Election Day Registration and the voter fraud red herring

NJ needs EDR (4.00 / 2)

Join the facebook group, if you haven't already!

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:15:12 PM CDT

you're mostly right (0.00 / 1)

The risk of voter fraud is not a good argument against EDR, but to say that voter fraud is just a manufactured talking point, especially in a state like NJ, is naive at best.

Voter fraud actually represents a greater threat to progressive insurgents who rarely have access to the kind of political infrastructures that make it possible for fraudulent votes to be cast.

That said, the upside of EDR to increase democratic participation dramatically overshadows any downside potential for voter fraud that it might enable.

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:37:15 PM CDT

naive? (4.00 / 2)

Voter fraud has been a top priority of the ironically-named Bush Justice department. For all of their efforts, what have they found? Bupkis.

Plus, if there were voter fraud going on in New Jersey, don't you think our good US Attorney would be prosecuting the perpetrators as we speak?

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 14:12:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

yes, naive (0.00 / 1)

Voter fraud is a game that both the Democratic and Republican establishments in this state play where they have the political infrastructure in place to do it.

To say that it doesn't exist here would be similar to the Claude Raines character in Casablanca being shocked to discover that there is gambling taking place in Rick's Americain Cafe as he is being handed his winnings for the evening.

That said, I would also argue that Republican efforts to suppress the vote in various parts of the country, particularly on a demographic basis, represent a far greater threat to the democratic process than voter fraud.

Unfortunately, Ray Lesniak is probably not someone who you want to have as the face of the EDR movement, considering that as one of the more powerful party bosses in the state, his role makes it very easy for opponents of EDR to use voter fraud as an opposing argument.

The movement would be much better off if someone trustworthy like Loretta Weinberg or Reed Gusciora was at the forefront of it.

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 16:25:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

more evidence and fewer metaphors, please. (4.00 / 1)

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 16:50:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A polite way of saying (0.00 / 0)

Fold it 5 times and put it where the moon doesn't shine.

I'll take the 2 Ohio election workers convicted of ELECTION FRAUD... for all the beans in rachael'sdad  vinyl pouch, that rachael'sdad  can't find one instance of voter fraud in the last 10 yrs.

http://www.cleveland.com/ap/st...

Well actually they rigged the recount, but close enough, considering how far off base rachael'sdad  is.

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:35:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That should read (0.00 / 0)

I'll take the 2 Ohio election workers convicted of ELECTION FRAUD... for all the beans in rachael'sdad  vinyl pouch, that rachael'sdad  can't find one conviction of voter fraud in the last 10 yrs.

Which is only fair, since I provided 2 convictions of election fraud, rachael'sdad only needs one conviction to have legal standing.


Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:46:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

why do you need proof? (1.00 / 1)

Do you need proof of corruption to know that it exists in our state?

If not, why is it so far-fetched to believe that where there is corruption, there is probably voter fraud as well?

Does anybody remember proofs from high school geometry?

If A=B and B=C, then A=C.

Is that enough proof for you?

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 22:26:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

More cow pies. (0.00 / 0)

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 20:17:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

here's some more (0.00 / 0)

I remember that you were at the core of the fight to stop Essex County from buying touchscreen voting machines that did not have a paper trail.

Why do you think that you experienced so much resistance from a Freeholder Board that was almost completely Democratic and that one of the friendlier members of the FB to your issue was a Republican?

I am sure that you will come up with an answer that completely ignores the fact that the Democratic establishment in the county at the time was about to face a revolution, starting in Newark, that would dramatically change the face of politics in the county for the foreseeable future, and that they wanted to have every weapon possible at their disposal, including but not limited to voter fraud and vote tampering with machines that would make it easy for them to rig a close election.

Fortunately, Cory Booker and his allies were able to win their races by such large margins that the establishment's weapons were useless.

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 23:12:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

absentee ballot (0.00 / 0)

Well, here's a recent scandal in New Jersey.

Chris Christie forced a company to endow a professorship at the law school he went to.

