On Wednesday, March 24th, a Mosca resident authored a letter to the Valley Courier asking Alamosans to contact their U.S. senators to vote ‘Yes’ on H.R.1. She stated: “... this is a crucial step toward protecting our elections and building a more inclusive democracy.” Yes, protecting our elections and strengthening democracy are worthy goals, however, the passage of H.R.1 would accomplish none of them. Putting Democrats solely in charge of future elections undermines democratic rule and would soon lead to a one-party state.

House Resolution 1 is not the panacea for fair federal election laws liberal legislators and others claim. In fact: “It’s the single most dangerous piece of legislation before Congress.” (Senator Ted Cruz). Many on Capitol Hill say the language in the bill is much too broad – that Democrats will have an unfair advantage in all future elections if this bill is enacted. Some say the passage of H.R.1 will likely lead to the election of more and more liberal candidates, which is the entire purpose of this legislation. Will authoritarianism, the rejection of political plurality and blind submission to authority, be far behind?

Senator Schumer of New York, the poster-boy for term limits, is on record proclaiming unequivocal support for the filibuster process just a few years ago, when his political party was the minority. Sen. Schumer mysteriously changed his mind now that his party finally controls the Senate again. Schumer and his allies see the filibuster as a problematic legislative weapon because it could challenge and delay the Socialist’s game plan.

Democrat’s attempts to get rid of the filibuster, end the Electoral College, pack the Supreme Court and now push-thru H.R.1- are these partisan efforts truly aimed at strengthening democracy or further eroding it?   

Thomas Boynton

Alamosa