Oversight Project punches back after NYT tries to downplay registration of illegal alien voters in Georgia



The Heritage Foundation's Oversight Project has in recent months highlighted the threat of election interference by both the Biden-Harris administration and illegal aliens. This has evidently made some establishmentarians uncomfortable.

Over the weekend, the New York Times published a report characterizing concerns about interference by groups of noncitizens as a "false, but snowballing, theory" — claiming "there is no evidence to support Heritage's findings in Georgia ... or, for that matter, anywhere else in the country."

The Oversight Project is punching back, reiterating that the threat is real, that "the system has been designed to be abused," and that the Times is now "protecting the ability of noncitizens to participate in American elections."

Mike Howell, executive director of the Oversight Project, told Blaze News, "The fact that they're upset and jumping to the defense of noncitizens being able to vote in elections, I think, tells Americans all they need to know and what they probably already know."

Howell, who explained to Blaze News how the Times' hit piece was as hollow as it was transparent, tweeted to the Times article's author, Ken Bensinger, "If you're going to be our dedicated oppo journalist you need to do better. This was too easy."

'Systems are being taken advantage of, and the outcome of the 2024 election will be difficult to determine.'

A spokesman for the Times told Blaze News in a statement, "This is a piece of thorough and deeply-reported independent journalism based on original reporting and pursuit of facts amid explicitly politicized agendas. The Times stands behind our reporting."

When pressed for comment, Mike Hassinger, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger's (R) elections public information officer, defended a number of claims made in the Times report and accused the Oversight Project of "an out-and-out fabrication."

Background

The Oversight Project published troubling footage in conjunction with Anthony Rubin's Muckraker earlier this summer that showed a handful of noncitizens at the apartment complex Elliot Norcross in Norcross, Georgia, admitting they were registered to vote. Some indicated on camera that they were registered at work. At least one indicated she had already voted.

The results were comparable to those in another Oversight Project investigation conducted in Charlotte, North Carolina.

According to Rubin, 14% of the respondents in Norcross said they had been registered. The Oversight Project was unable to locate these noncitizens on Georgia voter rolls, indicating that "shoddy address history records" and fake documents might be to blame.

Noting that there are an estimated 339,000 noncitizens living in Georgia — an apparent reference to Migration Policy Institute's 2019 "unauthorized population" estimate on the basis of U.S. Census Bureau data — the Oversight Project suggested that "if the 14% proportion holds true state wide, this would equate to over 47,000 registered non-citizens" in the Peach State alone.

Even with that projected number halved, a noncitizen cohort participating in the election could prove hugely consequential in November. After all, President Donald Trump lost Georgia by under 12,000 votes the last time around.

"Systems are being taken advantage of, and the outcome of the 2024 election will be difficult to determine given the near impossibility of auditing in a short period of time," said the Oversight Project.

The watchdog's damning exposé created waves, especially after Elon Musk shared the video on Aug. 1 with the caption, "Extremely disturbing!" — a post that netted over 52.8 million impressions since.

Within hours, Raffensperger tweeted, "The state of Georgia aggressively investigates specific claims of voter fraud and we welcome any individual or group to submit specific, evidence based claims, and we will investigate."

The NYT hit piece

The New York Times published an article Saturday titled "Heritage Foundation Spreads Deceptive Videos About Noncitizen Voters."

According to Ken Bensinger and Richard Fausset, "The right-wing think tank has been pushing misinformation about voting into social media feeds."

'We have noncitizens in Georgia on camera admitting to being registered to vote.'

Despite acknowledging that noncitizens did in fact speak to persons linked to the Oversight Project in the video and that they had said plainly on camera they were registered to vote, the Times labeled the video as "misleading."

The Times further claimed that the Oversight Project's claims "do not hold up," suggesting that "three of the seven people Heritage filmed later said they had misspoken," even though they had conversed with the questioners in the video in Spanish.

One of the three women who allegedly recanted their earlier statements told the Times she lied in the video for fear of being deported. The woman, an illegal alien who referred to herself as Marta, claimed she "just wanted them to go away."

In its attempt to discredit the video, which included a rehash of the false and well-worn Democratic talking point about Project 2025, the Times also said state investigators "found no evidence that any of the seven people on the tape had ever registered to vote," despite admitting deeper in the piece that Raffensperger's investigation into Heritage's claims was still ongoing.

The Times' Bensinger and Fausset confidently asserted days after the DOJ announced it had charged an illegal alien in Alabama "in connection with her fraudulent assumption of a United States citizen's identity and her use of that identity to vote in multiple elections," that "there is no evidence to support Heritage’s findings in Georgia, a critical swing state with a large immigrant population, or, for that matter, anywhere else in the country."

They proceeded to cite the findings of the Brennan Center for Justice — a leftist advocacy organization that has received funding from George Soros' Open Society Institute and the Tides Foundation — that supposedly only "one-ten thousandth of 1 percent of votes in the 2016 election were cast by noncitizens."

Rebuttals

The Oversight Project responded to the Times article with a thread on X, suggesting it amounted to an "election lie."

After noting that the article's title conflated noncitizens who were registered to vote with noncitizen voters, Oversight Project zeroed in on the retraction by one of the illegal immigrants interviewed in the video.

"Ken [Bensinger] stakes his credibility on a noncitizen named Marta who told us on camera that she was (1) a noncitizen and (2) registered to vote," wrote the watchdog group. "He claims she lied to us because she was afraid of being deported."

Howell told Blaze News that made "zero sense because if you're afraid of being deported, why would you admit to a deportable offense on camera? It's so counterintuitive, it doesn't pass the laugh test."

Howell also raised the possibility that those who retracted their statements may have done so after being coached on what to say by Lead Stories, the left-leaning fact-checking group that tracked them down, or others.

"That reeked of a cleanup effort," said Howell. "We put our stuff out on video. Or [do you] take the word of these other political actors who did not videotape their encounter?"

'People are going to get through the cracks and the cracks are there because they want them to.'

The watchdog group further indicated on X that of the seven individuals who admitted to being both noncitizens and registered to vote, four had yet to walk back their statements.

"What about the other four, Ken?" asked the Oversight Project.

— (@)

The Oversight Project also seized upon the Times' claim that state investigators under Raffensperger had found no records to indicate the people in the video had registered or voted.

"They said they don't know and only checked the records from that address," said the watchdog group, whose executive director does not appear entirely convinced the Georgia secretary of state's office is altogether eager in "actually investigating this."

