‘Moscow Mitch’ Angry At Being Called ‘Moscow Mitch’ | The Last Word | MSNBC

I don't like the "names" given to opponents. I do agree we need to get something going to make this harder for Russia. I would have no problem with him blocking this if he had something better to bring to the floor. It appears he doesn't and there is the rub

Wow, playing right into the Dems hands. The first bill introduced was put forth via a request of unanimous consent. For those who don't understand this, here's the definition:

"Unanimous Consent Agreement - A unanimous consent request setting terms for the consideration of a specified bill or other measure. These agreements are usually proposed by the majority leader or floor manager of the measure, and reflect negotiations among senators interested in the measure. Many are "time agreements," which limit the time available for debate and specify who will control that time. Many also permit only a list of specified amendments, or require amendments to be to the measure. Many also contain other provisions, such as empowering the majority leader to call up the measure at will or specifying when consideration will begin or end."

Now call me crazy, but when only 1 GOP member agrees to this bill from the house, it seems to me that it needs to be debated clarified, understood, and officially voted on, rather than simply agreeing to let it pass. I'd also like to ensure that this particular bill does not federalize state and local election laws, and/or impose measures which they cannot facilitate by the 2020 election as they would be required to do (i.e. required backup paper ballots). Furthermore, this particular bill addresses none of the issues which are tied to Russian interference. To date, there has been zero discovery of Russian manipulation of the election systems. Zero. Are they vulnerable? Yes. Does anyone here actually know how and what one would have to do to exploit them? Let's just say paper ballot are no more secure and they can even complicate the results even more. The last thing we need to do is revert technology and instead find ways to make it more secure. Paper ballots do the opposite.

On the second bill, to require all offers of help from foreign government members. This is already a requirement in which campaign members are required to report anything of value offered to them by a foreign government. But what if it were a surrogate? How would you know? Does this mean I report all offers of help? What's the threshold? Is it constitutional? What's the process? Is everyone aware that this would not have required Trump Jr and company to report the events leading up to the so called "Trump Tower Meeting"? Also, what about all these opposition research firm used by both sides of the isle? Are they subject to this law too? After all, once they are hired by the campaign, aren't they a part of that campaign?

So what should we do? I am all for providing more funds to help states modernize and secure voting systems. This has been done since 2016. I am also for staging federal cyber units to monitor for and respond to any cyber activity directed at state and local election systems (to include the databases housing the voter registrations). Again, this has been organized and even implemented in the 2018 election. Cyber has many more actions they can take which have been implemented since 2016. Now if we want to get into more things we can do, how about ensuring every voter is who they say they are by implementing a ID requirement (i.e. you must have a government issued ID when you show up to vote)? How about looking into these so call opposition research practices and remove the back door means in which candidates (some of who are serving in a government role already) spy on other Americans. Essentially it is illegal to use US intelligence assets to spy on Americans, but hiring former spies and espionage experts (to include Foreign ones by the way) to do so is OK? All in the name of researching a candidate right?

Forgive me as I do not share the Democrats need to rush legislation and frankly, I view such moves with suspicion. We've already improved on the election security since 2016, and I know for a fact the lessons learned from the election are being applied as we speak for 2020. Will it be perfect, not likely. but I would also argue that few of the measures recently pushed by the Democrats will provide any significant results. All they will likely do is give both sides more ways to find unproductive gotchas /conspiracies when someone makes a mistake by not reporting a Foreign National offering assistance. Or another means to delay and or attempt to build the perception that one candidate may have won an election as they compare paper ballots with the electronic results. Or the fact we might have to fill out two ballots may discourage more people from voting at all.