83% of Americans (including 95% of Republican voters and over 70% of Democrat voters) support mandatory photo ID for voting, while a Gallup poll published in late 2024 found similar results: 84% of Americans (including 98% of Republicans, 67% of Democrats, and 84% of Independent voters) support requiring a photo ID in order to vote, and 83% (including 96% of Republicans, 66% of Democrats, and 84% of Independent voters) support requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote.

The majority of Americans are likely correct in their belief that noncitizens are voting in U.S. elections. A 2025 Iowa Secretary of State’s office audit, for example, found that at least 35 noncitizens had illegally cast ballots in the 2024 general election. The Public Interest Legal Foundation reported that as many as 100,000 noncitizens likely registered to vote in Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, Department of State official Jonathan Marks testified that noncitizens voluntarily told the state that they had illegally voted over 500 times in elections held between 2000 and 2017.

A previous review of Georgia’s voter rolls found that over 1,600 noncitizens had attempted to register to vote in the swing state between 1997 and 2002, while Virginia found that noncitizens had voted nearly 7,500 times between 1988 and 2017. North Carolina voter rolls showed almost 1,500 registered voters who were evidently noncitizens at the time of casting their ballots and Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold (D) admitted to accidentally mailing postcards urging 31,000 noncitizens to vote in the 2022 midterm elections.

Over the course of 2025 and the first few months of 2026, at least 30 foreign nationals have been criminally charged with illegally voting in U.S. elections, including Lina Maria Orovio-Hernandez, Jose Ceballos-Armendariz, James Ross Wightman, Jacqueline Dianne Wallace, Michael Nana Baako, Francis Bagnall, Leonardo Lleras-Rodriguez, Rogelio Mejorada-Lopez, Yaakov M. Schulman, Mayra Alejandra Lopez Morales, and Abel Hernandez-Labra, among others.

More recently, Democrats brokered a court-sanctioned deal allowing over 73,000 improperly-registered voters to remain on North Carolina’s voter rolls, including those who were unable to provide a driver’s license number or the last four digits of their social security numbers.

The SAVE America Act would not only require proof of citizenship when registering to vote and photo identification when casting a ballot, but would also require states to regularly cross-reference their voter rolls with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in order to ensure that noncitizens are not registered to vote and to allow DHS to identify noncitizens who illegally register to vote.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

RNC Says It Won’t Defy Trump On Mail-In Voting Despite Legacy Media Reports

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

The Republican National Committee told the Daily Caller that it isn’t planning on leaning into mail-in voting, despite reports that the party might be breaking with President Donald Trump to do so.

The GOP plans to push mail-in voting ahead of the 2026 midterms, Politico reported Wednesday. Since the 2020 election, Trump has often lamented the voting method and dissuaded his voters from casting their votes by mail. The RNC told the Caller that they aren’t breaking with Trump on the issue.

“The RNC’s mission is to protect the vote and turn out the vote by strengthening voter confidence. Our election integrity work has boosted Republican participation by addressing concerns about security, and this cycle we’re again ensuring every ballot is secure and properly counted,” GOP press secretary Kiersten Pels told the Caller.

A source familiar with the party’s strategy told the Caller that as long as mail-in ballots are an option, they will be encouraging Americans to cast their vote any way they can but rejected that they were “leaning-in” to the voting method in any way. The source added that, as the White House previously floated, it’s possible the president will sign an executive order on such voting methods that could change their strategy.

On the campaign trail in 2024, Trump often encouraged his voters to cast their vote so the election would be “too big to rig.” His RNC did the same, balancing election integrity measures to ensure a fair election while also underscoring that it is important Americans actually cast a vote, despite the method.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters in November that the president and his team were considering an executive order to ban mail-in voting.

The source also pointed the Caller to the party’s numerous lawsuits around mail-in ballots and trying to make the method more secure. Such moves are in step with the party’s election integrity approach and with ensuring that if Americans’ choose to vote by mail it will be secure, the source added.

Over the last year, the RNC has filed several lawsuits related to regulating mail-in voting. The Supreme Court agreed in November to hear one of the party’s suits which debates whether federal law requires mail-in ballots to be received by Election Day.

The source familiar with the GOP’s strategy told the Caller that many Trump voters are already distrusting of mail-in ballots, which makes it hard and unproductive to lean in to the method.

Politico reported that the RNC plans to build on its 2024 campaign to push early mail and in-person voting. The party promoted early in-person voting during the 2024 presidential election, and during the special election in Tennessee for a Congressional seat.

