Will John Merrill get blamed

In 2020 the most important task for Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill is to assure there is good election in Alabama, and there is not election chaos in Alabama on November 3rd and during the days following.

A main possible contributor to election chaos in Alabama are voting lawsuits that are unresolved on, or that are commenced after, November 3rd.

If there is election chaos in Alabama, immense heat will be turned on Secretary of State Merrill.

Secretary of State Merrill knows of the heat that can get turned on him. For his own good, he has presumably been thinking a lot about being sure the things he has been doing along the way in the run up to November 3rd will ultimately be judged "right," and will not be judged "wrong" as results in much political and professional damage getting inflicted on himself.

What weighs on John Merrill
John Merrill is relatively insulated in Alabama, but he could still wind up in a cauldron if a lot of violence breaks out around the country on November 4th and days following.

Violence seems more likely if the election is close, a winner is not quickly determined, and there are aggressive charges that the election was flawed.

Blame will be cast on Secretaries of State for election problems. If Trump is blamed for election problems because of the doubts he has sowed regarding the election, Secretaries of State will be called on to defend that they acted as best they could to counter the doubts Trump sowed regarding the election.

If there is violence, voter suppression and reaction to voter suppression may be cited as a cause of  violence. Secretaries of State will drawn in to defend themselves that they cannot be criticized for engaging in voter suppression.

Further, if there is violence, Secretaries of State will be called on to defend their decisions relative to accommodations to Covid.

November 6, 2020

Trump is claiming fraud in the election and trying to rile his allies and supporters to ratchet up Trump's claim of election fraud to the maximum extent possible. Trump supporters carrying weapons have protested vote counting facilities and may try to breach the facilities and attack vote counters.

John Merrill's job has been to make sure the Alabama elections were conducted fairly and honestly and to defend the integrity of Alabama elections now that they are over.

John Merrill is a member of the National Association of Secretaries of State. 

Other Secretaries of State have the same responsibilities for their State's elections as John Merrill has for Alabama elections.

Their National Association should be promotive of the member Secretaries of State collectively fulfilling their responsibilities, and the member Secretaries of State should be supportive of one another fulfilling their responsibilities.

This should be manifested by the National Association endeavoring to vouch for all their Secretaries of State fulfilling their election responsibilities. 

Alabamians can legitimately want to know what John Merrill's involvement has been with the National Association of Secretaries of State and how he has worked with the National Association to promote collective confidence in the integrity of all State's elections.

For now, John Merrill is making utterances that are undermining the engendering of a collective confidence in all State's elections and that may contribute to Trump protesters resorting to violence against the election process.

First, see the utterance indicated in below tweets.

Alabama changed its rules on absentee voting and daily counting of absentee ballots prior to the election, with a reasonable eye toward making voting safer and ensuring a timely counting of ballots. #alpolitics https://t.co/NbY1KGhSz3

— Brian Lyman (@lyman_brian) November 6, 2020

Further John Merrill has issued a press release today, which says in part: 

Days after one of the most significant elections in our nation’s history, America is still waiting anxiously and earnestly on several states to conclude the processing of ballots.
While claims of ‘fraudulent voting’ are running rampant in the media and by campaigns, the public’s confidence in American elections is quickly diminishing.
America deserves election results in a timely, secure, and efficient manner.

The press release then levels a criticism of other Secretaries of State as follows:

However, many of the states we are currently waiting on to report results have inconsistent election laws that vary county by county or parish by parish. Many of the changes we witnessed in election administration during this time came without legislative approval or the guidance of other state officers, which have in-turn resulted in lengthy wait times and the inconsistent reporting of results.

Claims of "fraudulent voting" are running "rampant" because of Trump. 

John Merrill should request his National Association to issue a pronouncement that either vouches for the integrity of all State's elections (and condemns Trump for his election fraud claims) or confess that there has been a failure by the National Association to address election integrity failure by individual Secretaries of State.

@JohnHMerrill
Will your @NASSorg approve of the criticisms of fellow Secretaries of State that you have made today in your press release regarding Trump's election fraud claims & related public utterances?#alpolitics @lyman_brian @JackRoyer @KPageTV https://t.co/9pzcxJJJ6m https://t.co/pMcCU9482o

— Rob Shattuck (@RobShattuckAL06) November 6, 2020

(See also https://al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com/2020/08/silent-majority-election-manifesto.html.)