"Instead of them saying outright, 'Zero of the seven people are registered in the state of Georgia,' they played a weird rhetorical game where they say, 'We checked the registrations at that address,'" said Howell. "OK, so did we. That's what we told them."

"Just because they're at that address now does not mean that they are registered there. In fact, over the course of our investigations nationwide, several people have indicated that they're registered at work," continued Howell. "Just checking people out at their current address is insufficient to prove that they are not registered at all."

While the watchdog group highlighted other issues with the Times report, it emphasized that the reporters' word choice and framing gave them away as biased ideologues. For instance, whereas the Brennan Center for Justice was referred to as a "policy group," the Times referred to the Oversight Project as a "right wing think tank."

Ultimately, Howell said that the "short of it is the New York Times is clearly working with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger's office in an effort to discredit the video, which hasn't been discredited in the least. We have noncitizens in Georgia on camera admitting to being registered to vote."

When pressed for comment, Hassinger told Blaze News, "The fundraising stunt created by Project Oversight and funded by Heritage was more than disinformation, it was an out-and-out fabrication. Our office learned that it was fabricated by verifying voter registrations at the apartment complex, and by sending investigators to speak to the people featured in the video."

"Our investigation revealed that no one in the video was registered to vote, nor had they voted," continued Hassinger. "When this office asked The Oversight Project for any other evidence that these apartment residents were A) in the country illegally or B) registered to vote, they couldn't provide anything."

"The Oversight Project may have valid concerns about illegal aliens voting in Georgia, but they have yet to express them in any serious way and have chosen instead to tell lies in order to create fear and distrust in Georgia’s election processes," added Hassinger.

When asked whether President Joe Biden's Executive Order 14019, which effectively mobilizes the federal government to turn out votes for Democrats, is connected to the potential registration of illegal aliens, Howell told Blaze News, "The system basically makes it easy for them. ... The system has been designed to be abused."

The Biden Department of Justice, various other federal agencies, and White House staff held a "Listening Session" on July 12, 2021, regarding the order's implementation. Referencing the session, Howell noted that champions of open borders engaged in the discussions suggested illegal aliens should be trusted to operate within the bounds of the law.

"This is kind of the high-level politics of it all. They want to create such a loose system and have no checks on it. People are going to get through the cracks, and the cracks are there because they want them to," said Howell.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biden's 'election interference' scheme could throw millions of votes Harris' way. Are red states ready?



President Joe Biden’s parting gift to his replacement is a March 2021 executive order that effectively compels federal agencies to mobilize and register elements of historically Democratic voting blocs along with potentially ineligible voters.

With President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris now in a surprisingly tight race, this scheme — which critics have suggested will play out as "election interference" — could potentially hand the election over to the Democrats. After all, the leftist think tank whose recommendations ostensibly inspired Executive Order 14019 indicated that the scheme could net as many as 3 million new voter registrations a year.

That Democrats swapped out Biden for Harris makes little difference.

While Democrat-controlled states like Michigan appear keen to take EO 14019 as far as it can, Republican-run states and states with Republican election officials have an opportunity to limit its impact.

Most Republican secretaries of state and attorneys general have spoken out about EO 14019.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, for instance, blasted the EO in October 2022, stating, "It’s difficult to see how this is anything but a grotesque insult to election integrity, on top of being unconstitutional."

Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft stated, "This executive order undermines state sovereignty and threatens the integrity of our elections."

In terms of concrete action taken by Republican AGs, however, the record is thus far somewhat mixed. While some have taken concrete steps, as we will outline below, others thus far seem to be content to rest on having issued a strongly worded letter.

There are a number of outstanding questions, even though the country goes to the polls in about three months: What have states with Republican trifectas done about the EO? In cases of states that have yet to take meaningful action, what are they planning on doing, if anything? Is it too late now to act?

Blaze News recently reached out to the relevant officials in Republican trifecta states as well as in select swing states for answers. While some responses may be heartening for those keen on a fair election, it appears that the fight over EO 14019 is just getting started.

Background

According to Biden’s Executive Order 14019, minorities, blacks in particular, are disproportionately met today with “significant obstacles” to voting — "burdened by voter identification laws and limited opportunities to vote by mail."

To accommodate the constituents of those historically Democratic voting blocs supposedly incapable of using IDs and mailboxes, and to "protect the right to vote," Biden called upon federal agencies to "consider ways to expand citizens' opportunities to register to vote and to obtain information about, and participate in, the electoral process."

'Not only is it unconstitutional, it is outrageously wrong.'

The Heritage Foundation's government watchdog Oversight Project, which has waged a campaign to expose and kneecap the initiative, revealed earlier this year that under the EO, federal agencies that regularly engage with the American public must:

  • "use their resources, connections, and relationships with their clientele to facilitate registrations and mass mail-in ballot applications";
  • "use federal resources to assist in completing those registrations and applications"; and
  • "provide space on 'agency premises' and resources to 'approved' non-governmental organizations ('NGO') and 'state officials' to accomplish these directives."

The Foundation for Government Accountability, another watchdog group that has been tracking the implementation of EO 14019, summarized the problem thusly:

At the minimum, what’s become known as ‘Bidenbucks’ is a clear abuse of power. Political appointees ... are being deputized to register and mobilize voters and submit their plans directly to the White House.It is an unconstitutional and undemocratic way for the incumbent to intentionally put his or her finger on the scale to affect the outcome of an election — and use your tax dollars to do so.

Some scholars have alternatively suggested that watchdogs and critics have made a mountain out of a mole hill.

Nicholas Stephanopoulos, a professor of law at Harvard Law School whose research largely concerns empirical political science and the American electoral system, told Blaze News, "I don't think there's a serious constitutional issue here."

"The federal government has authority to regulate the 'manner' of congressional elections, and the Supreme Court has held that the 'manner' of elections includes voter registration,” said Stephanopoulos. "So an executive order addressing voter registration raises no genuine constitutional problem."

While Stephanopoulos indicated the executive order "addressing voter registration raises no genuine constitutional problem," he acknowledged that it would be problematic for federal agencies that have not been appropriately designated by states as "voter registration agencies" under the National Voter Registration Act to engage in voter registration efforts.

The trouble is that federal agencies have reportedly been working toward the satisfaction of Biden’s order without authorization in various states of strategic importance.

Here is a brief overview of where Republican states stand on EO 14019 and what they have done thus far to date to combat the problem.

