Tag Archives: Electoral fraud

What Voter Fraud ?

Posted on by

Many states currently under Republican control have moved to set up voter identification requirements in order to prevent voter fraud. Many Democrat Party members have accused the Republicans of trying to suppress the voter rather than prevent fraud. I posted a story about this yesterday (rightwinggranny.com).

Today there is a new story. WALB.com in South Georgia reports:

12 former Brooks County officials were indicted for voter fraud. The suspects are accused of illegally helping people vote by absentee ballot.

State officials launched an investigation after an unusually high number of absentee ballots were cast in the July 2010 primary election. “As a result of their grand jury findings 12 individuals were indicted in that particular matter and we will be trying that case in a court of judicial law instead of a court of public opinion so that will be pending this next year,” said District Attorney Joe Mulholland.

The people indicted included some workers in the voter registrar’s office and some school board members. It is a shame that supposed leaders in the community would engage in this sort of behavior.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Case For Voter Identification

Posted on by
Artur Davis (D) - US Representative

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday the Daily Caller posted a story about the need for voter identification. Generally speaking, the Democrats claim that the move toward requiring voters to have picture identification is designed to limit the voting ability of minorities. Well, one Democrat is destroying that argument with tales of Democrat voter fraud.

The article reports:

But former Democratic Rep. Artur Davis told The Daily Caller that anti-fraud measures are needed to protect African-Americans from corrupt political bosses — many of them African-Americans themselves — who run Democratic Party machines in the South.

The Daily Caller quotes Mr. Davis:

“What I have seen in my state, in my region, is the the most aggressive practitioners of voter-fraud are local machines who are tied lock, stock and barrel to the special interests in their communities — the landfills, the casino operators — and they’re cooking the [ballot] boxes on election day, they’re manufacturing absentee ballots, they’re voting [in the names of] people named Donald Duck, because they want to control politics and thwart progress.”

We need more people to speak up for voter identification–honest elections are a very necessary part of our government.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Looking Past The Headline To The News

Posted on by
John_F_Kennedy_1964_Issue-5c.jpg

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday the Los Angeles Times posted a story with the headline, “Election laws tightening in GOP-run states.” Interesting headline. Why are election laws being strengthened in Republican rather than Democrat states? There are two ways to look at this–the Democrats would have you believe that the Republicans are trying to hinder minority voters, the Republicans would have you believe that they are combating voter fraud. Which is closer to the truth?

The article reports:

But Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said the GOP drive was triggered by “the infamous example of ACORN,” the collection of community organizations which, he said, submitted 400,000 fraudulent registrations in 2008. He called the new laws “common-sense proposals” to “preserve the sanctity of our elections by ensuring that only eligible voters vote.”

The results of the election of 2008 would not have been changed had voter fraud not existed, but in a close election, voter fraud can change the results. It s an accepted fact that Mayor Daley stole the election in 1960 for John F. Kennedy.

Wikipedia (not my favorite source) reports:

Known for shrewd party politics, Daley was a stereotypical machine politician, and his Chicago Democratic Machine, based on control of thousands of patronage positions, was instrumental in bringing a narrow 8,000 vote victory in Illinois for John F. Kennedy in 1960. A PBS documentary entitled “Daley” explained that Mayor Daley and JFK potentially stole the 1960 election by stuffing ballot boxes and rigging the vote in Chicago. In addition, it reveals, Daley withheld many votes from certain wards when the race seemed close.

I have no problem with requiring voter identification. Identification is required to do many things in our society that are considerably less important than voting–rent a video, board an airplane, cash a check, buy cigarettes, buy alcohol, and receive any sort of federal assistance. Voting is at least as important as any of these.The election of 2012 may be close. I would prefer that whatever the result is, it represents the rule “one man, one vote.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Something To Think About As We Approach 2012

Posted on by
Photo portrait of John F. Kennedy, President o...

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article about voter fraud. Mr. Hinderaker lives in Minnesota, so the focus of the article is on voter fraud in Minnesota, but there are some interesting generic points in the article.

A group called Minnesota Majority has done some research on voter fraud in Minnesota. The group reports:

The report finds that 113 individuals who voted illegally in the 2008 election have been convicted of the crime, “ineligible voter knowingly votes” under Minnesota Statute 201.014.

The article at Minnesota Majority also reported:

Minnesota’s recent charges and convictions stem from research initiated by Minnesota Majority. The research identified upwards of 2,800 ineligible felons believed to have unlawfully voted in Minnesota’s 2008 general election.

“These convictions are just the tip of the iceberg,” said Davis. “The actual number of illegal votes cast was in the thousands. Most unlawful voters were never charged with a crime because they simply pled ignorance. We have evidence of these people casting illegal ballots, but in Minnesota, ignorance of election law is considered to be an acceptable defense.”

I don’t think that number of illegal votes mattered in 2008, but if 2012 is a close election, that number of illegal votes in some states could make a difference in the outcome of the election. Those of us over the age of 60 remember that there were some serious questions about the validity of John Kennedy’s victory in the 1960 presidential election. Richard Nixon chose not to litigate the election, although he certainly could have. The difference in the 1960 election was the city of Chicago. Somehow that city provided the right amount of votes for Kennedy to win. Hmmm.

Enhanced by Zemanta