The Arizona Senate passed a joint resolution on Wednesday aimed at combating House Resolution 1 — the For the People Act of 2021 — and other legislation interfering in how states conduct elections.
The resolution had already passed the Arizona House of Representatives last month on a strict party-line vote, with all Republicans voting for it and all Democrats voting against it.
The same held true in the state Senate.
In a Wednesday news release, the resolution’s sponsor, GOP state Rep. Jake Hoffman, confirmed that the move came in direct response to the passage of HR 1 in March.
“The ‘Corrupt Politicians Act’ is the most dangerous piece of legislation to come out of DC in generations,” Hoffman said.
— AZ House Republicans (@AZHouseGOP) April 8, 2021
“The bill reflects the Democrats’ attempt to rig America’s electoral system in their favor and strip voters of their civil right to have their vote matter.
“The Constitution delegates the power over elections to the legislature and we intend to fiercely oppose any effort by corrupt politicians in Washington, D.C. to interfere with our sovereign authority. The Arizona legislature stands unwaveringly against the Democrats’ unconstitutional power grab and attempt to federalize our state’s elections process,” he added.
The resolution reads, in part: “H.R. 1 strikes at the very heart of the arrangement that gave rise to this nation, namely that states are sovereign and free from interference and the intrusion of power from the government of the United States absent clear constitutional authorization.”
Republican U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona supported the resolution.
“While most of the country has some doubt as to the integrity of our elections, the Democrats want to ensure that we never have an honest election again,” Biggs said in the news release.
“If we do not stop H.R. 1, it will become increasingly difficult to restore trust in American elections.”
Democratic state Sen. Martin Quezada said there was “discriminatory intent” behind the resolution in a Wednesday tweet.
— Sen. Martín Quezada (@SenQuezada29) April 7, 2021
Two of the nation’s top election experts — The Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky and National Review’s John Fund — along with Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft argued in an online event hosted by Regent University’s Robertson School of Government last month that HR 1 would have a disastrous effect on U.S. elections.
Von Spakovsky and Fund — who co-authored the 2012 book, “Who’s Counting?: How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk” — both pointed out that HR 1 would overturn voter ID laws, which are present in 34 states.
Congrats to Arizona lawmakers for signing HCR 2023 today — AZ is now the first state in the nation to formally condemn HR 1!
States across the nation oppose the Corrupt Politicians Act — they should follow AZ’s lead.
— Heritage Action (@Heritage_Action) April 7, 2021
The bill also allows same-day voter registration, ballot harvesting, acceptance of mail-in ballots up to 10 days after the election and automatic voter registration.
Automatic voter registration would mean large portions of the estimated millions of illegal immigrants living in the U.S. would be registered to vote if they have any interaction with a government agency, such as obtaining a driver’s license or attending a state university.
HR 1 also prevents illegal aliens from being prosecuted for being registered to vote, von Spakovsky said, which he argued means Democrats fully expect that to happen.
“This [bill] is not something that will inspire confidence in our elections. It will breed cynicism, mistrust and despair,” Fund said.
“HR 1 is the worst bill I’ve ever seen and the most dangerous bill I have ever seen when it comes to elections,” von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission, said.
Further, Ashcroft contended that HR 1 is an “unconstitutional encroachment” upon the right of states to conduct elections.
Fund anticipates that if Democrats garner enough support for the bill, a vote could come in the Senate as early as this month, but some change to the filibuster rule would likely be needed for it to pass.
This article appeared originally on Patriot Project.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.