“Fair:” please define what “fair” means in the context of United States elections. I think it’s fair to say that tens of millions of Americans agree with this story’s title. The November 3, 2020, election showed just how unfair our elections are — at least this one was.
When our forefathers established elections in that “new” nation that got its roots from Northern Europe, they purposely structured an election system that carefully distributed the processes of voting to every person that was qualified. How did they cast their votes? There were no voting machines, no internet, and no printed ballots. There were no mail-in ballots or even absentee ballots. Election day was the day in which they voted — period.
They were required to physically present themselves to officials at the polling location in their village or community to vote. It was common for each to cast their vote on paper and certify the vote was their vote and that no one else could cast a vote fraudulently. Nor could there be duplicate votes cast for any one voter. How did they do that?
To secure there would be no “voter fraud,” a very sophisticated process was used: the voter (after voting) dipped a forefinger into a bottle of permanent ink. That showed all that they had voted. No one who voted could slip into the polling location and cast a duplicate vote: “One person — one vote.”
2020 Election Fraud
The Trump Campaign on Sunday filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court asking the Court to reverse the findings of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The PA court denied the Trump claims that state officials changed the mail-in and absentee-bailout cutoff date to be received in violation of the U.S. Constitution. It states that the only entity in any state that can change election law is the elected body that MAKES election law. In Pennsylvania, that authority lies solely with the state legislature.
Most Americans now know (and believe) there was election fraud in November. All of the details and potential remedies continue to be fleshed out. Who knows what the results will be. In the meantime, Americans struggle to fully understand what happened, how it happened, and who is guilty of any illegality. But it is almost certain voter fraud occurred.
But there’s a “new” type of voter fraud that has raised its ugly head in the United States. And it has to do with the alleged unfairness in our election system that, according to one professor, attacks black people who, he maintains, have been egregiously taken advantage of throughout American history long after slavery was abolished. And this professor has a proposed method to “fix” the system while giving reparations to those African Americans who have allegedly paid the price for others’ voter fraud.
Black Vote Fraud Reparations
A law school professor called for “vote reparations” for black people to make elections fairer by giving them twice the voting power of other citizens.
“Vote reparations would empower us to replace oppressive institutions with life-affirming structures of economic, social, and political equality,” Brandon Hasbrouck, an assistant professor at the Washington and Lee University School of Law, wrote in the nation last week. “And if our elected representatives did not prioritize this transformational work, we could vote them out.”
Hasbrouck, who teaches race relations law and a class on critical race theory, argued that the “core problem” of the United States’s election system is the Electoral College. The professor pointed out that Wyoming and its 580,000 residents are 93% white, but the state gets “three electors because of its two senators and one representative in the House.”
“By comparison, Georgia’s Fifth Congressional District — which includes Atlanta, has 710,000 residents, and is 58 percent Black — has no dedicated electors or senators and can only occasionally overcome the mostly white and conservative votes from elsewhere in the state,” Hasbrouck wrote.
The professor argued the current system devalues black voters and ignores black lives but that it was done this way “by design” to allow for the “endurance of slavery” by the Constitution’s framers.
Hasbrouck said the way to remedy this injustice is with “vote reparations,” which would work “by double-counting ballots cast by all Black residents.”
“Vote reparations should also extend to Native Americans,” Hasbrouck continued. “Slavery is rightly called America’s original sin, but so too was the United States’ genocidal seizure of land from its original inhabitants.”
Hasbrouck said the goal of vote reparations would be to create institutions with “life-affirming structures of economic, social, and political equality,” He added that politicians who “did not prioritize this transformational work” could more easily be voted out of office.
“Because white votes currently count more than Black ones, double-counting Black votes would restore electoral balance,” Hasbrouck said. “Vote reparations would be a giant step toward remedying our nation’s long history of denying and devaluing Black votes.”
He added: “Even if vote reparations aren’t instituted, Black voters will keep tirelessly dragging our states toward a perfect union. But just imagine our country if our votes counted twice.”
Washington and Lee University told the Washington Examiner of the post: “Washington and Lee’s faculty are individuals who hold and express a variety of opinions, and the university is committed to upholding their right to freedom of expression. Professor Hasbrouck’s piece on voting reparations in The Nation was published as part of ‘The Argument,’ which the publication identifies as ‘a column where writers and thinkers propose a provocative idea that may not be politically realizable in the short term but that pushes one to think broader about a pressing issue of public importance.'”
Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue with Assistant Professor Hasbrouck’s “Black Vote Reparation” plan? If historical issues sustained by various groups in our society must be used for “fair voting,” we would face an ongoing adjustment process. Such a plan would necessitate a formula for every ethnicity, religion, sexuality, and even hair color segment of Americans! I can envision even deeper adjustments for left-handed people (they are in the minority), fat people, and, of course, skinny people. The list would be exhaustive and would never work.
Just consider the futility of trying to address every type of difference in Americans in voter fairness. Trying to create an equitable plan for such would be an impossible challenge.
I have an idea: why don’t we just make to purely simple: one registered voter gets one vote. How about we, while doing so, just deal with the “rule of law” and operate our elections following laws passed by each of the 50 state legislatures — which is a Constitutional provision.
“But that wouldn’t assure fairness for all voters!” It would: in voting. Let’s break it down:
This nation was founded with a series of promises that are to use as the fundamental structure by which we operate our lives. Our forefathers knew that in a country that welcomed ALL people and guaranteed the rights of all to pursue all the things they wished. Notice, we were NOT promised to “get” all the things we wanted, just the right to “pursue” those things.
In the U.S., we welcome diversity, encourage keeping ethnic, religious, and racial identity while “melting-together” with others, some who are like us but many others who are not.
We champion our differences while becoming one nation allowing those differences to make us stronger and do more. That’s from where the saying comes: “One for all and all for one.”
As a Representative Republic, our democracy is built on the People holding the sole power to choose those who govern us. Fundamental to that process is voting. With all of the differences we all share, voting for those who will lead us with each having an equal share of that process is how this nation has not only existed but thrived for 260 years. It remains the most powerful and prosperous nation in World history. “Free and fair elections” is THE key to that success. “Free and fair” prohibits any fingers on the scale to tip votes one way or another. Trying to implement any such plan would immediately destroy our diversity AND unity.
What we can and must assure is that the system that has worked so effectively for these many years remains as reliable and fair as ever. There are always those who choose to impact elections for their benefit. Life works that way in almost every way. Not all people work to join the process of democracy.
Our voting system is not perfect. For that reason, we have always adjusted it through the years for changes dictated by circumstances unforeseen in the 1700s. We all weigh-in, express our thoughts and opinions, and we all vote.
November 3rd’s horrors that continue to play out seven weeks later are a notification that we are at a tipping point. We must choose to maintain and protect the structure of our republic or to go the way that have so many countries before us and even today. That way is one of inevitable failure and resulting doom.
“Fair” means legal and democratic. It means that we agree to have differences and to reconcile those peacefully in whatever manner is necessary. It means that we enforce laws — even those with which we disagree. And when we disagree, we democratically change the laws.
We have a Constitution, a “roadmap,” to guide us as we approach these hiccups. It’s worked for 260 years, and it will work for that many more or even longer.
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”
It ain’t broke.