Tag: elections

Oregon Could Vote to Ban Hunting and Fishing – Proposed Law Would Classify Both as Cruelty to Animals

A petition to ban hunting and ranching in Oregon is nearing the number of signatures needed to be placed on this fall’s ballot.

David Michelson, the organizer of Initiative Petition 28, said supporters have gathered about 105,000 of the 117,713 verified signatures needed by July 2, according to Fox affiliate KPTV.

“If it makes it on the ballot and is approved by voters in November, the protections that currently apply to pets such as dogs and cats would extend to wild animals, livestock, and animals used in research,” the outlet reported. “Supporters call the proposal the PEACE Act, short for People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions. Supporters say the measure is intended to protect animals from abuse, neglect, and killing.”

The proposed law reportedly has exceptions for veterinarians and for those who kill animals in self-defense.

Michelson told the NBC affiliate KOIN-TV, “We really want to make Oregon the first state to vote on something like this.”

“We are aware that it’s unlikely 50 percent of Oregonians are ready right now to move away from killing animals,” he added. “But we want to get that conversation out there. So that we can hopefully move in that direction.”

Amy Patrick with the Oregon Hunters Association told KPTV, “I’m hopeful that Oregonians will not vote ‘yes’ on this. I’m hopeful that whether you’re in an urban region or a rural region, you understand what makes Oregon great.”

“And part of that is our wildlife. And part of that is our economy that comes from our farming and ranching,” she continued. “And that folks will really, really delve into what this [proposal] does and how this is going to affect us not just in the abstract. So if you’re not a hunter or you’re not a rancher or a farmer, don’t think that this is not going to affect you in your day-to-day life.”

An Oregon State University report issued in February 2025 stated that cattle ranching makes up a significant portion of the state’s economy, contributing over $900 million annually.

Keep reading

Nobody Trusts Elections — That’s the Crisis

One of the most corrosive realities in contemporary American electoral politics isn’t polarization, misinformation, or even foreign interference. It is something more basic: a majority of Americans no longer trust the integrity of their elections.

This is not a fringe belief limited to one party or ideology. According to polling from Rasmussen Reports, ahead of the 2024 presidential election, 62 percent of likely voters were “concerned that cheating will affect the outcome of the 2024 election.”

This skepticism crosses party lines and has persisted over the years. The pattern is clear: whichever party loses a presidential election claims the winning party cheated.

Democrats insisted George W. Bush stole the 2000 election. Many believed he did so again in 2004.

The idea that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to “steal” the 2016 election became a conviction on the political left, supported for years by media, weaponized intelligence community lies, and congressional investigations.

Republicans, especially President Donald Trump, believe the 2020 election was compromised through mail-in ballots, procedural changes enacted without legislatures, ballot harvesting, delayed counting, and statistical anomalies that were never convincingly explained. And now, after 2024, many Democrats again claim that Trump cheated to regain the presidency.

This recurring cycle reveals an important point: the issue is no longer who wins, but whether Americans trust the legitimacy of the system itself. It’s not about any specific election, but about the electoral process as a whole.

Whether Donald Trump “probably” won in 2020 is a separate debate, one with strong feelings on both sides. But that debate isn’t the main point here. The real issue is that half the country sees every election loss as illegitimate, and nothing has been done to rebuild trust in the American election system.

Democracy cannot survive on blind faith alone. Trust must be earned through transparency, consistent rules, and procedures that make fraud difficult and detection easy.

Yet instead of reforming elections to restore public confidence, political leaders often respond to skepticism by dismissing it as dangerous, disloyal, or a “threat to democracy.”

That is backward. In a healthy republic, distrust in elections should lead to reform, not censorship, gaslighting, or moral condemnation.

Election procedures are important. Think about how American elections are now run. Voting can start weeks or even months before Election Day. Ballots are mailed en masse, harvested, cured, and counted long after polls close. 

In some jurisdictions, results may take days or weeks to be revealed.

Congressional races sometimes change multiple times as new batches of ballots are “discovered” or counted.

Keep reading

Maricopa County Recorder Finds 137 Illegal Voters, Refers 60 Non-Citizens to be Prosecuted for Voting as Democratic Arizona Secretary of State Whines Over Kristi Noem’s Visit to Arizona and Claims Illegals Can’t Vote

While Democrats claim that illegal aliens can’t vote in elections because it’s already illegal and they need to sign an affidavit attesting they’re eligible to vote, Maricopa County recently identified over 100 noncitizens who were registered to vote.

