Letter from RNLA Founding Chair Bob Horn on Ron Hicks Winning Chairman's Award

Dear Michael,

I am especially pleased that the Republican National Lawyers Association has selected Ron Hicks to be the second recipient of the Robert J. Horn Chairman’s Award.  Ron personifies the attributes and skills that all of us at RNLA value in terms of insuring the accuracy and honesty of elections and the election process.  The RNLA has a targeted set of missions - all complementary, and none of which duplicate missions accomplished elsewhere.  From my perspective, its most important mission is to ensure open, fair and honest elections at all levels of American society in a non-discriminatory manner and to provide access to the polls to all qualified and eligible voters.

Your participation in this Seminar evidences your desire to accomplish this mission by receiving election law training from our members who are among the most qualified election law professionals from all over the country. Through the efforts of volunteers like Ron Hicks, we have been able to respond to requests for assistance from Republican Party organizations and its candidates by communicating the requests to all of you and having you volunteer and work pro bono to address these concerns.

I was introduced to Ron by Heather Heidelbaugh, on election day 2004, when I went to Pittsburgh to help out by working in the call center they created to protect the honesty of the presidential election process. What I discovered, was an efficient and well run operation that anticipated many of the issues that arose or could have arisen as a result of Democrat initiatives to change the outcome of the electoral process. Ron and Heather were the lead counsels at the time and Ron represented the campaign by requesting expedited decisions from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court under the Pennsylvania Election Code.  His success in handling these matter before Democrat Supreme Court Justices contributed greatly to ensuring a positive electoral outcome.

Since then Ron has continued to contribute greatly to the Republican Party in Pennsylvania and to the RNLA. In addition to having a successful  private practice, Ron has worked as Co-General Counsel and as a member of the Board of Governors for the Republican National Lawyers Association.  He is a founding board member and former chair of the RNLA’s Pittsburgh Chapter.  He serves as the Deputy Solicitor for Western Pennsylvania for the Pennsylvania Republican State Committee, and is an elected member of the Republican Committees of Allegheny County and Pittsburgh, and the County Committee’s Solicitor and chair of the City Committee’s 3rd Council District in Pennsylvania. 

As a result of what he accomplished and for everything he has done, I am especially pleased and honored that Ron has been selected as the second recipient of the RNLA’s Robert J Horn Founding Chairman’s award.  Although I am saddened that I cannot join you at the conference this year, I wish you great success and hope that I can join you next time.   Best wishes to all of you, especially Ron and hope that all of you will find the time to help the Republican cause in the upcoming mid-term election. 

Sincerely,

Bob Horn

Promising Start to Protecting Freedom Through Election Integrity

RNLA Vice President for Communications Ron Hicks wrote today about how important election integrity is to securing our freedom through the ballot box and how the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity is beginning its important work to help states better administer their elections:

Last week, Commission Vice Chair and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach sent a letter to chief election officials in every state that set off another round of manufactured, faux outrage and misleading headlines.  What was in this letter that had everyone up in arms? A request for input from the states on a variety of election administration questions and suggestions about how the Commission could best help the states, and a request that the states provide already publicly available voter data. 

Unlike previous presidential election commissions, this Commission is taking the unprecedented step of not only recognizing states’ primary role in administering and protecting the integrity of elections, but in also asking states how the Commission can be of help to them.  Instead of taking a top-down (federal-to-state) approach, the Commission has given the states the opportunity to participate in the process and has asked for their input in recommending goals for the Commission. . . . The second part of the letter asks each state to provide “publicly available voter roll data for [your state], including, if publicly available under the laws of your state,” personal data typically recorded as part of a voter’s voter registration record.  As stated twice in that short portion of the request, the Commission is requesting only publicly available voter registration data. . . . 

Sadly—as has been far too common in recent months—the mainstream media’s reporting has twisted the letter into a threat by the Trump administration to gather and publish confidential information about every voter in the country.  Headlines tout the states’ non-compliance with the letter, claiming that some 44 states plus the District of Columbia are refusing to provide the information requested by the Commission. 

The truth is that 29 states are providing publicly available voter registration information, as determined by their state’s law, and just 18 states are not providing the data.  This is hardly the massive, overwhelming resistance to the Commission portrayed in the media.  And this is only part of the whole picture.  State laws in Tennessee and North Dakota do not allow release of voter registration data to the Commission. Yet, these states are being portrayed by media as being non-compliant when, in fact, their hands are just tied by their own laws.

The RNLA will highlight the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity's actions here and in our weekly Daily Caller column.

