School reinstates sex-specific restrooms for students
Backlash erupts from parents, grandparents when officials mandate LGBT plan
A public school in Scotland has killed off a transgender agenda point that demanded students of both sexes use the same restrooms after a backlash from parents and grandparents who were stunned with the idea.
According to the Scottish Dail Mail, staff and students at Culloden Academy in Inverness both returned from summer break to find the new scenario.
The report explained Headmaster James Vance claimed he had nothing to do with the change, which was made by the Highland Council.
But the school’s plan was to force students into unisex facilities, and that triggered a response from students and parents alike.
“Locals were concerned at the prospect of girls as young as 11 sharing toilets with boys as old as 18, while some pupils said they were uncomfortable with the decision,” the report explained.
It said the school responded with a reinstatement of single-sex facilities, although it is also is keeping an option for the unisex restrooms.
The school had told parents that the restroom “improvements” were needed because of an increase in student population.
“There are similar facilities in place at Alness Academy, Wick High School, Inverness Royal Academy and Charleston Academy… the new toilet cubicles and doors are full height and fully enclosed for improved security and privacy for pupils,” the school said.
Online, a community group warned, “Could consulting school, parents, and pupils have saved a lot of time and money?”
More than 600 respondents “liked” the criticisms, and contributor Kelly Lewis More said, “Highland Council is an absolute joke. Let’s make a really stupid decision, cause distress and waste money – even though we know it’s stupid and will have to waste even more money to sort things out.”
Another, Margaret MacLeod, simply said the council members “need their heads examined and quickly.”
The Inverness Courier explained grandparent Judith Reid charged, “The U-turn by Highland Council has been welcomed by the Culloden Academy community, and we are delighted that the council has seen sense and overturned their initial decision to have exclusively unisex toilets.”
She continued, “However, the lack of consultation or communication with teachers, parents and pupils over the initial decision, which eroded safe spaces for young female pupils, and left pupils of both sexes uncomfortable, has been frankly appalling, and I am not entirely convinced that this will be a one-off.”
At the Christian Institute came the explanation that the LGBT lobbyists at Stonewall have been pushing for “gender neutral toilets and signage for a number of years.”
But the report said opposition to that agenda “is growing.”
FORBES HAS JOINED THE FAKE NEWS BRIGADE
For those who missed it, Forbes magazine, once owned and managed by the swashbuckling Malcolm S. Forbes Sr., who was an ardent capitalist as well as the Republican candidate for Governor of New Jersey in 1957. His namesake and son, Malcom S. Forbes Jr., known as “Steve” matched his father’s devotion to capitalism and effectively championed the Kemp, Reagan, and Trump tax cuts.
Unfortunately, the new owners of Forbes have a different political point of view. As Isaac Stone Fish (who is not related to me and may or may not be related to the line of Hamilton Fishs that served in Congress) wrote in the Washington Post, “Since that purchase, there have been several instances of editorial meddling on stories involving China that raise questions about Forbes magazine’s commitment to editorial independence.”
Last week, Zach Everson reporting for Forbes mocked me when they noted that I was among those speakers pardoned by President Trump, who will be featured at AMPFest 2021 at Trump Doral, the President’s iconic Golf Club and Hotel, traditionally the largest and most influential political gathering in the America First Movement.
Don’t be fooled by the Forbes magazine masthead. Once a fountain of conservative-leaning opinion, the Forbes magazine of today is among the worst purveyors of fake news and elitist narrative. Nothing at Forbes approaches legitimate journalism. Zach is a perfect example of this false narrative peddling.
Both Zach and his colleagues at Forbes magazine now endlessly parrot the discredited line of the Democrat/media/tech-narrative that Trump colluded with the “Russians” to win the 2016 race for The White House was real. They also pushed the fiction that I had been an intermediary between WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, and the Trump campaign.
Forbes was among the media outlets who celebrated when I was convicted in a breathtaking Soviet-style show-trial. Complete with a Trump-hating biased Judge, a corrupt Jury Forewoman (who attacked me by name on Facebook and Twitter), a painstakingly rigged Jury that included no Republicans, Independents, Trump supporters, military veterans, Roman Catholics, or African-American males – the Jury was united about one thing, – they all hated Donald Trump. Zach Everson of Forbes, of course, would mention none of this.
President Trump was able to clearly see that the charges against me were politically motivated and that I did not receive anything approaching a fair trial. Therefore he granted me clemency in an act of both mercy and justice after the Court upheld the order for me to report to a Covid-19 infested prison in Georgia — effectively a death sentence.
That I escaped the deadly snare so carefully set for me by Robert Mueller and Congressman Adam Schiff, drives the American left into a frenzy. The outright bloodlust with which some have tried to falsely connect me to the illegal events of January 6th is as sweeping as it is bogus. I note a Reuters report attributed to a senior FBI official, who confirmed that the FBI had found no evidence that Alex Jones or I was involved in any conspiracy regarding January 6th.
