US News
Proposed House Rules Seek To Erase Gendered Terms Such As ‘Father, Mother, Son, Daughter’
Leaders in the House of Representatives announced on Friday a rules package for the 117th Congress that includes a proposal to use “gender-inclusive language” and eliminate gendered terms such as “‘father, mother, son, daughter,” and more.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rules Committee Chairman James McGovern (D-Mass.) announced on Friday that the rules package includes changes that would “honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral.”
A separate announcement from McGovern (pdf) said that the Democratic rules package will make “Changes [to] pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral or removes references to gender, as appropriate, to ensure we are inclusive of all Members, Delegates, Resident Commissioners and their families—including those who are nonbinary.”
Terms to be struck from clause 8(c)(3) of rule XXIII, the House’s Code of Official Conduct, as outlined in the proposed rules (pdf), include “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, [and] granddaughter.”
Such terms would be replaced with “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, [and] grandchild.”
According to the proposed rules, “seamen” would be replaced with “seafarers,” and “Chairman” would be replaced with “Chair” in Rule X of the House.
Pelosi and McGovern said that the overall package “includes sweeping ethics reforms, increases accountability for the American people, and makes this House of Representatives the most inclusive in history.”
The rules package includes removing floor privileges from former Congress members who have been convicted of crimes related to their House service or election.
It would also make it “a violation of the Code of Official Conduct for a Member, officer, or employee of the House to disclose the identity of a whistleblower.”
It also establishes a new Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth, to “investigate, study, make findings, and develop recommendations on policies, strategies, and innovations” to “[empower] American economic growth while ensuring that no one is left out or behind in the 21st Century Economy.”
The rules package will be introduced and voted on once the new Congress convenes.
In Arizona, to vote in federal elections (President, the House, and the Senate) you are required to swear (under penalty of perjury) that you are a U.S. citizen…
But there is no proof requirement.
Official Arizona Secretary of State Citizenship Requirements for Voting:
The federal government relies on the attestation of the individual, the penalties for false statements, and the states’ efforts to cross-check information to maintain the integrity of the voter registration process (Source).
The process is largely based on the honor system.
The Associated Press recently reported this fact:
Source: https://apnews.com/article/arizona-voting-laws-citizenship-proof-50dafd68f8dd4af5cf669afa62efdf19
Currently, there is no national database or system that verifies the citizenship of voters directly. There is no guaranteed audit at the federal level specifically targeting “federal only” voters who have not provided proof of citizenship.
What about election audits? Wouldn’t non-citizen voters get caught?
Non-citizens in the country on parole awaiting an asylum hearing could potentially be identifiable in databases used for post-election audits, such as the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program, which is designed to verify the immigration status of individuals (Source).
As for “gotaway” illegal immigrants who evaded entering in a documented fashion, it would be significantly more challenging to identify them in databases for the purposes of a post-election audit.
Since they have not been processed through official immigration channels, they would not have records in the same databases that document legal entries and immigration statuses. Therefore, they would not be easily identifiable through the standard verification processes used in post-election audits.
I’ve seen studies that claim non-citizen and Illegal Immigrant voting is extremely rare… What about those?
Studies such as those from the Brennan Center for Justice (link), indicate that non-citizen voting is extremely rare based on available data and the significant legal risks involved.
However, these studies rely on the analysis of documented cases and official records, which would not include undocumented individuals who evaded detection entirely.
For “gotaway” illegal immigrants, since they lack official records, there would be no straightforward method to audit their voting activity after an election. This is a limitation of the current verification systems, which are designed to prevent ineligible voting using the records available. The rarity of non-citizen voting cited in studies is based on the assumption that the risk of severe penalties, including deportation and imprisonment, serves as a strong deterrent against such actions.
In summary, while there are robust systems in place to deter and detect ineligible voting, the nature of undocumented entry into the country creates a gap in the ability to audit post-election voting activity for those individuals. The extent to which this occurs is unknown, and the studies available do not account for individuals without any official records.
All things considered, voting is only a small fraction of the overall concerns that Americans are expressing related to illegal immigration and asylum into the United States.
Gallup recently reported:
Quote from Gallup:
“For the third month in a row, immigration is the problem Americans name more than any other as the most important facing the U.S. While immigration has not ranked as the top problem often in Gallup’s monthly trend, it stands alone as the most politically polarizing issue in the past 25 years of Gallup’s measurement.
The record surge of migrants at the southern U.S. border in December brought even more focus on the issue — and while attempted crossings have eased slightly since then, they are expected to increase as spring continues. President Joe Biden’s approval rating for his handling of immigration has been persistently poor. With the presidential election about six months away and immigration top of mind, the issue remains a significant vulnerability for Biden as he seeks reelection.”
Source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/644570/immigration-named-top-problem-third-straight-month.aspx
Health
Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, Has Been Diagnosed with Terminal Cancer
This follows his transfer to a medical facility in December
The new comes from a letter he wrote:
Concerns Grow Over Non-Citizen Voting in Arizona
Illegal Immigration Massively Surges in 2024
China and Russia are increasing their military collaboration
Evidence shows ANTIFA being escorted into DC by police ahead of Jan. 6th MAGA Stop The Steal rally…
Vaccine maker: ‘Covid is never going away’…
