John Lott thinks a gun background check should be done on voters. He is an independent researcher and Fox News commentator.
Lott is a gun researcher and wrote a book called “More Guns, Less Crimes”. He has also written about voter’s fraud. Lott has now combined his thoughts on both with this new idea.
He said “regulations that prevent fraud are shown to actually increase the voter participation rate.”
Michael McDonald said that what Lott said wasn’t credible. McDonald is a political scientist at the University of Florida.
McDonald said he doesn’t believe Lott’s proposal will work. He said “I do not believe using the background check, which Lott opposes for gun buyers, is a serious proposal.”
McDonald continued, “it does not speak well of the impartiality of the commission. That the speakers with little knowledge in elections are asked to present in favor of a particular point of view.”
Gun Check
Lott said the purpose of the check would reveal any criminal history. He argued the authorities would know if the right people are voting.
The proposal is posted on the elections commission website. He has been invited to speak at a Trump’s commission meeting on voter fraud.
Lott recently sent a statement by email.
The email read “given all the many hundreds of statements that I [am] sure that you can find by Democrats and gun control advocates. That the [federal background check] system checks do not ‘in any way infringe’ on people’s ability to have guns for self defense and given Republican concerns about vote fraud.”
He said “it seemed like something that in theory could satisfy both sides for a topic where no common ground otherwise seems possible.”
Absurd Idea
Adam Winkler thinks the idea is absurd. Winkler works at UCLA as a constitutional law specialist.
He said “given the previous criticism of the background check system by John Lott. And the fact that the structure of voting regulation is entirely different than the regulation of guns. It’s hard to believe this is a serious proposal.”
Justin Levitt was asked if he thinks Lott has any credibility. Levitt said he doesn’t think he does. Levitt works at Loyola Law School as a political scientist.
He spoke of those selected for the panel. He said it “seems to mirror the selection of commissioners. This is not the group you’d assemble if you were serious about real research into real solutions to real problems with the voting system.”
Winkler said “either this is just an effort to jag Democrats for supporting a background check system for guns when they wouldn’t support one for voting.”
He continued “or it could be a sign that the election commission is planning to propose broad new federal legislation for determining eligibility for the right to vote.”
Lott said he is very serious about his proposal. It is left up to legislators to make such a proposal a reality.