Zach Everson reporting for Forbes uses the most common technique utilized by the fake news media – that is; omission of key facts to shape a narrative. Here is the biggest omission of all. On November 3rd, 2020, at the stroke of midnight, the U.S. Department of Justice, by Court order, released the last redacted section of Robert Mueller’s long-hidden final report regarding Roger Stone. Even Mueller cannot sugarcoat his stark admission that with sweeping legal authority and unlimited budget and manpower, he could find “no factual evidence” to support the claim that I had been involved in “Russian collusion,” had collaborated with WikiLeaks or had any knowledge or participation in the fishing and publication of John Podesta’s e-mails. I was innocent on all counts.
Why would the DOJ put out a press release at midnight of the busiest news day of the year – the presidential election day – unless they wanted their release to be buried.
BuzzFeed, of all outlets, reported that I was “vindicated.” Other than the Washington Examiner, no major news organization who had insisted for two years that I was a traitor who had trafficked in stolen e-mails received from “the Russians” and sent to the Trump campaign, reported this startling admission. The New York Times, The Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, The Wallstreet Journal, the Associated Press, Atlantic, Salon, and the rest of the fake news chorus reported… nothing.
Zach Everson at Forbes will not tell you that the D.C Prosecutors and the Judge herself withheld this information from my defense attorneys at trial. Given that I was charged with “lying to Congress” regarding these exact same matters, Mueller’s admission illustrates why any misstatement I made before Congress was immaterial and proving that I had no motive to lie. This would have completely undercut the contrived “lying to Congress” house of mirrors, so carefully constructed in my criminal indictment by Mueller’s Deputy, Andrew Weissmann.
Nor will Zach tell you that Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein lied under oath to Congress when he insisted that he had not authorized the investigation into me several weeks after Robert Mueller concluded that there was no Russian collusion. The memo authorizing the investigation into my affairs was signed by Rod Rosenstein. Why is Rosenstein facing no prosecution for lying to Congress?
Zach Everson and Forbes will also fail to tell you that Mueller’s prosecutors told a Federal Judge that they had probable cause to charge me with “treason, conspiracy against the United States, unauthorized access to a protected computer, international money laundering, mail fraud, wire fraud, aiding and abetting a felony, and being an accessory to a felony after the fact.” Mueller’s thugs used this claim to get access to all of my devices, as well as searching my home and offices. Forbes also fails to report that they found no evidence whatsoever to support their sensational claims which justified the search.
Zach Everson and Forbes also forget to mention the 30+ pages of exculpatory e-mails my attorneys supplied to the Special Counsel’s Office. They prove categorically that lefty nutjob Randy Credico was indeed the source of what little I knew regarding the timing of the WikiLeaks disclosures. Forbes would not report on the multiple exculpatory witnesses who told the Grand Jury that Credico had told them firsthand that he was indeed the source of this information. Fobes particularly won’t mention Credico’s threat to at least one Grand Jury witness that he would “put a hole in his head” if the witness contradicted Credico before the Grand Jury. Remember I was charged with “witness tampering” because I allegedly threatened to steal Credico’s dog, but Forbes won’t tell you that Credico threatened another witness in my case but was not charged with witness tampering.
One other thing Zach Everson and Forbes left out of their snotty little item was that Steve Bannon, who was Robert Mueller’s chief surprise witness against me, also testified under oath for the House Intelligence Committee and that that testimony completely contradicts his sworn testimony on the stand at my trial.
As George Washington University law professor, Jonathan Turley told the NY Post, “There does appear a glaring and irreconcilable conflict in what Bannon stated in testimony before Congress and the court. What is striking is that this was not a peripheral point but one of the main areas of inquiry. He has two diametrically opposite sworn statements in a high-profile controversy with dozens of attorneys in attendance.”
Forbes will also fail to mention that the prosecutors in my case had an obligation to tell me, and my lawyers, that Bannon was under federal investigation at the time at which he testified at my trial. The indictment subsequently announced against Bannon proved definitively that Bannon was under investigation when he appeared as a witness at my trial. How could Zach Everson of Forbes have missed this?
Forbes was among those fake news media outlets who bought, hook, line, and sinker, the completely fabricated claim that Attorney General Bill Barr and his top aides interfered in my sentencing and pressured D.C. Prosecutors to “go easy” on me because I was a friend of the President. In fact, current Biden Justice Department official Aaron Zelinsky said that he was pressured by senior officials at DOJ regarding my sentence under oath in testimony for the House Judiciary Committee. The Washington Post, however, has reported that the three top nonpolitical career-prosecutors at DOJ have all denied to the DOJ’s Inspector General having any conversations or communications with my prosecutors other than to observe that the seven to nine-year sentence cooked up by the politically motivated prosecutors in my case sought to give me added prison time for crimes I had neither been charged with nor convicted of. When will Mr. Zelinsky face prosecution for lying under oath to Congress? Don’t expect Zach Everson, or anyone at Forbes, to mention it.