During the race, a party official told the Caller that they launched a large-scale mail effort targeted at Republicans, independents and low-propensity voters in conjunction with the state GOP. Mailers sent to voters’ homes, and obtained by the Caller, promoted early voting similar to how the party approached the 2024 election.

Some state chapters told Politico their plans to push mail-in voting ahead of the 2026 midterms.

“We have to encourage people to embrace mail-in voting and early voting,” Pennsylvania GOP Chair Greg Rothman told the outlet in an interview. “That has to be a priority for us in 2026.”

AUTHOR

Reagan Reese

White House Correspondent

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: RNC Responds To 28 Bomb Threats, Nearly 500 Tips Of Suspicious Election Activity

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Mail-In Ballot Case Makes Its Way to SCOTUS ahead of Midterms

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

The nation’s highest court will soon deliberate on an election case that could impact how over a dozen states count ballots. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to take up the case of Watson v. Republican National Committee, centered on a challenge to a Mississippi state law permitting mail-in ballots received after election to be counted, provided that they were postmarked on or before Election Day.

“Like all other States, Mississippi requires that ballots for federal offices be cast — marked and submitted to election officials — by [Election] Day. And like most other States, Mississippi allows some of those timely cast ballots (mail-in absentee ballots, in Mississippi) to be counted if they are received by election officials soon after election day,” Mississippi Secretary of State Michael Watson (R) explained in his petition before the Supreme Court. Watson argued that Mississippi’s law, which allows for ballots received by mail and postmarked on or before Election Day to be counted by election officials for up to five business days after Election Day, does not conflict with federal election laws, which Watson says only stipulate when ballots are to be cast, not when they are to be counted.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, however, disagreed with Watson’s interpretation, determining that Mississippi’s law was in conflict with federal statutes governing elections. “For more than 150 years after the enactment of the first election-day statute, States complied with Congress’ mandate by ensuring that the ballot box closed on the federally mandated election day. With rare outliers, the States mandated that ballots must be received by election officials by election day,” the Republican National Committee (RNC) wrote in its challenge to Mississippi’s law. “But recently, an increasing number of States — including Mississippi — have deviated from that practice by permitting at least some ballots to be received after election day.”

“These States risk ‘the chaos and suspicions of impropriety that can ensue if thousands of absentee ballots flow in after election day and potentially flip the results of an election.’ … They reduce the time to resolve postelection disputes. … And they deprive the electorate of a clear nationwide deadline that ‘puts all voters on the same footing,’” the RNC argued, citing Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. “While the question in this case is important, this Court should decline review here because the Fifth Circuit answered it correctly,” the RNC added. “The Secretary asks this

Court to grant certiorari and draw a line between ‘casting’ ballots and receiving ballots by election officials. But that line was unknown at the time of the election-day statutes.”

Currently, Mississippi is one of 16 states that allows ballots received by mail after Election Day to be counted: Alaska, California, Ohio, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia, in addition to the District of Columbia and Guam, do the same. On Wednesday’s episode of “Washington Watch,” Conservative Partnership Institute Senior Legal Fellow and Election Integrity Network founder Cleta Mitchell explained that some states will keep counting ballots received up to two weeks after Election Day. “I will tell you that in the state where I live, North Carolina, they can accept ballots — it’s supposed to be only from the military, but they stop categorizing whether it’s military or non-military, and they just accept ballots,” she observed. “And in Pennsylvania, they have defended and started counting ballots with no postmark. So you don’t know if it’s postmarked before, you don’t know if it was sent before or after the election. So these are really big problems. I’m so glad the Supreme Court hopefully will say that.”

Mississippi originally approved its mail-in ballot law in response to COVID-19 but made the law permanent in 2024. Mitchell commented, “The Democrats and the Left took to heart what Rahm Emanuel famously said: ‘Never let an emergency go to waste.’ And so, they took the opportunity under COVID to completely upend America’s election laws in state after state after state.” She detailed, “Marc Elias and the constellation of left-wing, anti-integrity voting groups sued state after state to get rid of all the safeguards that have been protecting our elections for a century, really. And so, one of the ways that they did that was they had been moving to get states to accept ballots after Election Day.”

Mitchell also anticipated that the Supreme Court’s ruling on the issue will likely be handed down in time to set the standard for the 2026 midterm elections. “Arguments will be sometime between now and, say, the end of April, and the decision would come no later than June 30. So the decision will be made before the November 2026 election, and I just hope that they will uphold Election Day,” she posited. “The next thing we have to do is get states to stop having ‘election season,’” Mitchell added. “Some early voting, maybe seven days, maybe eight days, but having — like Virginia has 45 days of early voting. They started voting for the November election on September 19. It’s time to stop all that nonsense.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.