December 13, 2020
Shame on John Merrill

Sooooo in other news, John Merrill, Alabama’s Secretary of State, was the keynote speaker at today’s “Stop the Steal” loser rally at the Spanish Fort Container Park. #SuperSpreader #alpolitics #TrumpDerangementSyndrome #BidenWonDonaldLost pic.twitter.com/qucEKheeBY

— PHP (@purplehullpea) December 12, 2020

2/18/21
The below information is copied and pasted from https://yellowhammernews.com/7-things-severe-weather-continues-impacting-alabama-rush-limbaugh-passes-away-merrill-wants-to-restore-the-integrity-of-the-election-and-more/

 4. Merrill to help restore faith in elections

• A new commission that will work in partnership with the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) aims to restore “the American people’s confidence in the integrity of their free and fair elections.” Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill will be the co-chair of the commission.
• The commission will work to determine the best practices in running elections and advise state officials. Merrill said that “every state in the nation should be working to assess and improve their respective election laws.” He added that they’re going to identify the best methods for elections “and make sure those are available for legislative bodies in the 50 states to consider as options.”

3/6/21 Existential political war over voting access

The 2020 election is over; the votes have been counted; Trump went to extreme lengths to get the election results overturned in the courts, by pressuring state legislatures to select electors contrary to the vote results in the state, and by pressuring Secretaries of State to change the vote counts in their state.

Throughout the time after November 6th Trump, using the biggest megaphone on Earth, proclaimed that there was widespread voter fraud, the election was rigged, and he was the winner of the election. Trump called on his supporters to come to Washington DC for a "wild" day on January 6th when Congress would meet to approve the electoral college's results. On January 6th he held a Save America Rally and told his supporters in attendance to march on the Capitol. They did so, and they violently assaulted the Capitol with the intent of killing Pence, Pelosi and other members of Congress. The insurrection was stopped before the worst possible things happened.

After January 6th Trump has continued to tell his supporters that there was widespread voter fraud, and the election was rigged and stolen from him. Millions of Trump's followers believe that there was widespread voter fraud and the election was stolen.

In the House of Representatives, the Republicans gained seats and the Democratic majority has been reduced to 222 to 211 (with two additional seats not in that count). The Senate is evenly divided 50 to 50, and Vice President Harris can break a tie vote, so the Democrats are considered the majority in the Senate.

To avoid losing more elections and losing more power, the Republicans are undertaking nationwide efforts to make it harder for Democrats to vote in the 2022 and 2024 elections. The main justification the Republicans are advancing for making it harder to vote is that there is an unacceptable level of voter fraud if the procedures that make it harder to vote are not in place.

This situation creates an existential political war between Republicans and Democrats over voting access, with Republicans exerting themselves mightily to get laws passed making it harder to vote, and Democrats resisting to the utmost. This political war is existential because the winner will potentially be in a stronger position of power that the loser may have great difficulty to reverse for many years to come, if ever.

In this situation, it is reasonable to predict that, for the next 2 years, our nation's politics and governance will be consumed by the existential political war between Republicans and Democrats over voting access. The nation's governance will be adversely affected because the two sides need to show a unified strength against the other side, and there will be immense pressure on individual Senators and Representatives to stay with their side in casting votes in Congress.

Relations between the two sides are becoming toxic because the Republicans are saying to the Democrats that Biden is President due to widespread voter fraud and  a rigged election, and the Republicans are using that as a justification for moving nationwide to restrict voting access for the Democrats.

The situation is further exacerbated by how evenly divided Congress is, by the great power that is provided by a few seats in the House of Representatives or by one Senate seat; and by the same token the fragility of the majority party's hold on that power, and this intensifies the efforts in the existential political war where only a small difference in electoral outcomes is needed to gain the power or lose the power.

In the situation, division and polarization are getting transmuted into a hatred by each side of the other side. These strong emotions are felt at the higher levels and lower levels of the two political sides.

How the foregoing existential war between the two political sides will play out cannot be predicted.