In the meantime, AMPFest 2021 is going to rock and you’re not going to want to miss it. Tickets will sell out so I recommend you order yours now.
PRAGER: Colorblind Is The Moral Ideal
There is little that reveals the immorality and dishonesty of the Left more than its labeling the term “colorblind” racist.
Here are just a few of countless examples:
The University of California publishes a list of “microaggressions” — terms and ideas it considers racist — that white people should avoid using. The list includes the term “colorblindness” as well as statements such as “there is only one race, the human race.”
The Left’s racist war on colorblindness is everywhere.
Psychology Today published an article by a psychology professor titled, “Colorblind Ideology Is a Form of Racism.”
HuffPost published a piece titled, “How Colorblindness Is Actually Racist,” in which the author gives three examples of statements white people make that are racist:
“I am colorblind.”
“I see people, not color.”
“We are all the same.”
The Walt Disney Co. recommends that its white employees atone for their racism by “challeng(ing) colorblind ideologies and rhetoric” such as … “I don’t see color.”
Even the U.S. Army got into the act. It sent an email to all personnel saying that the word “colorblind” is “evidence of white supremacy.” (The Army later withdrew the email after a congressman threatened a federal investigation.)
I could give dozens of other examples of the Left’s Orwellian labelling of “colorblind” as “racist.”
Why Orwellian?
Because becoming colorblind is precisely what people opposed to racism should aspire to.
That is why Martin Luther King Jr.’s most famous quote, from his most famous speech, is: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
The Left’s position is that Martin Luther King Jr. was wrong.
But it’s the Left that’s wrong. The colorblind person is the very definition of a non-racist person.
Here’s one obvious proof: The worst racists — defenders of slavery, supporters of Jim Crow laws and the Ku Klux Klan, just to cite American examples — were the least colorblind people. Color is the one thing they and all racists see in people. Precisely because they defined people by their color, they justified their subjugation of black people.
Colorblind means one does not believe a person’s color is in any way significant.
Isn’t that the ideal? Shouldn’t we define a person by their heart, mind, personality and, as Martin Luther King Jr. said, above all, character? When people, of any color, look into a mirror, do they see color? No, they don’t. They see a human being. When a white person looks into a mirror, does he or she think, “Look, a white person!”? When a black person looks into a mirror, does he or she think, “Look, a black person!”?
Of course not. When we look at ourselves, we see John, or Jessica, or Tameka, or Jose. We see ourselves — not color. Why isn’t that how we would want everyone else to see us?
The Left’s insistence that color is important is one of the most racist and anti-human doctrines of our time. It was precisely when America was most racist that people’s color was deemed most important. Why would we want to return to that time?
Why is your skin color any more important than your hair color or, for that matter, the color of your shoes?
Name one important thing your color tells others about you. You can’t.
Does your color tell us if you’re kind, or smart, or what foods or music you like, or what you do for a living? Does it tell us anything about the most important thing about you — your values?
No. Your color tells us nothing about you.
So, why should anyone not be colorblind? To be colorblind means one ignores the least important thing about you. Isn’t that a good thing? And isn’t the opposite position — that your race is important — racist?
Those of us who regard the Bible as the greatest book ever written, as the greatest repository of wisdom, must be colorblind. The only thing the Bible tells us about the first human being, Adam, from whom we are all descended, is that he was created in God’s image. If the Bible placed any significance on race, wouldn’t it have told us Adam’s color?
That there were Christians who defended slavery on race grounds only proves that there were Christians who didn’t take the Bible seriously. Conversely, some Christians who did take the Bible seriously organized the first large-scale effort in world history to abolish slavery.
One final thought: Imagine that tomorrow every human being became blind. Would the world be more — or less — racist?
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host and columnist. His latest book, published by Regnery in May 2019, is “The Rational Bible,” a commentary on the book of Genesis. His film, “No Safe Spaces,” was released to home entertainment nationwide on September 15, 2020. He is the founder of Prager University and may be contacted at dennisprager.com.
Fauci-Funded Wuhan Lab Viruses 10,000 Times Stronger Than Usual, Documents Show
American and Chinese researchers funded by Dr. Anthony Fauci’s federal agency created viruses in a Wuhan lab that exhibited over 10,000 times higher viral load in humanized mice than the natural viruses they were based on, another expert in infectious diseases says, citing newly released documents.
