The Real Story On Voter ID

Yesterday Just the News posted an article about support for voter id laws. The information is surprising if you depend on the mainstream media for your news.

The article reports:

A coalition of black leaders on Friday came out strongly in support of voter ID laws, arguing that most black voters feel the same way and rebuking what they said was the “oblivious” and “opportunistic” denial of those opinions by progressive leaders. 

The coalition — which includes U.S. Rep. Burgess Owens, former Florida Lt. Gov. Jennifer Carroll, former Texas state Rep. James Earl Wright, and former mayor of Cincinnati and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights Ken Blackwell — declares at RealClearPolitics that “liberal orthodoxy” dictates that “all Blacks think alike, and all Blacks support Black Lives Matter, and all Blacks oppose the recently enacted Georgia Election Integrity Act,” one that in part mandates voter ID at the polls.

I believe that every American wants every legal voter to be able to vote and to have their vote counted. Unfortunately, every illegal vote cancels the vote of a legal voter.

The article continues:

Yet the writers note that a recent Rasmussen Reports poll “found that 69% of Blacks and 82% of nonwhite minorities support voter ID,” while another recent poll “found that a full two-thirds of Blacks in Georgia support voter ID.”

At this point, you begin to wonder who is actually opposing the Georgia law and why.

The article notes:

“The data seems clear: A majority of Black Americans support voter ID laws,” they argue. Yet, they claim, “opportunistic activists like Stacey Abrams pretend the entire Black community stands behind them and the radical Democrat Party,” crafting a narrative in which black people “are either opposed to voter ID or, even more offensively, that Blacks are incapable of obtaining IDs.”

Realistically, most Americans know that an id of some sort is pretty much required to function in America today. You can’t buy cigarettes or liquor without an id, you can’t fill a prescription without an id, you can’t open a bank account or cash a check without an id, and you can’t receive medical care without an id. Do you know anyone who has not at some point engaged in one of the above activities? I don’t.

Voter id makes it harder to cheat. Why are some politicians opposed to that? That is the question.

 

You Can Fool Some Of The People Some Of The Time…

Hot Air reported yesterday that recent polls show that H.R. 1 is losing support among Americans.

The article reports:

Both House and Senate Democrats seemed to enjoy talking about how “popular” the COVID relief bill was every time a camera was pointed at them. (“Free money” seems to have that effect on people.) If they are so concerned about popularity polls when it comes to legislation, I wonder what they’re going to be saying about HR1, the “For the People Act.” Earlier this week we looked at one brutal poll showing that large majorities of people are opposed to some of the central provisions of the bill, including restrictions on voter ID laws and the continued expansion of mail-in ballots. Close on the heels of that survey, we now have a second poll from Scott Rasmussen and FreedomWorks on the same subject and the news for the Democrats isn’t getting any better. It seems that the more people learn about HR1, the less they like it. And this isn’t indicative of any partisan divide. Even Democratic voters are giving these proposals a major thumbs down. (Washington Examiner)

…In a new FreedomWorks/Scott Rasmussen survey provided exclusively to Secrets, 85% of registered voters said it is common sense to require photo identification to get a ballot. A previous survey from the unaffiliated Rasmussen Reports found 75% back photo ID.

But even more, 72% told FreedomWorks that photo ID laws boost their confidence in elections, and 52% believe it would reduce fraud.

The article concludes:

The widespread use of mail-in ballots and how they are handled also has large portions of the populace feeling uneasy. HR1 would require states to accept mail-in ballots up to ten days after the election. But 73% of the people surveyed said they believe that ballots should arrive by election day. As far as the HR1 requirement to mail out a ballot to every voter, 63% panned that idea, saying ballots should only be mailed to those who request them.

After all of the chaos surrounding the 2020 election and the mountains of mail-in ballots that election officials in most states were clearly not ready to deal with, is anyone surprised? Nobody wants to go through that again, but the Democrats are working overtime to make that a permanent fixture of American elections. In states that don’t put in any serious effort to clean up their voter rolls, those mass mailings led to any number of problems. That’s probably why a majority of respondents (57%) said they would “strongly favor” a law requiring states’ voter rolls to be regularly cleaned up.

Perhaps the most disturbing figure to come out of this poll is the one showing that 43% of the people surveyed had never even heard of HR1. The Democrats are trying to ram this through and the media is totally failing to educate voters on the specifics inside the bill. And if they manage to pass it, it will require the GOP to move mountains to undo the damage if and when they come back into power.

H.R.1 is not a stop toward election integrity and needs to fail miserably when voted on in the Senate. The “For the People Act of 2021” could be better described as the federalize election fraud act of 2021.

Beware Of Executive Orders That Sound Good

Most Americans want everyone who is entitled to vote to be able to vote and have their vote counted. They also want to make sure that illegal votes are not counted. Somehow the rhetoric surrounding voting rights has overlooked the idea of registering and counting only legal votes. This is not overtly stated, but when you look closely, you find very little interest in maintaining accurate voting laws and making sure voters are who they say they are.

Townhall posted an article today about an Executive Order by President Biden.

The article reports:

President Joe Biden on Sunday signed an executive order aimed at expanding voting rights. It’s the Biden administration’s latest move to expand voting rights as they push the Senate to pass H.R. 1, the House Democrats’ bill to radically transform America’s election system, including prohibiting voter ID laws and mandating taxpayers fund political campaigns.

“It is the policy of my Administration to promote and defend the right to vote for all Americans who are legally entitled to participate in elections,” the executive order stated. “It is the responsibility of the Federal Government to expand access to, and education about, voter registration and election information, and to combat misinformation, in order to enable all eligible Americans to participate in our democracy.”

Article 1 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators.

Why are the Democrats in Congress trying to take this right away from the states?

Why is voter ID considered restrictive? You need an ID to do almost anything in America–receive medical treatment, open a bank account, board an airplane, buy liquor, take out a loan, etc.. Why not be required to show an ID to prove you are an eligible voter and that you are who you say you are?

