Whereas we the people are created equal, and whereas we the people are endowed with certain inalienable rights, and whereas we the people instituted a government to secure these rights, and whereas we the people lay the foundation on such principles, and organize its power in such form, as to us shall seem most likely to affect the above objective, do require the following Bill of Rights for Voting Equality.

All citizens of the United States, attaining the age of majority in an election year, shall have the right to vote in any public election in the jurisdiction where they reside.

(The age of majority shall be based on the YEAR and not the MONTH. Therefore if Your birth occurs after the election (Nov & Dec) you shall be permitted to participate that year.)

That right shall not be denied, abridged, suspended, or revoked, by the United States, or any State, City, Judge, agreement, person, or Organization.

Furthermore, in order for the People to Form a more perfect union; the citizen's input must be in all government decisions.

Therefore all citizens at or exceeding the age of majority have the obligation to vote and shall consider elections as to have been summoned for that purpose.

An election will not be valid or verified until it is confirmed that all citizens have voted.

Equal Access Amendment says:

The creation of a democratic society can not be accomplished without the input of the demos. To abdicate completely one's participation is to place too much of a burden and temptation on other members of society. It can not be stressed enough that human beings have the capacity for helping and the capacity for harm. Mutual surveillance is the only surety of just and humane laws.

In addition, Felons should not be disenfranchised. And Why should a felon be allowed to vote? Because it is possible that the law imprisoning the felon is a bad law and they should have the right to participate in changing it.

"Purge-by-Crosscheck" 1.1 million voters were removed because they were accused of voting or registering in two states. In the Keystone State, Interstate Crosscheck listed 344,000 voters as suspect; in North Carolina: 589,000; Arizona: 258,000, Colorado: 769,436, Nevada 90,000, Illinois 500,000. Altogether, 28 states used Crosscheck and over 7,000,000 voters were deemed suspect on extremely flimsy pretenses.

In Georgia, 288 voters named James Brown wrongly registered in a second state. But look closely at the two-state voters. Kobach lists James DONALD Brown as the same voter as James EDWARD Brown. And James Brown Sr. is supposed to be the same voter as James Brown Jr. Both Senior and Junior would get purged from the rolls. I got my hands on the secret instructions for Crosscheck's implementation sent by Kobach to every voting state official telling them they could "ignore" mis-matches.

"Purge-by-Inaccuracy" At least 75,355 ballots were not counted in Michigan in 2016. What's more, most of these were from Detroit and Flint, both majority Black cities (82+% and 55+% respectively) These ballots were not counted because they were unreadable by machines. When the oval next to a candidate's name on the paper ballot was not filled in correctly — i.e., it was checked or was marked with red ink — the machine did not register it and the ballot was set aside. In other cases, no voter error occurred and the machines simply didn't work.

Officials simply don't count all the ballots. They call this "spoilage" or "undervotes" or "overvotes." It's an extra mark on your ballot. They disqualified and rejected 1,913,369 ballots. Most likely to be rejected: mail-in ballots.

"Purge-by-Defective Voting Machine" How come more ballots were uncounted in Detroit and Flint than in the white 'burbs and rural counties? Are the machines themselves racist? No, but they are old, and in some cases, busted. An astonishing 87 machines broke down in Detroit, responsible for counting tens of thousands of ballots. Many more were simply faulty and uncalibrated…

"Purge-by-Postcard" In this method, states mail postcards to voters to "verify" their addresses and if the postcards are not returned, the voter's registration is canceled.

"Purge-by-Voter ID" Republican lawmakers present these laws as a means of discouraging voter fraud, but their true intent — and actual results — are to disenfranchise voters who are less likely to have a state-issued photo ID. Such people include students, the elderly, the poor, and people of color,

“Purge-by-Voter Felony” It has been common practice in the United States to make felons ineligible to vote, in some cases permanently. Over the last few decades, the general trend has been toward reinstating the right to vote at some point, although this is a state-by-state policy choice.