The U.S. nonprofit group EcoHealth Alliance notified Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in two reports that between June 2017 and May 2018 it had created three lab-generated chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses in China that exhibited “significantly higher” viral loads, documents first reported by The Intercept show. But Fauci’s agency continued to fund the project with taxpayer dollars without flagging it for review by an independent committee created in late 2017 to oversee so-called gain-of-function research.
Rutgers University professor Richard Ebright, a vocal opponent of gain-of-function research, said the data was a “bona fide bombshell” that proves the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, under Fauci’s leadership, violated federal policies, endangered the public, and lied to Americans.
“Three EcoHealth/[Wuhan Institute of Virology] lab-generated viruses exhibited >10x to >10,000x higher viral load than the starting bat virus in humanized mice,” Ebright tweeted. “One EcoHealth/WIV lab-generated virus exhibited higher pathogenicity than the starting bat virus in infection studies with humanized mice.”
“The results demonstrate–unequivocally–a gain in function,” he said.
In comparison, the viral load for those infected with the delta variant of COVID-19 is roughly 1,000 times higher than those infected with the original strain of the virus, according to Nature, a science journal.
Ebright added on Twitter that the research that National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases allowed EcoHealth Alliance to conduct in China could have yielded the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 or a progenitor of that virus.
EcoHealth Alliance first notified the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases that it created the three lab-generated SARS-related coronaviruses in a progress report detailing its research activities between June 2017 and May 2018.
In the report, the organization said:
Using the reverse genetic methods we previously developed, infectious clones with the WIV1 backbone and the spike protein of SHC014, WIV16 and Rs4231, respectively, were constructed and recombinant viruses were successfully rescued. 2 and 4 days post infection, the viral load in lung tissues of mice challenged with rWIV1-SHC014S, rWIV1-WIV16S and rWIV1-Rs4231S … were significantly higher than that in rWIV1-infected mice.
“These results demonstrate varying pathogenicity of SARSr-CoVs with different spike proteins in humanized mice,” the report added.
EcoHealth Alliance included a chart visualizing the increased viral load of its lab-created viruses. The chart is presented in a Log scale, meaning each tick of the chart represents a 100-fold increase in viral load in mice with humanized cells, Ebright explained to The Daily Caller News Foundation.
“Each tick in the chart on the right represents an increment of 100x,” Ebright said. “The day 4 data show greater-than-10,000x higher viral loads for the lab-generated viruses.”
The viral load for humanized mice infected with the natural virus caught up with the lab-created strains by the end of the experiment, the chart shows, but Ebright said that viral loads in the early stages of an infection are important figures to consider when assessing a pathogen’s transmissibility.
“In terms of assessing potential for transmissibility, the viral load at all time points, particularly at early time points, is relevant. (See delta variant),” Ebright told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
EcoHealth Alliance provided another chart in its progress report showing that humanized mice infected with EcoHealth’s lab-created viruses lost more bodyweight than humanized mice infected with the natural WIV1 strain.
EcoHealth Alliance included the same two charts in a 2018 request to Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases requesting additional funding for its research in China, the document trove released by The Intercept shows.
Federal funding for gain-of-function experiments that increase the transmissibility or pathogenicity of potential pandemic pathogens was temporarily suspended in 2014 due to widespread scientific concerns it risked leaking supercharged viruses into the human population.
Funding for gain-of-function research was resumed in late 2017, but only for projects that went through the new Potential Pandemic Pathogens Control and Oversight framework. That framework includes a review by a Department of Health and Human Services review board tasked with critically evaluating whether grants that involve enhancing dangerous pathogens, such as coronaviruses, are worth the risks and that proper safeguards are in place.
The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases opted not to flag the EcoHealth Alliance grant for Potential Pandemic Pathogens Control and Oversight after determining on its own accord that the project “did not involve the enhancement of the pathogenicity or transmissibility of the viruses studied,” a National Institutes of Health spokesperson previously told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
DeSantis Just Completely Dismantles Biden’s Dictatorial Vaccine Mandate
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis was one of the governors who immediately came out after Joe Biden announced his unconstitutional vaccine mandate plans and said no, we will not comply, and we will stop your illegal actions, to Biden.
But DeSantis wasn’t done with Biden yet. He was asked at an event about Biden making an oblique reference to him during the announcement about his vaccine mandate plans.
DeSantis blasted Biden for taking unconstitutional actions threatening the jobs of the people in Florida, saying he was going to stand up for them and protect their jobs from Biden’s federal overreach. Additionally, DeSantis chastised Biden for wanting to do away with parents’ rights and allowing school boards to force five-year-olds to wear masks all day long.
