When Will the Election-Fraud Debate End?
Reader letters challenge the SAVE Act by questioning claims of widespread election fraud.
这些读者来信回应了参议员Tim Sheehy关于《SAVE美国法案》的专栏文章。第一位读者Bill O'Keefe指出，没有证据表明2020年大选存在大规模欺诈，引用了前司法部长William Barr和美联社等独立分析的结论。他认为参议院在寻找一个并不存在的问题的解决方案。第二位读者则建议，如果该法案真的有80%的民意支持，就应该让反对者通过冗长辩论来阻挡，让他们付出政治代价。
In the op-ed "How to Pass the SAVE America Act" (March 28), Sen. Tim Sheehy (R., Mont.) tells us more about the failings of Congress than he does about election integrity. The op-ed is finely written, but it fails to make the case that recent elections were rife with fraud.
No one disagrees with the need to have safe and fair elections. But where is the evidence that supports the hypothesis that state election processes need this legislation to achieve that objective, or that the 2020 election was fraught with fraud? To the best of my knowledge there is none.
States have the constitutional authority to establish voting rules and have established voting systems that have proven robust. There have been audits and lawsuits of the most contested state results—and those investigations haven't produced evidence of widespread fraud and abuse.
Former Attorney General William Barr explained at the time of the 2020 election that, "To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election." Independent analyses by the media, the AP, for example, and the National Academy of Sciences have concluded that there was no evidence of fraud sufficient to alter the election's outcome.
So instead of working to address real problems—of which there are many—the Senate is pushing a solution in search of a problem.
Bill O'Keefe, Midlothian, Va.
Sen. Sheehy, like many others, dismisses the talking filibuster as unworkably burdensome. But if the minority party wishes to "grind the nation to a halt," let it. If legislation is so important that it must be blocked, let those who wish to stop it pay the political price to do so.
Sen. Sheehy claims that "Eighty percent of the American people want voter ID requirements." So let the Democrats act the fool by taking the stage for as long as it takes to block the SAVE Act. As for when the political winds inevitably shift, I would love to see Republicans have to determine what is truly worth blocking and compromise when it is not.
A simple solution would be to provide proof of the "fraud permeating elections in many parts of the country." I imagine if it was as rampant as he implies the SAVE Act would pass with ease.