H.R. 1 is the Worst Bill in 40 Years

or a 1? It is the worst bill in 40 years of covering American politics. There is nothing that has ever come close to undermining the fundamental foundation of our democracy, our republic, and our freedoms.

I just want to tell my listeners that having spoken to you many times, you tend toward the understated in your approach. So this gives what you're saying all the more credibility and power. So, okay, let's review why it is so damaging and truly damaging. Before we do, maybe there's an even bigger question. What is the purpose of the bill?

The public stated purpose or the private behind-the-curtain purpose?

Well, I get— I was thinking of the latter, but let's do both.

Well, of course we— it's for the people. It's called the For the People Act. It's going to expand voting. It's going to stop nefarious Republican efforts to prevent voter fraud, which is obviously voter suppression. And it's going to bring new transparency to American politics, and it's going to crack down on corporate evildoers who are trying to influence our politics. That's the public stated purpose, right?

Okay, but in fact, what is it for?

It's a grab for one-party rule. It so tilts the political playing field in the direction of one party, which is why not a single Republican voted for it, that it would effectively create what I would— what I call a one-and-a-half-party democracy. You'd have one party that is so advantaged and has so turned the wheels of democracy in its direction, uh, that you can't really count on a free and fair vote.

Okay, so the— is there— and this may be a naive question— is there one Democrat in the House that has misgivings about this bill?

Oh, there are dozens, absolutely. I mean, there are There are Democrats I've talked to who say, you know, the only reason I'm voting for this is because Nancy Pelosi ordered me to, and you cannot cross the Queen, and I believe the Senate will kill it.

Will the Senate kill it?

Probably, but you can't be sure of that, because you have Democrats saying this is such an important bill, maybe we won't get rid of the filibuster, but maybe we'll find some way for just this one bill to get around the filibuster so we can pass it with 50 votes plus vice president.

There will not be one Democratic senator who will vote the other way?

It's possible that you may get one or two, but only after it's clear that there's public opposition. That's why it's important for your listeners to oppose this bill, because the more that people learn about this bill, the less they will like it. The less they will like it, the more they will protest it, and the more some Democrats in moderate states, uh, I'm thinking of Senator Sinema, I think of Arizona, Senator Manchin of West Virginia, Senator, uh, Tester of Montana. They may decide this is an HR1 too far and not vote for it, but they first come, must come the public opposition.

Okay, there is— I want to get to the details for people to understand that this is pure corruption. in the purest sense, that corruption has come to America.

It is Tammany Hall nationwide. Tammany Hall was the old Democratic machine that used to steal votes with a bandit in New York City, and it was known as the antithesis of free and fair elections. This— I mean, just for— let's look at, for starters, Dennis, just starters, there are 32 states that have voter ID laws of some form or another. This bill would say all of those laws, we are overriding them. We are overriding all of those 32 state laws with a diktat from Washington, and we're going to declare that no matter what your state legislature or your voters have passed, anyone could avoid the voter ID requirement by just signing a piece of paper saying, yeah, I am whom I say I am.

All right, hold it there, please. John Fund is my guest. My obvious question is, why is this even constitutional? Isn't it up to the states to make their voting laws? And now, R-E-L-I-E-F-F-A-C-T-O-R, relief.