Gov. DeSavage CLAPS BACK at Biden for his tyrannical vaccine mandates, says what we're all thinking:
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) September 10, 2021
"It's not based on science. He's saying he's losing patience with people?… We don't live with a one-person rule in this country. We live in a Constitutional system." pic.twitter.com/xBYVza8v7P
“Here he comes from Washington, D.C., instituting an unprecedented mandate, even his own people acknowledged is unconstitutional,” DeSantis declared. “That’s not leadership. And the the problem I have with Joe Biden is – this guy doesn’t take responsibility for anything. He’s always trying to blame other people. Blame other states.”
“This is a guy who promised when he ran for president that he was going to shut down the virus,” DeSantis said. Then he eviscerated Biden, “If you look now, there’s 300% more cases in this country today than a year ago when we had no vaccines at all. So his policies are not working.”
“He’s doubling down on things that are going to be very destructive for the livelihoods of many, many Americans and obviously going to be disruptive to our constitutional system and the rule of law. And so, these are times, you believe in that Constitution, you gotta stand up. And obviously, the substantive issue is important, because there are places that are going to toss aside people – they’ve worked this whole time throughout COVID. Now, all of sudden, they should be tossed aside? They were working when nobody had vaccines. You don’t know their history. You don’t know why they’re making the decisions they are making.”
DeSantis raised the incredibly important issue that Biden completely ignores in all this — natural immunity.
“Many of these people have already recovered and they have immunity. The idea that somehow you have someone that gets a Johnson and Johnson vaccine can work, but someone who has natural immunity somehow can’t? That natural immunity is strong. So, it’s not based on science.”
DeSantis then took on the dictatorial nature of Biden’s speech and the harmful effects the mandates would cause.
“And you can say, he’s saying he’s losing patience with people? You know at the end of the day, we don’t live with a one-person rule in this country. We live in a constitutional system in which people’s rights are respected. But particularly in this juncture, their livelihoods and their jobs have be protected.
If you just think about what this mandate would do, it’s going to drive people out of work, out of hospitals, out of all this stuff, where you have a need for people.
So, it’s totally counterproductive and I think it will ultimately lose in court. But before that, there needs to be action taken to protect the people of our state and hopefully of the entire United States. Nobody should lose their job based on this decision.”
It would be hard to say it better than DeSantis did in just under three minutes. This is why this guy has such promise — completely cutting through the b.s. and getting right to the heart of the matter.
Larry Elder: In Snubbing Me, Democrats And Leftist Media Expose Their Racial Double Standard
The corporate media and Democrats are treating Larry Elder, a black man, with a double standard, says the Republican California gubernatorial candidate.
“You know, I don’t want people to vote for me because I’m black or vote against me because I’m black. But there is a double standard,” Elder told The First’s Buck Sexton.
The New York Times, Elder recalled, recently demonstrated this divide on their front page.
“It was just a front-page article [in the] New York Times, it was negative about my candidacy. And it never once mentioned I’m black, never once mentioned that if I were to be elected, I’d be the first black governor of California,” Elder said. “Again, I’m not making a big deal out of that, I want to be the first Larry Elder governor of California.”
“However, on the very same front page, The New York Times, it was an article about the first female governor of New York. A woman by the way, who became governor because the previous one resigned, not because she got elected. That was a big deal for The New York Times, that first,” he continued. “But Larry Elder, because I have an R at the end of my name, I’m not a first anything. It’s just a double standard that I think we ought to be talking about.”
A similar blind spot in the media appeared, Elder said, when members of his security team were assaulted by unnamed attackers and a woman dressed in all black and in a gorilla mask with pink hair threw an egg at him. The left largely ignored the attack, which Elder said would not have happened if he wasn’t a Republican.
“Well you know what the reaction would be, they’d be talking about this in Bangladesh. And if I were a Democrat and some white woman wearing a gorilla mask threw an egg at me, they’d be talking about systemic racism, enduring racism, foundational racism, whatever kind of racism you can come up with. I’ve never played that game,” he continued.
Elder noted the corporate media’s efforts to cover up Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom’s failures, including California’s homelessness problem.
“Bernie Sanders cut an ad for him. Senator Warren cut an ad for him. Kamala Harris has weighed in. Joe Biden has weighed in. I will tell you what they never said though. They never said and I’m quoting, ‘Governor Gavin Newsom has done a good job for California.’ They’ve never said that,” Elder said.
“They’ve talked about this being a Republican takeover. They’ve not praised him on what’s done about the cost of living. They’ve not praised him on what he’s done about the homelessness problem. They’ve not praised him on the fact that crime is up 41 percent — shootings and homicides in Los Angeles,” he added. “They’ve not praised him on the fact that for the first time in our state’s 170-year history, Californians are leaving. It’s never happened before.”
18 States Passed Election Reforms This Year—Here’s What They Did
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott this week capped off a year of major election reforms across America by signing hotly debated legislation after a prolonged drama that saw Democratic legislators flee the state in a bid to prevent its passage.