Letters, lawsuits, and lines in the sand

Louisiana

In September 2022, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry led a coalition of Republican attorney generals — from Indiana, South Carolina, Kentucky, Texas, Mississippi, Utah, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Nebraska, Montana, and Alabama — in demanding that Biden rescind his EO.

Their joint letter noted that the EO "appears to be a get-out-the-vote effort designed by the Left, to benefit the Left, all paid for by federal taxpayers. It is illegal, unethical, and unconstitutional."

After the Biden administration failed to respond, Louisiana Secretary of State Nancy Landry penned a follow-up letter to the Democratic president on March 4, highlighting how he had ignored the multi-state imploration as well as her colleagues' concerns "about the overreach, intrusion in state election administration, interference in the election process, and possible intimidation of individuals applying for federal benefits at federal agencies that this executive order represents."

Secretary Landry emphasized that Biden’s initiatives "would do nothing but undermine the states and the voters."

When pressed on actions taken and planned by Louisiana regarding EO 14019, Joel Watson, deputy secretary of state for communications, told Blaze News that Landry "believes that said EO is a violation of the Constitution’s Election Clause."

Watson indicated that "[f]uture actions are pending" but that he was not presently at liberty to go into detail on them.

Tennessee

Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett was one of 15 Republican secretaries of state who signed an Aug. 3, 2022, letter to Biden requesting that he rescind EO 14019.

"Executive Order 14019 was issued without Constitutional authority nor Congressional approval," said the letter. "Involving Federal agencies in the registration process will produce duplicate registrations, confuse citizens, and complicate the jobs of our county clerks and election officials. If implemented, the Executive Order would also erode the responsibility and duties of the state legislatures to their situational duty within the Election Clause."

Hargett said in a statement to Blaze News, "The Biden Administration's implementation of Presidential Executive Order 14019, which allows ineligible voters to be provided with voter registration services, has made it more difficult to keep voter rolls clean of ineligible voters."

"We will continue to ensure the votes of eligible voters are not diluted by ineligible voters," added Hargett.

Wyoming

Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray told Blaze News that "Executive Order No. 14019 is blatantly unconstitutional, and violates the authority of the states to administer elections under the United States Constitution. Not only is it unconstitutional, it is outrageously wrong."

Gray noted that Wyoming joined a coalition of eight other states — West Virginia, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, Tennessee, and Wyoming — in filing an Amici curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on May 28 "asking the Court to rule that Executive Order No. 14019 is unconstitutional, and violates the authority granted to the states to administer elections by the United States Constitution."

The corresponding case, Keefer v. Biden, was first brought by 26 Pennsylvania state representatives and one state senator challenging Biden's EO as well as Gov. Josh Shapiro’s enactment of automatic voter registration.

The plaintiffs claimed that the EO and Shapiro's registration schemes violated the Constitution's Electors and Elections Clauses and that the president "does not have the power to regulate the time, place, and manner of Presidential or Congressional elections in Pennsylvania."

They also argued that the "President of the United States does not have the power to usurp the authority of Pennsylvania legislators with regard to the registration of Pennsylvania voters, as Article VII, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution clearly places the duty of 'regulating the registration of electors' on the General Assembly."

After proving unsuccessful in lesser courts, the plaintiffs asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up their case in April with an appeal still pending in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Indiana

Blaze News previously reported that in late June, Indiana Secretary of State Diego Morales (R) put federal agencies operating inside his state on notice that they are not permitted to engage in voter registration or other election activity without state authorization.

Extra to the National Voter Registration Act, Indiana Code 3-7-17 requires that such agencies are specifically designated by the state as "voter registration agencies" to lawfully provide or offer voter registration services and the like.

Morales noted in his June 28 letters, "To my knowledge, your agency is not a designated voter registration agency."

"If your agency has been distributing voter registration forms or assisting the public with voter registration or absentee voting forms, you are requested to discontinue such action immediately, as the unauthorized conduct of such activity is likely violative of Indiana and federal law," added Morales.

Unfortunately, it appears as though elements of the Biden administration have disregarded Morales' notices.

Lindsey Eaton, communications director for Morales, told Blaze News this week that the "Indiana Secretary of State's Office has received a very low number of responses to the letters. It’s concerning as these letters were sent more than a month ago."

"This is beginning to become a pattern of the Biden Administration continuing to hide information related to the implementation of his executive order," continued Eaton. "Secretary of State Diego Morales is currently looking at other avenues that could force federal agencies to discontinue covering up actions under the Biden administration. Secretary Morales is committed to protecting Indiana's elections."

Missouri

JoDonn Chaney, director of communications for Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, told Blaze News that his state has been ranked very high in election integrity assessments, adding "we run elections just fine."

"Any interference from the federal government would just make our elections worse," said Chaney.

'This executive order undermines state sovereignty and threatens the integrity of our elections.'

Chaney alluded to EO 14019 as a prime example of a federal initiative that would do just that.

In the interest of protecting the integrity of elections in Missouri as well as to preclude the Biden-Harris administration from infringing on the state’s rights to manage its own election procedures, Ashcroft filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on July 31 challenging EO 14019.

"Missouri has a robust and effective election system in place, and it is the responsibility of the states, not the federal government, to manage voter registration and election procedures," Ashcroft said in a statement.

Ashcroft added, "This executive order undermines state sovereignty and threatens the integrity of our elections. This legal action is not about partisan politics; it is about maintaining the balance of power between the states and the federal government as intended by our Founding Fathers."

Extra to Biden, the lawsuit names the heads of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Transportation, and several others as defendants.

The complaint raises various concerns but emphasizes Missouri’s interest "is in the need to maintain a current accurate vote roll that includes only the names of citizens eligible to cast a ballot and to assure that the ballots actually cast and counted are those cast by citizens eligible to cast a ballot."

According to the suit, the implementation of EO 14019 will "undermine this interest and the Plaintiffs' ability to fulfill their responsibility to oversee fair, just, and honest elections."

Chaney stressed to Blaze News, "We will strongly oppose any federal interference in Missouri elections."

Georgia

In Georgia, President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are presently polling within a point of one another. Biden narrowly won the state in 2020 — by a margin of 0.23% and 11,779 votes.

Kara Murray, spokeswoman for Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, told Blaze News in a statement that Carr "has continued to defend Georgia's commonsense election law, which strengthens security, expands access and ensures transparency for all Georgians."

Regarding EO 14019, Murray said, "We agree that President Biden's Executive Order is unconstitutional, and we will continue to fulfill our duty and ensure that Georgia is protected from any illegal actions by the federal government."