• In Maine and Vermont, felons never lose their right to vote, even while they are incarcerated.
• In 16 states and the District of Columbia, felons lose their voting rights only while incarcerated, and receive automatic restoration upon release.
• In 21 states, felons lose their voting rights during incarceration, and for a period of time after, typically while on parole and/or probation. Voting rights are automatically restored after this time period. Former felons may also have to pay any outstanding fines, fees or restitution before their rights are restored as well.
• In 11 states felons lose their voting rights indefinitely for some crimes, or require a governor's pardon in order for voting rights to be restored, face an additional waiting period after completion of sentence (including parole and probation) or require an additional action before voting rights can be restored.

All citizens shall have equal early voting hours in which to cast their vote. and sufficient voting places, materials, and personnel shall be provided to reduce the voting time to within an hour

All citizens of the United States, residing in all states, shall have equal access, (the same requirements), to creating a political party and achieving a ballot line.

All candidates and parties of these United States shall have equal time constraints to qualify for ballot access.

All candidates must present proof of belonging to a party in order to use the party's ballot line for office. This proof shall be signed by the authorized person in the party registered with the Federal Election Commission

Verification of requirements met shall be submitted to a multi-partisan regulatory board, such as the Board of Elections.

All citizens that desire to be candidates, within these United States, shall register at their local Board of Elections.

The Board of Elections shall divide equally, the campaign tools for election purposes. All tools must be properly labeled as having been provided by the revenue stream and not a direct private donation.

Corporations are NOT people and MONEY is not speech. Elections shall be publicly funded. No private money may be used for a public office, or seat in the government. No ads may be purchased for the purpose of an election. No candidates may appear in an ad for an election for themselves or others.

Candidate campaigns may not accrue profits or in-kind donations.

The citizen must have full confidence that no bribery or appearance of bribery is taking place. The citizen must weigh only the consequences of the words spoken or read were they to become a law.

Equal Access Amendment says:

The 14th amendment provides for equal treatment under the law, but since currently, every state has its own rules for gaining ballot access, that effect is made moot. Also, a party that has current standing does not have to repeat the qualifications but instead rides through on past performance.

For this reason, we submit that every citizen should have equal access (rules) to forming a party and achieving a ballot line. And we advocate that this requirement be met by all, at each election.

The United States must have integrity in its elections. It can not be tempted with money or power, to deviate from true evaluation from the poorest of its citizens to the richest.

It is time to overhaul our federal, state, and local election agencies to guarantee fair elections. We must replace the current system of partisan election administration, in which partisan secretaries of state, county clerks, election commissioners, and other partisan officials are able to issue rulings that favor their own political parties and themselves, with a non-partisan, independent system of running elections. We must end the practice of contracting out fundamental election functions, such as the maintenance of voter lists, to private corporations. We must also insure that independent international and domestic election observers are given full access to monitor our elections. Any donation to a campaign is, in essence, a bribe to ask a candidate to do what the donator wants. Elections must be decided based on the veracity of the candidates' words and ideas.No More Stolen Elections says:

Many citizens are discouraged from voting by unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles and restrictions. We must simplify and rationalize voter registration so that no one is again disenfranchised for failing to check a superfluous box, as occurred in the year 2000 in Florida, or for not using heavy enough paper, as nearly occurred in Ohio.

We must require voter registrars to sign affidavits promising to submit any registrations in their possession in a timely manner. We must eliminate police intimidation, language, physical disability, extra-legal requirements of personal identification, and other barriers to voting.

To ensure that all qualified voters are able to vote, we must follow the lead of states like Minnesota and Wisconsin by replacing restrictive voter residency requirements with same-day voter registration, allowing qualified voters to register at the polls on Election Day itself. Our current system forces millions of voters to wait up to ten hours to vote.