We Could Have Avoided This Entire Mess

The Daily Signal posted an article today explaining how the confusion about this years presidential election could have been avoided. The article cites the 2005 report of the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, known informally as the Carter-Baker Commission.

The article lists seven areas of recommendations in the report that needed to be changed to prevent all of the charges and counter-charges we currently see.

This is the list:

1) Voter IDs

With the vast expansion of mail-in voting this year, voter ID requirements were less likely.

Today, states have a patchwork of voter ID laws, with 36 states either requiring or requesting voters to present identification at the polls, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The conference says only six states have “strict” photo ID requirements—Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. 

The Carter-Baker Commission called for voter ID standards nationwide in its 2005 report. 

2) Mail-In and Absentee Voting Risks

In a brief filed supporting the Trump campaign’s Pennsylvania litigation over mail-in ballots, a group of Republican state attorneys general reference the Cater-Baker Commission report among other items regarding mail-in voting and ballot harvesting. 

The 2020 election trends seemed to shift dramatically as mailed-in votes were counted. Further, many questions have emerged about the point of origin for ballots. 

Specifically, the report called on states to prohibit third parties or political operatives from collecting ballots—a practice commonly known as “ballot harvesting.”

3) Avoiding Duplicate Registration Across State Lines

In Nevada, the Trump campaign asserts there were potentially thousands of out-of-state votes cast in one of the most closely contested states. 

The Carter-Baker Commission report called for states to make it easier to track registered voters who move from one state to another to reduce duplication of registrations. 

The report states, “Invalid voter files, which contain ineligible, duplicate, fictional, or deceased voters, are an invitation to fraud.”  

“In order to assure that lists take account of citizens moving from one state to another, voter databases should be made interoperable between states,” the Carter-Baker report stated. “This would serve to eliminate duplicate registrations, which are a source of potential fraud.” 

4) Election Observers for Integrity

In Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Nevada, Republicans have complained that qualified election observers have been prohibited from watching the counting. 

The Carter-Baker Commission report stressed the need for election observers to maintain the integrity of the ballots. 

5) Reliable Voting Machines

Voting machines have also been a significant issue in 2020, particularly in Michigan, as one county there flipped from Biden to Trump after a hand recount showed the machine count to be inaccurate. 

The Carter-Baker Commission suggested that machines print out paper receipts for voters to verify their vote was accurately counted. 

6) Media Calling Elections

On election night, Fox News Channel was the first to call the state of Arizona for Biden, prompting outrage in the Trump camp. Moreover, major media outlets have projected Biden to have won the election, even as vote counting and litigation continue

The 2005 commission report also addressed problems with the media, suggesting news outlets voluntarily offer candidates free airtime and also show restraint in calling a state for one candidate or the other. The First Amendment would prevent any such rule from being mandatory. 

7) Prosecuting Voter Fraud

The Carter-Baker Commission suggested that federal and state prosecutors should more aggressively monitor voter fraud. 

“In July of even-numbered years, the U.S. Department of Justice should issue a public report on its investigations of election fraud,” the report says. 

Think what a difference these ideas would make in securing the integrity of our elections. Obviously it is too late for this election, but we need to take a good look at instituting these reforms for future elections.

How Voter Fraud By Mail Works

On Saturday, The New York Post posted an article exposing how mail-in voter fraud works.

The article reports:

Mail-in ballots have become the latest flashpoint in the 2020 elections. While President Trump and the GOP warn of widespread manipulation of the absentee vote that will swell with COVID polling restrictions, many Democrats and their media allies have dismissed such concerns as unfounded.

But the political insider, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he fears prosecution, said fraud is more the rule than the exception. His dirty work has taken him through the weeds of municipal and federal elections in Paterson, Atlantic City, Camden, Newark, Hoboken and Hudson County and his fingerprints can be found in local legislative, mayoral and congressional races across the Garden State. Some of the biggest names and highest office holders in New Jersey have benefited from his tricks, according to campaign records The Post reviewed.

“An election that is swayed by 500 votes, 1,000 votes — it can make a difference,” the tipster said. “It could be enough to flip states.”

The article explains the method used:

The ballot has no specific security features — like a stamp or a watermark — so the insider said he would just make his own ballots.

“I just put [the ballot] through the copy machine and it comes out the same way,” the insider said.

But the return envelopes are “more secure than the ballot. You could never recreate the envelope,” he said. So they had to be collected from real voters.

He would have his operatives fan out, going house to house, convincing voters to let them mail completed ballots on their behalf as a public service. The fraudster and his minions would then take the sealed envelopes home and hold them over boiling water.

“You have to steam it to loosen the glue,” said the insider.

He then would remove the real ballot, place the counterfeit ballot inside the signed certificate, and reseal the envelope.

“Five minutes per ballot tops,” said the insider.

The insider said he took care not to stuff the fake ballots into just a few public mailboxes, but sprinkle them around town. That way he avoided the attention that foiled a sloppy voter-fraud operation in a Paterson, NJ, city council race this year, where 900 ballots were found in just three mailboxes.

“If they had spread them in all different mailboxes, nothing would have happened,” the insider said.

…“You have a postman who is a rabid anti-Trump guy and he’s working in Bedminster or some Republican stronghold … He can take those [filled-out] ballots, and knowing 95% are going to a Republican, he can just throw those in the garbage.”

In some cases, mail carriers were members of his “work crew,” and would sift ballots from the mail and hand them over to the operative.

In 2017, more than 500 mail-in ballots in New York City never arrived to the Board of Elections for races that November—leaving hundreds disenfranchised. They eventually were discovered in April 2018. “For some undetermined reason, some baskets of mail that were bound to the New York City Board of Elections were put off to the side at the Brooklyn processing facility,” city elections boss Michael Ryan said at the time of discovery.

The article continues with details on how those intent on voter fraud target nursing homes and states without voter ID laws. Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It is frightening to know that this has gone on for years. It is time for voter fraud to end.