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger was among the 15 top election officials who previously denounced Biden’s EO and raised alarm about the scheme.

Alabama

Republican leaders and election officials in Alabama have been particularly vocal about EO 14019 and the threat they believe it poses to the integrity of elections in the state.

Earlier this summer, Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen raised the alarm about federal policies that provide voter registration forms to foreign nationals as well as to the dead.

The secretary claimed that the Biden-Harris administration is "knowingly and purposefully enacting policies that result in supplying non-citizens with a mechanism to register to vote in our state and all 49 other states."

Allen further noted that his office has attempted on several occasions to gain "clarification from the White House regarding the Biden Administration’s efforts to expand the NVRA through the implementation of Presidential Executive Order 14019" — attempts that have apparently been in vain.

"It is obvious to me that this EO is an attempt to federalize an expansion of voter registration policies originally established by the NVRA. I have requested access to public records and information related to those plans and their implementation within our state," Allen said in a statement. "Those requests have been ignored."

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall's office indicated in a statement to Blaze News that the Biden-Harris administration has also "rebuffed requests from Secretary Allen to cooperate with him to remove noncitizens who may be registered to vote in Alabama."

'A ton of damage has been done already.'

"The States have primary responsibility for registering voters, determining their eligibility, and conducting elections. But through EO 14019, the Biden-Harris Administration has forced federal agencies to flood every State with voter registration forms. Many of the recipients are not eligible to vote," said Marshall’s office.

Whilst pushing this scheme, the White House has "opposed efforts like the SAVE Act that would ensure those voting in our elections have the documents to prove their citizenship."

The Alabama AG's office noted that it is "working with Secretary Allen on additional ways to safeguard our elections this November."

Virginia

In response to questions about what the Old Dominion is doing about EO 14019, a spokesman for Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin told Blaze News that the governor "believes we need to continually invest in our election system to improve the process, restore faith in elections and address any concerns."

"Election security isn't a Democrat or Republican issue, it's an American and Virginian issue — we must ensure we are adequately maintaining voter lists, abiding by election security procedures and taking election crimes seriously," continued the spokesman. "In Virginia, Governor Youngkin is taking critical steps to improve the election process and ensure it's resilient."

The spokesman referenced various actions Youngkin has taken to bolster election security, including ratifying legislation to ax outside interference in elections; to provide absentee results by precinct so voters can see who is voting absentee in person and by mail and where they’re coming from; and to remove dead voters from voter rolls every week.

Oklahoma

Oklahoma Attorney General John O’Connor was among those who called for the repeal of EO 14019 in 2022. However, the public information officer for the Oklahoma State Election Board — the elections administrator for the state — told Blaze News, "We are not very familiar with that EO."

While apparently not overly familiar with the EO, the election board’s information officer noted that "it is a crime for someone to knowingly cause an unqualified person to become a registered voter or to knowingly submit a voter registration application containing false or fraudulent information. Any evidence of such would be referred to the appropriate district attorney for investigation."

West Virginia

West Virginia Secretary of State Mac Warner’s office did not respond to Blaze News' request for comment. It is, however, clear that Warner takes the "federal overreach" seriously.

Months before signing the Aug. 3, 2022, letter with his Republican peers demanding that Biden rescind EO 14019, Secretary Warner called out the order solo, telling Biden "it is not necessary or appropriate for voter registration services to be mandated or offered at every federal government agency without a state requesting such assistance under its own authority," stressing that the order constituted an "improper federal overreach."

Warner also led the nine-state delegation asking the Supreme Court in June to strike down the order.

While other states with Republican trifectas as well as swing states with Republican election officials have ostensibly moved the needle on countering EO 14019, Blaze News did not hear back from relevant officials in Nebraska, Montana, Arkansas, Texas, New Hampshire, South Dakota, North Dakota, Ohio, Nevada, and Idaho by the deadline.

Not too late to act

Blaze News circled back to Mike Howell, executive director of the Oversight Project, for additional insights into what actions have been taken by states to-date and the value in stepping up this late in the game.

When asked which have been the most effective actions taken by states to-date in the way of kneecapping EO 14019 and its execution, Howell said, "The Indiana Secretary of State took overt action to kick the Feds out for the purposes of using tax-payer dollars and government authority to act as Kamala Harris' get-out-the-vote operation."

"We're at the stage now where more states should be stepping up and taking overt action instead of just asking questions and complaining," added Howell.

Howell indicated it is not too late for state officials with gumption to make a meaningful difference.

"A ton of damage has been done already, but it's not too late to at least mitigate this constitutional disaster where the incumbent administration is using their power and our money to ensure their own re-election," said Howell. "This is an assault on 'democracy' that the United States hasn’t seen before."

This sense of urgency has evidently caught on in recent weeks and months.

In July, the America First Policy Institute, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R), Republican Texas Reps. Ronny Jackson and Beth Van Duyne, and others filed a lawsuit against Biden, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and several other big names in the Democratic administration over the EO, claiming Biden and his cabinet officials "have usurped States' role in registering voters and redirected federal resources to partisan voter mobilization efforts, in violation of federal law."

The Trump campaign, the Michigan Republican Party, and the Republican National Convention also sued the Biden administration, Whitmer, and Benson last month over the "BidenBucks" scheme.

That Democrats swapped out Biden for Harris makes little difference, suggested Howell.

"The left has reconstructed the election system in the United States as a competition between machines to collect ballots as opposed to votes. It doesn't really matter who the candidate is for that machine to work," said Howell.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘Bidenbucks’ Plan Uses Native American School Children In Voter Registration Scheme

Records also expose Biden’s secretary of the Interior arguably stepping over the Hatch Act line barring political activities on the job.

Trump campaign and RNC sue Gov. Whitmer over her part in Biden's 'election interference' scheme



President Joe Biden's effort to compel federal agencies to mobilize favorable voting blocs has encountered another serious setback, this time in Michigan.

Background

The Heritage Foundation's government watchdog Oversight Project revealed via a Blaze News exclusive in May how the dutiful enactment of Biden's Executive Order 14019 could play out as "election interference."

The EO takes for granted that minorities, particularly black people, are disproportionately met today with "significant obstacles" to voting, especially by "voter identification laws and limited opportunities to vote by mail."

To rectify this supposed problem affecting groups that disproportionately vote Democrat, Biden suggested it is critical that his administration enmesh itself more fully in the election process and compelled federal agencies to "consider ways to expand citizens' opportunities to register to vote and to obtain information about, and participate in, the electoral process."