While investigating a voter registration glitch that occurred in the state’s Motor Vehicle Division voter registration system, which, for nearly 20 years, allowed individuals who received a driver’s license before 1996 to vote without citizenship verification, the County Recorder’s office said it identified 137 non-citizens who were registered to vote.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported on this issue, which surfaced in September 2024, just months before the 2024 election. The massive “error” allowed anybody who received a driver’s license before 1996 to vote without citizenship verification, and left nearly 100,000 voters with no citizenship verification. It was later revealed that the error may have affected more than 200,000 voters.

Arizona executive branch officials, who were fraudulently elected after 60% of voting machines failed Republican voters in 2022, were further caught discussing the error and admitting that the 2020 and 2022 elections were “challengable” as a result.

Nearly half of them, 60, “have voted in prior elections,” according to the Recorder’s office.

Those 60 individuals have been referred for prosecution to the Maricopa County Attorney’s office and the Arizona Attorney General.

This comes after Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem visited Arizona on Friday to deliver remarks in support of the SAVE America Act. Some speculate that the federal government may return to Arizona to investigate the fraud in the state’s elections.

After Noem’s speech in Arizona, where she rebuked the state’s election procedures, Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes attempted to puff out his chest and own Noem with a contemptuous video statement, claiming that Arizona already requires proof of citizenship to vote. “We’ve been doing that for 20 years, maybe not in the Dakotas, where you came from, but we do it here,” he said.

However, this is not true. To vote in Arizona, one simply must check a box saying they are a US citizen. Ironically, the Secretary released the following video on the same day that Maricopa County found the illegal voters!

Keep reading

CA Pot Tax Heist: $370 Million Stolen from Kids’ Drug Prevention to Fund Dem Voter Registration Scam

Steve Hilton announced the first findings from the newly formed California Department of Government Efficiency, led by Jenny Ray LaRue, alleging large-scale fraud involving state funds.

Speaking outside the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, Hilton said the new department had begun examining financial activity within state agencies and tracking alleged misuse of taxpayer money.

“Welcome everyone. We are here outside the California Department of tax defeat administration. This is where your money goes. This building is where your money goes into the Democrats bottomless money pit,” Hilton said.

Hilton referenced a prior estimate released weeks earlier, which he said projected at least $250 billion in fraud statewide.

“Our estimate, as you may remember, that we put out a few weeks ago, at least $250 billion of fraud in California,” Hilton said.

“And today, we’re announcing our first findings since we got to work in Cal DOGE just a few weeks ago, just a couple of weeks ago, and here it is. It’s a classic.”

Keep reading

Fifth Circuit Upholds Texas Ban on Paid Ballot Harvesting in Major Election Integrity Win

The Fifth Circuit just handed Texas a major win on ballot harvesting, reversing a lower court and allowing the state’s ban on paid in-person ballot harvesting to take effect.

The ruling clears the way for enforcement of a key provision in S.B. 1, the 2021 election integrity law signed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R). The statute targets compensated political operatives who interact with voters while they are physically handling ballots.

The law defines “vote harvesting services” as:

“in-person interaction with one or more voters, in the physical presence of an official ballot or a ballot voted by mail, intended to deliver votes for a specific candidate or measure.”

That definition is neither abstract nor open-ended. It zeroes in on in-person conduct that occurs in the presence of a ballot and is intended to influence how that ballot is cast. The statute does not sweep in general political advocacy. It addresses direct interaction with a voter while the ballot itself is being handled.

The enforcement provision leaves little ambiguity. Under the statute, a person commits an offense if he:

“knowingly provides or offers to provide vote harvesting services in exchange for compensation or other benefit.”

Put more plainly, Texas can prohibit someone from being paid to hover over a voter while a ballot is being completed and steer the voter toward a preferred candidate or measure.

Keep reading

28% of US Voter Verifications Have NO MATCH at Social Security Administration

Since 2004, the Social Security Administration has provided a simple process to help States with verifying voter applications. It’s called the HAVV System. States send in the name, DOB, and last four digits of the voter’s SSN. The SSA then notifies the State if that person is deceased, alive, matches SSA records, or No Match Found!