 

Another Reason To Support Voter Identification Laws

Patch in Philadelphia reported yesterday that former Democrat Congressman Michael “Ozzie” Myers is accused of bribing a Philadelphia election judge over several years to stuff ballot boxes.

The article reports:

United States Attorney William M. McSwain said U.S. Congressman Michael “Ozzie” Myers, 77, of Philadelphia, has been charged by indictment with multiple counts, including conspiring to violate voting rights by fraudulently stuffing the ballot boxes for specific Democratic candidates in the 2014, 2015, and 2016 Pennsylvania primary elections, bribery of an election official, falsification of records, voting more than once in federal elections, and obstruction of justice.

Myers, a Democrat, was elected to Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District in 1976 then was expelled from congress in 1980 as a result of the Abscam sting. He was sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000 on bribery and conspiracy charges. Before that, he represented the 184th District in the Pennsylvania State Legislature from 1971 to 1976.

Myers is alleged to have bribed Domenick J. Demuro, who served Judge of Elections for the 39th Ward, 36th Division in South Philadelphia, over several years to illegally add votes for certain candidates of their mutual political party in primary elections.

If convicted, Myers faces up to 90 years in prison and $2 million in fines.

Demuro, who was charged separately and pleaded guilty in May 2020, was responsible for overseeing the entire election process and all voter activities of his division in accord with federal and state election laws.

Voter identification laws would not solve this problem, but a computerized system involving scanning identification and making sure that the number of votes reported matches the number of people scanned in would solve this problem. Election fraud undermines our republic and needs to be dealt with harshly.

Still Trying To Honor The Votes Of North Carolinians

Voters in North Carolina have voted twice to require a photo id during elections. Both times the courts have told the voters ‘no.’  On July 9 WRAL posted an article detailing the latest effort by the North Carolina legislature to honor the wishes of the voters.

The article reports:

Legislative Republicans called on the courts Thursday to lift an injunction and require voter to present photo identification at the polls this November, saying a bill they passed earlier this year should satisfy the last arguments against the rule.

“It is past time for activist courts to stop blocking another commonsense elections policy that is required by North Carolina’s constitution and a strong majority of other states,” House Speaker Tim Moore said in a statement.

There are two lawsuits seeking – so far, successfully – to block the state’s voter ID requirement: one state and one federal. Republican lawmakers filed a motion in the state case Thursday, asking judges to drop their injunction against the state’s voter ID law.

They argued that a provision included in House Bill 1169 earlier this year should satisfy the court.

That bill dealt with a number of election issues, most of them geared toward tweaking election procedures to account for the coronavirus pandemic. It passed with broad bipartisan support.

It also included language adding a new category of IDs to the ones poll workers would accept: public assistance IDs.

That Republican lawmakers hadn’t included those IDs in the bill they passed in late 2018 laying out voter ID rules was part of the court’s rationale in blocking implementation this year.

“With the enactment of H.B. 1169, the General Assembly has adopted nearly every ‘ameliorative’ amendment proposed … and it also has addressed the key shortcoming identified by the Court of Appeals,” Moore’s office said in its release.

This is the exact step some Democratic lawmakers said they feared when they backed off support for House Bill 1169 earlier this year: That the snippet of voter ID language would be used in court.

“That was the poison pill when they put that in,” Rep.

Marcia Morey , D-Durham, said Thursday.

Stay tuned. After a while, you begin to wonder why some people are fighting so hard against voter id.

Well Done

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit reported that the Kentucky state legislature has overridden Democrat governor Andy Beshear’s veto of a bill requiring ID to vote.

The article reports:

Well it turns out Kentucky has a relatively low threshold for overriding a governor’s veto, which only requires a simply majority.

The Kentucky General Assembly is overwhelmingly Republican, outnumbering the democrats 29-9 in the Senate and 61-37 in the House.

So the legislature got back together last week and took up votes to override Beshear’s veto, which passed by huge margins in both chambers.

We live in a country where ID is required to cash a check, get on an airplane, enter a federal building, rent a car, receive medical treatment, and many other routine things. Why shouldn’t we require an ID to exercise our most precious right–the right to vote?

Every vote cast by in ineligible voter cancels out the vote of a legitimate voter. That alone should be a reason to support voter ID.

The Fight For Honest Elections

The goal of elections in America is to have every citizen vote and every citizen’s vote counted. When a non-citizen votes, it cancels out the vote of a citizen. That is one of the arguments for voter id requirements.

Yesterday The Washington Free Beacon posted an article about a recent Texas lawsuit that had to do with voting.

The article reports:

The largest county in Texas settled a lawsuit with a watchdog group after refusing to release records dealing with noncitizens on its voter rolls.

A federal district court in Houston entered a settlement agreement this week between the Harris County voter registrar and the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF). The settlement calls for the county to turn over records on its cancellations of ineligible voters, copies of registration applications that have blank or negative responses to citizenship questions, and all registrar communications with law enforcement regarding ineligible registrants, among other records. Officials from Harris County, the most populous county in Texas, previously testified that “thousands” of noncitizens were discovered on its voter rolls every year.

The settlement comes as the election watchdog group seeks to clean voter rolls in major cities ahead of the November elections. Democrats have pushed back against attempts to clean voter rolls, often calling them “purges.” Individuals removed for ineligibility tend to belong to demographic groups that lean Democrat. Texas has in recent years become a target of national Democrats, who have poured millions into the Lone Star State in attempts to gain power.

The article concludes:

PILF has filed a number of lawsuits in cities across the country in recent months. The group filed a suit against Detroit officials after discovering 2,500 dead registrants on the city’s voter rolls. Nearly 5,000 voters appeared more than once on the rolls, and there were more registered voters than there were eligible voters in the city.

PILF also filed suit against Pittsburgh officials after finding dead voters, duplicate registrants, and 1,500 registrants aged 100 or above (49 marked as being born in the 1800s) on county voter rolls.

It is really sad that Americans do not turn out to vote in high numbers, yet those who come here illegally vote. There is something wrong with that picture.

