Voter Fraud And Intimidation
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-10-25/voter-fraud-and-intimidation
Republicans are pushing efforts to crack down on voter fraud, but others say the problem is extremely rare. Debate over the scope of voter fraud and what's being done to prevent it.
Guests
Jane Mayer
staff writer at The New Yorker and author of "The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals."
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Thank you "areyoukiddingme"
President Bush didn't steal anything.
If I thought I would have a chance in getting my call through I would have called DR today to complain about her obvious bias in allowing that caller to accuse (again?!!) Bush. But the DR phone screener will not allow any call to go through that challenges the obvious proDemocrat bias that Ms Rehm and the majority of her guests demonstrate on a daily basis.
College students are not victims, people. Please Ms. Rehms stop allowing guests such as "Jane" to perpetuate the "I'm a poor victim" mentality.
College students are required to give the university's their HOME address. If the home address is local, then they shouldn't have a problem voting. If the home address is not local, then they can easily obtain an absentee voter ballot. Thousands if not millions of people do it every election. Where is their common sense that they can't figure this out?
Also, why wasn't the Al Franken voter fraud case discussed? It's under the DOJ federal investigation right now. Several hundred fraudulent votes in a situation where only a few votes would make the difference?
Voter fraud exists. The best way to avoid it is to require all voters to show a drivers license or a state issued id. We have to pay for the drivers license anyway, or as in California when a person can't drive they can get a state photo id, and it costs money.
Gherbert: Your observation about the requirement for identification at the time of registration may be valid where you live in Michigan, but is not necessarily true in all places and in all cases.
I have registered neighbors and district residents, and I request their Drivers License number or last 4 digits of SS number as required on the form. Anyone "could" falsify that information. There was a local liquor store where the proprietor (also a precinct chairman for another party) kept voter registration forms under the counter, and frequently offered to register anyone who was new to the area. (Of course, he too needed to see photo ID.) Did either of us examine the ID in detail? Not necessarily.
By the way, poll books in the election places also listed several previous residents of the homes where I registered the new tenants!
So, we cannot assume that all applications have been verified, nor that everyone listed as a registered voter still lives in the precinct/ward/district where they vote unless they present a current valid ID at the polling place.
Jerry W. Kelley wrote:
"In the 2000 election, Bush was elected by the SCOTUS, not the people. They would not let Gore recount the whole state of Florida, only the contested counties. In 2001, the state was recounted by all the major news organisations and Gore won the 2000 election. The results were printed in the NY Times right after 911 and very few people even noticed it".
Jerry,
I encourage you to read my posts at the end oif the 10/23 hour 1 mb which I just posted this morning, for a discussion of this and an explanation as to why, as you say, "very few people even noticed it". What it boils down to, a year later, is that it didn't matter anymore. My posts also include a discussion of the TWO SCOTUS decisions (not just one) in Bush v Gore and why, had the 5-4 decision been reversed and Gore continued to press his suit, it would not have changed the outcome.
@"areyoukiddingme"
Diane allowed the caller to say that, but then immediately slammed him down as firmly as (though much more kindly than) any Limbaugh. She was right to do so, too--and you are just in denial of definite fact to maintain otherwise. Also, NPR as a whole is mandated to be impartial, but individual segments can be with just one side or the other. Remember that guy from Bain Capital who was on arguing in favor of rising inequality? Diane was awfully nice to him, too.
But, boy oh boy, do I have to take on your ridiculous statement about Florida 2000. First of all, you're already confused when you say "every voter recount conducted in the State of Florida". I have no clue what you mean by that, and I doubt you do, either. But, despite the lamestream media's unwillingness to even consider the possibility, it is just plain fact that the 537 votes by which Bush "won" Florida and thus the nation (despite actually having a minority of votes nationwide, with Gore easily ahead by half a million votes), are canceled out multiple times over by the number of votes clearly marked for Gore that were illegally thrown out by the Republican-hired recount experts. And that's not to mention the big one: *Before* the election, a purge of the voter rolls eliminated tens of thousands of reliably Democratic voters (racial minorities, poor and disenfranchised) on charges of being felons. The surprising thing is that "only" 90%+ of the felony charges were... INaccurate?! That's right. Carefully chosen criteria ensured that the smallest possible number of those purged would be those who the purge was ostensibly aimed at, while three-quarters of them were demographically likely progressives. This was ultimately, devastatingly proven by Greg Palast, post-2000.