One element that can potentially mitigate the toxicity is for the two sides to engage in a fair minded way about the voter fraud question and to endeavor to reach an agreed characterization of the 2020 election and of the amount of voter fraud and whether or not the election was stolen (as Trump says). If it is not a fair characterization that the 2020 election was stolen, the ideal outcome would be for Trump to say it was not stolen. That will probably never happen, but, if it is not a fair characterization to say the election was stolen, it would go a long way to get Senators such as Cruz, Hawley, Cotton and Graham, and Representatives such as Alabama's Republican members of Congress to say that.

Republicans may refuse to engage on the voter fraud question and keep on saying there was widespread fraud and the election was stolen, just as Trump says.

Because of the primacy of the existential political war over access to voting, and because of the deleterious consequences to the nation of that political war, it would behooves parties with influence (such as the media) to press Republicans on whether or not they will engage with Democrats in a fair minded way on the voter fraud question.

Plea to Judge Barrett

Dear Judge Barrett,

The country has witnessed that you are an extraordinary jurist and person, who is superbly qualified to be a Supreme Court justice, and who can inspire the utmost trust in your goodness, humanity and integrity.

Our country is in dire straits. Our country needs you more than just as a Supreme Court justice.

Please listen to these two pleas.

FIRST PLEA

Can you give a response to the letter that more than 50 faculty members of your University of Notre Dame sent to you (which letter is at https://teacher-scholar-activist.org/2020/10/13/an-open-letter-to-judge-amy-coney-barrett-from-your-notre-dame-colleagues/ ). 

Please particularly respond to the following summation in the letter: 

Finally, your nomination comes at a treacherous moment in the United States. Our politics are consumed by polarization, mistrust, and fevered conspiracy theories. Our country is shaken by pandemic and economic suffering. There is violence in the streets of American cities. The politics of your nomination, as you surely understand, will further inflame our civic wounds, undermine confidence in the court, and deepen the divide among ordinary citizens, especially if you are seated by a Republican Senate weeks before the election of a Democratic president and congress. You have the opportunity to offer an alternative to all that by demanding that your nomination be suspended until after the election. We implore you to take that step.
We’re asking a lot, we know. Should Vice-President Biden be elected, your seat on the court will almost certainly be lost. That would be painful, surely. Yet there is much to be gained in risking your seat. You would earn the respect of fair-minded people everywhere. You would provide a model of civic selflessness. And you might well inspire Americans of different beliefs toward a renewed commitment to the common good.
We wish you well and trust you will make the right decision for our nation.

Regardless of what your response is, I think Americans will take heart in in your goodness, humanity and integrity, and that will help them in seeing their way through the dire straits that the country is in.

SECOND PLEA
A main component of our country's dire straits is that 350,000,000 Americans believe contradictory things about their President or do not know what to believe about their President, and these 350,000,000 Americans do not have one person of national standing to whom they are all willing to listen for guidance.

In the country's witnessing your potential to inspire the utmost trust in your goodness, humanity and integrity, you could be that person.

Moreover, for you to be that person would not take you out of the area in which you have expertise as a professor of law and a jurist.

In particular, upwards of 350,000,000 million Americans would listen to you if you talked to them along the lines of the following (subject to exactly how you would prefer to express yourself on the matter):

I am profoundly grateful to have been nominated to be a United States Supreme Court justice.

It has been suggested to me that your and my country is in dire straits and that 350,000,000 Americans believe contradictory things about their President or do not know what to believe about their President. It has been suggested to me these 350,000,000 million Americans do not have one person of national standing to whom they are all willing to listen for guidance, and that I could be that person. I don't know if I can be that person but I would like to say the following to you about matters as to which I have expertise as a professor of law and a jurist.

The United States constitution provides for the three branches of government of the legislative, the executive and the judicial. 

The legislative branch has the responsibility for making the law. The executive branch has responsibilities for implementing the laws that the legislative branch has enacted. The judicial branch is responsible for applying the law in legal cases that are brought before the judicial branch.

The three branches of government are separate and independent.

The independence of the three branches is not absolute, and there are limitations ("checks and balances") on the independence of the three branches.

The President is obligated to implement the laws that Congress enacts, and the President cannot act contrary to the laws the Congress has enacted or do things that are not authorized under the laws enacted by Congress. Under "checks and balances", both the Congress and the judicial branch have capacities to prevent the President from doing that, including through the power of the purse, the impeachment power, and the deciding of specific legal cases.