This Would Be The Right Answer

North Carolina House Speaker Tim Moore posted the following on this website on Wednesday:

General Assembly lawmakers requested a hearing of the full state Court of Appeals on Tuesday to review North Carolina’s voter ID law, arguing “there is no category of voters that is even theoretically prohibited from voting.” 

A liberal, activist appeals court panel recently reversed a bipartisan trial court’s approval of the state’s voter ID law that allows individuals without ID to still cast a ballot. 

Attorneys for state lawmakers noted that the bipartisan three-judge trial court panel found the plaintiffs in Holmes v. Moore were unlikely to succeed on their challenge to North Carolina’s voter ID law, but “an error-ridden decision that took a one-sided look at the record” from an appeals court panel reversed their ruling last week. 

North Carolina’s voter ID law was passed pursuant to a constitutional amendment approved by voters, was then vetoed by Gov. Roy Cooper, but enacted by the state legislature in S.B. 824 Implementation of Voter ID Constitutional Amendment.

Arguing the case is of “exceptional importance” concerning “a constitutional mandate,” lawmakers’ request for a full hearing of the North Carolina Court of Appeals notes the state’s voter ID law “is exceptionally protective of voters and compares favorably with other laws that have been upheld in the face of similar challenges.” 

“The panel failed to adequately distinguish North Carolina’s voter ID law from Virginia’s and South Carolina’s laws – which were upheld despite the fact that both laws are stricter than North Carolina’s in many respects,” attorneys for state lawmakers wrote Tuesday.   

“Voters lacking ID may cast a reasonable impediment ballot that will be counted unless the declaration underlying the ballot is factually false.”

General Assembly leaders also noted in the filing that “less than 0.1% of participants in the March 2016 primary had to vote provisionally because they lacked ID under a prior law’s shorter ID list.”

“The General Assembly still exercised its discretionary authority to allow exceptions from the constitutional voter ID requirement to ensure that all registered voters will be able to vote…there thus is no category of voters that is even theoretically prohibited from voting by S.B. 824’s terms,” the motion for an en banc hearing of the state Court of Appeals said. 

North Carolina House Speaker Tim Moore (R-Cleveland), who filed the proposed voter ID constitutional amendment approved by voters, said the state Court of Appeals must grant the request for an en banc hearing given that “the people’s voice in the democratic process is at stake.”

“The people of North Carolina deserve a full, fair hearing of the state Court of Appeals on voter ID,” Speaker Moore said this week. 

“This liberal, activist appeals court panel was wrong to reverse a bipartisan trial court’s ruling and tread on the will of voters in this state.  The Court of Appeals must grant the request for a full hearing on voter ID given the people’s voice in the democratic process is at stake in this litigation.” 

North Carolina voters voted for voter id twice–once outright and once as an amendment to the North Carolina Constitution. It is really annoying to vote for something twice and have the courts ignore the will of the voters.

How Many Times Do Voters Have To Pass This To Make It Law?

A 2016 article at CNN reported:

A federal appeals court Friday overturned parts of North Carolina’s 2013 voting law, including provisions that required voters to show a photo identification card, saying they were enacted “with racially discriminatory intent” in violation of the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act.

“We cannot ignore the record evidence that, because of race, the legislature enacted one of the largest restrictions of the franchise in modern North Carolina history,” 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Diana Motz wrote.

This was the third federal court ruling against voter identification laws this month. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled July 20 that Texas’ voter ID law violated the Voting Rights Act, and federal judges softened a Wisconsin law on July 19.

The voters responded by passing an amendment to the North Carolina Constitution in November 2018 that required voter id.

The Carolina Journal continues the story today:

 A federal court gave North Carolinians who adopted a constitutional amendment requiring voter ID a late lump of coal.

U.S. District Court Judge Loretta Biggs and Magistrate Judge Patrick Auld issued a notice Thursday, Dec. 26, saying the court will put the law implementing the constitutional amendment on hold. They’re presiding over a lawsuit challenging the law requiring voters to present a state-approved form of identification at the polls. The court said it will issue an order next week.

…What happens next is anyone’s guess. The defendants in the lawsuit who have standing to file an appeal may choose not to, jeopardizing the voter ID requirement for the March 2020 primary.

The N.C. chapter of the NAACP filed the lawsuit a year ago, saying the 2018 implementing law was too much like earlier voter ID attempts that were ruled unconstitutional. Senate Bill 824 became law Dec. 19, 2018, over Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto.

But in its lawsuit, the NAACP didn’t include the General Assembly among the defendants, even though legislators passed the law being challenged. The only defendants are Cooper (who vetoed S.B. 824) and the members of the State Board of Elections.

Legislative leaders asked the court in January to join the lawsuit. Biggs rejected the request, saying the elections board could defend the law.

County elections boards were told Thursday the voter ID informational mailing was scrapped.

It is significant that the only defendants are Governor Cooper and the State Board of Elections. My guess is that the Governor will choose not to oppose the ruling and we will have to vote for voter id again. The legislature passed voter id laws a few years ago, and the voters amended the Constitution to require voter id last year. The court is taking away the rights of the voters and of the legislature. That should not be allowed to stand.

Preparing To Steal An Election

There have been a number of people convicted of voter fraud since the 2016 election. Efforts to remove dead people and non-citizens from voting rolls have been consistently opposed by Democrats, claiming racism. Frankly, I don’t think dead people should vote–regardless of their race. On Friday, the Democrats in the House of Representatives passed an updated version of  H.R. 4, which will make it very difficult for states to require identification to vote or to purge their voter rolls of dead people or non-citizens.

PJ Media posted an article yesterday explaining the bill and its consequences.

The article reports:

While the country is being distracted by the Democrats’ bogus impeachment, House Democrats passed H.R. 4, the so-called Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019, on a mostly party-line vote. Democrats claim the legislation is about fighting voter suppression—because when Democrats lose elections it can only be because of voter suppression, obviously. “Action is urgently needed to combat the brazen voter suppression campaign that is spreading across America,” Nancy Pelosi claimed at a press event Friday before the bill’s passage.