Even then, those who were kicked off the voter rolls weren't put back on.
(continued)
(@"areyoukiddingme" continued)
And what about the posters put up in poor and minority neighborhoods declaring that election day was the day after it really was? (Never in wealthy white neighborhoods.) And the voting machines that, in cases of unclearly marked ballots, would spit them back out to be redone--in solidly Republican districts, that is--or would just eat them and throw them away uncounted--in districts where the ballots were likely to be Democratic?
Oh, and your thing about the Times/Herald analysis of the recount? Sure, it demonstrated that Bush won the vote--but it also demonstrated that a fair recount would have actually had Gore winning the vote. Go and check your sources, man, 'cause you been misinformed.
(P.S. Obama weakened the welfare-to-work requirement, Mitt Romney wanted to liquidate the American auto industry, Mitt Romney killed people by taking away their health insurance, and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act is actually a government takeover of health care, as well as mandating death panels. Nothing in that last sentence is true at all. But I'm sure somebody wants to argue; it's the American way.)
I was listening late in this fascinating show and imagine my surprise as a Canadian living and voting in Canada when a caller said Canada has an identity card which can be used for voting.
I don't have a card nor have I heard of such a card. I can vote with a Drivers license OR
I can vote with my health card and something like an electric bill OR
I can be sworn in at the booth.
What is interesting is that I cannot uyse my passport as it doen't have my address on it
Don't believe me see the Elections Canada site;
http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=ids&document=index&...
Good luck to my neighbours to the south. It is fun/sad to watch. Having said that, we are no better but this is what democracy is all about
If you want to see voter fraud, come to Arizona....
It's been discovered that the Maricopa County Recorders Office has been printing the wrong election date on the Spanish language material it sends out. The English version of the same documents provides the correct date — November 6 — next to “8 de Noviembre.”
Honest mistakes? Voter suppression? Whatever it is, I hope the Hispanic citizens of Arizona are even more fired up to get out the vote.
Why is it legal for citizens to challenge other citizens. Can you explain the law to me? Why is anyone allowed to stand at the polls and do ANYTHING but vote?
@The Last Moderate,
I may have been willing to concede a point or two about your Bush v. Gore argument...but you lost me with your Democrat advertised lies about Mitt Romney. When all else fails, slander the opposition.
If I were Mitt Romney, Harry Reid and Barak Obama both would be slapped with a slander lawsuit.
By the way, don't forget the 11,000+overseas military votes that were rejected by the Democratic party in the Florida count.
Polling place workers are usually trained. Most take their responsibility seriously and are loyal Americans. Their pay is usually less than minimum wage and they spend long hours (12-14) at the polls on election day. They are required to stay at their station along with several other people for the entire day. They rarely leave their station to take a break and their breaks are short. Just long enough to walk around the room, go to the bathroom, or police the poll booths.
Dear Claudette Robinson,
I read your post and respectfully note that you are incorrect. As noted by the Supreme Court of the State of Michigan in 1968, college students are domiciled the greater part of the year at college and they have the right to register at the address where they are domiciled the greater part of the year. That means at college. Their college home is where they pay their taxes either directly or through rent, where they utilize government services such as police and firefighters, and where they are arrested if they violate the laws put in place by their representatives, not those of their parents' home town. Yes, students who consider themselves temporarily away from home and who plan on returning to their parents house after school can stay registered at their parents house and vote absentee, but the norm is for them to register where they live, at college.
This is true in most states and is another urban legend about voting rather than a fact.
Greg Hebert
Last time I voted I noticed that to local person checking IDs only checked persons of color and not any anyone else. I called to complain but no response from Republican watch keepers. I will never forget this is happening here. But then again this is Arizona.
Where I live there are felons who vote. When caught, they claim they didn't know they were not allowed to vote or that their voting rights had been restored to them. But they get convicted anyway.
Few talk about felons voting, but I think it is really the primary issue. The number of 85 year old women who can't find their birth certificates is insignificant compared to the number of felons walking among us.
