[EL] Incidents of fraud ID is designed to stop
BZall at aol.com
BZall at aol.com
Wed Aug 6 11:24:31 PDT 2014
Justin knows that I respect him as a researcher and writer, but that I
disagree with many of his characterizations and conclusions.
Here, for example, is a brief that I filed in the current Kobach v EAC
appeal, documenting, through numerous, specific video and news reports,
"specific and credible" voter registration fraud:
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Kobach105.pdf. (I have repeatedly put up my
Crawford brief dealing with voter impersonation fraud, and Justin has
acknowledged the incidents I documented, so I won't do that again.)
The brief illustrates the singular difference between my analyses and
Justin's: if there is an ambiguity, no matter how small, Justin would "bet"
that this is the result of error, not fraud. He may be right. But defining
"fraud" as only an intentional attempt to deceive the system by a person
participating in an effort to change the outcome of an election -- which seems
to be what Justin tends to do -- downplays the systemic effects of such
things as Las Vegas unions threatening illegal immigrants with deportation
unless they vote, and so on. Was it fraud for an organization to send
pre-populated voter registration documents to dead dogs, as was repeatedly done? Was
it fraud for an alien to register to vote -- before they received
citizenship -- even if they received it afterwards? Was it fraud for an
organization to intentionally register aliens to vote -- the Orange County District
Attorney reported that 61% of their voter registrations were "illegal" --
even if the number who ultimately voted was not enough to sway that particular
election? Was it fraud to send out millions of pre-populated voter
registration forms, counting on over-worked election officials to weed out the
duplicates and the false ones? "It's up to [the people who receive] them to
obey all ... laws," Voter Participation Center's Page Gardner told the
Washington Post. Even assuming the purest of motives doesn't make up for the fact
that the actions put, in the kindest of descriptions, substantial stress on
a system whose components rely on affirmations and signatures (see, e.g.
InterTribal Council, upholding the EAC's decision to force states to rely
solely on a signature). And to say that requiring voter ID would not weed out
dogs and most illegal immigrants is, to put it mildly, odd.
None of these "specific and credible" incidents are in dispute, but
Justin's characterizations make them seem as though they are negligible in
effect. This is defining away the problem, rather than analyzing what the problem
is and what the consequences are. There may have been billions of votes
cast, and the vast, vast majority may have been legitimate, but under Purcell,
the Supreme Court notes that the public perception of fraud in the system
has adverse consequences which are probably much more significant than the
raw numbers of those reported frauds.
Of the 1.3 million voter registration applications ACORN turned in, only
450,000 were legitimate. Reports like that, about which there is no dispute
over the facts, just the motivation, fuel public distrust. So saying only 31
reports of voter impersonation (which may be true, as defined, or even in
the abstract) among billions, rings hollow. Saying voter ID will not help
either of those problems is another "thud."
If researchers are wondering about the persistence of the American public's
concern about fraud, it may stem from repeated attempts to tell them:
"Nothing happening here. Move along", when something is clearly happening. If
the explanation looks like minimizing the effect on public confidence, the
research design is flawed. And so is the Brennan advocacy-oriented website,
which contains only briefs that confirm their view.
Barnaby Zall
Of Counsel
Weinberg, Jacobs & Tolani, LLP
10411 Motor City Drive, Suite 500
Bethesda, MD 20817
301-231-6943 (direct dial)
bzall at aol.com
In a message dated 8/6/2014 1:09:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
levittj at lls.edu writes:
By the way, _in the piece_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-cr
edible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/) about fraud to which
Rick linked, I listed the incidents I know of since 2000 that reflect
credible allegations of the type of fraud ID was designed to stop (to Brad's
_repeated point_
(http://department-lists.uci.edu/pipermail/law-election/2014-July/009759.html) , I agree that it's possible that there may be sporadic
incidental effects on some other mistake or misconduct). And I mentioned that
I'd welcome additional information.
Specifically, I said that "I am a researcher, and so I am interested in a
thorough list: if you have credible information about a specific individual
whose vote was stolen by an impersonator at the polls, please tell me.
Specific and credible means just that. Not — please — examples like _this_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/06/27/the-manchurian-candi
date-of-oklahoma/) . And if you have information about an incident below
that indicates that it was error rather than fraud, please tell me that as
well."
That's a sincere request.
--
Justin Levitt
Professor of Law
Loyola Law School | Los Angeles
919 Albany St.
Los Angeles, CA 90015
213-736-7417
_justin.levitt at lls.edu_ (mailto:justin.levitt at lls.edu)
ssrn.com/author=698321
On 8/6/2014 8:22 AM, Rick Hasen wrote:
_“A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible
incidents out of one billion ballots cast”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64062)
Posted on _August 6, 2014 8:15 am_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64062)
by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Justin Levitt_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incid
ents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/) for WonkBlog:
I’ve been tracking _allegations of fraud_
(https://web.archive.org/web/20070622014244/http:/truthaboutfraud.org/index.html) _for years now_
(http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/The%20Truth%20About%20Voter%
20Fraud.pdf) , including the fraud ID laws are designed to stop. In 2008,
when the Supreme Court weighed in on voter ID, I looked at _every single a
llegation_
(http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/Democracy/Analysis%20of%20Crawford%20Allegations.pdf) put before the Court. And since then, I’ve been
following reports wherever they crop up.
To be clear, I’m not just talking about prosecutions. I track any
specific, credible allegation that someone may have pretended to be someone else at
the polls, in any way that an ID law could fix.
So far, I’ve found about 31 different incidents (some of which involve
multiple ballots) since 2000, anywhere in the country. If you want to check my
work, you can read a comprehensive list of the incidents below.
To put this in perspective, the 31 incidents below come in the context of
general, primary, special, and municipal elections from 2000 through 2014.
In general and primary elections alone, more than _1 billion ballots_
(http://www.fec.gov/general/library.shtml) were cast in that period.
Some of these 31 incidents have been thoroughly investigated (including
some prosecutions). But many have not. Based on how other claims have turned
out, I’d bet that some of the 31 will end up debunked: a problem with
matching people from one big computer list to another, or a data entry error, or
confusion between two different people with the same name, or someone
signing in on the wrong line of a pollbook.
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_fraudulent fraud squad_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8) , _The Voting
Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter id_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9)
_______________________________________________
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/20140806/0d30c8e7/attachment.html>
View list directory