The bill, if signed into law, would require states to obtain “preclearance” from the Justice Department in order to make changes to voter laws—a blatant infringement of states’ rights. Why would Democrats want such a law in place? According to House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2019, “is a good step to right the wrongs that’ve dismantled the fundamental right to vote through Voter ID laws, purging voter rolls & closing majority-minority polling places.”

The article concludes:

It’s obvious what this legislation is really about. Democrats are fighting efforts to ensure the integrity of our elections. “This bill would essentially federalize state and local election laws when there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that those states or localities engaged in any discriminatory behavior when it comes to voting,” said Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.). “The Supreme Court has made clear that this type of federal control over state and local elections is unconstitutional, because Congress can only do that when there’s proof of actual discrimination, which is what this bill is supposed to be about,” he added. Collins also believes the problem Democrats claim to want to fix isn’t actually a problem. “Voting rights are protected in this country, including in my own state of Georgia, where Latino and African American voter turnout has soared. Between 2014 and 2018, voter turnout increased by double digits for both men and women in both of these communities.”

As scary as this legislation is, it won’t go anywhere in the U.S. Senate. But, make no mistake about it, Democrats oppose every attempt to ensure the integrity of our elections, and they won’t stop.

Any fraudulent vote cancels the legitimate vote of an American citizen. All of us need to protect voter integrity in our elections. H.R. 4 does not do that.

One Way To Fight Voter Fraud

On Friday, One America News reported that some election battleground states are taking steps to avoid voter fraud in next year’s election. Obviously there are a number of types of voter fraud. Some states have passed laws requiring a photo identification to prove that voters are who they say they are. The current efforts are to combat electronic fraud.

The article reports:

A leg of the Department of Homeland Security recently announced its soon to be partnership with election officials and non-profit VotingWorks that would audit votes in 2020. Ballot box officers say the purpose is to prevent possible hacks and watch for faulty voting machines.

Battleground states, such as Pennsylvania and Ohio, have already embraced a voter monitoring tool known as Arlo. Four other states have reportedly adopted the tool as well. The VotingWorks sponsored tool is free for state and local election leaders, and would double-check all votes cast.

Arlo is a web-based app that uses a security method called “risk-limiting audit.” During this process, a small percentage of the paper ballots are taken at random to check if they match what the machines recorded. Although the method is simple, many places don’t use them reportedly because many states use direct electronic voting machines, which eradicates all paper trails.

This is a really good idea. We need to make sure our elections are honest. Voter fraud is a problem. Various voter integrity groups have found multiple examples of illegal registrations in various states in recent years. Voter identity requirements and spot audits are ways to assure Americans that their votes count and are not being cancelled out by illegal votes or electronic shenanigans.

This Sounds Like A Logical Complaint Until You Look At The Actual Facts

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article about something Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently retweeted. The original tweet was supposed to point out a problem with voter ID laws. Instead, when you looked at the actual facts, the policy in place makes sense.

This is the tweet:

In order to get a concealed carry permit in Texas, you have to be a legal resident of Texas. In order to get a student ID in Texas, you don’t have to be a resident of Texas or an American citizen. When the facts are considered, the policy makes sense.

So Remind Me Why I Voted

We live in a representative republic. We elect people to represent us. Occasionally we actually vote on issues via referendums, ballot initiatives, etc. Those votes directly reflect the will of the voters.

In 2018, the General Assembly passed a law putting an item on the ballot that required voters to show identification in order to vote. Governor Cooper vetoed the legislation; the Senate overrode the veto. The measure was also challenged in court, but that challenge seems to have gone nowhere.

The voters of North Carolina approved voter id by more than 50 percent. The Governor has called the law racist and unnecessary. If everyone is required to show identification, how is that racist? The law is necessary because we have a number of voters on our voter rolls that are over 110 years of age. I doubt that all of those people are still alive. There are also situations where fifty or more people are listed as having the same address–an address that does not have an inhabitable building. There have also been situations where people who voted were asked to serve on a jury and told the court they couldn’t because they were not American citizens. Wow.

Yes, voter id is necessary. Yes, the voters of North Carolina voted for it. Yes, Governor Cooper, you should be representing the will of the voters.

The Case For Voter ID

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article yesterday with the following headline, “Study: Voter ID Laws Don’t Stop People Voting.”

The article reports:

Strict voter ID laws do not suppress turnout, a new paper finds, regardless of sex, race, Hispanic identity, or party affiliation.

Requiring photo ID to vote is a hotly contested subject in American political discourse. Proponents argue that it is necessary to insure against fraud and preserve the integrity of the American electoral system. Opponents argue that it will disenfranchise otherwise eligible voters—many of whom would be poor and of color—who are unable to easily obtain ID.

In total, 10 states, ranging from Georgia to Wisconsin, require voters to show ID in order to vote. Seven of those states require a photo ID, and three do not. An additional 25 states “request” that voters display ID, but may still permit them to vote on a provision ballot if they cannot. The remaining states “use other methods to verify the identity of voters,” according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The new research, from an economics professor at the University of Bologna and another at Harvard Business School, indicates that “strict” voting laws of the type implemented in those ten states do not have a statistically significant effect on voter turnout.

A few years ago, North Carolina tested a voter ID system during a primary election. Turnout was higher than in previous primary elections. The voter ID requirement did not suppress the vote. The system allowed the poll workers to scan the voter’s driver’s license in order to print the correct ballot. Implementing that system allowed the lines to move quickly and resulted in more efficient voting for everyone. The idea that voter ID limits voters is a myth. You need an ID to do a lot of everyday things, so most people have an acceptable form of ID.

The article concludes:

At the same time, the study’s authors use the same data to examine the actual effect of strict voter ID laws on voter fraud itself, and similarly find no statistically significant effect. Using two datasets of voter fraud cases (which represent a cumulative 2,000 proven or hypothesized events over eight years), the study examines the relationship between laws and frequency of measured voter fraud, finding no evidence of a change after implementation.