---

by: Hopeful @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:50:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thats election fraud. (0.00 / 0)

No voter committed fraud, nor was one charged/accused of fraud.

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 22:03:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

what's the difference? (0.00 / 1)

It seems to me that you are making a distinction without a difference.

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 22:28:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

As I Understand It... (0.00 / 0)

Electoral fraud is an attempt to illicitly effect/change/suppress the outcome of an election by manipulating machines, ballots, counting software and by suppressing the voters likely to vote against you.  This is usually a systematic/complex crime.

Voter fraud is a deliberate attempt by an individual voter to vote when they know they're not eligible, or to vote more than once, etc.  

I suspect that there is likely some voter happening; but it's rare enough that no one has been caught and convicted in at least ten years.

We would get a much larger "bang for the buck"  if all the money spent on combatting "voter fraud" were allocated to making sure that we had verifiable paper trails for votes.

Electoral fraud is a far greater threat than voter fraud.

MY sense is that the laws making it more difficult to register/vote as a way of "preventing voter fraud" are themselves fraudulent in that their real purpose is to suppress turnout and increase the chances of a particular outcome.....so, in some roundabout sense; the law that the SCOTUS upheld in Indiana forcing all voters to produce official state picture ID before they could vote.....is itself a form of electoral fraud.

That vote went down 100% along party lines.  

The Republicans know that there haven't been any convictions for electoral fraud in Indiana in the last hundred years...but since they controlled the Indiana legislature and the SCOTUS is dominated by Republicans; we now have the absurdly perverse situation of state (and now SCOTUS) sanctioning electoral fraud.

 

---

by: Nick Lento @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 01:11:49 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree (0.00 / 0)

But my point was not that NJ should spend more money, time, energy, or any other resources combating voter fraud than it already does, which is minimal if anything, especially when so many of our election oversight officials are appointed by the political machines that are most guilty of committing voter fraud.

As someone who has spent as much time working against Joe Ferriero, I would think that you would recognize the fact that one of the weapons in his arsenal is his ability to get many of the people who are loyal to him to vote more than once and the reason that so few, if any, have been caught and/or convicted is the controls that he has over the investigatory and enforcement mechanisms.

This is also the reason that I said earlier that Ray Lesniak was a poor champion for EDR.  Anybody who opposes it will be able to say, "Of course Ray Lesniak is in favor of EDR.  All he wants to do is make it easier for his Union County machine to rig elections."

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 07:59:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Please cite the voter fraud convictions (0.00 / 0)

that support your statement.

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 20:04:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Far be it from me (0.00 / 0)

to fight someone else's battle, but the biggest red herring there can possibly be is "No one has been convicted, therefore it doesn't happen."

If the fraudulent voter isn't apprehended at the time of casting a vote, then it is impossible to track them down and prosecute them.  But there is evidence in many major cities of the dead or incompetent casting votes.

While we're linking to Milwaukee, there were five convictions in that city alone.

Will commit political science for food.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 20:56:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Holy smoke (0.00 / 0)

Bush appointee loses 9 out of 14 cases.

Thanks, I'm sure it was real easy to google.

But seriously, I object to the quotes:

"No one has been convicted, therefore it doesn't happen."

Since I never said that, or inferred it. OTOH maybe you can suggest a metric to fairly use as a comparison... ?

Lacking that, comparing convictions just might be a way. Unless you have a better idea.....

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 21:54:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Objection noted (4.00 / 1)

But you're being dishonest if you are now going to claim this doesn't represent the argument you've been making.

For example:

Please cite the voter fraud convictions (0.00 / 0)
that support your statement.

Earlier you had claimed that another commenter couldn't find two examples of voter fraud.  Well, here's five.  How far do you want to move the goal?  I never thought how many cases are lost was a consideration - is that a new hurdle that must be overcome now that more than two cases have been convicted?

It was very easy to Google the case.  I'm sure a more thorough review would find more cases - or at least more evidence that it does occur, even if convictions cannot be obtained.  I would argue that the ease with which it was found should undermine any claim that efforts at eliminating voter fraud are some kind of red herring.  It happens.  It should be stopped.  What's hard to understand or somehow morally wrong with that?