Mike Howell, executive director of the Oversight Project, previously pointed out to Blaze News how Demos, a leftist think tank whose 2020 recommendations to the Biden administration ostensibly inspired EO 14019, boasted that the so-called "BidenBucks" scheme could bring in as many as 3 million new voter registrations per year.

Even though Biden's decrepitude has hurt him in the polls in the aftermath of his disastrous debate with President Donald Trump, millions of votes in critical swing states could nevertheless tip the election in his favor.

'The Biden administration’s desperation to unfairly and illegally win the election knows no bounds.'

Besides exposing various agencies' strategic plans, the Oversight Project highlighted three ways states could derail the scheme: Pass laws attacking the application of the order with regard to presidential elections; frustrate the scheme with complaints about possible Hatch Act violations; and remove or attack designations of federal agencies to act under the National Voter Registration Act that were not provided by the state or were provided without appropriate authority.

Some Republicans were apparently paying attention.

Fighting back

Earlier this month, Indiana Secretary of State Diego Morales (R) revealed he had taken action accordingly, informing federal agencies and departments active in his state that they were prohibited from engaging in voter registration and other election activities without state authorization.

Morales noted in a letter to the various EO-guided agencies in Indiana, "If your agency has been distributing voter registration forms or assisting the public with voter registration or absentee voting forms, you are requested to discontinue such action immediately, as the unauthorized conduct of such activity is likely violative of Indiana and federal law."

"States know best when it comes to our elections," Morales wrote on X. "We don't need federal government overreach to run safe, secure elections!"

Last week, the America First Policy Institute, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R), Republican Texas Reps. Ronny Jackson and Beth Van Duyne, and others filed a lawsuit against Biden, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and several other big names in the Democratic administration over the EO, claiming Biden and his cabinet officials "have usurped States' role in registering voters and redirected federal resources to partisan voter mobilization efforts, in violation of federal law."

Echoing many of the concerns raised by the Oversight Project, the complaint noted that Biden's "EO and its implementing agency actions violate federal law, including multiple violations of the Administrative Procedure Act."

It also emphasized that the EO unconstitutionally expands the federal government's role in elections.

"The Biden administration’s desperation to unfairly and illegally win the election knows no bounds," Rep. Jackson said in a statement. "Instead of instilling policies that Americans want and need, they turn to the well-oiled D.C. swamp filled to the brim with deep state loyalists to illegally register voters in an attempt to help them win."

LaRose noted, "This is a cynical attempt to turn government agencies into a Democratic turnout machine, and it's wrong. That's why I'm joining this lawsuit and working to hold the administration accountable."

Taking Whitmer to court

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) and her administration appear especially keen to help see through Biden's initiative.

The Oversight Project indicated that the U.S. Small Business Administration announced an agreement with the Michigan Department of State to aid in the realization of Biden's EO.

That's particularly troubling given that Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson's poor track record when it comes to elections. A court determined in 2021 that she violated state law by unilaterally altering absentee voting rules ahead of the 2020 election. She also worked closely with Mark Zuckerberg-funded groups to influence state elections in 2019.

— (@)

The Trump campaign, the Michigan Republican Party, and the Republican National Convention sued the Biden administration, Whitmer, and Benson on Monday over the "BidenBucks" scheme.

The lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan accused Whitmer of issuing an executive directive in December to designate several state and federal agencies as voter registration agencies — including the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs — despite lacking the legislative authorization to do so.

'This is an illegal attempt by Biden, Whitmer, Benson, and the party in power to manipulate our country's most important election.'

The lawsuit indicated further that Benson, who similarly lacks such authorization, did likewise, designating various Small Business Administration offices throughout the state VRAs.

"Because these unauthorized actions do not represent lawful designations by the State of Michigan for purposes of Section 7 of the NVRA, the designated VA and SBA offices are not lawfully operating as VRAs under federal law," said the complaint.

The Oversight Project previously indicated that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 provides that federal and nongovernmental offices can only "engage in the type of activities directed by the Executive Order if a state 'designate[s]' that office to act as a voter registration agency."

The plaintiffs are seeking a "permanent injunction barring the State Defendants from designating any VRAs without express authorization from the Michigan Legislature."

RNC Chairman Michael Whatley said in a statement, "The federal government should not be using American taxpayers' dollars to conduct unauthorized voter registration activities."

"This is an illegal attempt by Biden, Whitmer, Benson, and the party in power to manipulate our country's most important election," continued Whatley. "We are committed to stopping this election integrity violation and securing our elections."

The Oversight Project said of the lawsuit, "The exposure of the 'BidenBucks' scheme to turn the entire Federal government into President @JoeBiden campaign's get-out-the-vote is in legal jeopardy."

A spokeswoman for the Michigan Department of State told Blaze News in a statement, "It is unfortunate that this divisive, partisan lawsuit was filed yesterday. Making it easier for veterans and small business owners in Michigan to register to vote should not be controversial."

The spokeswoman added, "We will review this and any other litigation that comes our way but remain committed to ensuring that every Michigan voter has the tools and resources they need to participate in every election."

Blaze News also reached out to the governor's office but did not immediately receive a response.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Indiana takes a stand against Biden's 'election interference' scheme



The Heritage Foundation's government watchdog Oversight Project revealed via a Blaze News exclusive in May just how President Joe Biden's Executive Order 14019 might play out as "election interference."

The order, issued early in Biden's presidency, effectively compels federal agencies that regularly engage with the American public to mobilize historically Democratic groups to vote.

The Oversight Project obtained various agencies' strategic plans, providing insights into some of the lengths to which agencies were willing to go to mobilize Biden-friendly voter turnout per the EO.

Besides providing a look behind the curtain, the watchdog detailed three ways states could throw a wrench in the works: Pass laws attacking the application of the order with regard to presidential elections; frustrate the scheme with complaints about possible Hatch Act violations; and remove or attack designations of federal agencies to act under the National Voter Registration Act that were not provided by the state or were provided without appropriate authority.

Indiana Secretary of State Diego Morales (R) took action accordingly Tuesday, underscoring in letters to those federal agencies and departments active in the state that they are not permitted to engage in voter registration or other election activity without state authorization. Any such efforts are to end immediately.

In the June 28 letter obtained by the Indiana Capital Chronicle, Morales stated, "To my knowledge, your agency is not a designated voter registration agency."

'The fight back is beginning.'

