[EL] Lead Penn Voter ID Plaintiff gets her ID
Richard Winger
richardwinger at yahoo.com
Fri Aug 17 14:02:46 PDT 2012
John Fund has been good on ballot access for candidates and parties.
Richard Winger
415-922-9779
PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
--- On Fri, 8/17/12, Lorraine Minnite <lminnite at gmail.com> wrote:
From: Lorraine Minnite <lminnite at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [EL] Lead Penn Voter ID Plaintiff gets her ID
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Date: Friday, August 17, 2012, 1:55 PM
I'd like to see John Fund
put the same level of energy he puts into misleading the public
about voter fraud into reporting on the thousands of citizens in
federal elections who are eligible to vote, want to vote, try to
vote and don't get their votes counted. Election administration
is still a mess, despite all the good intentions, money, and
civic-mindedness of election officials, poll workers, and
volunteers.
Here is a place for John Fund to begin his new line of research:
I recently moved from New York City to New Jersey. In June, I
spent three days driving here and there to obtain a copy of my
birth certificate ($20), applying for a new Social Security card
which I lost decades ago, and transferring my drivers license and
car registration. At the DMV I was asked if I wanted to register
to vote. I said yes. Later that day, I mailed in a form to the
New York City Board of Elections requesting that my voter
registration be cancelled because I had moved, and supplying my
new address. I changed my address online with the U.S. Postal
Service. It's August 17th, and I do not show up on the voter
rolls in New Jersey; today, a former house mate reported that a
brochure from the New York City Board of Elections on how to vote
on the new machines arrived in the mail addressed to me. I'm
still on the rolls at my old address in Manhattan.
So here we have a situation, more and more common it seems to me,
where nothing works. I did not get registered as I should have in
compliance with federal law; my registration at my old address has
not been cancelled despite my reasonable effort to cancel it; and
a change of address with the USPS registered two months ago did
not prevent a mailing from an elections board going to my old
address. If I weren't me, I might not pay attention to all of
these bureaucratic failures and show at the polls in NJ in
November, only to be turned away.
Where is the outrage, John Fund? Many, many more people have
their votes "cancelled out" and "diluted" by these kinds of
problems than they do by any fraudulent vote, but we are still
having this stupid discussion with right-wingers about voter
fraud.
Lori Minnite
On 8/17/2012 4:06 PM, Justin Levitt
wrote:
Well, for those (vanishing few) who are actually
interested in the facts, I'd recommend that people read the actual
report referenced in Fund's article, rather than Fund's gloss,
which (as usual) conflates a whole lot of irregularity that ID
requirements couldn't possibly help stop.
The actual report that Fund references (available, among other
places, here),
as I've said,
appears to be far better researched than most.
Justin
On 8/17/2012 12:43 PM, John Meyer
wrote:
I think many of you may have read this, but it is
relevant to the question of need for voter ID requirements
with specific reference to Pennsylvania
as it includes reference to an actual, recent look
at various voting irregularities in Philadelphia:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/314273/voter-fraud-keystone-state-john-fund
I
certainly am not an expert on Pennsylvania voter
problems, but it is well-known in political circles that
both parties used to have areas where they would
manufacture votes by
various methods. with the demise of big-city Republican
machines, the tendency became more party-specific -- and
even more so with
the collapse of some of
the Republican suburban machines, such as Nassau county
in New York (I don't know if Nassau County R's actually
manufactured votes
or if they only followed
the 1% of salary for all public employees tradition).
Anyway, I do recommend the article.
From:
Jon Roland <jon.roland at constitution.org>
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Sent:
Friday, August 17, 2012 12:26 PM
Subject:
Re: [EL] Lead Penn Voter ID Plaintiff gets her ID
In general there are no requirements for a
plaintiff to prove identity to file a case, in any
jurisdiction. Identification comes in with being a
witness and providing evidence, such as presenting an
affidavit, which must be sworn before a notary or
other designated verifier. Of course, the attorney
will be expected to provide his name, address, and bar
card number, but he will usually not have to otherwise
prove he is who he says he is, and his client can be a
"John Doe". Even a witness may be anonymous with the
consent of the court.
The elevation of personal identity to the importance
accorded it today is an innovation in our legal
tradition. Historically it has had much less
importance, usually where ownership of property was
involved.
On 08/17/2012 11:07 AM, Michael McDonald wrote:
The state of Pennsylvania has a more strict
identification law for voting than to be a plaintiff in a case?
-- Jon
----------------------------------------------------------
Constitution Society http://constitution.org
2900 W Anderson Ln C-200-322 twitter.com/lex_rex
Austin, TX 78757 512/299-5001 jon.roland at constitution.org
----------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
--
Justin Levitt
Associate Professor of Law
Loyola Law School | Los Angeles
919 Albany St.
Los Angeles, CA 90015
213-736-7417
justin.levitt at lls.edu
ssrn.com/author=698321
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120817/98834148/attachment.html>
View list directory