Also, there are practical necessities that allow for intrusion of one branch of government into another branch. The legislative branch needs information about how laws are being implemented by the executive branch and has powers to demand and get information from the executive branch.

This includes getting information about whether there are conflicts of interest in the executive branch that are causing the laws to be improperly implemented to advance private interests and resulting in laws not being implemented to achieve the public purposes of a law.

The ultimate check and balance under the constitution is the power of the people to vote out of office the President for any reason, including that the people believe the President is disobeying the laws Congress has enacted (whether or not Congress and the judicial branch have done anything to stop the President), and the power of the people to vote out of office members of Congress because the people want different laws or because the people believe that Congress has failed to keep the President from disobeying the law. 

I hope that saying the foregoing helps you to know what you believe about your and my President.

10/25/20

[Below is email I have sent to the contact person for the website where Notre Dame faculty letter was published]
From: Rob Shattuck <rdshatt@aol.com>
To:
Sent: Sun, Oct 25, 2020 9:56 am
Subject: Notre Dame faculty letter to Judge Barrett Open Letter to Judge Amy Coney Barrett From Your Notre Dame Colleagues
Dear Professor Jensen,
I believe Judge Barrett owes it to the American people to respond publicly to the "Open Letter to Judge Amy Coney Barrett From Your Notre Dame Colleagues" dated October 10, 2020, which is published on your website at https://teacher-scholar-activist.org/2020/10/13/an-open-letter-to-judge-amy-coney-barrett-from-your-notre-dame-colleagues/.
I see that there are currently 550 thoughts (comments) posted underneath the open letter on your website.
I have put on my blog a "Plea to Judge Barrett" (which can be found at https://al6thcongdist-ihaveuntiljan13.blogspot.com/2020/10/plea-to-judge-barrett.html), in which I reference the Notre Dame faculty letter and request Judge Barrett to particularly respond to the following summation in the letter:

Finally, your nomination comes at a treacherous moment in the United States. Our politics are consumed by polarization, mistrust, and fevered conspiracy theories. Our country is shaken by pandemic and economic suffering. There is violence in the streets of American cities. The politics of your nomination, as you surely understand, will further inflame our civic wounds, undermine confidence in the court, and deepen the divide among ordinary citizens, especially if you are seated by a Republican Senate weeks before the election of a Democratic president and congress. You have the opportunity to offer an alternative to all that by demanding that your nomination be suspended until after the election. We implore you to take that step.

We’re asking a lot, we know. Should Vice-President Biden be elected, your seat on the court will almost certainly be lost. That would be painful, surely. Yet there is much to be gained in risking your seat. You would earn the respect of fair-minded people everywhere. You would provide a model of civic selflessness. And you might well inspire Americans of different beliefs toward a renewed commitment to the common good.

We wish you well and trust you will make the right decision for our nation.

I think it would have been entirely legitimate and appropriate for the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee to have called the Notre Dame letter to the attention of Judge Barrett and to have asked her to expressly respond to the summation part of the letter quoted above.
Even now I think the 47 Senate Democrats and Independents should send a letter to Judge Barrett and invite her to come to the Senate floor before the final vote and to please express her response to the letter for the benefit of both the United States Senate and the American people.
If Judge Barrett has expressed any response to the Notre Dame faculty letter, either in writing or orally, I think you should post Judge Barrett's response on the webpage underneath the letter and above the the thoughts (comments) section on the webpage.
After I send you this email, I will look at the 550 thoughts (comments) that are posted beneath the letter, I may post the body of this email as a thought (comment) on the webpage, and I will probably copy and paste this email on my above "Plea to Judge Barrett" blog entry.
Thank you for your attention to this email.

10/27/20
See also J'accuse our judiciary

My critique of debate

A. Truth and honesty

Given the constancy and intensity with which charges about lying and dishonesty have been hurled back and forth during the past four years between the two political parties and at, by and between Trump and Biden, Chris Wallace should have started the debate with a question such as:

"Given the constancy and intensity with which charges about lying and dishonesty have been hurled back and forth during the past four years between the political parties and at, by and between yourselves, would you please say how truthful and honest you consider yourself to be in the things you say to the American people, and please say how truthful and honest you believe your opponent to be in the things he says to the American people. President Trump, you go first."

[to be continued]