This is unacceptable, and it disenfranchises those who cannot afford to wait. To increase access to the polls, all states must provide sufficient funding for enough early voting and election-day polling places to guarantee smooth and speedy voting.

To ensure equal access and minimize the wait at the polls, election authorities must allocate resources based on the number of potential voters per precinct. We must put an end to the government-backed practice of allowing partisan activists to challenge the voting rights of individual voters at the polls. Instead, the government must invest in campaigns designed to educate voters about how they can exercise and protect their right to vote.

An election will not be valid or verified until it is confirmed that all citizens have voted.

All citizens must be able to verify that the vote has been counted accurately. All ballots must be ABLE to be counted by hand. (Hand counting may be used as verification if there is a challenge to the accuracy of another type of counting.)

All counting must be supervised by multi-partisan personnel and recorded. Currently supporting the Dechert Method

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au3w1Kyztg8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_HOGDobRMg

https://youtu.be/7gkQ8w0Pneo

Every voting system in the United States must be equipped to facilitate a permanent, visible record of every vote cast, and to honor the right of the voter to mark their own ballot themselves. The public is the only realistic check on vote counts because elections determine the composition of government itself; those in power cannot be trusted to count or process -- unsupervised -- the very ballots by which they came to office. The acid test for a free people is the guaranteed right to remove incumbents at will, especially criminal incumbents, from office. Any system that allows secret and therefore unaccountable vote counting is unacceptable because it denies the right to vote and to "kick the bums out" at precisely the moment when that right is needed the most.

Voters must know that their vote will count and make a difference. Election officials must ensure that every voting precinct and ward is adequately staffed with sufficiently trained personnel and professional supervision; that absentee ballots are mailed with a sufficient time for delivery; that every ballot, including provisional ballots, are counted; and that provisional ballots count for statewide and federal contests regardless of where the vote is cast. Election officials should wait until after any recounts have been completed to provide final certification of election results.

Reasoning:

These indicators must be present to ensure fair voting. 1. Who can vote (the voters' list) 2. Who voted (the polling place sign-in book) 3. Whether ballots counted are the same ones as were cast (chain of custody) 4. Whether the count was accurate (public count

A fundamental principle of our representative democracy is, in Hamilton’s words, ‘that the people should choose whom they please to govern them.’

(NOTE: The concept of a single-seat office as different from a multi-seat office, is as such: Multi-seat offices such as LEGISLATIVE branches must hold votes to make decisions. The single-seat office -EXECUTIVE- theoretically decides on its own.)

All citizens exceeding the age of majority shall have the right to be represented in the House of Representatives, by the person of their choice, continuously without interruption.

Reasoning: Thirty-Thousand.org says:

a) The intended purpose of the very first amendment proposed in the original Bill of Rights was to ultimately limit the maximum size of congressional districts in order to complement the minimum size already established by the Constitution. However, though affirmed by many states, "Article the first" was never ratified due to an inexplicable defect in its language.

a)) One seat in the house legislative branch shall be added for every thirty thousand in population.
b)) Each state shall divide its population by 30,000 to determine its number of representatives.
c)) Each Representative shall have the voting power equal to the number of citizens that voted for them. https://youtu.be/pEPI929cn4I
d)) Congress shall be unicameral, and the Senate shall be dissolved.

b) Several empirical studies show that there is a clear relationship between the population size of legislative districts and the size of government; specifically, government spending increases as the population size of electoral districts increases.

c) With respect to how a representative assembly should be constituted, John Adams stated: "It should be in miniature an exact portrait of the people at large. It should think, feel, reason, and act like them."

It is no longer necessary, or even advantageous, to require all federal Representatives to commute weekly to a single distant location. Current technology makes available other means – which would have been unimaginable at the time of the drafting of the Constitution – for virtually assembling and voting on bills.

c) The justification espoused by plurality voting is that the most popular candidate/representative is capable of and concerned with adequately representing people who voted against him or her even if it conflicts with the interests of the people who elected said representative.