Texas, with its Republican governor, is among at least 18 states to enact election reform measures this year, including bills to require voter ID, curb the controversial practice of ballot harvesting, and remove the dead and other ineligible voters from registration rolls.
Organizations that tallied the election changes include the National Conference of State Legislatures, a nonpartisan group representing state lawmakers, and the Brennan Center for Justice, a liberal group opposed to voter ID laws and the upkeep of voter registration.
“State legislatures finally realized in many states that these holes and vulnerabilities that existed in the system for quite a while need to be fixed,” Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission, told The Daily Signal.
“States like Texas, Georgia, Florida, and other places actually passed some good reforms to fix it,” von Spakovsky said.
Now manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, parent organization of The Daily Signal, von Spakovsky noted that many of the state election reforms prevailed despite misleading political attacks.
“[Lawmakers have] done it in the face of totally unfair and outrageous criticism of them, basically saying all kinds of lies about what they were doing,” von Spakovsky, also a member of President Donald Trump’s Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, said.
The Brennan Center, which is affiliated with the New York University School of Law, characterized the new state laws as “restrictive” measures that would “suppress” voting.
The group announced a lawsuit against the state of Texas, claiming that the objective of the legislation known as SB 1 “is not to prevent voter fraud; it is to retain power in the face of a changing and expanding electorate.”
The 18 revised state election laws could be the most such successful bills since 14 states passed election measures 10 years ago, the Brennan Center said, noting: “The United States is on track to far exceed its most recent period of significant voter suppression—2011.”
Most of the new laws, however, allow more early voting and are less restrictive than election laws in New York, where the Brennan Center is based, von Spakovsky said.
Kansas and Kentucky are the only states with Democratic governors to enact major election reforms, although Nevada saw passage of a modest new law. The Kansas law came only after a veto override.
In most states that acted, a clear partisan divide opened over election reforms, with Republicans backing them and Democrats opposed.
“I think it’s a hopeful sign because I think it finally, maybe, will show that many of the opponents in the political ranks are realizing that the lies they are telling about voter ID aren’t working,” von Spakovsky said of states with Democratic governors.
“Given that the American people overwhelmingly support [voter] ID, that they better finally get onboard and go with what the American people think is a good idea,” he said.
Here is an overview of state election reforms passed so far this year:
Alabama
A new Alabama law prohibits curbside voting and requires that applications for absentee ballots be received no less than 10 days before Election Day.
Arkansas
A new Arkansas law requires voters who cast provisional ballots to show ID by noon on the Monday after Election Day. These voters previously had only to sign a sworn statement.
A separate law puts stricter limits on ballot harvesting, the practice in which political operatives distribute and collect large quantities of absentee ballots. It also prohibits election officials from distributing unsolicited applications for absentee ballots.
Arizona
One new Arizona law requires the secretary of state to compare death records with a statewide voter registration database. Another law enhances the security of voting machines.
The Grand Canyon State also joined a trend among states by banning private money to pay for election administration. The move largely was in response to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s donating $350 million to election offices across the United States last year.
Another new Arizona law will remove the names of inactive voters from an early-voting list if they have not voted in two consecutive election cycles. And a fourth law requires voters to sign the envelope in which they submit an absentee ballot.
Florida
A new Florida law restricts ballot harvesting by allowing someone to collect absentee ballots from immediate family members, but no more than two ballots from others.
Besides banning private funding of election administration, the law requires voters to request an absentee ballot in order to receive one. It also increases security for ballot drop boxes, which debuted in the 2020 election because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Georgia
A Georgia law, among the most controversial in prompting protests, requires voter ID to cast an absentee ballot. Opponents falsely claimed the restriction amounted to “Jim Crow 2.0.”
The law establishes guidelines for ballot drop boxes, aims to shorten lines at polling places, and gives a State Election Board more oversight over county election administration.
The measure also prohibits political operatives from offering food, bottled water, or anything of value within 150 feet of polls. Only New York and Montana have similar provisions related to offering food and water in voting lines.
Idaho
Idaho is among states that responded to Zuckerberg’s big spending on election administration through the left-leaning Center for Tech and Civic Life, which distributed the money.
The Idaho Legislature passed and Gov. Brad Little, a Republican, signed SB 1168, which requires that all state elections be funded only by appropriations from federal, state, or local government entities.
Indiana
Indiana’s SB 398 prohibits local election jurisdictions from accepting or spending funds that come from private donors for the purpose of running elections. In response to the Zuckerberg donations, the new law specifies only federal, state, and local government money may be used to administer elections.
“A number of states banned private funding of election officials, election offices, which I think was something that happened in the last election [and was] unprecedented—“Zuckerbucks”—[and] raised enormous conflicts of interest and ethical problems for election officials,” von Spakovsky said.
“They have now banned that, which is a good thing,” he added. “No private party, no political candidate, should be able to give money to local election offices in a way that might influence and manipulate the outcome of the election.”
