in the exercise of rights conferred by the Constitution of the United States essential to the healthy organization of the government itself,” id. at 666. (4) The Elections Clause grants Congress “plenary and paramount jurisdiction over the whole subject” of Federal elections, Ex parte Siebold, 100 U.S. 371, 388 (1879), allowing Congress to implement “a complete code for congressional elections.” Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355, 366 (1932). The Elections Clause, unlike, for example, the Commerce Clause, has been found to grant Congress the authority to compel States to alter their regulations as to Federal elections, id. at 366–67, even if these alterations would impose additional costs on the States to execute or enforce. Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now v. Miller, 129 F.3d 833 (6th Cir. 1997). (5) The phrase “manner of holding elections” in the Elections Clause has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to authorize Congress to regulate all aspects of the Federal election process, including “notices, registration, supervision of voting, protection of voters, prevention of fraud and corrupt practices, counting of votes, duties of inspectors and canvassers, and the making and publication of election returns.” Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355, 366 (1932). (6) The Supreme Court has recognized the broad “substantive scope” of the Elections Clause and upheld Federal laws promulgated thereunder regulating redistricting, voter registration, campaign finance, primary elections, recounts, party affiliation rules, and balloting. (7) The authority of Congress under the Elections Clause also entails the power to ensure enforcement of its laws regulating Federal elections. “[I]f Congress has the power to make regulations, it must have the power to enforce them.” Ex parte Siebold, 100 U.S. 371, 387 (1879). The Supreme Court has noted that there can be no question that Congress may impose additional penalties for offenses committed by State officers in connection with Federal elections even if they differ from the