Trump Wants to Fix Elections with Integrity Commission; Left Says Election Integrity Study Will Pollute Our Water?!?

RNLA Vice President for Communications Ron Hicks wrote praising President Trump for formally announcing his Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity earlier today:

This study, and the recommendations for reform and better practices that will come from it, is long overdue.  Only 30% of Americans expressed confidence in the “honesty of elections,” according to a recent Gallup poll. 

Like the response to any action by President Trump, we can expect manufactured public outcry from the left, likely centered on the fact that the commission will investigate problems of vote fraud as part of its mission.  The activists on the left who deny the existence of vote fraud despite evidence to the contrary will decry the commission, even though vote fraud is a non-partisan issue. 

A typical overreaction from the left is here: the Friends of the Earth think a commission on election integrity is a partisan action that somehow destroys the environment:  

By signing this order, Trump is using his office to silence voters and is ignoring Americans demanding action to address climate change, protect our drinking water, and ensure the food our children eat is safe.

In reality, as Hicks explains, it is non-partisan:   

Why is it non-partisan?  Because vote fraud takes many different forms and is a much broader problem than the voter impersonation fraud often discussed in the news—when someone shows up at the polls pretending to be a legitimate voter and votes in his or her name.  When vote fraud occurs, it cancels out the vote of someone voting for a different candidate.  It’s a broad problem that affects honest voters broadly.  And no voter who has taken the time to research the candidates and issues and vote wants to know that a fraudulent vote has negated his or her vote. 

The best example of the non-partisan nature of the study is Secretary of State Bill Gardner.  Gardner has been Secretary of State of New Hampshire since 1976 during very Democrat and very Republican swings in the New Hampshire electorate.  Gardner is just one of the qualified Secretaries of State on the commission who act in a non-partisan manner for election integrity:  

Commission member Democrat New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner understands this well.  His party affiliation does not prevent him from caring deeply about the integrity of New Hampshire elections and working tirelessly to ensure that eligible votes from New Hampshire citizens are counted and not canceled by fraudulent votes. . . . Commission vice chair Kris Kobach, Kansas Secretary of State, also has worked for years to improve the integrity of elections not just in Kansas but around the country.  He founded, and his office administers, the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck (IVRC) program, which compares voter registration databases from member states to identify possible errors and duplicate registrations.

We look forward to to reviewing the findings and recommendations of the commission and working together with election officials to ensure that the problems that harm the integrity of our elections are eliminated or reduced to protect the lawful votes of all eligible voters.

Partisanship and Hypocrisy on Free Speech by FEC Democrats Should Concern Citizens

RNLA Vice President for Communications Ron Hicks wrote about the dangers of partisanship and hypocrisy regarding free speech from the Democrats at the FEC:

In the name of democracy and equal speech, campaign finance “reformers” demand broad power for the FEC to regulate the political speech of average citizens, organizations, and corporations, requiring disclosure, repeated filings, and compliance with complicated regulations (that not even the FEC understands), while asserting freedom and anonymity rights for their own political speech. This hypocrisy has been demonstrated numerous times in recent months. . . .  

Part of this desire to investigate and regulate political speech on the Internet is to defeat anonymity through requiring registration and disclosure with the FEC. This would be especially hypocritical if Center for Public Integrity’s supposition is true and former Commissioner Ravel is involved with the altFEC account. . . . 

Strong partisanship on the part of FEC Democrats shakes the public’s confidence that the FEC will apply the law equally without regard to partisan or policy goals. And when the “reform” community within and without the FEC applies different standards for speech and anonymity to themselves and others, it not only further de-legitimizes the agency but also reveals the “reform” movement’s goal: to silence speakers that disagree with them through actual or threatened government regulation.

In the end, the question is whether Americans should be concerned about the strong partisanship of this FEC’s Democrats. In my opinion, the answer should be “yes,” because the reformers’ right to speak in the name of democracy should not be greater than the right of those in the democracy who disagree with them.  

Last week, we covered this partisanship and hypocrisy in detail, as Ron does in his op-ed:

Left Reveals View of FEC as Tool to Oppose Republicans 

FEC Commissioner Weintraub: Using FEC Resources to Engage in Partisan Activity 

FEC Commissioner Weintraub: Hypocrite on Speech Seeks Control Over All Aspects of Federal Elections

We hope that the Democrat FEC commissioners, including whomever is selected to replace former Commissioner Ann Ravel, will reduce their strident partisanship and apply consistent standards to restore public confidence in the FEC's ability to interpret and apply the law fairly.