As in so much legislation this Congress, the final fate of the travesty that is HR1 will lie in the hands of Democrat Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Krysten Sinema of Arizona. Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas laid it out on Sunday.

FNC: “Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, slammed the H.R. 1 bill as a partisan scheme for Democrats to hold on to power. The House passed the bill earlier this month in a party-line 220-210 vote…The senator said the bill’s chances in the Senate rely heavily on Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., and Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., who have spoken out against the revisions.”

Close

 

“This is a power grab,” Cornyn told “Sunday Morning Futures.” “It’s that simple. They want to install a permanent partisan majority in the United States when it comes to voting in elections.” It features the ‘hijacking of state and local laws’ on voter ID requirements and ballot harvesting. ‘We’re going to be fighting this thing with everything we’ve got in the United States Senate,” he said. “And then the courts … will be the backup plan.’ ”

On the recently passed Covid Relief bill? “This was a purely political move,” Cornyn said. “We still had $600 billion left that was appropriated in December which hadn’t even made its way out the door yet. So they’re just flooding the zone while they can for political advantage, and I think they’re going to regret it.” But that is now old news. HR1 is an ongoing threat.

Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation details the problems with HR1.”H.R. 1 would mandate same-day and automatic voter registration, and encourage vote trafficking of absentee ballots. It would eviscerate state voter ID laws and limit the ability of states to verify the accuracy of their voter registration lists. This would institutionalize the worst changes in election rules that occurred during the 2020 election. But H.R. 1 would go even further in increasing the security weaknesses inherent in the current ‘honor’ voter registration and voting system that exists in states across the country. Anyone who doubts that fraud occurs is living in a dreamland. When the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s new voter ID law in 2008, it noted that America has a long history of election fraud documented by journalists and historians—and that fraudulent voting could make the difference in a close election. After all, we frequently have close elections.

“If H.R. 1 is not stopped, then Americans may never be able to trust the fairness and credibility of future election outcomes. To assure the integrity of future elections, a far better approach is to prod states, which have primary constitutional responsibility for the administration of elections, to fix the holes in their election laws and rules to ensure both eligible voter access and ballot security. Those are the two essential principles of the election process and, unlike what the Left believes, you cannot have one without the other.”