Iowa
A new law in Iowa, a battleground state in recent presidential elections, requires absentee ballots to arrive at election offices by the close of Election Day to be counted.
The measure also allows fewer early-voting days, dropping the total from 29 to 20.
Kansas
A new law in Kansas curbs ballot harvesting by limiting to 10 the number of ballots one person may return to an election office.
The Republican-controlled Legislature voted in May to override a veto of the measure by Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat.
Kentucky
Kentucky’s new law increases security for absentee ballots and requires a paper trail for voting machines. It also sets up an online portal for absentee ballot requests and adds three days to in-person early voting, up from the previous 19-day limit.
Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, signed HB 574, which was passed by the Republican-controlled General Assembly.
Louisiana
Louisiana’s new law, known as HB 167, establishes a procedure for election officials to remove dead voters from registration rolls within 30 days of receipt of a death certificate.
Montana
One new Montana law requires voters at the polls to present either a state driver’s license, a tribal photo identification card, a state ID card number, or a military ID.
Other new laws in Montana close voter registration at noon the day before an election, restrict paid ballot collectors, and allow local election officials to reduce hours at polling locations with fewer than 400 registered voters who will cast ballots in person, as long as other polling places are open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Nevada
A measure signed into law by Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak, a Democrat, increases the maximum size of an election precinct from 3,000 to 5,000 registered voters.
New Hampshire
A new law in New Hampshire, the only New England state to pass election reforms this year, requires the secretary of state to provide information on matches of death records against voter checklists.
Another law requires that those who register to vote on Election Day by using a voter affidavit or sworn statement must also have a photo taken beforehand. The Brennan Center claims the measure is among those that “restricts access to vote.”
Oklahoma
A new law in Oklahoma sets a 30-day limit for a county election board to remove dead voters from its registration list. Another law both expands early in-person voting and requires applications for absentee ballots to be received no later than 5 p.m. on the third Monday preceding an election.
A third Oklahoma law allows the State Election Board to participate in multistate organizations that maintain voter lists, such as the nonprofit Electronic Registration Information Center.
Texas
The new Texas law extends early voting hours, prohibits election clerks from mailing out an application for an absentee ballot unless a voter requests one, and bans “drive-through” voting. The measure also requires voter ID for mail-in ballots and safeguards for poll watchers.
The law also requires the Texas secretary of state to use specifics on a driver’s license to “verify the accuracy of citizenship status information previously provided on voter registration applications.”
Utah
Utah’s new law, known as HB 12, requires that the names of dead voters be removed from rolls and assigns the state’s lieutenant governor to enforce it.
The Brennan Center described the law and others removing dead people from voter rolls as a “purge.”
Wyoming
A new Wyoming law requires voters to show ID to vote in person. Acceptable forms of identification include a driver’s license, a state or tribal ID, a passport, a military ID, or one from a Wyoming public school, university, or community college.
GOP seeks Biden referendum over vaccine mandates
Congressional Republicans are blasting President Biden’s latest steps to require more people to get vaccinated against COVID-19 as “un-American” and vowing to fight back against them.
Republicans will try to push back on vaccine mandates from multiple angles through legislation they’ve introduced to ban such requirements and legal actions as they try to make the issue a referendum of Biden’s job performance ahead of the midterm elections next year.
But polling indicates that a majority of the public is on Biden’s side, with most people backing vaccine requirements for workplaces, airplanes, indoor dining at restaurants and attending events with large crowds.
While Republicans’ opposition to vaccine requirements may reflect the views of their party’s base, it risks appearing to prioritize the rights of vaccine holdouts who at this point represent a minority of the American population.
At this point, a supermajority of U.S. adults have taken steps to get inoculated against COVID-19. About 75 percent of adults have received at least one dose and 64 percent are fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Republicans are nevertheless leaning into the argument that people shouldn’t be coerced into getting vaccinated.
“To Joe Biden, force is more important than freedom. Americans won’t stand for it,” said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.).
One House Republican suggested the expanded vaccine requirements could lead to a “revolt,” while J.D. Vance, a Republican running for a Senate seat in Ohio, called for “mass civil disobedience” to “save us from Joe Biden’s naked authoritarianism.”
“Are you people trying to start a full on revolt? Honestly what the hell is wrong with Democrats? Leave people the hell alone. This is insanity,” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) wrote on Twitter.
Biden announced a requirement that all private employers with 100 employees or more must mandate vaccines or weekly testing, as well as plans to require vaccines for most federal workers and contractors. The president also said he would require employers to provide paid time off to get the vaccine and encouraged some large venues to require proof of vaccination or testing for entry.
House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) warned against a “slippery slope” in response to Biden’s announcement and said “it’s all about government control.”
