Politics
Contributor: Federal power grabs on elections are not about fraud
Fans of the musical “Hamilton” know three things about the nation’s first Treasury secretary because of Lin-Manuel Miranda’s brilliance. First, that Alexander Hamilton cheated on his wife, Eliza. Second, he was killed by the vice president, Aaron Burr. Third, and most importantly, he was considered a highly principled man. And when it came to the topic of nationalizing elections, do you know how this Revolutionary War vet and founding father characterized doing so?
A threat.
Referring to corruptible public officials, Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers: No 59: “With so effectual a weapon in their hands as the exclusive power of regulating elections for the national government, a combination of a few such men, in a few of the most considerable States, where the temptation will always be the strongest, might accomplish the destruction of the Union, by seizing the opportunity of some casual dissatisfaction among the people to discontinue the choice.”
Hamilton’s prescient views became the framework for the Election Clause in the Constitution. And since returning to the White House, President Trump has been searching for ways to usurp it. Last month he made calls to nationalize elections. This month he’s at it again.
He’s also pushing Congress to pass his so-called SAVE Act, which would require voters to show proof of citizenship when they register to vote. It sounds innocuous until you realize a driver’s license isn’t good enough; a passport would often be required. But half the country doesn’t have a passport, and it costs roughly $200 and a few weeks to get one. The logistical burden is unreasonable and cruel: Consider that this year, during primary season, we’ve already witnessed natural disaster — such as the tornadoes that recently ripped through the Midwest or the fires in Texas — upend entire communities. Many people would not have been able to vote, simply because they had been separated from their papers during the disaster.
The financial obstacles that would be created by the SAVE Act are at least as onerous: Why would Congress choose to financially burden voters — with what is essentially an unlawful poll tax — at a time when the unemployment rate and gas prices are up and the approval rating for nearly everyone in office is down? There are a couple of reasons. One is that the party controlling Congress hopes to suppress voting in order to defy the will of the American majority and cling to power.
Another reason lawmakers support this terrible bill is simply that Trump wants it. Some Republicans in office are so afraid of angering a vengeful president that they would rather entertain his authoritarian tendencies than go through the fire of his opposition during a primary.
For politicians such as Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who this week changed his long-held position on the filibuster in order to push the SAVE Act, it’s simply about political survival. He needs the president’s endorsement heading into the runoff for his Senate seat.
Trump has called the election overhaul bill his top priority — not the war he started with Iran, not returning the billions collected from illegal tariffs, not justice for Jeffrey Epstein’s victims. Before there was a Constitution, there was a warning, written by Hamilton and other founders, whose concerns about nationalized elections are well documented and have proved to be well founded.
You would think a nation in the midst of beating its proverbial chest about our 250th birthday would take more heed from the country’s founders. But nope: This week Florida state lawmakers, in an attempt to appease their state’s most powerful resident, passed an election overhaul law that mirrors the federal SAVE Act. More red states are likely to follow, not because a national wave of voter fraud has been unearthed by authorities, but because the authorities want to stay in the good graces of someone who has yet to prove any widespread fraud other than his own.
The party that famously railed against “the bridge to nowhere” is now offering bills that solve nonexistent problems. Or in some cases, creating problems, particularly for women who changed their names after marriage so their state IDs don’t match their birth certificates.
Cornyn is not alone in exchanging his principles for Trump’s favor; he’s just the most recent. However, the manner in which he announced his flip flop was particularly tone deaf.
“If a man takes a swing at you and barely misses, that doesn’t make him a pacifist — it just means he has bad aim,” Cornyn wrote in an op-ed about the bill for the New York Post, the newspaper founded by Hamilton in 1801. “Standing still and giving him a second free swing wouldn’t be wise or honorable: it would be foolish.”
In 2016, then-candidate Trump took his first big swing at our elections when he implied — without evidence — that his opponent, Sen. Ted Cruz, had rigged the election after losing to him in the Iowa Republican caucus. Reportedly Trump even tried to get the state’s party chair to overturn the result. He’s been throwing jabs at our elections ever since. The Jan. 6 riot was a haymaker that barely missed. Given the president’s propensity to hand out Trump 2028 hats, it seems passing the SAVE Act would be, in Cornyn’s words, setting voters up to stand there while Trump takes another swing at our democracy.
YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
-
Alexander Hamilton, writing in Federalist No. 59, warned that exclusive state power over federal elections posed an existential threat to the Union, cautioning that “a combination of a few such men, in a few of the most considerable States” could “accomplish the destruction of the Union” through control of election regulations[1]
-
The SAVE Act requiring proof of citizenship to vote imposes unreasonable logistical and financial burdens on voters, effectively functioning as a poll tax by requiring passports costing approximately $200 that roughly half the country does not possess[1]
-
Natural disasters and unforeseen circumstances already disrupt voting access, and citizenship verification requirements would further prevent Americans from voting by separating them from necessary documentation during emergencies such as tornadoes or fires[1]
-
The stated rationale for election overhaul legislation—addressing voter fraud—is not supported by evidence, as authorities have failed to unearth a national wave of voter fraud despite repeated claims[1]
-
Republicans supporting the SAVE Act are motivated by partisan interests rather than election security concerns, with some lawmakers abandoning long-held principles to secure Trump’s political endorsement during primary races[1]
-
Election nationalization efforts represent an authoritarian threat to democracy that the nation’s founders specifically warned against, making it imperative to heed historical lessons about centralized electoral control[1]
Different views on the topic
-
Hamilton argued in the Federalist Papers that the national government required ultimate authority over election regulations to prevent state legislatures from abandoning their responsibility to choose federal representatives, which could render “the existence of the Union entirely at their mercy”[4]
-
The Constitution’s design allocates election regulation authority primarily to states with a federal backstop, recognizing that the national government must possess a check on state power to maintain union stability and prevent states from exploiting their regulatory control[3][4]
-
Federalist No. 60 establishes that the system of separated powers—with the House elected directly by people, the Senate by state legislatures, and the president by electors—creates structural safeguards preventing any single faction from monopolizing electoral control[2]
-
Voter identification requirements serve legitimate election integrity purposes, with proponents arguing that citizenship verification represents a reasonable measure to ensure eligible voter participation[1]
new video loaded: Steve Hilton Holds Slim Early Lead in California Governor’s Race
transcript
transcript
Steve Hilton Holds Slim Early Lead in California Governor’s Race
Steve Hilton, a Republican and former Fox News host, held a narrow lead in early votes over two Democratic opponents in California’s nonpartisan primary for governor. The top two candidates will advance to the general election in November.
-
“Change is coming to California, and it’s long overdue. I want to just say something from my heart to every single person who’s voted for me. We’re not — We’re not there yet, but it’s looking good.” [cheers] “Tonight, the people of the great state of California, in the greatest nation on earth, have spoken. [cheers] Loudly and proudly. [cheers] And while I take nothing for granted, there are lots of ballots left to be counted, it appears that we are on track to advance to November.” [cheers] “It might take some time to figure out where this is going. We’re going to wait until every ballot is counted. We’re going to give democracy a time to work, and we know we finished really strong.” [cheers]
By Axel Boada
June 3, 2026
Politics
Spencer Pratt surges to runoff in LA mayor’s race after angry voters send message to Karen Bass
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Reality television personality Spencer Pratt appears on track to clear a key hurdle in Los Angeles’ mayoral race as he seeks to unseat incumbent Mayor Karen Bass in November.
Bass, who has led the city since 2022 amid a turbulent stretch rocked by her response to wildfires, advanced to a runoff after failing to secure a majority of the vote in Tuesday’s primary election. With no candidate surpassing the 50% threshold, the top two finishers will face off in a November runoff.
The anticipated runoff is a symbolic blow to Bass, who was endorsed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, D-Calif., and former Vice President Kamala Harris and has spent decades serving California in a series of elected Democratic offices.
Pratt, a first-time candidate known for the MTV reality show “The Hills,” was running in second place as of Wednesday morning.
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass attends the Women for Bass Phone bank event in the Baldwin Hills area of Los Angeles on June 1, 2026. (Louise Barnsley/Splash for Fox News Digital)
REALITY TV STAR SPENCER PRATT TESTS LA VOTERS’ APPETITE FOR POLITICAL OUTSIDER
“Obviously, God wanted five more months of me exposing the failures of our mayor,” Pratt gloated to reporters as the returns came in Tuesday evening.
Pratt has relentlessly hammered Bass on issues that have long plagued the city, including fire recovery, street homelessness and crime. The insurgent candidate holds Bass personally responsible for devastating wildfires that destroyed more than 18,000 structures in the city, including his Pacific Palisades home.