A whopping 13% of all HAVV verifications processed in 2025 came back as NO MATCH. That’s 318,217 of the 2.37 million submitted. Since 2011, an astounding 28.8% of all HAVV submissions have come back as NO MATCH. For the past 15 years, the federal government (SSA) has been unable to match 28.1 million voter submissions from States, to the information in its comprehensive computer systems. The Feds have every right to know what garbage is being processed at the State level for our Federal elections.

These alarming percentages most certainly are justification for the DOJ to have access to any State’s voter rolls, including the voter’s full SSN. Yet, activist Judges in MI, OR, and CA tossed out the DOJ cases for voter rolls. The HAVV program was created to process new voters who can’t provide a valid Driver’s License during registration.

This amount of “Non Matches” is why passing the SAVE Act, which requires voter ID, is simply imperative.

When a blue State receives a “NO MATCH” report from their own Federal Government, do you think they reject, or approve that voter application?

Keep reading

213 Democrats Vote Against Requiring Voter ID And Proof Of Citizenship To Vote

Nearly every single Democrat voted against legislation that would require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID for voting in federal elections.

The House passed the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act 218-213. Just Democrat Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas voted to pass the legislation alongside his Republican colleagues. A similar version, known as the SAVE Act, passed the House last year with the support of four Democrats.

The legislation now heads to the Senate, though it would need 60 votes to reach cloture. Self-described “Republican” Lisa Murkowski has already stated she would oppose the election integrity legislation, while Democrat Chuck Schumer has suggested the legislation is “dead on arrival.”

But as The Federalist’s Matt Kittle reported, Republicans — who control the Senate — could invoke the “talking filibuster,” which would force Democrats to keep talking to stall a vote on the legislation. Legislators would have no opportunity for a break and, as Kittle points out, would have to “explain to the 80 percent of Americans (including a significant number of Democrats) who support citizenship and ID requirements, why they so vehemently oppose basic election integrity.”

Some Republicans, however, don’t want to force a vote on the popular legislation, as Kittle reported — but they should.

Keep reading

It’s Not Just Pakistan – Foreigners from Around the World Who Are Not US Citizens Can Register to Vote in US Elections

As The Gateway Pundit reported on Friday, the San Joaquin County Sheriff’s office in California help a news conference 2023 on illegal voting in their California community.

The San Joaquin Sheriff’s Office found 41 sealed, completed, mail-in ballots in the home of Lodi City Council member Shakir Khan. There were a total of 71 voter registrations tied to his address, phone, or email.

Khan targeted members of the local Pakistani immigrant community (including elderly individuals unfamiliar with U.S. voting processes), pressuring them, forging signatures, filling out ballots, and submitting fraudulent registrations.

The San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Captain told reporters at the time that voting records revealed people outside of the country, in Pakistan, were allowed to vote in the California elections.

The Sheriff’s  Captain revealed this during a press conference in September 2025.

Sheriff’s Captain: “The way the voting system is structured, we see quite a few flaws. You’re able to register and cast a vote if you don’t live in the country as evidence of his brother in Pakistan.

I think we have some evidence of two or three other people out of the country that are voted? Is that correct? Yeah, approximately two or three other people out of the country, as well as people residing outside of the district.

The online voter registration system, it seems to be an honor system. Anybody can put information in there to register to vote. All you have to do is click a box and say that you’re not lying, and then you’ll get an email from the Secretary of State or something in the mail saying, Thank you for registering to vote. And there you are. Once you’re on the voter rolls, anytime an election comes around, guess what? You get mailed a ballot, right? You get mailed something to vote. So we found that a little bit problematic.

Keep reading

Senator John Fetterman Weighs in on the SAVE Act – “I Do Not Believe That it’s Unreasonable to Show ID Just to Vote”

Senator John Fetterman was on “Sunday Morning Futures” with host Maria Bartiromo to discuss the SAVE Act, which, if passed, would require voters to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.

“Are you gonna vote to fund DHS?” Bartiromo asked.

“I’ve always been, you know, just secure our border, deport all the criminals,” Fetterman said.

“I hope it doesn’t shut down cause we could all agree to focus on those things, and that’s where I’m gonna be and where my vote is gonna be,” Fetterman said.

“That’s going to impact TSA, people’s travel, certainly under the Department of Homeland Security. It’s gonna impact FEMA,” Bartiromo commented.

“What I don’t understand, Senator, is why it is so difficult to get the SAVE Act into the portfolio and onto the floor. What’s wrong with having an ID to vote?” Bartiromo said.