This finding is naturally limited by the extremely small number of voter fraud cases actually identified: fewer than one per million people per year. It is possible that voter ID laws would be more effective suppressing fraud in a context where it was more evidently prevalent; as is, the authors estimate that the laws themselves only cover about 0.3 to 0.1 offenses per million people per year.

In total, then, the paper suggests that voter ID laws are not suppressive, but also that they do not have much of an impact on elections overall.

“Our results suggest that efforts both to safeguard electoral integrity and enfranchise more voters may be better served through other reforms,” it concludes.

Voter ID will not end voter fraud. It will, however, make it more difficult.

This Is A Problem Voter ID Will Not Solve

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article about non-citizens voting in Texas.

The article reports:

Project Veritas dropped an undercover video earlier Tuesday showing election officials admitting “tons” of non-citizens are voting in Texas.

O’Keefe’s undercover video caught the attention of Texas Governor Gregg Abbott. “This will be investigated,” Abbott said of the non-citizens being encouraged to vote by election officials.

In the video, a Project Veritas undercover journalist asked a Texas election official if her “DREAMer” boyfriend can vote as long as he is registered to vote and has a driver’s license.

“Yeah okay” the election official responded.

“If he has his ID that’s all he needs. If he’s registered,” the election official said of a potential DACA voter.

“Right. It doesn’t matter that he’s not a citizen?” the PV journalist asked, adding, “I saw some mess on the internet that it’s not legal for him to vote because…”

“No. Don’t pay any attention to that. Bring him up here,” the Texas election official said.

When the Project Veritas journalist pressed the election official about her ‘DREAMer’ boyfriend and asked if there is an “issue with DACA people voting,” the election official responded, “No, you tell him no, we got a lot of ’em.”

Texas Governor Abbott said not only will he be launching an investigation into the elections officials, the illegal votes will be tossed out and lawbreakers will be prosecuted.

Unfortunately voter identification laws will not solve this problem–the young man had an ID and was registered to vote despite the fact that he was not a citizen. I am not sure if Texas has a way to track individual voters, but all votes from non-citizens should be disqualified.

Thank you, Project Veritas, for the work that you do.

Is Voter Fraud Real?

In August of 2017, Investor’s Business Daily posted an editorial that is still significant today. The editorial dealt with voter fraud.

The editorial stated:

Elections: American democracy has a problem — a voting problem. According to a new study of U.S. Census data, America has more registered voters than actual live voters. It’s a troubling fact that puts our nation’s future in peril.

The data come from Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project. The group looked at data from 2011 to 2015 produced by the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, along with data from the federal Election Assistance Commission.

As reported by the National Review’s Deroy Murdock, who did some numbers-crunching of his own, “some 3.5 million more people are registered to vote in the U.S. than are alive among America’s adult citizens. Such staggering inaccuracy is an engraved invitation to voter fraud.”

Murdock counted Judicial Watch’s state-by-state tally and found that 462 U.S. counties had a registration rate exceeding 100% of all eligible voters. That’s 3.552 million people, who Murdock calls “ghost voters.” And how many people is that? There are 21 states that don’t have that many people.

The article concluded:

And, in at least two nationally important elections in recent memory, the outcome was decided by a paper-thin margin: In 2000, President Bush beat environmental activist and former Vice President Al Gore by just 538 votes.

Sen. Al Franken, the Minnesota Democrat, won his seat by beating incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman in 2008. Coleman was initially declared the winner the day after the election, with a 726-vote lead over Franken. But after a controversial series of recounts and ballot disqualifications, Franken emerged weeks later with a 225-seat victory.

Franken’s win was enormous, since it gave Democrats filibuster-proof control of the Senate. So, yes, small vote totals matter.

We’re not saying here that Franken cheated, nor, for that matter, that Bush did. But small numbers can have an enormous impact on our nation’s governance. The 3.5 million possible fraudulent ballots that exist are a problem that deserves serious immediate attention. Nothing really hinges on it, of course, except the integrity and honesty of our democratic elections.

I don’t claim to be a mathematical genius, but logically it doesn’t seem as if you should have more registered voters than live people. I understand that there can be a delay if a person dies, but hopefully that person can be taken off of the voter rolls quickly. There are also cases of intentional fraud. A friend of mine checked the voter rolls for the names of anyone registered to vote at her address. She found three names that she did not even recognize.

Recently there has been a move in some areas to compare voting rolls with the names of those refusing jury duty by stating that they are not American citizens. A number of people have been charged with crimes for voting when they were not eligible to vote.

We need honest elections. That is one reason that voter identity is a good idea. We also need checks and balances on our data–reporting and storing data. Recently a friend checked election data and found that it has been altered after certification. That should not happen.

North Carolina has a voter id measure on the ballot in November. The voters had already passed a voter id measure, but the courts struck it down. Let’s hope the will of the people will prevail this time.

Why We Need Voter Identification At The Polls

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about the voting rolls in the 12th District of Ohio. It seems that in that district there are 170 registered voters over the age of 116. It is quite possible that some of those registered have the wrong birth year listed as a result of clerical errors or computer errors, but for the sake of argument, let’s just say half of those voters have the right birth year. That is 85 voters that are not likely currently living. Troy Balderson’s current lead in that election is 1700 votes.

The article reports:

Soros pledged $5 million to fund Clinton campaign attorney Marc Elias’s efforts to fight voter ID laws in Ohio and two other states ahead of the 2016 election. Elias would file that suit in Ohio on behalf of several groups, including the Ohio Organizing Collaborative, that would have an employee sentenced to prison for voter fraud.

In 2016, liberal activist groups Demos and the ACLU filed suit against the state of Ohio in an attempt to stop its efforts to remove inaccurate voter registrations from its rolls. Soros gave 1.25 million to Demos in 2016, on top of the more than $3 million he had given in previous years. And Soros has been even more generous with the ACLU, giving over $35 million for Trump related lawsuits.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ohio’s efforts in a 5-4 decision earlier this year.

