To:  All New Mexico Republican House Representatives

Re:  NMSA (1978) ABSENT VOTER ACT Article 6, Sec 1-6-1. AS AMENDED 2018


This memorandum targets one specific statute in order to undo uncertainty and any need for audits of critical elections.

The Absent Voter Act of 2018 is unconstitutional if it opens the door, even a crack, to unverified voters, delayed counting of mail ballots, ballots of uncertain origin, and ballots with chain-of-custody and adjudication issues.

The vote is a franchise limited to citizens, at least 18-years old, regardless of race, religion, or sex. In addition, having two separate standards for verifying voter qualification, one for mail and one for in-person, is an unequal application of law.

If voters are registered who are deceased, non-residents, non-citizens, or of otherwise unverifiable identity, then lawfully qualified voters have their votes diluted, if not completely disenfranchised:

Establishing the principle of “one person, one vote,” the Court stated that “the Constitution visualizes no preferred class of voters but equality among those who meet the basic qualifications.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377, 380 U.S. 533, 568 (1964); Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368, 379–81 (1963); Baker, 369 U.S. at 228–29. 3 Gray, 372 U.S. at 381. 4 Id. at 380; see also Reynolds, 377 U.S. at 555 (“[T]he right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.”); as cited from

On its face, the Absent Voter Act is in violation of NM Const Art IV, Sec. 24.

Local and special laws. “The legislature shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following cases: . . . the opening or conducting of any election or designating the place of voting;

Any peripheral consideration of ‘making voting easier,’ or claims of protecting the health and welfare of citizens from exposure to COVID are meaningless and inapplicable. They cannot supersede the constitutional qualifications for the vote.

Finally, due to ‘lack of standing’ and the ‘Doctrine of Laches,’ election fraud cannot be cured after-the-fact; it must be prevented through assurance of legally qualified voters.

Question: Is the 2018 NM Absent Voter Act Unconstitutional?

Answer:  Because of the 2018 legislation (cited supra), many Absentee Ballots are of a lower, if not unacceptable standard of validity compared to the ‘in person’ vote. Therefore, the Absent Voter Act mail ballots are unconstitutional as they can disenfranchise ‘in person’ voters, or voters who applied for absentee ballots directly from the Secretary of State’s office. The Absent Voter Act has serious 14th Amendment ‘equal protection’ issues, and may be in direct violation of New Mexico’s constitutional ban on ‘special laws’ in elections.  

Explanation:  Starting with the ‘no excuse’ absentee ballot, certain factions have been working through legislation to make voting ‘easier.’ The result has been the creation of an inferior ballot of a second, unequal set of standards that potentially disenfranchises the ‘in person’ and ID’d registered voter. Several audits and thousands of affidavits indicate the Absent Voter ballot has been abused to manipulate election outcomes.

Fraud Must be Avoided Preemptively Because Post-Election Remedies Extend Beyond Mandated Time Limits for Certification

Congress has known for over a decade, through expert testimony, that computerized voting is vulnerable to fraud.[1] The problem with a voting system complicated by mail ballots is that discovery of fraud cannot be corrected within the narrow window of constitutionally required certification by the states.[2] We first experienced this issue in 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court ordering Florida to stop analyzing ‘hanging chads’ and certify the election as required by the Florida constitution. In the case of the 2020 election, the November 3rd election had deadlines for state certification, and then the Electoral College in the first week of January.

There is evidence that the Chinese CCP interfered with the 2020 Election through Dominion Voting Systems.[3] This was an Act of War, so much so that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, panicked, calling a general in China on January 8th, two days after agents provocateurs[4] attacked the U.S. Capitol in order to disrupt six states from filing Title 3 Section 15 Objections to Biden’s electors.

So, making elections even more complex, or federalized, is not the solution. Limiting unconstitutional Mail Ballots so elections can be quickly counted and certified is the only way to reestablish confidence of citizens that their votes were not disenfranchised.

NEW MEXICO EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE:  While the Secretary of State portal requires four data points that automatically validates voter registration, the mass-mailed applications from the non-profit ‘The Center for Voter Information’ rely only on a name and address that must be tediously hand-verified by the county clerk.

