Once again king-in-waiting has taken out his magic Sharpie and signed yet another EO (how many is that now?)….this time another wasted time and something for him to go on about…..voting.
President Trump signed a sweeping executive action Tuesday to overhaul elections in the US, including requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and demanding that all ballots be received by Election Day. The order says the US has failed “to enforce basic and necessary election protections” and calls on states to work with federal agencies to share voter lists and prosecute election crimes. It threatens to pull federal funding from states where election officials don’t comply. Trump says more election actions will be taken in the coming weeks.
- The move, which is likely to face swift challenges from voting rights organizations, is consistent with Trump’s long history of railing against election processes, the AP reports. He often claims elections are being rigged, even before the results are known, and has waged battles against certain voting methods since he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden and falsely blamed it on widespread fraud.
- Trump has focused particularly on mail voting, arguing without evidence that it’s insecure and invites fraud even as he has shifted his position on the issue given its popularity with voters, including Republicans. While fraud occurs, it’s rare, limited in scope and gets prosecuted, reports the AP. The Wall Street Journalnotes that it’s already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, and studies have found no evidence of ineligible people voting in numbers large enough to affect election outcomes.
- The Guardian describes many of the provisions in the order as “legally suspect” because the Constitution gives states and Congress, not the president, the authority to set election rules.
- “The short answer is that this executive order, like all too many that we’ve seen before, is lawless and asserts all sorts of executive authority that he most assuredly does not have,” says voting rights lawyer Danielle Lang at the Campaign Legal Center nonprofit.
How much longer will this country have to suffer from these senseless acts and get about the business of actually running, not ruining, the country?
Finally, just what the Hell is Congress doing?
Is Trump trying to male our reps obsolete?
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”
I suspect it will be almost impossible to get Trump to stop signing E.O’s as he thinks it legitimises himself. It’s important that people let him see their disapproval, not that it will stop him trying to fix it that he can never lose an election again. If he can’t be King he would want to settle on President for life like Putin. It must not ve allowed to happen.
I agree….he must be stopped or at least slow down a bit. chuq
I suspect Trump ‘knows’ his limits, like the brain child here knows..
I read only the first few lines to dismiss the post as honest elections is the most obvious move needed to secure anything like a “democracy”, and everybody agrees with the requirements needed and HAS for quite some time.
How honest are the elections? They find problems that do not exist and change the habits of the voter…..not a good look chuq
…just what the Hell is Congress doing? THAT is the $64,000 question!
Then again, it could be answered thus: The Republicans are busy kissing T’s ass; the Democrats are hiding in the WH basement.
Nan I could not have said it better….well done chuq
We have voter ID in this country now, but only photo proof of identity is required, for example a driving licence. There is no citizenship requirement, just a residence requirement. Proving citizenship is going to stop a lot of people voting, which I am sure is their aim.
Best wishes, Pete.
It is there aim and it will probably effect Dems more so than others. chuq
The Election Assistance Commission is an independent agency created by congress. So far the Supreme Court has let those type of agencies operate outside the Executive Branch control. The constitution does not authorize congress to do that. The Supreme Court could change the way they are run and say the executive branch has jurisdiction over running them as an executive function of government.. That would be a big change in how parts of our government operates.
I have little faith in the Court to carry out wishes of the Constitution….they are now just political hacks. chuq
It sounds like you’re frustrated with the current political situation, particularly with President Trump’s latest executive order on election reforms. You’ve raised some big questions about the state of the country, Congress’s role, and Trump’s intentions. Let’s break this down a bit.
The executive order you’re referencing—signed on March 25, 2025, based on the timeline—aims to tighten federal election rules, like requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration and setting strict ballot deadlines. Trump’s pushing it as a fix for what he calls lax election security, but critics, as you’ve noted, argue it’s overreach. The Constitution does give states and Congress primary authority over elections (Article I, Section 4), so legal challenges are almost guaranteed—voting rights groups are likely already gearing up. The AP and others point out that non-citizen voting is already illegal and rare, with studies showing it’s not a game-changer in outcomes. Mail-in voting fraud? Also prosecuted when it happens, but not widespread. So, the debate’s heating up over whether this is a solution looking for a problem or a power grab dressed as reform.
