Several Speaches Discussed
The Pennsylvania Challenge
I stayed up most of the night yesterday and this morning to watch the drama at the capital. Hopeful that there would be a change in tone in the discussion after the extreme Trump supporters stormed the Capital. I don’t believe this element of Trump supporters are the majority of Trump supports.
The Pennsylvania challenge provided the perfect backdrop for what could have been a change in tone. I’m sorry to say the debate in the House was disappointing.
My Understanding of the Issue.
When it became clear in the spring that the pandemic would make voting difficult in the fall, the Republican legislature passed a bill which would allow wide spread mail in voting. On the face of it, this makes a lot of sense. It was the Republican lead legislature that championed this change.
The primaries were held using this model with no objection. Until Donald Trump began his diatribe about mail in voting.
Voting began in the general election.
The Republicans in Pennsylvania declared foul. The basis was that any change to voting procedure requires amendment to the commonwealth constitution. The case went to the courts. The state courts including the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that since voting had begun, rules in place for the election could not be changed. The basis was the inability to create a fair remedy, since declaring already cast votes illegal and not counted would disenfranchise a large number of voters.
The federal courts punted the case, by ruling it is a state matter.
How should this be debated?
The Ayes have a valid argument that the votes are illegal. The Nays need to acknowledge that fact. The deciding factor should and must always be the right of the voters to have their vote counted.
As the court ruled during and after the election. Yes, the US Constitution designates that the legislature has the authority to create an electoral system in each state. In this year of pandemic the Pennsylvania Legislature and Executive Branches both amended the electoral system to safely hold an election. Both were guilty of creating an “unconstitutional” voting system.
Bug in the needs of the voters must always be the decider. Disenfranchising any voter diminishes us all. At this point those who fall on the Aye side, should agree. The voter’s rights must be supreme.
It is this point which the Ayes must concede.
The legislature (republican), executive (democratic), and judicial branches in Pennsylvania created a situation based on voter need. The election is over. The people voted, the votes counted, and a winner declared. This was within the rules in place for the election. Fraud was not part of the process. Only an enabling process approved by both parties to enhance voter safely.
Arguing this as a deep state conspiracy, as a stolen election is wrong. It has led to what we saw on January 6, 2021. If we are to truly have a civil discourse in this country. Those in power who continue say otherwise do us a disservice.
If we are to maintain our democracy…
We must honor the right of every citizen to express their opinion. The right to vote is absolute. To diminish that right after the fact is wrong, period.
To rant and rave from the presidential bully pulpit about unfounded conspiracy theories damages our country does the work of our enemies.
I stand by yesterday’s post
nobodyretires.com/index.php/2021/01/06/not-tomorrow-but-tonight/. If we are to heal our country, we must disavow the authoritarianism championed by Donald Trump. Removal of his social media accounts is not sufficient. He must be unceremoniously kicked out of office with a bipartisan vote.
Yes, he only has 13 days left in office, but he still says the election was stolen from him. That is just not the truth. The damage he does to our country in the next 13 days is unimaginable. It is already too much.
He has empowered those who believe that rampaging through our legislative buildings at all levels is a solution. Donald Trump continues to insult those who disagree with him. With him in power, there is and never will be a civil discourse.
Recent Comments