It is not inconceivable, that the doubling of Absentee Ballots, and the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by the Zuckerberg non-profit to solicit mail applications, overwhelmed the county clerks making their ability to verify a registered citizen voter impossible. (See Exhibits 1 and 2)

The omission of provisions to block non-citizens or unverified voters disenfranchises lawful citizen voters, violating the New Mexico Constitution[5] and the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment Rights of New Mexico citizens. Ballots from invalid voters or only verified by signature match cancel out lawful votes.

Under the U.S. Constitution, a citizen is identified having the right to vote, and disenfranchisement based on age, sex, and race forbidden. Without proper ID and voter registration requirements, citizens are being disenfranchised unconstitutionally.

The mailed application (see Exhibit 2) is not only unable to sufficiently validate registered voters, but is an unconstitutional application of two disparate, unequal legislated rules. It constitutes an unconstitutional ‘special law’ creating inclusion of a conflicting, illegal class of voter.[6]

In addition, days of late counting massive quantities of absentee ballots enable cheating on a scale that can control the outcome of any election. On Election Night the ‘in person’ votes are known, giving unscrupulous election workers advance knowledge how many mail ballots are needed to flip the election outcome. If this gaping hole in voting security is not closed by limiting the Absent Voter mail ballot, no election outcome will be trusted.[7]

This is what happened in Georgia, 2020. Mark Zuckerberg’s $400,000,000 not only funded ‘The Center for Voter Information’ mass-mailing of absent voter applications, but Stacy Abram’s ‘Happy Faces,’ the preferred temp agency where vote tabulation workers were trained and hired.[8] 

SUPREMACY CLAUSE: Under the 26th Amendment, Amendment XXVI, Section 1. “The right of citizens of the United States, whoare 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.” [emphasis added] [9]

Establishing the principle of “one person, one vote,” the Court stated that “the Constitution visualizes no preferred class of voters but equality among those who meet the basic qualifications.” Reynolds v. Sims, 377, 380 U.S. 533, 568 (1964); Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368, 379–81 (1963); Baker, 369 U.S. at 228–29. 3 Gray, 372 U.S. at 381. 4 Id. at 380; see also Reynolds, 377 U.S. at 555 (“[T]he right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.”); as cited from

There are several amendments to the constitution that protect citizens from being disenfranchised by the states, but they all have a common factor which is the vote is a qualified right of a state’s ‘citizens.’ However, over a dozen states issue driver’s licenses to non-citizens who are not supposed to use the ID for voter registration, but there is no regulatory action enforcing that rule.

Under the Supremacy Clause, any state statute that furthers disenfranchisement of citizens is unconstitutional.

According to the New Mexico Secretary of State:

If you are registering for the first time in New Mexico, and you submit the registration form by mail, then you must submit with the form a copy of (1) a current and valid photo identification; or (2) a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, student identification card or other government document, including identification issued by an Indian nation, tribe or pueblo that shows your name and current address. If you do not submit one of these forms of identification with your mailed-in, first time registration, then you would be required to present one of the forms of identification when voting in person or absentee.

These rules actually conflict with a citizen’s voting rights; in that a utility bill or paycheck does not validate the registrant is a U.S. citizen. In addition, neither is a New Mexico driver’s license proof of citizenship.[10] In fact, a previous NM Secretary of State admitted that over 80,000 driver’s licenses were issued to non-citizens.[11]


The ‘Application for Absent Voter Mail Ballot’ mass-mailed by ‘The Center for Voter Information’ is insufficient to reliably validate a registered voter. This is in violation of the Equal Protection Clause (US Const 14th Amendment Sec. 1).

It also violates the New Mexican Constitution by creating a ‘special law.’

