Title : "President Trump’s voting commission stumbled into public view this week, issuing a sweeping request for nationwide voter data that drew sharp condemnation..."
link : "President Trump’s voting commission stumbled into public view this week, issuing a sweeping request for nationwide voter data that drew sharp condemnation..."
"President Trump’s voting commission stumbled into public view this week, issuing a sweeping request for nationwide voter data that drew sharp condemnation..."
"... from election experts and resistance from more than two dozen states that said they cannot or will not hand over all of the data," WaPo reports.The immediate backlash marked the first significant attention to the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity since Trump started it last month and followed through on a vow to pursue his own unsubstantiated claims that voter fraud is rampant and cost him the popular vote in the presidential election. The White House has said the commission will embark upon a “thorough review of registration and voting issues in federal elections,” but experts and voting rights advocates have pilloried Trump for his claims of widespread fraud, which studies and state officials alike have not found. They say that they fear the commission will be used to restrict voting.So, there's the fear that the Commission will find things that may be either true or false but that, either way, people don't want to know — especially because it will leverage arguments that things must be done that they don't want to have to do.
There's also a privacy argument, which I think I would find more compelling, but the WaPo article does not put in words what the privacy problem is. It merely cites an "elections expert" (Justin Levitt of Loyola Law School) and says he "pointed to the request about voters’ party affiliations, which he said violates the federal Privacy Act of 1974." So WaPo doesn't quote Levitt, doesn't give the text of the Privacy Act, and doesn't give any substance to what the privacy interests are and how they are impaired.
It's as though they want us to think the privacy argument is bad or, worse, they're writing for a liberal audience and they don't care about the argument that appeals to a more conservative mind. If they did, they might talk about federalism and the way the Constitution gives the states the role of running elections for for members of Congress (with a role given to Congress — not the executive branch — to regulate how the states handle their elections). And the states have the role of determining how to select the electors who choose the President.
It seems as though WaPo can't report this story without pushing the usual agenda, characterizing Republicans as bent on disenfranchising people.
Thus articles "President Trump’s voting commission stumbled into public view this week, issuing a sweeping request for nationwide voter data that drew sharp condemnation..."
that is all articles "President Trump’s voting commission stumbled into public view this week, issuing a sweeping request for nationwide voter data that drew sharp condemnation..." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article "President Trump’s voting commission stumbled into public view this week, issuing a sweeping request for nationwide voter data that drew sharp condemnation..." with the link address https://usainnew.blogspot.com/2017/07/president-trumps-voting-commission.html
0 Response to ""President Trump’s voting commission stumbled into public view this week, issuing a sweeping request for nationwide voter data that drew sharp condemnation...""
Post a Comment