I have a job where I meet some of these folks and even the white collar criminals volunteer that they now vote Democratic.
Dear G4Kiing,
I read your response and you are correct. Any registrar who does not follow the mandated registration procedure by seriuosly verifying the voter's ID is committing fraud or perjury, depending on your state's statutes. This does not mean we should dis-enfranchise other voters, but that we should quality check our registrars. Typically city and county clerks do exactly that through sampling and remove faulty registrars.
As for previous tenants still being registered where they used to live, up until a few years ago in the State of Michigan it was legal for a voter to vote "one election" at their old address and change their registration to their new address while at the polls. Currently, there is a 90 day requirement to change addresses, same as on your driver's license or state ID, but you may do it at the Secretary of State's office for both documents. Again, this a pre-election day activity and not a reason to dis-enfranchise an entire class of voters.
Thanks,
Greg Hebert
Dear Julie,
I am pleased to report that citizens may not challenge citizens at the polls. The challenger may not speak to the voter, may not touch the polling book, may not interfere in any way with the voting process. All the challenger can do is ask to visually inspect the most recent voting applicaton slip or the poll book on the current page and take notes. Any thing else is a favor.
Additionally, the challenger may point out an irregularity to the poll worker, typically the poll chairperson, but any action can only take place by a poll worker. And these workers are typically made up of members of all Parties involved in the election and typically don't allow any games. That is why the Florida fiasco was so painful to watch. In my experience, any poll worker in Michigan, whether Republican, Democrat, HRP, Green or whatever, would have shown all of those dispruptive challengers the door. Voting is sacred and challengers may not interrupt the process.
Yours,
Greg Hebert
Dear Partisan Politics,
Please note that your quote correctly states that identification and proof of citizenship should be used when REGISTERING voters, not when voting. My oath and signature have been sufficient on election day to connect me with my proven registration at City Hall for over 40 years.
Respectlfully,
Greg Hebert
Dear Jean,
Typically, when someone registers to vote in their college town, the city and county clerks notify the clerk at the voters prior location about the change of address, and they are removed from the rolls there. If the voter fails to list their prior registration on the new form, they are guilty of a crime. If they vote twice, they are guilty of a crime and have created documentation to convict themselves. In the State of Michigan we have a state-wide database of all registered voters to help with this process and we exchange data with other states. I don't think it's perfect yet, but, again, we are talking about REGISTRATION, not voting.
Thanks and I hope I answered your question.
Greg
Dear Greg Hebert,
Thanks for your considerate response. (and your others-- I was a student at WMU Kalamazoo in 1968, and remember the occasion-- but still had to wait. 18-year-old's were not yet enfranchised for that election, but we were vocal about it! "If you're old enough to be drafted, you're old enough to vote!")
Back to my main question:
What do you define as the "entire class of voters" who is being disenfranchised?
The few people who have shown up to vote without state or federal ID on election day have been students from out of state, a woman who forgot to renew her driver's licence since before the last general election (2 years previous). I was most disappointed to have a challenge to a man who had temporarily resided at a homeless shelter, and had his valid driver's licence, but had been dropped from the poll book because his voter registration had been mailed to his temporary (incorrect) address and returned to the registration clerk!
I really don't see any "class" relationship, other than these individuals had not checked their ID and registration status prior to election day.
Incidentally, one of our Bureau of Motor Vehicle offices is located downtown, only one block from the central bus transfer station. Where I live, there is no real excuse for not having ID and being registered. And at my polling place, we do all we can to ensure an opportunity to vote for everyone in the poll book, and we call Voter Registration HQ if we need to redirect someone or make corrections.
Thanks,
Gary
@climatewiz1: Where is the evidence that machines default votes for Obama after Romney is entered in North Carolina? The New Black Panthers, and all groups who intimidate others were addressed in the interview, and were stated as acts that are not condoned. Your immature comments are those that rarely find their way to this blog, as most listeners of this program post adult comments, rather than resorting to namecalling and profanity.
I wish the political dialogue was dominated less by liberal and conservative cultists and more by people who value truth and integrity. Here we are in 2012 still hearing people claim that "Bush stole the election."
