Election Integrity FAQ
Why do so many people on the West Coast believe that our elections are stolen?
It’s not just Republicans. Citizens from all political parties are beginning to question the integrity of our elections. This is largely due to the fact that election results are becoming more and more contractive to voter sentiment. For example, Kate Brown was the lowest rated governor in the U.S., yet voters elected her predecessor, Tina Kotex, who is now the lowest rated governor in the U.S. How is it possible that the most despised governors keep getting re-elected by the people who despise them? How is it possible that a majority of Republican voters in Clackamas County, OR could elect a known Antifa activist over a beloved conservative incumbent who’s served multiple terms of office? How is it that in Oregon, where the majority of voters widely reject new taxes, the homeless industrial complex, gender theory in schools, soft on crime policies, tolling, government corruption and the bad economic policies of the far left, widely elect Democrat Supermajorities in the House and Senate in 2024? These policies are destroying our economy, communities and institutions.
People don’t elect politicians who have proven to hurt them. So, when the results don’t jive with the sentiment, people begin taking a closer look. In Oregon, election fiascos and unexplainable anomalies have become commonplace in every election cycle. Those of us who have followed our elections closely, for a longer period of time, have developed deeper mistrust. If you are newer to the election integrity issue, or you believe that our Vote by Mail system is secure, what you are about to learn will shock you.
The following sections present indisputably verified facts about Oregon’s election system with links to anomalous findings logically related to the system’s feature or function. Please note that Oregon, Washington and California have nearly identical elections systems. While the methods and means slightly vary, the intended outcomes are the same.
Where’s the Indisputable Proof of Mass-Election Fraud?
Oregon’s election system has been carefully and patiently designed, during the past 40 years, to enable government actors to manage the outcome of all elections. The system, itself, is the “smoking gun” of mass-election fraud.
Those who understand the system, have no doubt that mass-election fraud is occurring in every local, state and federal election in Oregon. To help you understand the system, we’ve provided a verifiable timeline that features key legislative events that shaped our fraudulent election system. It all began with vote by mail in 1981.
Elections in Oregon: The Timeline
Make sure to expand bill titles below. The titles are designed to deceive. It’s what the bills do that cause significant effects to the integrity of our elections.
-
HB 3099 allowed counties to conduct certain elections entirely by mail as a pilot program. It was limited in scope and primarily focused on small local elections. This bill is not available online, but is retained by the Oregon State Archives.
Election Integrity Impact: With Vote by Mail, it cannot be confirmed that a single person cast a single ballot.
-
Oregon Legislature makes VBM a permanent option for local elections, allowing counties to choose this method for various types of elections. The bill number is missing, but multiple sources (including Wikipedia) confirm this as fact.
Election Integrity Impact: The political debate to expand VBM was led by the League of Women Voters, AARP and the Oregon Education Association. Supporters believed it would increase participation and make voting more convenient. Opposition was led by Bill Sizemore and Lynn Snodgrass who believed VBM would invite election fraud.
-
Term ends for the last Republican Governor ever to serve Oregon. Victor Atiyeh was the first Arab-American governor in the United States. He was of Syrian descent.
Election Integrity Impact: Oregon has not had a republican governor in 37 years of vote by mail.
-
A bill that would’ve made it legal to vote by mail in Oregon’s primary election was defeated across party lines 33-27.
Election Integrity Impact: The belief that vote by mail would reduce Oregon’s election integrity was bipartisan at the time.
-
This legislation allowed vote by mail to be used for federal elections under specific circumstances, such as special elections. This bill is not available online but is retained by the Oregon State Archives.
Election Integrity Impact: This bill paved the way for Oregon to conduct the first entirely mail-based federal primary election in 1995.
-
Governor’s Task Force on Local Government Services “identifies” statewide vote by mail as one of the most significant opportunities to save money on conducting elections.
Election Integrity Impact: Governor Barbara Roberts, facing economic challenges, creates the argument that VBM saves money. She also focused on education reform, environmental protection and access to healthcare. She served a single term in office.