“Liberals don’t care about the freedoms this country was founded on. Just their own power. Biden admitted that: ‘This is not about freedom or personal choice.’ Wake up America. It’s a slippery slope from here,” he said.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) quickly vowed to sue the Biden administration over its COVID-19 vaccine and testing mandate. RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel accused Biden of lying, saying he said upon his election that he would not impose vaccine mandates. She said the president failed to shut down the virus and that mandates will shut down small businesses.
“When his decree goes into effect, the RNC will sue the administration to protect Americans and their liberties,” she said.
Several Republican governors have also threatened to take Biden to court over requiring workers to get vaccinated, including Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem.
Biden vowed to use his power as president to get governors who won’t help beat the pandemic “out of the way.” He said on Friday that he is “so disappointed” that some Republican governors “have been so cavalier with the health of these kids,” while visiting a school in Washington, D.C.
“One of the lessons I hope our students can un-learn is that politics doesn’t have to be this way. Politics doesn’t have to be this way. They’re growing up in an environment where they see it’s like a war, like a bitter feud,” he said.
He pointed to the polling data, arguing that a majority of Americans support mandates.
A recent Gallup poll found that respondents ranged from 53 to 63 percent in favor of vaccination requirements across five different situations like air travel, dining in a restaurant or going to an office.
Polling from The Associated Press-NORC also found that half of Americans favor vaccine requirements at their workplaces, and that 59 percent back similar mandates for teachers as children return to in-person schooling across the nation.
Biden placed blame on unvaccinated Americans for prolonging the pandemic that has upended American life for the last year and a half, saying their refusal “has cost all of us” and “our patience is wearing thin.” He also admonished some elected officials for worsening the pandemic by not encouraging vaccines.
Aside from the GOP governors vowing legal action in response to Biden’s latest efforts to enforce vaccinations, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, both Republicans, had also previously enacted measures banning vaccine and mask mandates in their states.
Some top Republicans have tried to promote vaccines, albeit while stopping short of calling for mandates. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a polio survivor, has filmed a public service announcement encouraging people to get vaccinated against COVID-19.
But other Republicans continue to spread misinformation about vaccines and the pandemic. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who was temporarily suspended from Twitter this summer for violating its COVID-19 misinformation policy, said Thursday that “we should make every effort” so that hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and Regeneron’s monoclonal antibody drug are “just as available as vaccines in order to save lives.”
Health authorities have strongly advised against taking hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malaria drug, or ivermectin, which is used to treat parasitic worms, as measures for COVID-19.
The attempts by some Republicans to keep spreading misinformation has hardened Democrats’ resolve to lean into a tough stance on enforcing vaccinations as they seek to portray Republicans as catering to a radicalized minority.
“If we lose progress in our fight against this virus and getting Americans back to work there will be no wonder about who is to blame. The American people simply can’t afford to give extremist House Republicans control of Congress,” the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the House Democrats’ campaign arm, wrote in a memo.
Poll: Americans don’t think the government is doing a good job protecting their rights
A significant proportion of Americans do not think the U.S. government is doing a good job protecting many of their rights, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research nationwide poll carried out Aug. 12-16.
The poll found that only 43% think the government is doing a good job defending the right to vote, a dramatic decrease from 70% in 2015 and 2013 polls, and from 84% in 2011. The Associated Press reported that while 43% indicated the government is doing a good job defending the right to vote, 37% think Uncle Sam is doing a poor job.
Similarly, just 45% think the government is doing a good job protecting the all-important freedom of speech, while 32% indicated it’s doing a poor job. The 45% figure marks a sharp decline from 59% in 2015, 66% in 2013, and 71% in 2011.
Much the same can be said of other critical American rights, including freedom of religion and freedom of the press, which have both seen significant declines compared to past polls.
While a slim majority of 51% in the recent poll think the government is doing a good job defending religious freedom, that has fallen from 55% in 2015, 67% in 2013, and 75% in 2011. Only 44% felt that way about freedom of the press in 2021, compared to 58% in 2015, 60% in 2013, and 63% in 2011. The recent poll found that 26% feel the government is doing a poor job on protecting press freedom, according to the AP.
On the government’s performance protecting the right to keep and bear arms, sentiment has been on the downtrend. The 2021 poll found that only 35% think the government is doing a good job defending that right, a decline from 38% in 2015, 44% in 2013, and 57% in 2011. While 35% in 2021 think the government is doing a good job on the issue, 36% think it is doing a poor job. But back in 2011, 57% thought the government was doing a good job versus 27% who thought it was doing poor job on this issue.
“The nationwide poll was conducted August 12-16, 2021 using the AmeriSpeak® Panel, the probability-based panel of NORC at the University of Chicago. Online and telephone interviews using landlines and cell phones were conducted with 1,729 adults. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3.2 percentage points,” according to apnorc.org.