This premise is false, especially in this day of huge special interest investments in campaigns and the molding of messages, NOT on what the candidate believes, but on what the consultants believe will attract enough votes for their candidate to win.

When the representatives we vote for are denied office (RDO's = Representatives Denied Office) and are barred from participating in the legislative process, the citizen is being denied full participation in our government. The present system is partial or exclusionary representation. What we need and deserve is full inclusion representation.

A Choice of Representation System treats a vote as a durable proxy of voting power that the representative carries to the governmental body in which he or she serves. When they vote, they do not have one vote equal to all of the other representatives, they have a vote that has a weight equal to the number of people who voted for him or her.

Under Choice of Representation, there are no wasted votes, every vote marginally increases the power of the person receiving it, a person obtaining the representation of his/her choice does not reprieve another person of the representation of his/her choice.

We must adopt Proportional Representation (PR) for legislative elections to ensure the fair representation of all voters. Millions of Democrats in Republican areas and Republicans in Democratic areas are unrepresented in our system, and the majority of Greens, Libertarians and other independents are unrepresented at all levels of government. The right of representation belongs to all citizens.No More Stolen Elections says:

d) The principal advantage of a unicameral system is more efficient lawmaking, as the legislative process is much simpler and there is no possibility of legislative deadlock. Proponents of unicameral have also argued that it reduces costs, as even if the number of legislators is the same as it would be in a multi-cameral system, there are fewer institutions to maintain and support.

Not until 1842 did Congress undertake to exercise the power to regulate the ''times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives.'' In that year, it passed a law requiring the election of Representatives by districts.

Several state legislatures, following the Revolution, were created unicameral, and the Continental Congress, limited in power as it was, consisted of one house.

So much on the subject, it is best to provide a link https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-2/clause-1

The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall elect Senators and Representatives in the Congress in such a number and such manner as it would be entitled if it were a State. (open to adding the population to Maryland or Virginia)

Reasoning:

An amendment to the Constitution needs to be passed to give DC voting rights. Congress has passed laws to modify the DC government structure in the past. In 1961, the 23rd Constitutional amendment granted DC residents the right to vote in Presidential elections. In 1973, Congress passed the District of Columbia Home Rule Act giving DC the right to a local government (mayor and city council). For decades DC residents have written letters, protested, and filed lawsuits striving to change the city's voting status. Unfortunately, to date, they have been unsuccessful.

While DC residents have an elected mayor and city council, all locally passed laws must be reviewed by Congress and the local budget must be sent to Congress for affirmative approval. In many cases, Congress has attempted to include noxious riders on the budget that overrule the decisions of the local government. DC Vote is working to end this injustice and to protect DC's local democracy. Americans living in our nation's capital pay full federal taxes, fight and die in wars and serve on juries, but are denied voting representation in the House and the Senate.

We must replace our current "first-past-the-post" system. Our winner-take-all elections award representation to the largest factions and leave everyone else, often the majority, unrepresented. The winner-take-call system unnecessarily restricts choice, polarizes politics, and limits political discourse.

The Presidential/Vice-Presidential election (which is a SINGLE-SEAT OFFICE) shall be counted by (score or approval) counting.

aa) https://youtu.be/2q_eMUGCU5U

bb) https://youtu.be/AuKDXeJt7KA

cc) https://youtu.be/AhVR7gFMKNght

No More Stolen Elections says:

It is time to end the safe state/battleground state dichotomy and make all votes equal, no matter the state of the voter. We must amend the Federal Constitution to replace the election of the President by the Electoral College with direct election by the voters.

The concept of a single-seat office as different from a multi-seat office needs a larger audience. Multi-seat offices such as LEGISLATIVE branches must hold votes to make decisions. The single-seat office decides on its own.

Approval voting is the simplest and fairest way to vote in a single-seat election.

The Judicial branch shall no longer be selected by the executive branch.