-
Despite then Governor John Kitzhaber’s (D) veto of a passed bill to expand VBM to all elections, Oregon held the first VBM federal primary as a special election.
Election Integrity Impact: Despite gubernatorial push-back on VBM, due its inability to validate ballots, Democrats pushed forward.
-
Oregon becomes first state to conduct a general election 100% by mail to fill a vacancy in a federal office (Senate). Democrat Ron Wyden defeated Republican Gordon Smith by less than 1%.
Election Integrity Impact: Did Democrats manipulate the VBM system to rig the outcome of this closely contested race?
-
Oregon becomes the first state in the U.S. to adopt an exclusive vote by mail system with the passing of Measure 60. The Measure was supported by League of Women Voters, AARP, Oregon League of Conservation Voters and the Oregon Education Association.
Election Integrity Impact: All current forms of mass-election fraud and the institutional disenfranchisement of all Oregon voters is as a result of this Act.
-
Oregon becomes the first state in the nation to conduct a presidential election entirely by mail achieving 80% turnout.
Election Integrity Impact: Typical voter turnout in Oregon prior to VBM was around 66%. After VBM typical turnout has been around 85%.
-
HB 2386 directs the Secretary of State to adopt electronic voter registration under emergency declaration. The bill defines a “qualified person” as anyone with a) an Oregon driver license b) Oregon driver permit and/or c) State identification card.
Election Integrity Impact: The bill does not mention U.S. citizenship as a qualification to register to vote. This is critical as Oregon is a “Sanctuary State” which provides ID cards and driver licenses to illegal aliens.
-
HB 2177 requires the Department of Transportation send information and signatures, of any individual applying for drivers license, ID card or change of address, to the Secretary of State for automatic voter registration, under emergency declaration. The bill includes provisions that auto register people under the age of 18; prevents public records requests of under-age registered voters; defines DMV applications as voter registration cards; directs county clerks to register incomplete registration cards; allows anyone to prepare, print and distribute registration cards with permission from Secretary of State; requires Secretary of State to approve voter registration forms developed by any agency designated as a voter registration agency; eliminates address requirement for voter registration; requires self attestation for citizenship; requires no questions asked by county clerk regarding attestation; protects from disqualification of elector due to errors in automatic registration; and increases maximum size of precinct from 5,000 to 10,000. Bill sponsors removed their names pursuant to House Rule 12.00. Val Hoyle and Dan Rayfield led the Subcommittee on General Government in passing this bill in 5-4 vote. It was then sent to Ways and Means by Order of the Speaker (Tina Kotek).
Election Integrity Impact: This is the worst election law passed since vote by mail in regard to the impact on election integrity. It appears the ultimate goal of the bill was to fill the voter rolls with invalid electors then prevent the public and elected County Clerks from asking any questions. Doubling the size of precincts further disenfranchises minority party voters and makes it harder to inspect voter rolls at the precinct level.
-
SB 861 was a bipartisan bill authorizing the Secretary of State to pay for ballot return envelopes; appropriates funds. The bill also allows out of state individuals to vote by mail, who are NOT overseas or active military and without ID verification; allows electors, not affiliated to a political party, to vote by mail in partisan primary elections upon request; validates electronic signature for online voter registration. Dan Rayfield (D) was a Chief Sponsor. Christine Drazan (R) and David Brock Smith (R) co-sponsored.
Election Integrity Impact: Increases probability of receipt of invalid ballots through initiating interference with primary elections from non-party ballots, enables Secretary of State to mail interstate ballots to potential non-residents and allows electronic signature to register to vote without ID verification.
-
HB 3291 allows ballot returns for seven days after election day with post mark on or before election day and requires county clerks to accept ballots without a postmark within seven days after election day. It enables county clerks to begin opening and counting ballots, as they are received, prior to election day. Extends certification of election results to 37 days after election day. This bill was sponsored by Dan Rayfield and Rob Wager and co-sponsored exclusively by Democrats.
Election Integrity Impact: Enabling clerks to count ballots as received encourages nefarious release of early voting totals. The ability to receive non-postmarked ballots after election day creates additional opportunities to infuse invalid ballots.