 |
| Republican National Committee Chair Michael Whatley |
The Republican National Committee has sent a letter to the Maryland State Board of Elections demanding it "clean up voter rolls." RNC Chair Michael Whatley said the notice letter informs the SBE that it is "violating federal law" in failing to do so previously. It's unclear what will happen if the SBE ignores the letter. A previous attempt by the conservative organization Judicial Watch to purge the names of dead or out-of-state voters from the Maryland rolls was unsuccessful. Judicial Watch's analysis at the time found there were more names registered to vote than actual voters in Maryland.
"Maryland is failing to maintain accurate and up-to-date voter rolls, in clear violation of federal law," Whatley said in a statement. "Citizens deserve to know their vote isn't being canceled out by duplicate or ineligible voters."
No Republican has won any office in Montgomery County since Maryland switched from punch card voting to electronic voting in 2006. Only four years earlier, County Republicans held at least two seats on the Montgomery County Council, several seats in the state legislature, and at least one Congressional seat.
4 comments:
Why would the democrats want to do this? They gerrymandered Morella out and aim to keep hold of power in MD by getting the votes of everyone, dead or alive.
"Judicial Watch's analysis at the time found there were more names registered to vote than actual voters in Maryland." This analysis assumes that if you didn't vote your name should be automatically deleted from the voting list, which is totally inaccurate. As a charity foundation Judicial Watch has a extremely poor rating and simply seeks stoke mistrust in government.
No Republican has won in this county since 2006 perhaps because they have no viable candidate to compete in a majority Democratically populated county. Your hypothesis or comparison is as weak as the efforts of Whatley and Judicial Watch combined with this failed attempt at stoking distrust in our voting process.
6:17: The facts: JW's analysis was that registration rates exceeded the eligible citizen voting population, which they calculated using US Census Bureau data.
The SBE chose to pay JW $27,000 in taxpayer funds in a settlement, rather than simply clean up its database.
Your definition of "viable candidates" is unclear, but sounds out of date in the era of AOC, Zohran Mamdani, MTG, and Lauren Boebert. They are winning on messaging, not resumes or "experience."
3:03: JW's actions have included initiating lawsuits concerning state voter rolls, often characterized as challenging voter roll maintenance procedures. These lawsuits are perceived by some as attempts to disrupt the election process during critical periods by raising concerns about "dirty voting rolls" and seeking to prompt counties to update or purge their voter rolls, contributing to broader debates regarding election integrity. The assertion that inactive voters indicate systemic issues is contested, as such statuses may result from outdated administrative procedures. Many jurisdictions targeted by JW resolved these matters through consent agreements or saw cases dismissed; JW has cited these outcomes as successes in support of their positions.
In this context my use of "viable" is defined as a candidate whose platform addresses the needs and preferences of their constituents during an election cycle. There is concern that certain candidates, such as MTG and LB, do not focus on constituent needs and instead employ vicious rhetoric that only serves to increase and further stoke division within the country.
Post a Comment