“Chuck Schumer last week said if the SAVE Act even attempts to get to the Senate, it is dead on arrival. Why?” Bartiromo asked.

“I’m going to see a lot of TSA people, and they are not gonna get paid. Now I can’t have an answer for them other than it’s just basic politics right now. I think every American deserves to be paid for the work that they have done,” Fetterman said.

“I’ve been a Democrat that refused to shut our government down last year. I mean, that’s real lives, and they are not wealthy if they are TSA folks. They are allowing us to fly safe here in America,” Fetterman continued.

Senator Fetterman stated that showing ID is a reasonable standard to be able to vote in federal elections.

“As a Democrat, I do not believe that it’s unreasonable to show ID just to vote,” Fetterman continued.

“Less than a year ago in Wisconsin, you know, they added that to the Constitution by a 63 percent, you know, passing,” Fetterman said of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

“It’s not a radical idea for regular Americans to show your ID to vote, and it’s absolutely those things are not Jim Crow or anything,” Fetterman continued.

“I don’t ever want to vote to shut our government down again,” Fetterman said.

“You are very much where the people are,” Bartiromo commented.

Keep reading

AIPAC Coordinates Donors in Illinois House Primaries

With Israel’s reputation reaching record lows among Democrats, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is resorting to ever more sophisticated methods to support its preferred candidates while cloaking its own involvement.

The amount of money that the premier pro-Israel organization is able to spend in elections is extraordinarily valuable to candidates who would otherwise have little chance of winning. But it now comes with a catch: If voters know the money comes from an organization advocating on behalf of Israel, it can do more harm than good.

AIPAC road-tested its stealth approach in a 2024 House primary in Oregon that pitted Susheela Jayapal, the sister of Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), against physician Maxine Dexter. Dexter raised relatively little money throughout much of her campaign, then saw a last-minute deluge organized by AIPAC coupled with outside spending through super PACs, which themselves turned out to be funded by AIPAC. The timing of the donations meant that there was no meaningful transparency before voters went to the polls, and Dexter expressed a mixture of ignorance and umbrage when her opponents suggested the money actually came from AIPAC.

The main super PAC in question (named 314 Action) explicitly denied that any funding came from AIPAC—a claim revealed as a flagrant lie once disclosure records finally became public. But by then, Dexter had triumphed and was on her way to Congress.

Campaign staffers expect AIPAC to continue using the tactic in this year’s primaries. “In these districts where we have a progressive primary fight, you’re going to see AIPAC put out a network of shell PACs, putting money into races without putting their name on it,” said Usamah Andrabi of the progressive campaign group Justice Democrats.

And indeed, the same pattern is emerging in three competitive House primaries in Illinois. The pieces of the puzzle can be found in the campaign disclosures of House candidates Laura Fine, a state legislator running in Illinois’s Ninth Congressional District for the open seat vacated by Rep. Jan Schakowsky on the North Side of Chicago and its northern suburbs; Donna Miller, a Cook County commissioner running in Illinois’s Second District to replace Rep. Robin Kelly on Chicago’s South Side and southern suburbs; and Melissa Bean, a banker and former member of Congress making a comeback in Illinois’s Eighth District in the western suburbs of Chicago. Bean is also running for an open seat to replace Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who like Kelly is running for Senate.

Putting the pieces together, it is clear that AIPAC is again funding super PACs in order to secretly funnel money to its preferred candidates, while also coordinating donors to give to those candidates directly.

Miller is running in a race that features an attempted political comeback by Jesse Jackson Jr., and Fine is squaring off against progressive Daniel Biss and Kat Abughazaleh, who became a national figure after she was indicted by the Trump Justice Department for her role in anti-ICE protests. Bean is facing Junaid Ahmed, who supports ending all military aid to Israel.

A look at Miller, Fine, and Bean’s filings betrays an impressively coordinated operation at work. Sixty-five donors who previously gave to AIPAC or its affiliated super PAC United Democracy Project (UDP) have given to both Miller and Fine. These donors delivered $88,066.66 to the Fine campaign. They also contributed $119,746.33 to Miller. A whopping 237 former AIPAC/UDP donors have given to both Miller and Bean, contributing $396,288.01 to Bean and $429,083.00 to Miller. Forty-four of these donors have given to all three candidates, sending a total of $208,753.33 to them.

Keep reading