re: Massie the only republican to vote against the SAVE Act

He voted for the bill though, and it passed.

SAVE ACT is DOA in the senate. They aren’t going to nuke the filibuster and they won’t get 60. The republicans are trying to take the high road but the next time Dems are in control filibuster is gone and they are packing the Supreme Court. This will end our country.

quote:

---

SAVE ACT is DOA in the senate

---

Possibly. But this thread was about Massie, and the record needed to be set straight.

quote:

---

Supporting states rights to cheat in national elections is a far left position.

---

I would just say it enables the far left and accelerates the failure of our flawed constitutional system.

quote:

---

Bad logic and ignoring what I said

This is not w binary scenario

If 60 is impossible, then you have to wait until it is possible or modify the legislation to make it more palatable

---

In other words, you accept it because there are only 2 choices here: Fix it or don't fix it.

Liberals don't want to fix it, as it's their tool for power.
Libertarians understand that about Liberals, but don't want to fix it because of muh principles.
Conservatives want to fix this, but cant because of the other 2 groups.

quote:

---

There's a false rumor that I voted against the Save America Act yesterday. I voted for it on the floor.

I voted against a "rule" that allows it to get a vote, but the "rule" also suspends house rules and allows spending bills to come to the floor with no 24hr notice!

This is what I voted against. It's not a bill, it's a modification of House rules.

---

LINK

quote:

---

A leftist doesnt want to STOP destructive growth of the government. I do,and this is the only way.

---

You guys are making the exact same argument as quoted above.

quote:

---

In other words, you accept it because there are only 2 choices here: Fix it or don't fix it.

Liberals don't want to fix it, as it's their tool for power.
Libertarians understand that about Liberals, but don't want to fix it because of muh principles.
Conservatives want to fix this, but cant because of the other 2 groups.

---

That you think there is a difference between libertarian and conservative is funny.

quote:

---

The populist position is to expand government.

---

Not necessarily.

Populist positions are based on whims and personal preference, not foundational philosophical principles like, "Smaller government."

Populists argued for smaller government during COVID lockdowns, for example.

All that's irrelevant anyway, because what a populist may choose to argue in favor of isn't the question—that changes like I change my shirt. The question is to what authority does a populist appeal for whatever argument he feels like making on any given day.

Like you, it isn't the Constitution. It's personal preference.

Massie has a legit argument against federalization of elections from a constitutional perspective. The federal government is attempting to regulate something which they were not granted power to do via Article 1: Section 8 of the Constitution. As a result, the power to do so should be reserved for the States under the 10th Amendment.

However, I would offer a constitutional argument rebutting his reasoning. The 15th Amendment prevents federal and state governments from denying a citizen the right to vote based on “race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” Every fraudulent vote cast, or vote cast by a non-citizen effectively nullifies the vote of a citizen, thereby denying that right. Congress is empowered under the 15th Amendment to pass legislation to enforce this mandate upon the states. Just as the federal government was empowered to force states to integrate their schools, they can be forced to secure their elections in order to ensure that citizens votes are not being changed or nullified.