I'm not arguing that there is a good metric.  As I stated, in fairly clear terms, it is impossible to know how many votes are cast fraudulently.  Your metric was two convictions.  That has been satisfied.  Why not just admit that?


Will commit political science for food.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:13:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sure. My metric has been satisfied >wink< (0.00 / 0)

My 2 convictions say the 2004 Ohio Presidential recount was rigged.

That does stack up quite nicely against 5 convictions, that result in um..... likely 5 votes... no?

What kind of metric did you think I was using.. LOL.. :-)  I choose the metric that allows me to make the point that those 2 convictions put Bush back in the White House..

You see I know there are as many as a 200 or more convictions of voters for voter fraud in the US each year.

SO I want someone to cite "any" voter fraud convictions, so I can cite 2 election fraud convictions, that may have put Bush back in the White House.

Do you think I would ask a question, if I  didn't already know what the answer is ? Not on this issue, not this question.

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Mon May 12, 2008 at 20:40:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Conflating voter fraud with election fraud (0.00 / 0)

Voters commit voter fraud, election officials can commit election fraud.

Anyone wanna bet me NJ AG Ann Milgram disagrees ?

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 20:15:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Frank Hague's rule (3.00 / 1)

It doesn't matter who votes; it matters who counts the votes.


Will commit political science for food.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 20:56:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I thought that was Joseph Stalin. (0.00 / 0)

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 22:33:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Aren't they the same person? n/t (0.00 / 0)

Will commit political science for food.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:53:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

No Scott is completely right (0.00 / 0)

Scott and I have provided links, you have provided squat.

WE provide facts, you provide squat.

We provide truth, you provide falsehoods,

....or squat.

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:41:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

are you serious? (0.00 / 0)

Do you truly believe that in a state as corrupt as NJ that voter fraud does not exist?

I am registered to vote at two different addresses.  No matter how hard my parents, who are poll workers, and I try to get me unregistered at their address, year after year my name still remains in the registration books in their election district.

If I wanted to risk the possibility that the idiots who are responsible for making sure that our state's democratic processes function democratically might actually figure out that I have voted twice, I could.

But the fact of the matter is that there has only been one election to date where it would have been worth taking that kind of risk and that was Linda Stender's Congressional run against Mike Ferguson.  But as much as I like Linda, I am not going to risk going to jail for her, and I seriously doubt that she would want me to either.

So knowing how easy it is for me to commit voter fraud if I wanted to leads me to believe that our state's Democratic and Republican political machines, who have varying degrees of control over the enforcement mechanisms in our state, probably commit a significant amount of voter fraud every election cycle.

In fact, on June 3, there is no doubt in my mind that there will be no less than 1,000 acts of voter fraud committed by both Democrats and Republicans against both Democrats and Republicans in each and every county in the state.

Once again, this is not intended to be an argument against EDR.  I wholeheartedly support EDR.  But voter fraud is going to exist in our state and probably every other state for as long as we continue to have a democratic process and elections.  EDR is not going to change this in either a positive or a negative way.

As I said before, voter suppression is a far more serious concern than voter fraud, and there is no doubt that EDR would have a positive impact on that problem.

---

by: rachael'sdad @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 22:22:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Grew Up In HUdson County (0.00 / 0)

Ya know, where you "Vote early, vote often.  Vote even if you're dead"

Recently I tried to get a copy of my birth certificate at the County Vital Records Dept.

I think someone mentioned it here, but it was a surprise to me that the County does not issue duplicate birth certificates filed before 2006.  It seems they had been issuing additional certificates to (I guess) anyone who would pay the price.  I seem to have heard that about driver's licenses, too.

I wonder if these people with the bogus birth certificates or duplicte driver's licenses want to vote.

I'm not against EDR, but the practical part of me says Oy what chaos.

