Home Illinois News Thorner: Democrats push for federal election law creating a perpetual Blue...

Thorner: Democrats push for federal election law creating a perpetual Blue Wave


By Nancy Thorner - 

In just one week, President Biden signed a record-high 30+ executive orders and counting, many of which were direct reversals of former President Trump's policies, and which ushered in a new era of incredibly radical and divisive policies.

But did you know about the Democrats' first bill introduced in the House on January 4, 2021– H.R.1, 2021 — known as the People Act of 2021? 

Democrats in Congress have renewed efforts in the House and Senate to make sweeping changes to America’s electoral laws.

The People Act would enshrine fraud, as House lawmakers seek to stifle dissent. The massive bill constitutes a Democrat power grab.

The nearly 800-page bill, H.R. 1, sponsored by John Sarbanes (D-Md.) and co-sponsored by Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), was  introduced on January 4, 2021, immediately after the start of the 117th Congress.

As the bill number suggests, the bill is a top priority for Congressional Democrats. Now that Democrats control the House, Senate, and White House, a possibility exists that this bill could pass and be enacted.  Should it becomes law, Democrats will control the federal government for decades.

Carlson discusses H.R. 1
Tucker Carlson, on his Monday, January 25, 2021 weekday show on Fox News, warned of the many dangers of "H.R. 1", a bill that would essentially nationalize what Tucker called the Californian election system.    
As Tucker's warned on 1/25/2021:
“Like most revolutionary documents, it's not a very exciting read — nothing sounds especially radical at first. The bill begins by declaring that — contrary to Article I of the United States Constitution – Congress has an "ultimate supervisory power over federal elections.”
“Under our current laws, states get to decide how much fraud they will tolerate: Florida requires you to show photo identification in order to vote. California just wants you to vote Democrat."
Carlson went on to point out that a line in Sarbanes' bill reads that a state government cannot require voters to provide "any form of identification" in seeking an absentee ballot."
Carlson continues:
“Under H.R. 1, [people] could freely go house to house and apartment to apartment collecting unknown thousands of ballots and then dump them all in a ballot dropbox. No one would have any idea if those ballots had been tampered with at any point along the way or would there be any way to prove it if they had been tampered with.”
“H.R. 1 also makes it harder for election observers to file complaints about any of this because complaining is racist."
“A system like that is suicidal for democracy and no other free country would tolerate it.”
Carlson further pointed out that Canada and France have prohibitions on mail-in ballots, while the party in power in the U.S. seeks the opposite remedy.
Carlson then pointed to legislation from Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla., noting that the Orlando lawmaker is proposing a bill that would "ban anyone with the wrong opinions from having a significant job in the federal government."
Further analysis of H.R.1
The Heritage Foundation created a list of the law’s provisions, which you can read  here. The Conservative Action Project also provided the following quick rundown of the bill:   
  • Forces states to implement mandatory voter registration, removing civic participation as a voluntary choice, and increasing chances for error.
  • Mandates that states allow all felons to vote.
  • Forces states to extend periods of early voting, which has shown to have no effect on turnout.
  • Mandates same-day voter registration, which encourages voter fraud.
  • Limits the ability of states to cooperate to see who is registered in multiple states at the same time.
  • Prohibits election observers from cooperating with election officials to file formal challenges to suspicious voter registration
  • Criminalizes protected political speech by making it a crime to ‘discourage’ someone from voting.
  • Bars states from making their own laws about voting by mail.
  • Prohibits chief election officials in each state from participating in federal election campaigns.
  • Mandates free mailing of absentee ballots.
  • Mandates that states adopt new redistricting commissions.
The bill is more or less a grab bag of progressive priorities, much like the Green New Deal.
Like the  misguided movement to abolish the Electoral College, H.R. 1, in the name of democracy, takes a blow torch to the concepts federalism and self-government enshrined in our Constitution.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who seems to have positioned herself at the forefront of every piece of radical legislation coming out of the House, dismissed the idea that H.R. 1 is a “power grab” by Democrats.
As  Jarrett Stepman wrote in 2019, when H.R. 1 was first proposed, "These reforms would be a significant threat to the federalist system under the Constitution of the United States and would undermine election integrity. "

"H.R. 1 is even more significantly threatening in the aftermath of 2020 election,where electoral flaws made many Americans question the integrity of the system. H.R. 1 makes it likely that all future elections will have that outcome."

Dan Bongino Show Podcast
Quotes from Podcast of The Dan Bongino Show, posted January 26, 2021:
“Nothing in this legislation could plausibly be interpreted as a means of restoring public confidence in our elections — but the reforms establish a clear road map to one-party rule.  This is especially so when you consider the new proposals for the war on “domestic terror” aimed directly at the free expression of American citizens."
“If that happens, the “Grand Old Party” of Abraham Lincoln might as well disband, because Republicans would never have any hope of regaining a congressional majority or controlling the White House under the rules that HR 1 would put in place.”
“We can only hope that principled Republicans and Democrats will reject this direct assault on American democracy and individual freedom and resist the institutionalists in both parties who believe the American people need them to protect us from ourselves.”
The way to create one-party rule is to control information and control the way a nation selects its leaders. The political left has joined with Big Tech and government careerists in aggressively trying to do both.


  1. I hope some republican congressmen will ensure that bill won’t pass. I think election laws should be passed by state legislators. I emailed two republican state legislators and asked them to propose these election reform bills: 1. bill that would require people, when they register to vote, to prove U.S. citizenship 2. bill that would require ballots to be received by county or city clerks by the time that polls close, on election night 3. bill that would require county and city clerks to check obituaries and remove dead people from the voter registration lists. One of the legislators said she agrees.

  2. Unconstitutional Provision
    Is H.R. 1 Constitutional? The obvious answer for anyone familiar with the U.S. Constitution and the Federalist Papers is a resounding “NO, NO, NO,” because there is no grant of power given to the federal government to simply take over elections.
    This bill’s supporters would likely disagree with that claim and quote Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution as justification, which says:
    The times, places, and manner of holding elections, for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof, but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.
    HR 1 is an attempted power grab by the commiecrats, they want to usurp power from the states for their One World Govt, unlawfully centralizing power in the federal govt all the while STOMPING on the 10th amendment.

  3. I suspect too many politicians are happy with the current rules, because they are to their advantage. If only we could get enough support to have more realistic term limits. I don’t think our forefathers intended us to have career politicians, ike Pelosi and Schumer. We need new blood, newly elected politicians … those who have recently been in the REAL World, experiencing how the laws impact the average person.

Exit mobile version