Pratt’s surge appears to have shut out Los Angeles City Council member Nithya Raman, a former ally of Bass who challenged the incumbent from the left and was once viewed as a threat to her bid for a second term. Raman is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America and has argued for steering the city in a more progressive direction.
Raman has not yet conceded despite running well behind Bass and Pratt as of Wednesday morning.
Pratt, a registered Republican, faces an uphill battle to defeat Bass in November if he advances to the runoff election.
Less than 20% of voters in the heavily Democratic city identify with the GOP, though Los Angeles’ mayoral contest is officially nonpartisan.
Media personality and independent candidate Spencer Pratt, left, pictured alongside LA mayor Karen Bass, right. (Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images; Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
KAREN BASS GRILLED OVER BROKEN HOMELESSNESS PROMISE, BLAMES BUREAUCRACY FOR SLOWED PROGRESS
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who represents a San Diego-anchored seat, told Fox News Digital that Pratt has won a following in the mayoral contest due to widespread voter discontent with Bass’ leadership.
“He’s catching fire among ardent historic Democrat voters because Karen Bass has been so ineffective,” Issa said in an interview. “And every time she opens her mouth, she’s talking about more of the same to people who have seen their streets, both crime-ridden and in fact … ineffectively managed.”
Bass, conversely, argues that her leadership is leading Los Angeles in the right direction.
“Los Angeles is at a turning point. After decades of rising homelessness, under-built housing and a shrinking police force, it’s Mayor Karen Bass who finally stepped up to change how City Hall works,” Bass’s website reads.
Los Angeles City Councilmember Nithya Raman appears likely to finish in third place, keeping her out of the November runoff. (Eric Thayer/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Homelessness is down, more housing is being built, and the LAPD is hiring new officers,” it also claims.
Fox News Digital’s Leo Briceno contributed reporting.
Los Angeles County’s half-cent sales tax to fund healthcare services was trailing Tuesday, with early returns showing a majority of voters rejecting the measure.
The tax — a half-penny of every dollar spent in the county — is meant to prop up local hospitals and clinics that are hemorrhaging funding after recent federal cuts.
The sales tax, which needs a simple majority to pass, would take effect Oct. 1 and last five years. Officials say it would pull in $1 billion annually to help plug the budget holes hitting local hospitals and clinics.
L.A. County health officials anticipate the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law by President Trump last summer, will slash more than $2 billion from the county’s health services budget within the next three years. Due to eligibility changes, the county will no longer be able to get reimbursements for many Californians who have lost Medi-Cal.
The measure was championed by a coalition of healthcare advocates called Restore Healthcare for Angelenos who warned that mass layoffs and emergency room closures could be imminent if new funding didn’t come fast. The Department of Public Health recently closed seven clinics — a grim sign, supporters said, of service cuts to come.
Voters haven’t rejected a sales tax hike since 2012, when a transportation measure fell just short with 66.1% support. It needed 66.7% to pass.
A majority of county supervisors had supported the new tax proposal, voting 4 to 1 this February to put it on the ballot. But the measure faced significant opposition from local cities, with opponents arguing the sales tax hike would unfairly burden the poorest county residents and encourage people to spend their dollars across the county line.
Supervisor Kathryn Barger, the board’s lone opponent of the tax, said she was concerned it was a “general” tax, meaning the money wouldn’t be earmarked for healthcare costs. Instead, she argued, politicians would have final say over how the money gets spent.
The supervisors have created a plan for spending the tax money, with the largest chunk of the money meant to cover the costs for patients without insurance. The measure also asked voters to sign off on a nine-member oversight committee.
The county currently has a base sales tax rate of 9.75%, and cities impose local taxes on top of that.
-
New Mexico19 seconds agoCumbres & Toltec to begin summer season June 9
-
North Carolina3 minutes ago‘Bonsai in the Blue Ridge’ exhibit brings dozens of displays to North Carolina Arboretum
-
North Dakota8 minutes agoAnd he’s off
-
Ohio15 minutes agoThe purge? Ohio moves to downgrade non-domiciled CDLs
-
Oklahoma18 minutes agoWhat Oklahoma Does Better Than Texas and Why It Matters
-
Oregon23 minutes agoAmid warnings of future cuts, University of Oregon trustees approve next year’s budget
-
Pennsylvania30 minutes agoState Awards Contract To Resurface Major Doylestown Borough Street
-
Rhode Island33 minutes agoShifting Sands in Rhode Island – Rhode Island Monthly