---

by: SmartyJones @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 05:50:19 AM CDT

EDR & voter reg. (0.00 / 0)

Let's emphasize the difference between casting a vote and making that vote count.

For an EDR vote to actually count, the registration must be successfully completed. Any method of voter fraud that EDR will facilitate that the current method does not will therefore be some type of registration fraud. It is difficult to see how a fraudulent registration that is completed at the polls on election day could not have been completed three weeks beforehand.

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 09:22:09 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Requirements are the same (0.00 / 0)

to register. Under the current system or how it would be under EDR.

So WTF are you talking about, I smell cow pies.

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 20:20:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Part of EDR (0.00 / 0)

is proving your ID - which, oddly enough, too many liberals/progressives oppose.  I freely admit that such laws have been used in the past to disenfranchise people - but police forces have been used in the past to disenfranchise people and no one is calling for an all-out ban on them.

Stupid example, but to the point that anyone who is supposed to be able to vote should be able to vote - but not anyone else.  When I worked as an eligibility specialist, I had to verify ID for Food Stamps, AFDC/TANF, and Medicaid programs - and I honestly don't recall a single person (even the homeless) that couldn't meet those standards.  A last resort was to walk into a courtroom and swear out an affidavit of ID - which is pretty easy to do.  

You can thank Javier Inclan for Hudson County not issuing replacement birth documents.  He was County Clerk when the office was busted for selling such documents to immigrants.  He didn't do it, but he didn't stop it, either.

Will commit political science for food.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 18:35:27 PM CDT

How Many (0.00 / 0)

duplicate SmartyJones do you think are out there?

I've heard of one (no caps) at Kos.

Then again, we probably don't vote in the same state.

In NYC, where I suppose there should/would be more voter fraud than usual, we are identified by signatures, chat with the poll watchers and press those little black levers in a gigantic wrap you in a cloth lever machine.  I know there have been problems, but not in my little distrcit.

---

by: SmartyJones @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 20:24:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I live in Hudson County (0.00 / 0)

duplicate voters are more the norm here.  In fact, the father of one of our former mayors who now sits on the school board was alleging just last year that someone cast his absentee ballot without his knowledge.  Eventually, the poor guy (he has been diagnosed with dementia) recanted his story.  Your guess is as good as mine as to what actually happened.

Of course EDR would do nothing to stop that.

Will commit political science for food.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 21:01:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Indiana ? Puh-lease.... (0.00 / 0)

Not a single case could be found of a voter who was prevented from having their vote counted

Private college student from out of state.... Indiana only accepts Indiana issued ID...

Notre Dame, St. Mary's College, and Butler University.

The case of the Nuns:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/n...
19-year old Allyson Miller, a sophomore at the University of Notre Dame and volunteer at a local children's clinic was similarly turned away from the polls today. An Indiana resident since the age of five, Miller left her driver's license in her dorm room, and arrived straight from class at the polls with her school ID and registration confirmation papers from the County Registrar. Upon arriving, however, poll-workers did not allow her to vote without a state-issued ID.
19-year old Angela Hiss,
http://www.futuremajority.com/...

And please remember Indiana passed its Voter ID by strict party lines, repubs voted for it.

Howard Dean:
National Democratic Chairman Howard Dean says the law does disenfranchise voters.

"We are not trying to perpetuate voter fraud. This is not about voter fraud. There is no voter fraud in Indiana. The secretary of State for Indiana was unable to sight one instance. This is about vote suppression."

The party chairman says similar laws passed in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania were vetoed by Democratic Governors and a third in Georgia was struck down on appeal.

"The law is part of a national Republican program to disenfranchise voters. They believe the lower the turnout the better for them. We believe the higher the turnout the better for America.

http://www.wthr.com/Global/sto...