The article concludes:

Consider that 170 registered voters listed as being over 116 years old still existed on the rolls of Ohio’s 12th Congressional when GAI accessed the data last August. That’s 10 percent of Balderson’s current margin of victory, pending provisional ballots. And 72 voters over the age of 116 who “live” in Balderson’s district cast ballots in the 2016 election.

But the Left hasn’t given up trying to create conditions favorable for voter fraud in Ohio. As former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell has pointed out, “hyper-partisan liberals…have their eyes on Ohio.” Electing a Democrat as the state’s top elections official would undoubtedly roll back the hard-won safeguards Ohio has implemented. And as Blackwell points out, as goes Ohio, so goes the Presidency.

An illegal vote cancels the vote of a legal voter. We need to clean up the voter rolls in all states. I seriously doubt that 72 voters over the age of 116 voted. If they did, I want to know what their lifestyle is because evidently they are on to something!

Revealing Their True Motive

For years we have been hearing the Center for American Progress say that voter ID laws are equal to voter suppression. The charge is somewhat ridiculous when you consider that the vast majority of Americans have picture ID of some sort because it is needed for so many simple things–cashing a check, entering a federal building, boarding an airplane, buying alcohol or cigarettes, opening a bank account, etc. Nevertheless, the Center for American Progress and other leftist groups claim that voter ID is voter suppression–they never mention that states that require voter ID also provide free ID cards for anyone who needs them.

Well, the motives of the Center for American Progress are showing. The Washington Times posted an article today about the Center for American Progress’s efforts to make our elections more secure.

The article reports:

After years of accusing states of “voter suppression,” the Center for American Progress wants to make it tougher for overseas military to vote in the name of election security.

The left-wing public-policy group issued Monday a report, “Election Security in All 50 States,” that called for stricter standards to prevent cyber-meddling in elections by foreign governments, including banning military stationed abroad from submitting ballots via email or fax.

One state that allows such vote-casting is Colorado. The center called on the state to “prohibit voters stationed or living overseas from returning voted ballots electronically.”

 “Regardless of the state’s secure ballot return system for electronically voted ballots, we recommend that all voted ballots be returned by mail or delivered in person,” said the 245-page report.

Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams defended the practice, saying the state has incorporated safeguards to protect the integrity of ballots cast by military personnel living overseas.

“They don’t believe someone who works on a submarine should be allowed to vote. We do,” said the Republican Williams in a statement.

The article notes:

“Perhaps they think that Navy SEALS can swim ballots ashore, hand them off to Army paratroopers who can parachute into Colorado to drop off the ballots?” asked the conservative website Colorado Peak Politics.

“You can bet that if the military historically voted Democrat instead of Republican, the Center for American Progress would not have a problem with it,” added Peak in a Monday post.

The article reminds us of some of the past activities of the Center for American Progress:

The report comes as something of a departure for the center, given its record of fighting for greater ballot access, including same-day registration and making it easier for felons to vote, and against tighter rules aimed at combating voter fraud.

Founded by former Clinton and Obama White House adviser John Podesta, who currently sits on its board, the center has opposed state efforts to require government-issued photo identification, scale back early-voting periods, and remove inactive voters from rolls.

The hypocrisy shown by the Center for American Progress is amazing.

Supporting Voter Fraud????

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article today about a group of liberal professors who want to counter the efforts of President Trump’s voter fraud commission. Why? I would think all Americans would be in favor of making sure our elections are honest. Any fraudulent vote cast nullifies a legitimate vote. Why would anyone support voter fraud?

The article reports:

A leaked email obtained by the Washington Free Beacon shows a proposal floated by members of the a prominent left-wing professor’s email listserv to form an academic commission to counter President Trump’s voter fraud commission.

Trump signed an executive order on Thursday to establish a commission to investigate voter fraud in the United States. Vice President Mike Pence and Kansas Secretary of state Kris Kobach will lead the new body, which will “study the systematic issues that have been raised over many years in terms of the integrity of the elections.”

Shortly after the announcement, Rutgers University Professor Lorraine Minnite emailed UC Irvine Law School Chancellor Rick Hasen’s email listserv in an effort to enroll members to “resist” Trump’s commission, according to an email provided to the Free Beacon.

“To members of this listserve [sic], especially the academics: If the President does indeed create a commission to study voter fraud and voter suppression in the American election system to be headed by the Vice Preisdent [sic] and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, I’m calling on scholars of election administration to resist participation of any kind in such an effort,” Minnite wrote.  “We should expect a Pence-Kobach Commission to find ‘evidence’ of rampant voter fraud across the U.S., and to recommend proposals to amend the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act to require proof-of-citizenships to register and a national voter ID requirement, among other changes that will be damaging to voting rights and therefore, damaging to democracy.”

So having to identify yourself and prove that you are a citizen of America to register is damaging to democracy?? First of all, we are a representative republic–not a democracy (you would think a professor would know that). Second of all, we are one of the few countries in the world where elections are held that does not require voter identification. It is time to realize that not everyone is honest and that we need honest elections.

The article concludes:

“Foes of the commission are trying to cover up crimes,” Logan Churchwell, spokesman for the Public Interest Legal Foundation, an Indiana-based group that litigates to protect election integrity, said of the proposed academic commission. “They are accessories after the fact to voter fraud.”

Most Americans have some form of identification. You need some sort of identification to buy cigarettes or liquor, board an airplane, cash a check, enter a government building, and attend many liberal political events. It seems very odd to me that someone would oppose having to show identification to vote, particularly when most states offer free voter identification cards.

Opposing Honest Elections

It kind of makes me wonder what in the world is going on when I see someone opposing a voter integrity group. Does the group oppose the idea of honest elections?

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article today about group that is opposing voter integrity lawsuits. Oddly enough, one of the leaders of the group is Senator Elizabeth Warren‘s daughter. The group is funded by George Soros.

The article reports:

Demos, a New York City-based progressive public policy organization, is assisting unions in pushing back against election lawsuits filed in North Carolina and Florida. The group is also writing letters of interest in another lawsuit in Pennsylvania. Amelia Warren Tyagi, Warren’s daughter, chairs the board of Demos.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), an Indiana-based legal group that litigates to protect election integrity, filed a lawsuit against Wake County, N.C., on behalf of Voter Integrity Project NC, a research organization dedicated to fair elections, after the county had failed to accurately maintain their voter rolls.

…”According to publicly-available data, Wake County has more registered voters on the rolls eligible to cast a ballot than it has citizens who are alive,” PILF wrote. “The complaint states that ‘voter rolls maintained by the Defendant for Wake County contain or have contained more registrants than eligible voting-age citizens. The number of registrants in Wake County, North Carolina has been over 100 percent of eligible voting-age citizens.”

A motion to dismiss the lawsuit was filed February 21 by the Wake County Board of Elections and three attorneys. Senior U.S. Judge W. Earl Britt ruled in favor of the Voter Integrity Project and denied the request.

Cameron Bell, a legal fellow at Demos, is assisting the attorneys on the case. One of the main goals of Demos is to reduce the role of money in politics and to guarantee “the freedom to vote,” according to its website. Demos received hundreds of thousands in funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundation.

Individuals from the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, a progressive nonprofit in North Carolina, are also assisting on the lawsuit. The Southern Coalition for Social Justice has also received funding from Soros.

I will admit to being a fairly simple person, but it seems to me that if a county has more registered voters than it has live citizens, there might be a problem with the voter rolls. It would also be interesting to know what the percentage of actual voters was. I would like to note that in the 2016 presidential election, the early voting turnout in Wake County broke all previous records (story here). Since most voter fraud occurs in early voting and same-day registration, that is an interesting statistic.

The article further reports:

Broward County (Florida), like Wake County, has more registered voters on their rolls than the number of eligible citizens who can vote in 2014, PILF said.

Cameron Bell, the Demos attorney who is involved in North Carolina, also interjected in Broward County. In addition to Bell, Scott Novakowski and Stuart C. Naifeh, counsel from Demos, are involved in Florida.

Individuals from Project Vote, a nonprofit that formerly teamed up with the scandal-plagued and now defunct Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), are also in Broward County.

Demos and Project Vote additionally wrote amici in a Philadelphia lawsuit but has not intervened.

“Just like when leftist financiers tried and failed to block voter ID laws from coast to coast, the checkbooks are open again to preserve the status quo were poor record maintenance is concerned,” Logan Churchwell, PILF’s spokesman, told the Washington Free Beacon. “When you view vulnerability as currency, it must come natural to want to protect not only the weaknesses in a system, but the actors who exacerbate them.”

Democrats have scrambled to build up a massive network to counter voter integrity efforts after Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton.

Voters are disenfranchised when there is voter fraud. It is time for Americans to take action to protect the integrity of their elections. Voter ID laws are needed. When an area reports 105 percent turnout, there is a problem.

Counting The Votes In Michigan

It is somewhat odd that an election candidate that received approximately 1 percent of the vote can demand a recount, but that is exactly what Green Party candidate Jill Stein did.  It’s not likely that the recount will change her status. In Michigan that request was denied, but when the votes were counted, the numbers were interesting.

Breitbart.com posted an article today the vote totals in Detroit.

The article reports:

Voting machines in 37 per cent of Detroit precincts recorded more votes than mathematically possible during November’s presidential election, according to records obtained by The Detroit News.

Reports obtained by the newspaper from Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett found that in 248 of the city’s 662 precincts, more votes had been counted than the number of people who had been marked as having voted, which might serve as evidence of voter fraud across the city.

Following the report, Michigan’s Secretary of State Ruth Johnson announced plans to conduct a full investigation into the irregularities. Detroit was one of the areas in which Hillary Clinton’s support was particularly strong.

The article further reports:

“We’re assuming there were (human) errors, and we will have discussions with Detroit election officials and staff in addition to reviewing the ballots,” said Michigan’s Elections Director Chris Thomas on Monday.

However, Krista Haroutunian, the chairwoman of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers, said that although “there’s always going to be small problems to some degree, we didn’t expect the degree of problem we saw in Detroit.”

“This isn’t normal,” she added.

Michigan was one of the last states to be counted, with Donald Trump defeating Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes, taking him to his landslide electoral college victory of 306 votes compared to Clinton’s 232. He also became the first Republican to win the state since George W.H Bush in 1998.

There is a real need for a voter ID requirement in American elections, particularly in our large cities. Detroit was not the only city where more people voted than were eligible to vote. In one North Carolina city, it was discovered that 240 people listed a gravel parking lot with a shed as their address. Voter ID would have solved that problem. If Congress is really  concerned about the integrity of elections, they would support stronger voter ID laws in federal elections instead of chasing straw men about leaks that probably came from inside the DNC.

 

The Media Is Not Fond Of The Truth

On November 27th, Donald Trump tweeted the following:

trumptweetThe media was outraged. How could he say such a thing? Maybe because it was true? Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article about the illegal alien vote in America.

The article reports:

True the Vote, a group dedicated to rooting out vote fraud, issued a statement supporting the charge by President-Elect Donald Trump that millions of illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election.

And there’s this…
A 2014 study found that 25% of illegal aliens polled were registered to vote. The study found that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent voted in the off-year 2010. The vast majority of non-citizen votes went to Democratic candidates, according Earnest and Richman.

If only 2% of non-citizens voted in a population of 20 million non-citizens in the US we are talking about 400,000 illegal alien voters. And that is on the low side.

Illegals are already deciding elections.

We not only need voter ID, we need to make sure that those voters with identification are American citizens. Just as an aside, True the Vote and its founder were targeted by the IRS during the Obama Administration in an effort to intimidate them and discourage them from investigating voter fraud.