As for how long the country will “suffer” through this—hard to say. Trump’s got a track record of using executive orders to make bold moves, especially when Congress drags its feet. Since taking office in January 2025, this could be his third or fourth EO, depending on how fast he’s been signing them (he averaged about 55 per year in his first term, for context). If he’s planning more election-related actions, as the order hints, this could drag on through the year, especially with midterms looming in 2026.
Congress? Good question. Right now, they’re probably split along party lines. Republicans might be cheering this or at least staying quiet to keep Trump’s base happy, while Democrats are likely plotting pushback—legislation, lawsuits, or just loud criticism. But Congress has been gridlocked on election reform for years; the 2021 For the People Act stalled out, and smaller bills since then haven’t gotten traction. If they’re not acting, it’s partly because they’re stuck in the same partisan muck as always. Trump’s move might be a jab at their inaction, but it’s not like he’s making their job obsolete—more like he’s daring them to respond.
Is he trying to sideline reps entirely? Maybe not explicitly, but centralizing election oversight under the executive branch does shift power away from states and Congress. It’s a pattern with him—using EOs to bypass legislative roadblocks. Whether that’s “ruining” the country or just running it his way depends on where you stand.
You’ve got a lot of passion in your post—love the “magic Sharpie” jab. What do you think Congress should do to get back in the game here? Or are you just venting (totally fair if so)?
It sounds like you’re frustrated with the current political situation, particularly with President Trump’s latest executive order on election reforms. You’ve raised some big questions about the state of the country, Congress’s role, and Trump’s intentions. Let’s break this down a bit.
The executive order you’re referencing—signed on March 25, 2025, based on the timeline—aims to tighten federal election rules, like requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration and setting strict ballot deadlines. Trump’s pushing it as a fix for what he calls lax election security, but critics, as you’ve noted, argue it’s overreach. The Constitution does give states and Congress primary authority over elections (Article I, Section 4), so legal challenges are almost guaranteed—voting rights groups are likely already gearing up. The AP and others point out that noncitizen voting is already illegal and rare, with studies showing it’s not a game-changer in outcomes. Mail-in voting fraud? Also prosecuted when it happens, but not widespread. So, the debate’s heating up over whether this is a solution looking for a problem or a power grab dressed as reform.
As for how long the country will “suffer” through this—hard to say. Trump’s got a track record of using executive orders to make bold moves, especially when Congress drags its feet. Since taking office in January 2025, this could be his third or fourth EO, depending on how fast he’s been signing them (he averaged about 55 per year in his first term, for context). If he’s planning more election-related actions, as the order hints, this could drag on through the year, especially with midterms looming in 2026.
Congress? Good question. Right now, they’re probably split along party lines. Republicans might be cheering this or at least staying quiet to keep Trump’s base happy, while Democrats are likely plotting pushback—legislation, lawsuits, or just loud criticism. But Congress has been gridlocked on election reform for years; the 2021 For the People Act stalled out, and smaller bills since then haven’t gotten traction. If they’re not acting, it’s partly because they’re stuck in the same partisan muck as always. Trump’s move might be a jab at their inaction, but it’s not like he’s making their job obsolete—more like he’s daring them to respond.
Is he trying to sideline reps entirely? Maybe not explicitly, but centralizing election oversight under the executive branch does shift power away from states and Congress. It’s a pattern with him—using EOs to bypass legislative roadblocks. Whether that’s “ruining” the country or just running it his way depends on where you stand.
You’ve got a lot of passion in your post—love the “magic Sharpie” jab. What do you think Congress should do to get back in the game here? Or are you just venting (totally fair if so)?
A great question….I keep waiting for the Dems to show some cajones but they continue to just plug along waiting for something to happen instead of making something. chuq
“…and studies have found no evidence of ineligible people voting in numbers large enough to affect election outcomes.” Oh, I see. A little bit of fraud is OK right ? In 2000, they gave Florida to Bush over Gore by roughly 488 votes. That’s about 8 votes per county !
Carl there has been minor fraud ever since we got the vote….but I do not think it is rampant. chuq