In the past, absentee ballot requests were for specific ‘excused’ circumstances, persons overseas, and the military. If you recall, some factions intentionally delayed military ballots in order to disenfranchise soldiers. [12]

Now, the Absent Voter Act of 2018 legalizes ‘ballot harvesting’ which has been observed being abused in various criminal arrests and surveillance camera recordings of Georgia ‘drop boxes.’[13] See also recent arrests of persons voting multiple ballots, and now more legislation presented to eliminate signature verification.[14] States have responded, limiting use of non-governmental drop boxes and verifying ‘chain-of-custody’ by requiring mail ballots to only be handled by a verified witness and election officials.[15]

Action Required:

The Absent Voter Act of 2018 must be challenged as-soon-as-possible in court, and in upcoming legislative sessions. Veracity and reliability of future elections depends on Absentee Ballot allocation limited to specific and relatively rare circumstances. While there will be massive resistance, Real ID Act standards must be adopted for driver’s licenses to prevent non-citizens from registering to vote.

Limiting excessive use of Absent Voter ballots will facilitate rapid tabulation of the vote, minimizing the temptation and opportunity to fraudulently manipulate the vote.   

This is a first step, as there are also legitimate concerns how voting tabulation scanners and computers have been compromised through ‘tweaking,’ access through thumb drives, and even WIFI access. The Wisconsin Audit of October, 2021 is 168-pages.[16] The Arizona Audit took months and is now in their State Attorneys General Office for investigation of criminal activity by members of the Maricopa Board of Supervisors, and Dominion Voting Systems.

Therefore, a direct approach to wind back the rush to Mail Ballots is prudent and lawful.


Summary of Mail Ballots in 2020:  There was a disturbing trend in a dozen states’ election results. (See Exhibit 5) On Election Day, when ‘in-person’ votes showed Trump leading by huge margins, days of counting ‘mail absentee’ ballots resulted in single digit to fraction of a percent victories for Biden.

One can conclude that the increase in mail ballots was due to COVID-19. But legislation to allow non-governmental solicitation of absentee mail ballots began soon after the 2016 election. The New Mexico Absent Voter Act (2018) permits ‘non-governmental people or groups’ (see Exhibit 1) to solicit and collect absentee ballots.

I, personally, received an ‘Application for Absent Voter Ballot’ addressed to a woman who may have lived at my address over ten years ago. The application required no ID; validation of voter registration only to be done by hand by the county clerk. In contrast, if she had requested a mail ballot through the Secretary of State’s portal, ID is absolutely required and voter registration is automatically validated. (See Exhibits 2 and 3)

Was the state prepared for a flood of unsolicited applications for absentee ballots coming in the mail? With only a name, address, and signature, could the county clerks validate voter registration? Four validation points, including a state ID# and social security confirmation are required when applications are made through the Secretary of State portal; that allows a computer to validate registration while the unsolicited applications can’t be reliably validated.

In addition, current ID requirements do not prevent non-citizens from voting.

Finally, if this unconstitutional disparity in validation points is not addressed in rapidly approaching legislative sessions, or in court, will the 2022 midterms also be unduly influenced with inadequately vetted voters?

Exhibit 5 shows nine states had Trump winning with 2X to 3X the ‘in-person’ votes compared to Biden’s. Of those states, five ‘flipped’ to Biden due to absentee mail ballots.

Pennsylvania was the most extreme example. Trump had 2X Biden’s votes on Election Day, Trump’s mail ballot percentage consistent with the 2016 and 2018 elections (about 1 in 5 votes). It took days, but Biden pulled ahead by 1.2% with mail ballots exceeding his in-person votes by 1.4X, seven times the levels in the two previous elections. (See Exhibit 4, graphics by the Philadelphia Inquirer newspaper.)

In Arizona, a massive audit was done (subpoenaed data is still being withheld by Maricopa County) with critical issues noted concerning processing mail ballots. 17,000 mail ballot envelope images were duplicates whose associated ballots shouldn’t have been counted at all. Same with 1,700 ballots whose envelopes had no signatures. The number of distributed mail ballots was exceeded by returned mail ballots by 9,000. 5,000 voters voted in multiple counties (identity determined by First, Last, MI, and Birth Year). Biden won Arizona by 10,427 votes . . . 17,000 votes shouldn’t have been counted at all, and a total of 32,700 mail ballots were identified as invalid under Georgia law.

The Georgia Senate Runoff also had unusual late ballot counting. At midnight, with 88% of all precincts reporting, both Republicans were ahead by 4%. However, sometime after 2AM, the Democrats had pulled ahead to win by about 2%. Some basic math reveals that to gain 6%, the Democrats had to win 75% of the votes in the remaining precincts. [Citations omitted. These numbers were from personal notes taken during from real-time election results.]