They shall be selected by a pool. As is the jury.

Legal peers (parameters needed) will score judges based on criteria (parameters needed).

Each Federal district shall have its own pool. Applicants may submit their names for any district but run the risk of not being "known by their peers" in that area.

Judges with the highest scores (after meeting a threshold) will be placed on a list and used in the order that they arrived on the list.

Judges must have tried as lawyers a minimum of 3 years of criminal, 3 years civil, and 3 years on the bench to be eligible for the Supreme court.

Judicial vacancies may not exist for more than 60 days. On the 61st day, there shall be an appointment.

Judicial appointments to the Supreme Court shall last for 25 years or until the year age 71 is will be attained.

Equal Access Amendment says:

It has become evident that our system of law can be corrupted by the influence of political activity. This allows a disproportionate circumstance for citizens. A fairer system of selecting judges would be an anonymous selection. This selection should be conducted by those with the most experienced in the field. LAWYERS. This check would curtail the imbalance of judges believing they are untouchable in their actions.

Bills must be addressed in numerical order.

Bills must have a time limit such as 30 days for research, and then 30 days for the dissemination of said research, and 2-minute comments, at the end of which time a vote on the bill must occur.

Equal Access Amendment says:

The United States creates thousands of bills and addresses less than a hundred per session. No other employment is allowed to be paid so much and perform so little. If the American People can be put to work on an assembly line, then so can Congress. Representatives are a TOOL to investigate concepts and devices that will make the lives of the average citizen better. That involves meeting with scientists who are conducting the research or invoking a committee to conduct the research.

Jury duty participants are to be paid an hourly rate equal to their congressperson's salary.

A Jury must not consist of more than 5 Caucasian European descent White people or people who live as one by the ability to pass. The Jury must also contain at least one Native American, one African American, one Latin American, and one Asian American.

The Prosecutor and the Defendant must have equal resources. The General Fund shall be used to bring whichever side is inadequate up to par. A Judge may cap the expenditures but must do so equally. And prosecute any fraud.

Equal Access Amendment says:

We ask our citizens to participate, knowing that they have to earn money to survive. It is no wonder that citizens try to get out of serving. It is also no wonder that juries are often filled with people who can afford not to work. And that people who can afford not to work have a different perspective on justice than those who must.

The exclusion of black people from juries is a hot topic in the United States Supreme Court. Citizens can be convicted and sentenced to death by an all-white jury, after prosecution lawyers used their so-called peremptory strikes to disqualify all the blacks in the jury pool, citing “race-neutral” reasons.

Data demonstrates a clear bias against black defendants whose victims were white: When both killer and victim were black, only 1 percent of the cases resulted in a death sentence. When the killer was black and the victim white, 22 percent were sentenced to death—more than seven times the rate.

“In Lezmond’s case, more than 400 Native Americans (out of a total of approximately 2000 prospective jurors) were summoned for possible service on his trial,” O’Connor went on. “More than 99% of those Native Americans summoned were excused or disqualified as unfit for jury service. No other racial group was dismissed at even half that rate. In a Navajo on Navajo crime committed on the Navajo reservation, jurors were excluded if they spoke only Navajo. Before being dismissed for ‘cause,’ Navajo jurors were badgered by the judge with questions such as ‘You’re Navajo and he’s Navajo. Could you possibly be fair?’

In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Batson v. Kentucky that it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to use a peremptory challenge during jury selection to remove a potential juror because of race.1

The Court has explained that it established this rule because discrimination in jury selection on grounds of race “causes harm to the litigants, the community, and the individual jurors who were wrongfully excluded from participation in the judicial process.”2

The Solution: Citizens should be given a survey when they arrive for jury duty. An evolving survey designed by scientists to weed out racists, bigots, and irrational or illogical thinking. Lawyers may continue with the jury process with those who score well in the survey.

The Solution: The Jury must reflect the culture at large. It must be a diverse body.