By Brennan Center Press Release
November 14, 2007

First Quantitative Look at Impact of Indiana's Voter ID Law Comes on Day Voting Rights Groups File Amicus Briefs Challenging Law

Citing new evidence that Indiana's voter identification law is disenfranchising thousands of Indiana voters, lawyers at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and a coalition of voting rights organizations filed a friend-of-the-court brief today urging the U.S. Supreme Court to scuttle the Indiana law. The brief is one of more than 20 amicus briefs being filed today by voting rights advocates, current and former Secretaries of State, law professors, historians, political scientists, student organizations, labor unions and civic, religious and civil rights organizations. A full list of amici and a summary of their briefs is available here.

The Brennan Center's brief comes as new research, also released today, from the University of Washington Institute on for the Study of Ethnicity and Race is providing the first direct evidence that Indiana's voter identification law is disenfranchising thousands of Indiana voters, especially African-American and low-income voters as well as senior citizens and students.

"The state of Indiana has the most stringent voter identification law in the country. This study makes clear that their law - rather than preventing fraud - is actually disenfranchising substantial numbers of Indiana voters," said Michael Waldman, the Brennan Center's executive director.

* 21.8% of black Indiana voters do not have access to a valid photo ID (compared to 15.8% of white Indiana voters - a 6 point gap).

* When non-registered eligible voter responses are included - the gap widens. 28.3% of eligible black voters in the State of Indiana to not have valid photo ID (compared to 16.8% of eligible voting age white Indiana residents - a gap of 11.5 percent).

* The study found what it termed "a curvilinear pattern (similar to an upside down U-curve)" in the relationship between age and access to valid ID - younger voters and older voters were both less likely to have valid ID compared to voters in the middle categories. 22% of voters 18-34 did not have ID, nor did 19.4% over the age of 70. (compared to 16.2% of Indiana voters age 35-54 without valid ID and 14.1% for 55-69 year olds).

* 21% of Indiana registered voters with only a high school diploma did not have valid ID (compared to 11.5% of Indiana voters who have completed college - a gap of 9.5%).

* Those with valid ID are much more likely to be Republicans than those who do not have valid ID. Among registered voters with proper ID, 41.6% are registered Republicans, 32.5% are Democrats.

http://www.votetrustusa.org/in...

Republicans in Indiana voted for this law to reduce Dem turnout, and it worked.


Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 21:35:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ex post facto arguments (0.00 / 0)

The argument that you quote was from the Supreme Court decision in which no evidence of a voter being disenfranchised was found.  The least you can do is attempt to be honest with the discussion.

The idea that Republicans voted for it, therefore it is wrong is the attitude that is destroying our country - see pretty much every speech made by Barack Obama.

The Voter ID law was in effect well before the primary - plenty of time for people to get their Free Indiana issued IDs.  

The out of state voter?  Uh - if you maintain that you are an out-of-state resident and have not moved to the state, then you are ineligible to vote in the state.  So the law actually worked to keep an ineligible voter from casting a vote.  If the out-of-state student wanted to become eligible to vote in-state, then he/she would have to change residence - otherwise I'd be able to vote in NY based on my out-of-state tuition payments to CUNY.

It is also false that someone is stopped from casting a ballot if they don't have ID.  They are allowed to cast a provisional ballot and then appear in court within ten days to prove their ID and thus have it counted.  So...leave your driver's license at home?  Cast a provisional ballot and go to court.  Is it a hassle?  Sure - but how stupid is it to go to the polls - probably DRIVE to the polls - without your DL?  I haven't been outside of my house since I was fourteen without mine.

The best case is that of the nuns - all in their 80s and 90s - who had no ID.  If you actually followed a link and read it, you'd find out that the law provides special consideration for those over 65 who can't show their birth certificate.

You think any of those nuns was drawing Social Security or on Medicare?  You have to prove ID to get either of those.  There was, and is - without a doubt - some way for them to meet the requirements.  They didn't do it before the election.  Whose fault is it for not doing so?

Obviously, it is the fault of every Republican in the state.  Obviously.  

So far, not one opponent of Voter ID has come up with a realistic answer to this basic question: Why is it wrong to ask someone to prove they are eligible to vote before they cast a vote?  

Or this: If it is fundamentally wrong to do so, then why have eligibility standards at all?

Will commit political science for food.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:07:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]