A Very Brief Course in “Voter Fraud” – Election Research & Discussion News 3/19/07

[autorank]

Election Research & Discussion News 19 March 2007
1) Weekly Comment (Below or Here)
2) Weekly Links from the Public Media (Here)

The Voter Fraud Scam and the Fired Federal Prosecutors

05, 2007 - Washington, DC - Widespread “voter fraud” is a myth promulgated to suppress voter participation, according to a new Project Vote report released this week. “The Politics of Voter Fraud” finds that fraudulent voting, or the intentional corruption of the voting process by voters, is extremely rare. Yet, false or exaggerated claims of fraudulent voting are commonly made in close electoral contests, and later cited by proponents of laws that restrict voting. The report is authored by Lorraine Minnite, Ph.D Project Vote

In the last eight years, there were 24 documented convictions for what Republicans like to call the wave of “voter fraud.” Voter fraud involves individuals or small groups who commit fraud on election day by their individual acts. They may try to vote twice, vote when not registered, or send in a few extra absentee ballots or, on an individual basis, break voting laws. It’s a favorite misdirection by the Republicans. They advance a non existent phenomenon and actually pass legislation to address the nonexistent problem. Thisi legislation usually makes it harder for people to vote, poor and miniority Americans primariliy. The whole concept of voter fraud is a fraud in and of it self.

This scam is a convenient method of accomplishing two key goals:

(1) Since “voter fraud” makes some sense as a possibility when described, some Republicans apply it to the Democratic Party as a means of deflecting attention captured by concerns about “election fraud.” Election fraud involves the exclusion of mass numbers of voters from the rolls (i.e., poor whites, blacks) to impact election outcomes or the theft of mass numbers of votes through e-voting technology or other means of digital deception.

(2) By repeating the “voter fraud” mantra over and over, Republican controlled or politically ignorant state legislatures have the cover they need to enact legislation against voter fraud. Since there are no real cases to speak of, these regulations have other purposes like keeping voters away from the polls, voter intimidation, and making it harder for people to access their right to vote. These steps generally work against the poor and minorities.

In essence, voter fraud is a non existent problem used to divert attention away from real election fraud. It’s also used to further suppress the voting rights of classes of citizens not well equipped to navigate the contrived obstacles placed between these citizens and the voting booth.

See The Politics of Voter Fraud by Lorraine Minnite, PhD of Barnard College is an outstanding and definitive account of this whole just published by Project Vote.

The report by Project Vote came out a week before the “Scoop” article below. It’s an academic study published by that organization. Charges of voter fraud can be dismissed out of hand since only 24 cases have been successfully prosecuted.

Select stories from the past week on: The “Voter Fraud” Scam and Fired Federal Prosecutors

[stellanoir]

1. but will my rec be counted. . .?

[Me.]

2. You've Certainly Had Your Wheaties This Morning AR

Excellent work, I admire your dedication

[mod mom]

3. 5.7 MILL VOTES IN OH IN '04 & 4 (FOUR) documented cases of VOTER fraud-just saying...

Thanks Auto!

[Algorem]

4. local news courtroom video links to Cuyahoga fallgirl convictions-

http://www.wkyc.com/news/politics_govt/politics_article.aspx?storyid=64336

http://www.newsnet5.com/news/11241566/detail.html

[GETPLANING]

5. KICK

Almost every major Republican scandal is related to this issue- winning the elections, no matter the cost. Election fraud is the single most important issue facing America today. Until the will of the People, not the Corporations, is restored, nothing else really matters.

[freedomfries]

6. K & R

and thanks autorank!

[autorank]

7. Is althecat sending me secret messages;)

I report, you decide.

[galloglas]

8. In Missouri, Circuit Judge Callahan SB1014

Unconstitutional.

Moreover, we find in his officail findings, that "voter fraud" does not exist.

F. SB 1014's Photo-ID Requirement is Not Necessary or Narrowly Tailored to Meeting the State's Compelling Interest in
Preventing Impersonation Fraud at the Polling Place.

Recognizing that the State does have compelling interests in preserving electoral integrity and combating voter fraud, the issue becomes whether the record shows that the type of Photo-ID Requirement enacted in SB 1014 "is necessary to accomplish a compelling state interest." Etling, 92 S.W.3d at 774.

Because, for the reasons set out above, this Court has found that the Photo-ID Requirement imposes a severe burden on the right to vote, it can survive strict scrutiny only by showing it is necessary to ccomplish a compelling state interest or that it is "narrowly drawn to express the compelling state interest at stake." In re Norton, 123 S.W.3d at 173.

Yet, Appellants do not demonstrate that SB 1014's requirement of state or federally issued, non-expired photo IDs is strictly necessary or narrowly tailored to accomplish the State's asserted interests. To the contrary, Appellants concede that the only type of voter fraud that the Photo-ID Requirement prevents is in-person voter impersonation fraud at the polling place. It does not address absentee voting fraud or fraud in registration.

While the Photo-ID Requirement may provide some additional
protection against voter impersonation fraud, the evidence below demonstrates that the Photo-ID Requirement is not "necessary" to accomplish this goal. As the trial court found: "No evidence was presented that voter impersonation fraud exists to any substantial degree in Missouri. In fact, the evidence that was presented indicates that voter impersonation fraud is not a problem in Missouri."(FN26)

The only evidence that Appellants marshal of voter impersonation fraud occurred prior to the enactment of identification requirements in 2002. The 2002 identification law, enacted in response to the federal HAVA law, required voters to present some proof of identity or residence when they arrived at the polling place. The list of acceptable identification under the 2002 requirements is much broader than the three types of photo ID that SB 1014 allows and included a utility bill, bank statement, expired passport, out-of-state driver's license, and other commonly available documents of identification. Sec. 115.427, RSMo
Supp. 2005.

Although Appellants protest that some of the approved identification documents under the 2002 law do not provide proof of eligibility to vote, neither does the Photo-ID Requirement. The Photo-ID Requirement assists in prevention of voter impersonation, but the evidence reveals that the 2002 requirements, which are much less restrictive on the right to vote, have been sufficient to prevent this type of fraud. These facts compel the conclusion that the Photo-ID Requirement is not "necessary to accomplish a compelling state interest."

The conclusion that the Photo-ID Requirement is not necessary to serve the State's asserted end should not be taken as an indication that the State's interest in combating voter fraud is insubstantial. Indeed, legislative efforts to combat the types of voter fraud and opportunities for voter fraud that persist in Missouri, such as absentee ballot fraud, voter intimidation, and inflated voter registration rolls, should be encouraged. Where the legislature places a heavy burden on the right to vote, however, the Missouri Constitution requires that the burden be justified by a compelling interest and the statute be narrowly tailored or necessary to accomplish the statutory goals. The Photo-ID Requirement could only prevent a particular type of voter fraud that the record does not show is occurring in Missouri, yet it would place a heavy burden on the free exercise of the franchise for many citizens of this State.(FN27)