Following the 2000 election, a meticulous ballot study was conducted for the Washington Post, New York Times, AP, CNN, LA Times, Wall Street Journal, and four Florida newspapers. Conclusions:
There were over 175,000 disputed ballots due to problems with voting machines, voting procedures, and standards for interpreting voter intent.
Gore tried to game the system by requesting a recount in four counties he thought would put him over the top. If he had asked for a full statewide recount, he would have won.
Both Gore and Bush tried to game the legal system; Gore through the left-leaning Florida Supreme Court and Bush through the right-leaning U.S. Supreme Court.
Bottom line: Bush didn't steal the election, Gore tried to and it backfired. Too bad. I would have preferred Gore's bumbling incompetence over Bush's. It would have saved us 11 years of war, thousands of lives, and trillions of dollars.
Can someone explain the phrase "amateur voter" which was used by today's guest. The guest also mentioned "the other side" when explaining who was responsible for pushing voter ID. I hope she doesn't think this election is some sort of game and that all we need to do is chose sides.
What a wonderful show! It is almost as honestly left as Rush's show is honestly right. The only missing piece on DR's show is admitting so on the air. What ever side one takes I think Rush should be applauded for stating his agenda clearly and publicly. One would hope that DR could do the same.
@SB52
Fascinating point of view, and thanks for it.
As I did the other poster I encourage you to look at my 10/23 first hour posts right at the end of that mb. Only one correction to yours and that is on "If he had asked for a full statewide recount, he would have won."
That question came before SCOTUS based on the proceedings in the FL State Supreme Court and was voted down 7-2 by the High Court, so a state-wide recount would never have happened. Plus, it took the media over a year to find a combination of criteria by which Gore would have won so they could then declare that to be "fair" and "the intent of the voter". But, your analysis of the Gore strategy with respect to the heavily-Democratic counties (Volusia, Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade) that he went for, however, is spot on.
You summarize bluntly. I've never heard the aftermath of 2000 put quite so succinctly.
The smartest move Republicans have made lately is talking about in-person voter fraud as if it's a thing that A) happens enough to be an issue, and B) disenfranchises millions but isn't the real issue.
The Democrats have to come back at this with the reasonable assertions that the Republicans can't come up with evidence. Some courts have been forced to rule against Voter IDs over a simple lack of the Republicans to prove what they're saying.
Moreover, the real fraud happens at the polling stations by people running the elections, at more centralized offices, and certainly at the partisan private companies that handles millions of votes. These companies don't allow security professionals access to their systems to actual make them secure and yet there are amateur YouTube videos showing you how to do simple hacks that could turn an entire election!
I work in IT and I can say that if they won't let auditors in to test the security of their systems (and given their partisan backers) it would be EXTREMELY easy to change the records in the databases without a trace and then report the results as you saw fit. Heck, I could script it right now and have it run throughout the election so there wouldn't be a big swing but rather a slow creep towards the candidate of my choice. No manual intervention necessary - just sit back and watch the TV show the results I wanted.
@kayaker01 You wrote "Where is the evidence that machines default votes for Obama after Romney is entered in North Carolina?"
- formally documented by the Mecklenburg county board of elections. 3 machines rolling to Obama after selecting Romney.
You also stated " The New Black Panthers, and all groups who intimidate others were addressed in the interview, and were stated as acts that are not condoned" Well... isn't it a little late to "not condone" their acts?.. the point is, NOTHING was done at the time and nothing was done after. The main reason being they were intimidating whites and Republicans. If it had been the opposite you can bet the results would have been different.
You also stated "as most listeners of this program post adult comments, rather than resorting to namecalling and profanity."
You must not stop by this spot much or read the posts... no one can stack a left leaning deck like Diane and all at the public's expense... NPR is campaign central for every leftist cause you can discuss. Tell me what qualifies Jane Mayer to even comment on voter fraud?
"Mayer has been both praised for her advocacy journalism and assailed by accusation of bias. For example, John Hinderaker wrote in 2011, “Jane Mayer is an agenda journalist....Her entire career has been spent carrying water for the Left.”
She is also way deeeeep into George Soros pockets. 2 things are obvious....either you are ignorant of the facts or else you are very aware of the facts and you too are carrying water for Soros and the left.