"If your agency has been distributing voter registration forms or assisting the public with voter registration or absentee voting forms, you are requested to discontinue such action immediately, as the unauthorized conduct of such activity is likely violative of Indiana and federal law," added Morales.

Morales' office indicated in a release that the warning letters, reportedly sent to over 120 agencies, were directly in response to Biden's executive order, "which would be contrary to state law as well as congressional authorization and funding."

"Under state and federal law (Indiana Code 3-7-17 and the National Voter Registration Act), government agencies must be specifically designated by the state as 'voter registration agencies' to lawfully offer or provide voter registration services and absentee voting assistance," said the release. "Such designation is critical to assuring compliance with laws prescribing administration of voter registration forms and absentee voting applications, which serve to protect the integrity of elections."

"States know best when it comes to our elections," Morales wrote on X. "We don't need federal government overreach to run safe, secure elections!"

Morales also made clear that he and his administration are committed to increasing voter turnout.

"Alongside my team, we have blanketed the Hoosier state with voter outreach efforts, from festivals to county fairs to sporting events. In anticipation of the upcoming November election, those efforts are only going to amplify," Morales said in his Tuesday announcement.

The Oversight Project noted, "The fight back is beginning."

Catherine Gunsalus, director of state advocacy at Heritage Action for America, stated, "By signing E.O. 14019, President Biden is abusing the power of the federal government in a desperate attempt to boost his sinking campaign. Thankfully, Hoosiers are having none of it."

"Secretary Morales should be applauded for protecting Indiana from undue federal overreach and directing agencies in his state to refuse to go along with Biden’s scheme," added Gunsalus.

Mike Howell, executive director of the Oversight Project, said in a statement, "We are thrilled that Secretary of State Morales is taking up our recommendation to kick the feds out of Indiana's elections. The people of Indiana should decide their own elections. Biden's illegal taxpayer-funded scheme to have government agencies run the get-out-the-vote operation for his campaign is an egregious abuse of power."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Former attorney general pulls rug from under DOJ's defense for keeping Biden tapes hidden



On the counsel of Attorney General Merrick Garland, President Joe Biden asserted executive privilege last month to keep recordings of his troubling interview with special counsel Robert Hurt hidden.

In defense of this secrecy, Biden's counsel and Garland cited a 2008 opinion from former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey.

Unfortunately for Biden's executive privilege play, Mukasey issued a declaration in the Heritage Foundation Oversight Project lawsuit against the Biden Department of Justice late Friday night, revealing Garland and his associate deputy to have misapplied his Bush-era argument and to be wrong about keeping the tapes from the American people.

Having described the declaration in advance as a "thermonuclear bomb," Mike Howell, executive director of the Oversight Project, wrote Saturday morning, "Boom[.] Merrick Garland's House of Cards just colapsed."

Background

Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Robert Hur as special counsel in President Joe Biden's classified documents case, tasking him in January 2023 with examining "the possible unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or other records discovered" at Biden's Delaware residence and Washington, D.C., think tank.

Hur concluded his investigation this past February, recommending no charges against Biden. He did, however, note in his 388-page report that his investigation "uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen."

While that acknowledgment was enough to make headlines, the report's suggestion that Biden was too decrepit proved the more alarming.

The Hur report noted Biden's "limited precision and recall during his interviews with his ghostwriter and with our office" and suggested prospective jurors might be disinclined to convict him of a "serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

The report further noted that the Democratic president — whose mental state is apparently too far gone for him to be able to consciously execute a crime — presented himself in October 2023 interviews with Hur's team "as a sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory."

Elsewhere in the report, it said "Biden's memory ... appeared to have significant limitations — both at the time he spoke to [his ghostwriter] in 2017, as evidence by their recorded conversations, and today, as evidenced by his recorded interview with out office."

While Biden's 2017 interview was reportedly "painfully slow" and dragged down by Biden's inability to remember events or even read his own notebook entries, his interview with the special counsel's office was far worse.

"He did not remember when he was vice president" or "when his son Beau died," said the report.

The tapes

Upon learning about the recordings, multiple House GOP chairmen requested on Feb. 12 that Attorney General Merrick Garland turn over the Biden-Hur interview tapes and other materials. Garland failed to do so, prompting the chairmen to respond with subpoenas, which Marland defied, resulting ultimately in a congressional vote to hold him in contempt.

Prior to the vote, Garland told Biden in a May 15 letter to "assert executive privilege over the subpoenaed recordings," stressing such an assertion could only be overcome if congressional investigators establish that they have a "sufficient need for the subpoenaed materials."

Sure enough, the White House took Garland's advice, keeping the tapes hidden.

Edward Siskel, counsel to the president, told House Republicans in a May 16 letter, "The Attorney General has warned that the disclosure of materials like these audio recordings risks harming future law enforcement investigations by making it less likely that witnesses in high-profile investigations will voluntarily cooperate. In fact, even a past President and Attorney General from your own party recognized the need to protect this type of law enforcement material from disclosure."

Just as Garland had in his defense of Biden's assertion of executive privilege, Siskel too specifically cited a 2008 opinion from former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey, titled, "Assertion of Executive Privilege Concerning the Special Counsel’s Interviews of the Vice President and Senior White House Staff."

In a May 31 court filing, Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer put additional emphasis on Garland's use of this opinion.

'The assertion of executive privilege made here goes well beyond the limits of any prior assertion.'

In the opinion, Mukasey asked President George Bush to assert executive privilege with respect to DOJ documents subpoenaed by a congressional committee, noting "such a production would chill deliverations among future White House officials and impede future Department of Justice criminal investigations involving official White House conduct."

It was unwise to lean too heavily on this opinion.

The Oversight Project sues

The Heritage Foundation's Oversight Project filed a lawsuit in March to compel the release of the Biden-Hur recordings and other pertinent materials.

Mike Howell said in a statement at the outset, "We are suing not only to find out why Special Counsel Hur gave President Biden the kid gloves treatment but also for the records he relied upon to determine that President Biden is too old and senile to face accountability for his egregious mishandling of our nation’s most important secrets."

"The American people deserve to know how the Special Counsel came to his conclusion. That's why we are suing for them to obtain those records and restore transparency to our government," added Howell.

Part of the reason the Oversight Project is keen to hear the tapes is because the White House admitted to doctoring the Biden-Hur interview transcripts to make Biden appear more coherent. The apparent need to clean up the transcript speaks clearly to the Oversight Project's sense that it is in the interest of the American people to have some insight into the "mental fitness of their president."

