[EL] New Hampshire doesn't ask voters to sign in
Richard Winger
richardwinger at yahoo.com
Wed Jan 11 18:14:16 PST 2012
Well, the video shows someone coming in who says he is not registered to vote. The poll worker tells him he can register right there on the spot. Then he asks if he needs ID to do that, and she seems to tell him that he doesn't. That surprised me. Maybe she was wrong.
Richard Winger
415-922-9779
PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
--- On Wed, 1/11/12, Lori Minnite <lminnite at gmail.com> wrote:
From: Lori Minnite <lminnite at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [EL] New Hampshire doesn't ask voters to sign in
To: "law-election at uci.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
Date: Wednesday, January 11, 2012, 4:16 PM
New Hampshire is not covered by the NVRA, which means on the books,
at least, they make it particularly hard to register any way but in
person, either before election day or on election day. In other
words, it's possible, but not easy to register by mail. Their model
is one in which the due diligence on identity, citizenship,
qualifications and residency is done at the time of registration,
with registration applicants consistently warned about the penalties
for voter fraud. See:http://www.sos.nh.gov/654-web2011.pdf
On 1/11/2012 5:58 PM, Richard Winger wrote:
I was surprised to
learn, as a result of this incident, that in New
Hampshire, voters at the polls aren't asked to sign
anything. California certainly requires voters to sign
in.
Richard Winger
415-922-9779
PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
--- On Wed, 1/11/12, Frank Askin <faskin at kinoy.rutgers.edu>
wrote:
From: Frank Askin <faskin at kinoy.rutgers.edu>
Subject: Re: [EL] Interview request
To: "Scott Bieniek" <sbieniek at bienieklaw.com>,
"law-election at uci.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
Date: Wednesday, January 11, 2012, 2:46 PM
I agree with Rick Hasen. It
appears that none of O'keefe's actors was
stupid enough to actually vote and risk a 5-year jail
sentence. I wish
they had.... Also, it is unclear whether a voter in
New Hampshire has to
sign in before voting. When I go to vote, no one asks
me for ID but I
have to sign the register so my signature can be
compared with the one
in the book. FRANK
Prof. Frank Askin
Distinguished Professor of Law and Director
Constitutional Litigation Clinic
Rutgers Law School/Newark
(973) 353-5687>>> Scott Bieniek <sbieniek at bienieklaw.com>
1/11/2012
4:53 PM >>>
“Who in their right mind would risk a felony
conviction for this? And
who
would be able to do this in large enough numbers to
(1) affect the
outcome
of the election and (2) remain undetected?” Hasen
wrote.
I'm not buying this argument. You could make the same
argument against
quid-pro-quo corruption, and the need for contribution
limits and
compelled
disclosure.
Quid-pro-quo corruption is typically a felony, and yet
we have
contribution
limits and compelled disclosure, in part, because the
risk of
prosecution
is deemed insufficient to deter the conduct, or at
least prevent the
appearance thereof in the eyes of the public.
If the appearance of corruption is sufficient to
support contribution
limits and compelled public disclosure, why isn't the
appearance of
in-person voter fraud sufficient to justify voter ID?
In return for Voter ID, we get:
1. Restored public confidence that it is harder for
O'Keefe and others
to
pull off a stunt like this.
2. A method of detecting in-person voter fraud at the
time of the
crime.
And because wagers are all the rage this cycle, I'd be
willing to
wager
that a higher percentage of the public believe that
Voter ID prevents
in-person fraud than those that believe limits or
disclosure prevent
corruption.
Scott Bieniek
On Jan 11, 2012, at 12:54 PM, "Ryan J. Reilly"
<ryan at talkingpointsmemo.com>
wrote:
I'm writing a story about James O'Keefe's new video in
which his
associates
obtained ballots using the names of recently deceased
New Hampshire
voters
and was hoping someone would be available for an
interview on short
notice.
As far as I can tell this is the largest coordinated
attempt at
in-person
voter impersonation fraud, and it was conducted by a
group to show why
voter ID laws were necessary. I'm at 202-527-9261.
Here's the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-uVhhIlPk0&feature=player_embedded#!
Thanks,
--
Ryan J. Reilly
Reporter, TPM
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/ryanjreilly
(202) 527-9261 (cell)
http://www.twitter.com/ryanjreilly
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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/20120111/0aca9cb6/attachment.html>
View list directory