This article is the final part of a series called “It Just Ain’t So”, in which we have debunked many widely held beliefs about our elections.
Part 1 of this series questioned the assumption that voting should be easy and convenient.
Part 2 of this series stressed that universal Vote by Mail harms election integrity.
Part 3 of this series debunked the myth that simply living here gives you the right to vote.
Part 4 of this series showed that requiring photo voter ID does not amount to voter suppression.
Part 5 of this series highlighted how delays in vote counting provide cover for dishonesty.
And now we address the question of our historically recent phenomenon of placing limits on freedom of speech when it comes to the topic of elections.
Americans used to be raised with the idea that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects free speech, serves as the bedrock of our Constitutional Republic. Demanding that our elected officials represent our interests was expected and respected. It was how we derived our great strength and ability to examine and improve on our faults.
This is no longer the case.
Americans of the 21st century appear to have collectively rejected the stabilizing concept of winning humbly and losing graciously, accepting diversity of thought and doing our best to work together toward common goals.
In place of civility, our society is now marred by political chaos and divisiveness unparalleled since the Civil War era. Friendships and even close family ties have been tragically severed due to political animosity. No longer do the majority of Americans appear able to respect diversity of opinion, agree to disagree and still be friends.
Half of Americans are now afraid to express their political
bent for fear of very real and violent reprisal.
Freedom of thought and speech are now defined by many as freedom to express only what others agree with.
Half the country routinely expresses their hatred of the other half, and those who dare to raise concerns or ask to verify before they trust are targets of FBI midnight raids and tarred with the moniker “domestic terrorists.”
It is no longer patriotic to voice concerns and ask questions regarding what appear to be election anomalies. Nowadays, many people who dare to express doubt find themselves ostracized, investigated by our government, and worse.
The mainstream media and politicians have converged on a narrative: “Questioning our elections threatens our democracy!”
Never mind that America is NOT a democracy!
It is a Constitutional Republic.
The “threat to our democracy” mantra now permeates the national conversation, and we are expected to believe it as dogma.
Our Founders often and consistently disagreed violently with each other over far more weighty topics than we bicker about today. They did not hold back, and were often anything but polite and civil in their discourse. But they did not demonize or reject one another. They continued to talk, debate and, for the sake of preserving a union dedicated to liberty and justice for all, compromised and stayed friends or at least respected co-patriots.
Those Founders would tell us that it is vital to zealously guard the legal, Constitutional and moral boundaries that shield the Republic and its people from harm, and when circumstances suggest,
It is not only reasonable but our civic duty
to question the integrity of our elections.
In fact, a separate series published by EIPCa, On Your Honor, described how California has made numerous changes to our election system over the years, which work together to create diverse opportunities for manipulation and lack of integrity:
- Lack of citizenship verification
- Inaccurate, outdated voter rolls
- Universal vote by mail
- Steering voters to return ballots through processes operating outside public view
- The need to process millions of mailed ballots
- Extending elections to blur the deadline for receiving and counting ballots
- Weak chain of custody for mailed in ballots
Elections matter.
If electoral results are not a valid and accurate reflection of the voice of the citizen voters, then there is no Republic, and all other rights we so treasure blow away like grains of sand in a desert windstorm.
The fact that sound processes are needed to create valid outcomes, and that those processes should be scrupulously and continuously monitored, should not be controversial.
Questioning the validity of our elections in the wake of legitimate and obvious irregularities does not threaten our Republic.
Failing to do so does.
Questioning infuses strength, as long as we can:
- work together to resolve our differences respectfully and civilly,
- look for truth even when it’s inconvenient,
- and embrace the opinions of ALL of our fellow Americans as valuable and essential in our continual efforts to “form a more perfect union.”