The Oversight Project's public records lawsuit was ultimately consolidated last month with suits filed by Judicial Watch and CNN. Other outfits have followed suit.

Mukasey pulls the rug from under Biden and Garland

In a declaration dated June 18 and filed overnight Friday, Mukasey noted that Garland had placed "heavy reliance" on his 2008 analysis of the law enforcement component of executive privilege — to a fault.

'The Department has lost sight of the true institutional interests of the presidency and is putting at risk the important traditions and principles on which the doctrine of executive privilege rests.'

While supportive for the president's constitutional responsibility to assert executive privilege "when necessary to protect sensitive information in the possession of the Executive Branch, Mukasey indicated that "the assertion of executive privilege made here goes well beyond the limits of any prior assertion and is not supported by the 2008 Executive Privilege Letter or other precedents relied upon by the Department."

Mukasey indicated there could be considerable fallout from the Biden DOJ and White House's attempt to hide the tapes using executive privilege.

The reasons given for invoking the privilege are entirely unconvincing, and I believe that by pressing this flawed privilege assertion, the Department has lost sight of the true institutional interests of the presidency and is putting at risk the important traditions and principles on which the doctrine of executive privilege rests, and thus the ability of this and future Presidents to invoke that doctrine when necessary and appropriate.

Mukasey highlighted various glaring differences between Biden's case and the circumstances in 2008.

For starters, he noted that the FBI reports and interview notes at issue in 2008 contained "frank and candid deliberations among senior presidential advisers" regarding White House business, including sensitive decisions on Bus's part as well as communications with the president.

The Biden-Hur interview, on the other hand, "did not touch on official White business, let alone the sensitive deliverations of presidential advisers, but only private conduct."

Mukasey made mince meat of the notion that the release of the Biden-Hur document would discourage "voluntary cooperation with future Department criminal investigations involving official white House actions" as would have been the case in 2008, and noted further the Bush-era documents of interest had still all been confidential, whereas a supposedly verbatim transcript of Biden's interview has already been released.

"I believe the public has an overwhelming interest in hearing the audio recording and that that interest in disclosure overwhelms any conceivable intrusion on the President's privacy interests," added Mukasey.

Mukasey echoed the suggestion of some lawmakers, noting that audio recordings provide additional insights that cannot otherwise be gleaned from a "cold transcript about the witness' demeanor, credibility, mental acuity, and other attributes" — insights that evidently played a role in Hur's ultimate determination not to recommend charges.

'This is the very reason for the existence of the Freedom of Information Act in the first place.'

According to the former attorney general, the effort to hide the tapes strongly suggests that the Biden administration believes its release "would prove embarrassing to the President and politically damaging" — which is hardly a justifiable reason to assert executive privilege or shrug off FOIA requests.

After briefly touching on Garland's intimation that the release of the Biden recordings would be akin to releasing the recording of the dying Challenger astronauts, Mukasey kneecapped the Biden attorney general's suggestion that if released, then the Biden-Hur interview recordings could be manipulated, noting there is ample stock of Biden audio to create "deep fakes."

"[Garland's] case crumbled tonight, "the Oversight Project stressed online. "No one is above the law."

"Despite the Government's voluminous briefing, fanciful arguments, and notwoethy attempts to invent new legal authority, this remains a simple case," said the Oversight Projet's brief. "This is the very reason for the existence of the Freedom of Information Act in the first place."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze News exclusive: Heritage Oversight Project exposes Biden's 'election interference' scheme, identifies 3 ways states can fight back



President Joe Biden issued an executive order early in his presidency that effectively compels federal agencies to mobilize historically Democratic groups to vote. After investigating Executive Order 14019, its origins, and its application, the Heritage Foundation's government watchdog Oversight Project concluded it constitutes "election interference" and could be greatly consequential in November.

"The last election was decided by less than 40K votes in the determinative swings," Mike Howell, executive director of the Oversight Project, told Blaze News.

Howell highlighted further how Demos — a leftist think tank whose 2020 recommendations to the Biden administration appear to have helped inspire EO 14019 — has boasted that the scheme could bring in 3 million new voter registrations per year. Howell suspects the number could be far higher.

The Oversight Project has gone beyond merely diagnosing the problem. Today, it has exposed various agencies' strategic plans and identified three major steps that states can take to thwart or at the very least "frustrate" them.

The order

Months after taking office, Biden issued Executive Order 14019, alleging that minorities, particularly blacks, are disproportionately met today with "significant obstacles" to voting. According to the preamble, they are "disproportionately burdened by voter identification laws and limited opportunities to vote by mail."

Greater turnout from this particular cohort would likely be a boon for Biden, given that 83% of black voters are presently Democrats or lean Democratic, according to the Pew Research Center.

After intimating that minorities have trouble using IDs and mailboxes, the preamble suggests that in order to remedy this perceived racial discrimination and to "protect the right to vote," it is incumbent upon the Biden administration to enmesh itself more fully in the election process.

'Biden signed Executive Order (E.O.) 14019 directing every federal agency to get out the vote for his reelection campaign.'

To this end, Biden compelled federal agencies to "consider ways to expand citizens' opportunities to register to vote and to obtain information about, and participate in, the electoral process."

— (@)

The Oversight Project indicated this means those federal agencies that regularly engage with the American public must:

  • "use their resources, connections, and relationships with their clientele to facilitate registrations and mass mail-in ballot applications;
  • "use federal resources to assist in completing those registrations and applications"; and
  • "provide space on 'agency premises' and resources to 'approved' non-governmental organizations ('NGO') and 'state officials' to accomplish these directives."

The Oversight Project has summarized the situation thusly: "On March 7, 2021 Biden signed Executive Order (E.O.) 14019 directing every federal agency to get out the vote for his reelection campaign. This whole of government approach is partnering with exclusively left-wing dark money groups."

Partisan executors

There are various reasons to doubt the lawfulness and neutrality of these efforts — whether prospective voters in historically right-leaning areas will be sought out for registry with the same enthusiasm as potential Biden voters in blue enclaves. After all, the administrative state overwhelmingly leans left and and has made no secret in recent years of its anti-Trump skew.

The Hill reported that 95% of all campaign donations from 14 government agencies went to Clinton ahead of the 2016 election. In 2020, the majority of federal employees again donated to the Democratic candidate.

A balance is unlikely to be struck now, especially with former President Donald Trump expected to restore the Schedule F employment category for federal employees if re-elected, which would make it easier to kick insubordinate and poorly performing bureaucrats to the curb.