[1] Software programmer says US elections are rigged and that US Representatives tried to pay him to rig their election vote counts. (Note: This is a copy of the original House Hearing video and of poor quality. Unfortunately, many videos and links on this topic tend to disappear down the ‘memory hole.’

[2] See, ‘lack of standing,’ and ‘laches.’

[3] “Andy Huang, who serves as Core Infrastructure Manager of Information Technology at Dominion Voting Systems, previously worked at Chinese government owned China Telecom, the report said. “Huang, who fulfills the critical technology role at Dominion, worked at the Chinese firm from 1998 to 2002,” the report noted.”

[4] As reported by War Correspondent Michael Yon from personal observations at the Capitol.

[5] NM Const. Bill of Rights Sec. 2. Rights and privileges. No member of this state shall be disfranchised or deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers.

[6] NM Const Art IV, Sec. 24. Local and special laws. “The legislature shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following cases: . . . the opening or conducting of any election or designating the place of voting;



[9] NM Const Art II, Sec 8: The supreme right guaranteed by state constitution is the right of a citizen to vote at public elections. State ex rel. Walker v. Bridges1921-NMSC-04127 N.M. 169199 P. 370.

[10] See NMAC B. 3.  a valid foreign passport with I-551 stamp; et seq

[11] “B. Fraud – Between the passage of the 2003 Amendments and August 2011, New Mexico issued over 80,000 driver’s licenses to undocumented immigrants. The provision of these licenses was not without controversy. Reports indicate that some of these driver’s licenses were obtained fraudulently by out-of-state residents.” Steven J. Escobar, Allowing Undocumented Immigrants to Obtain Driver’s Licenses in New Mexico: Revising, Not Abandoning, the System, 43 WASH. U. J. L. & POL’Y 285 (2014),


[13] [article updated, was 1900 ballots]


[15] “There’s a tremendous chain of custody issue that every voter should be concerned about,” said Illinois Representative Rodney Davis, the top Republican on the House Administration Committee. He has introduced federal legislation to prevent ballot harvesting. “The chain of custody that has to be taken into consideration because our ballot is so much more important — we have to understand how it gets to its final counting spot.” See also, Justice Alito, writing for the majority, noted that states have a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud and that these policies work to prevent such fraud. “Fraud can affect the outcome of a close election, and fraudulent votes dilute the right of citizens to cast ballots that carry appropriate weight,” the Court continued. “Fraud can also undermine public confidence in the fairness of elections and the perceived legitimacy of the announced outcome.”

Equally important, the Court found that “[e]nsuring that every vote is cast freely, without intimidation or undue influence, is [a] valid and important state interest.”




Chapter 6, Section 1-6-4.3 – Third party agents collecting applications for mailed ballots

A. A person or organization that is not part of a government agency and that collects applications for mailed ballots shall submit the applications to the appropriate office for filing within forty-eight hours of their completion or the next business day if the appropriate office is closed for that forty-eight-hour period.

Section 1-6-5 – Processing application; issuance of ballot

A. The county clerk shall mark each completed application for a mailed ballot with the date and time of receipt in the clerk’s office and enter the required information in the ballot register. The county clerk shall then determine if the applicant is a voter and if the voter is a uniformed-service voter or an overseas voter. If the applicant is a uniformed-service voter or overseas voter, the application shall be processed pursuant to the Uniform Military and Overseas Voters Act [1-6B-1 to 1-6B-17 NMSA 1978].B. If the applicant does not have a valid certificate of registration on file in the county, a mailed ballot shall not be issued and the county clerk shall mark the application “rejected”, file the application in a separate file from those accepted and notify the applicant in writing with an explanation why the application was rejected.


Unsolicited Application from ‘The Center for Voter Information’


Three ID’s Required to Validate Voter Registration

Exhibit 4



  1. How the New "Absent Voter" Laws are Unconstitutional - The Post & Email Says:

    […] by Leonard Daneman, blogging at paraleaglenm […]

  2. paraleaglenm Says:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: