A POWERFUL OPEN LETTER To MI Lawmakers As They Vote This Week To Destroy Every Last Hope For Election Integrity: “The biggest hazard to the survival of our kids and grandchildren is systemic election corruption”

Democrat House and Senate election expense analysis

• • Hypothetically, If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may compose, sponsor and gavel through costs that, at every stage of the election procedure, made things much easier for arranged vote scams wrongdoers. Is that why your 8 costs voted on recently and 4 more in the on-deck circle do simply that? If these are all signed into law, it will make Michigan a lot more susceptible to existing systemic election corruption.
  • If the Democrats looked for to assist in scams, they may extend even beyond their authority under the Michigan Constitution to deteriorate the State’s election laws. Is that why you took legal license, far over-extending the breach Prop 2 made in our election security guardrails?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may extend the ballot procedure from a single Election Day, making it difficult to staff the surveys with adequate oppositions, who, unlike survey employees, are unsettled volunteers. Is that why your costs allow from 9 to 29 days (clerk’s option) of “early ballot,” turning Election Day into “Election Month”?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may funnel as numerous citizens to the ballot technique most prone to scams: ballot by mail. Is that why your HB 4699 developed a single application for citizens to instantly get missing citizen tallies for all future elections, as long as they live, unless they send a signed demand to rescind it or stop electing 6 straight years?
  • If the Democrats looked for to assist in scams, they may make it simpler for arranged vote scammers to bring Third-World-style tally stuffing to America. Is that why you sponsored SB 0372, which not just mandates the positioning of drop boxes in every neighborhood, it will eliminate the existing video tracking requirement and alter it to clerks “may” video display drop boxes? And could that be why you got rid of the requirement that clerks count and log the variety of tallies showing up from those drop boxes every day, making it difficult for oppositions to identify suspicious spikes in drop box use?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may eliminate existing requireds that need publishing the overall variety of AV tallies gotten in the election by the close of surveys. This law (broken by Detroit on November 8th, 2022), when followed, avoids “additional” tallies from being silently contributed to the overalls in the morning hours after the surveys close. Is that why SB 0372 likewise gets rid of the present requirement that clerks publish the overall variety of AV tallies returned in the election prior to 9 pm on Election Day?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may enable the usage of insecure approaches to transfer tallies from military and non-military Americans overseas. Is that why your HB 4210 would enable not just uninformed however any certified abroad citizen to email (that’s not a misprint) their voted tally to their Michigan clerk? The costs clearly needs a disclaimer be signed by the abroad citizen accepting that “the secrecy of the missing citizen tally might be jeopardized throughout the duplication procedure.” Perhaps this disclaimer is needed since the co-chair of Michigan’s Cybersecurity Advisory Committee, U of M Prof. J. Alex Haldeman, affirmed recently that “HB4210 would seriously weaken the security of MI elections”.
  • If the Democrats looked for to assist in scams, they may lower the variety of oppositions enjoying each AV tally counting board, making it harder for them to recognize scams or other offenses of election law. is that why your Senate Bill 0387 minimizes the variety of oppositions allowed to supervise election employees to a ratio of one opposition per 6-8 election inspectors? This will make it difficult to have one opposition per counting board table per political celebration, as in the past. Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who, per Democrat Sen. Jeremy Moss, helped in the preparing of these costs, is still appealing her loss in court that obstructs her effort to make oppositions based on the impulses of election inspectors (rather of unconfined observers of their work).
  • If the Democrats looked for to assist in scams, they may attempt to counter the oppositions’ triumph in court (under appeal) to allow using video/audio recording inside a counting board by cynically altering the law. Is that why you’re SB 0387 slips an included stipulation into the oath oppositions must take: “… I shall not picture or audio or video record within the counting location …”?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may wish to lower nosey oppositions’ rights any method they could. Is this why your SB 0387 struck from the law the oppositions’ rights safeguarded under 168.730-168734 throughout the essential tally pre-processing duration? [The pre-processing was itself an outrageous security lapse passed last October (the Ann Bollin Law) that permits tally envelopes to be slit open and stay susceptible to prospective tampering 2 nights in a row right prior to the election. Oppositions’ rights need to use throughout ALL stages of the election procedure]
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may pass legislation to threaten oppositions with prosecution for simply doing their tasks, making them less most likely to offer in future elections. Is that why your HB 4129 would make it a felony if you do or state something that scares an election employee or makes the employee view (in the employee’s own mind) that she or he is being bugged, therefore putting an innocent opposition at the grace of an excessively delicate (or harmful) election inspector?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may get rid of the challenged tally requirement for citizens who do not reveal ID. Is that why HB 4567 does precisely that? Even if the clerk’s personnel determines a believed disqualified citizen, his or her vote will still be counted. All the best to canvassers looking for to erase those votes when a minimum of one jurisdiction (Detroit, November 2022) declined to follow Michigan Election Law’s difficulty treatment of composing the tally number on the challenged tally prior to the stub is gotten rid of. This guarantees that the tally can never ever be discovered and “backed out” of the vote count if the citizen later on shows to be disqualified. [Included benefit: this will continue to let all those countless Detroit tallies that do not appear in the survey books (as in 2020 and 2022) go successfully undisputed]
  • If the Democrats looked for to assist in scams, they may limit signature confirmation to inside the clerk’s workplace just– where they do not allow oppositions– and restrict any additional signature assessments by other employees, such as at the AVCB (where oppositions exist). Is that why SB0387 clearly restricts any extra signature confirmation of AV tallies by election inspectors at counting boards or precincts?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may unwind the ID requirements where possible. Is that why SB 373 unwinds the picture ID requirement to consist of IDs from ANY “university”?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may pass arrangements that centralize the counting of votes. Is that why you made no limitation to the variety of precincts present at an AV counting board area, leading the way for more municipalities and cities to send their tallies to big counting boards and far from the regional resident volunteers counting the votes? Is that likewise why you increased the variety of active signed up citizens in a single election precinct from 2,999 to 5,000 active signed up citizens?
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may make auditing election results harder. Is that why your SB 0387 would need tabulators to accept tallies from any precinct in the jurisdiction? Obviously, jumbling up tallies from several various precincts makes the proof that much more difficult to follow.
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may keep incarcerated individuals on the citizen rolls. Is that why you’ve presented SB0033, which would do simply that, allowing wrongdoers of arranged scams to keep the citizen rolls teeming with disqualified citizens whose ballot identities can be taken by means of usage of their names on unlawful tallies, which can then be put in drop boxes, no concerns asked. [Possibly that’s why our SOS utilized taxpayer dollars to combat in court versus a non-profit attempting to get rid of 27,000 verified dead individuals from our QVF citizen roll?]
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they may keep the tally harvesting laws in location (avoiding other individuals from gathering and providing your tally). This, remains in spite of all the rhetoric about the requirement to make it “simpler to vote,” establishing unwary Republicans– a lot of whom have actually been informed Prop 2 made tally collecting legal– for selective prosecution. Is that why, regardless of all the rhetoric about making it much easier to vote– the prime pretext for the majority of the above costs– none are developed to legislate tally harvesting? (Interesting!)
  • If the Democrats looked for to help with scams, they would fear direct exposure of these expenses to public argument. Is that why you rammed them through, providing the costs just 24 hours prior to their committee conferences without any possibility of public evaluation, argument or feedback from election stability groups?

Lastly, if the Democrats looked for to assist in scams, they would fear those lawmakers of either celebration, who may try to arrange opposition to their costs. Is that why you supposedly restricted the time set aside for some committee members to see alternative expenses to as low as 75 minutes prior to the meetings?As I go through and examined your election expenses from your house and Senate, they made me ill. It’s that ill sensation one gets when one recognizes there are people in high positions of power who have a liberty to do terrific damage to your state, your country, and your liberties. The best danger to the survival of our kids and grandchildren is systemic election corruption, which this legislation will codify into law.

To Democrat members: your actions offer clearness. More people than ever previously now understand, beyond an affordable doubt, that you are following a collaborated, methodical strategy to compromise our election security, which is itself a matter of state and nationwide security. To members of the Republican Caucus: you must be advised that a few of you have more than the years– and even this year– damaged ranks to vote with the Democrats. At this vital point, simply voting “NO” is inadequate. You are anticipated to speak up powerfully versus this attack on our election laws, being remorselessly advanced by your Democrat coworkers.

To the residents of Michigan: it’s previous time we, individuals of Michigan, raised up a rough union of downhearted, disappointed, and disengaged Republicans, neutral Independents, and truthful Democrats who all share something in typical: they anticipate and require sincere elections. We welcome citizens from these diverse groups to end up being notified and engaged so that together we can treat the widespread, systemic election corruption that is moving our state and country quickly towards destroy.

Sincerely,

Philip O’Halloran, MD Chairman
Election Integrity Committee Michigan Republican Party Phil@MIGOP.org

For a summary and analysis of these costs, see MFE’s comprehensive report: https://www.mifairelections.org/post/call-to- action-contact-your-representatives-senators-about-these-election-related-bills

To see the expenses themselves, go here

To call your lawmaker go here.