Oversight highlighted what are perhaps more pressing issues with the order's execution, such as its corresponding approval process for non-governmental organizations and state officials, noting that the evidence at hand — of which there would be more but for the administration's apparent aversion to transparency — "demonstrates a left-wing partisan implementation of E.O. 14019."

In a May 1 memo, Oversight indicated there was cause to suspect that the NGOs executing Biden's will were predominantly, if not entirely, populated by fellow travelers.

The Biden Department of Justice, various other federal agencies, and White House staff, held a "Listening Session" on July 12, 2021, with regards to the order's implementation. Oversight noted that there was not one identifiable Republican, Independent or politically conservative individual among the NGOs' representatives present for the session.

That is less surprising given the liberal, Democratic-aligned groups in attendance, which included the ACLU, the Anti-Defamation League, Black Votes Matter, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Open Society Policy Center, and the NAACP.

It's not just the political makeup and biases of the NGOs that warrant skepticism about the neutrality of the voter mobilization scheme.

According to the Oversight Project, Democratic state actors are similarly getting in on the scheme.

In March, the U.S. Small Business Administration announced an agreement with the Michigan Department of State to oblige Biden and execute his order in the state. Similar initiatives in Michigan boosted Biden in 2020. Now his administration will be working hand in glove with Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, "a left-wing partisan who has embraced policy positions that undermine election security."

Benson has a spotty record when it comes to elections. A State Court of Claims judge ruled in 2021 that she had violated state law by unilaterally altering absentee voting rules ahead of the 2020 election. According to the Federalist, she worked with a nonprofit linked to Mark Zuckerberg-funded groups to influence state elections in 2019. In March, she was sued by the Republican National Committee for allegedly failing to clean up Michigan's "inflated and "inaccurate" voter rolls.

Despite branding Biden's opponent a "threat to democracy" in December and suggesting she was allied with her counterparts in swing states against a "common adversary," the law violating Democrat will nonetheless play a part in "connecting Michigan's small business community with the tools and information they need to play an even greater active role in our democracy."

'Biden bucks' strategies exposed

While concerns in recent years about the execution of Biden's order could possibly be allayed by the provision of greater insights into the nature of its rollout, Oversight indicated "the Biden Administration and Congressional Democrats have fought efforts to provide transparency about E.O. 14019."

Various attempts to obtain information via congressional oversight and Freedom of Information requests — such as those launched by the Foundation for Government Accountability and America First Legal Foundation — have apparently been met with resistance.

Upon suing 14 agencies in an effort to see the strategic plans they provided to the White House, the Biden DOJ told AFL to pound sand, claiming the plans were exempt from public disclosure as privileged presidential communications, according to Oversight.

These apparent efforts to keep the specifics of the scheme under wraps have prompted greater suspicion, especially at Oversight, which has apparently filed around 1,600 FOIA requests related to the EO and a lawsuit just last week against the Small Business Administration.

Oversight has, however, finally got its hands on various agencies' strategic plans along with internal communications about the executive order and correspondences with leftist NGOs.

Newly released and largely redacteddocuments detail some of the lengths federal agencies are going to mobilize friendly voter turnout per the EO, such as guaranteeing federal employees four hours of paid administrative leave per election to go vote or participate as supposedly non-partisan poll watchers. In the documents, there are also indications of internal concern over executing Biden's will whilst avoiding brazen violations of the Hatch Act.

While some proposals in the documents are relatively innocuous, those promising to be most impactful appear to be geared toward boosting Democratic numbers, as Oversight previously indicated.

Among the documents obtained by Oversight is a 2021 recommendation to the Department of Education from various Democrat-aligned groups, such as the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, suggesting that it include "check-the-box" automatic voter registration for individuals applying for federal financial aid via the Free Application for Federal Student Aid process. The activistic outfits note in their recommendation that the Office of Federal Student Aid presently has the contact information of 20 million Americans enrolled in post-secondary institutions.

Non-college educated voters lean Republican whereas voters with college degrees are much more likely to lean toward the Democratic Party, according to Pew. 20 million email addresses and automatic registries could go a long way in a tight race.

Oversight has indicated that it will continue to populate its repository of "Biden Bucks" documents as they become available.

Counteroffensive

When pressed on whether Congress could take meaningful action against the scheme, Howell responded, "Congress missed their shot. Ship sailed. They funded this."

States, alternatively, could throw a wrench in the works.

Oversight outlined three ways that states could go about doing so, the first of which is attacking the application of the order with regards to presidential elections.

"Presidential elections are governed by the Electors clause of the Constitution, which by its text and original understanding gives zero warrant for Congressional action. States are well within their powers to pass laws solely governing presidential elections," wrote the Oversight Project. "To be sure, different procedures for Presidential Elections impose increased administrative burdens and costs, but those are justified by insulating at least that electoral process from partisan Executive Branch action."

States could also raise hell about the "partisan political activity inherent in the plans and actions of the federal employees involved."

Complaints citing possible Hatch Act violations could potentially frustrate the scheme or at the very least force the administration to speak to its meddling.

Finally, Oversight highlighted how "Section 7 of the [National Voter Registration Act] provides that 'Federal and nongovernmental offices' can only engage in the type of activities directed by the Executive Order if a state 'designate[s]' that office to act as a voter registration agency."

"States could take all appropriate action to remove and attack designations of federal agencies to act under the NVRA that States did not make, or that were made by State officials without appropriate authority," wrote Oversight, stressing that college campuses and state prisons would be worth scrutinizing.

'Executive Order 14019 raises significant challengers for our nation's system of checks and balances that the framers carefully crafted in the Constitution to guard against attempts by the executive branch to circumvent the legislative process.'

Howell and his team at the Oversight Project are hardly outliers in figuring the so-called "Biden Bucks" scheme for a "threat to election integrity."

Republicans on the House Oversight Committee noted in their Monday letter to Shalanda Young, the director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, "Ensuring the safe and secure administration of elections and access for all legal voters is critical, but the authority to engage in such efforts is expressly delegated to the states and the Congress by the Constitution."

"Executive Order 14019 raises significant challengers for our nation's system of checks and balances that the framers carefully crafted in the Constitution to guard against attempts by the executive branch to circumvent the legislative process," continued the letter.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Here’s Fresh Evidence Biden’s Using Your Tax Dollars To Turn Out Democrat Votes In 2024

The Biden administration's executive order has the potential to swing the 2024 election in the president’s favor.