[EL] Voter Fraud

Mon Oct 3 09:45:54 PDT 2016

"No one in their right mind..." requires that the goal of the fraud to be to win elections.

That's just not true.  I think most voter registration fraud is an attempt by the person commuting the fraud to scam someone who is paying them for campaign work.  Whether that is on a per head, per hour, or other basis will generally follow state law based on how people get paid.

What to do?  These applications are completed and submitted and clog the rolls until we can purge them legally.  Because the other option is to knock legitimate voters off the rolls based on suspicion alone.

In my practice you see fraud fairly regularly on candidate petitions.   These are almost never (but are occasionally) perpetrated by establishment candidates.  Most often it is done by some "contractor" for a sloppy campaign or by some outsider candidate campaigns that have no idea how hard it is to collect signatures.

You need more than a single fraudulent vote to win.  So, the question is how one who might want to impact an election could commit a fraud and you don't know a single vote or two will matter? As I can see it, there are a few scenarios:

(1) petition fraud -- this could be done by one person -- this is addressed through existing processes in most states

(2) registration fraud combined with absentee fraud -- this could be done by one or two people.  Thos is a risk that has to be fought BUT WHICH IS NOT ADDRESSED BY VOTER ID.

(3) registration fraud combined with people running to multiple polling places to vote.  This would require many people and a complicated conspiracy.    Yes, this could be addressed by Voter ID but almost never happens.  And, frankly, it would be much easier to put this effort into legitimate GOTV and persuasion efforts.

(4) poll worker fraud such as casting votes for others. This is also a real risk and needs to be policed.  But also CAN NOT BE ADDRESSED BY VOTER ID.

Kevin Greenberg
215-279-9912
kevin.greenberg at flastergreenberg.com<mailto:kevin.greenberg at flastergreenberg.com>

On Oct 3, 2016, at 12:22 PM, "JBoppjr at aol.com<mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com>" <JBoppjr at aol.com<mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com>> wrote:

As a general matter, we need to ensure that every vote counts.  This has two aspects, in my view, that are of equal weight and consequence.  The right to vote is violated by either (1) unreasonably preventing an eligible person from voting or (2) by canceling out an eligible person's vote by an ineligible person voting.  Liberals focus on (1) and, in my view, pay little attention to (2).

In my post, I did not focus on "in person voter ID requirements," but raised the general issue of voter fraud since I think voter fraud is a serious violation of a person's right to vote.  And certainly there are many different ways that this problem is and can be dealt with.

Obviously, at this point, registration fraud is most likely to be the focus of attention, since voting, by in large, is not occurring.  The voter registration process was created as a principal means to prevent voter fraud itself since prior registration provides a reasonable time to verify whether a particular person, who has registered to vote, is in fact eligible to vote. And if someone is not registered, the person cannot vote. Same day registration, that many liberal advocate, would remove this time-tested and effective voter fraud prevention measure.

Of course, no one in their right mind would commit voter registration fraud without having in mind, and without having a plan, to convert that registered voter into an actual vote.  The vote is the payoff, not the registration itself. So it is irrelevant that there is no proven voter fraud yet, since registration fraud is just the first step to voter fraud.

And as to your question,  it is perfectly obvious to me that an in person voter ID requirement is a substantial impediment to someone voting a fraudulently registered voter. The person would need to not only fraudulently register a person but also create a phony ID to vote that person.

So my view is that we need to strike a reasonable balance between two concerns that are of equal weight. First, all eligible voters must have a reasonable opportunity to vote.  And second we must take reasonable efforts to make sure that all ineligible voters do not vote. I understand that striking that balance is difficult and is often a subjective judgment.  But I rarely see liberals doing anything other than disparaging and denigrating those that raise one valid side of this issue. And usually it entails what you resorted to, claims that these are but " efforts to suppress the votes of the poor, old, and young without any basis in fact" or is just "fact-free hysteria" ie, nonexistent, which was mild actually since liberal usually just call it "racist."

So if we look at the big picture, liberal nirvana regarding voting procedures would involve: (1) no registration, or the functional equivalent, same day registration, (2) no ID requirement, and (3) voting at any voting center anywhere in the county (state?, nation?, or just online?).  This would provide zero protection against voter fraud, at least as far as the outcome of the election is concerned.

But, as I have suggested, if you really think that voter fraud is non-existent or just a racist plot to suppress certain voters, then I can understand why this nirvana appeals to you. But I think that there are plenty of people who would exploit such a system and make voter fraud a much more widespread problem than it is today. So a balance is needed.

Jeff, thanks for the question and the compliment.  I was not trying to build a case with my post, so I was not presenting "(my) 'best' facts." I was just drawing peoples' attention to random articles that have appeared in several states in the last few days, few of which made it to this list serve, even though I think they would merit it.  Jim Bopp

In a message dated 10/3/2016 11:12:11 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Kevin.Greenberg at flastergreenberg.com<mailto:Kevin.Greenberg at flastergreenberg.com> writes:
Jim, putting aside your inflammatory rhetoric, please explain how any of these cases, if true, would have been cured by in person voter ID requirements.

Except for the Colorado case, which has absolutely no facts about how those ballots were allegedly cast, none of these have anything to do with in person fraud.  I'd like to see more facts on the Colorado case.

Of course voter registration and absentee ballot fraud are problems.  And ones that law enforcement needs to purse.  But that has nothing to do with a certain group's affiliates efforts to suppress the votes of the poor, old, and young without any basis in fact.

For the purpose of the reporters lurking on the list, remember, Jim is one of the bright lights of the Right's voting litigation.  That's not a dig, he really is that good.  And these are his "best" facts.   Which tells you everything you need to know about the fact-free hysteria driving the "movement."

Kevin Greenberg
215-279-9912
kevin.greenberg at flastergreenberg.com<mailto:kevin.greenberg at flastergreenberg.com><mailto:kevin.greenberg at flastergreenberg.com>

On Oct 2, 2016, at 9:56 AM, "JBoppjr at aol.com<mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com><mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com>" <JBoppjr at aol.com<mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com><mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com>> wrote:

Since Rick and the PC police have declared that voter fraud is non-existent, and any mention of it is "dangerous rhetoric" and a threat to our "fragile" democracy, you are therefor prohibited from reading any of the articles below.  If you dare read them, you will be immediately declare to be one of the "bunch of deplorables" and sent to reeducation camp.

Click here: Investigation launched after dead people are registered to vote in Harrisonburg - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Virgini<http://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/article_e008ce00-0365-57a2-95c0-4d9aa70012f9.html>

Click here: Possible voter fraud under investigation in Brighton | AL.com<http://AL.com><http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2016/08/possible_voter_fraud_under_inv.html>

Click here: Voter Fraud: Dead People Voting in Colorado<http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/24/dead-people-voting-colorado/>

Click here: Indiana State Police investigating voter registration fraud<http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2016/09/15/state-police-investigating-voter-registration-fraud/90407438/>

Click here: Arcan Cetin, Cascade Mall shooting suspect, voted in 3 elections without U.S. citizenship - Washington Times<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/29/arcan-cetin-cascade-mall-shooting-suspect-voted-in/>

I dare you.  Jim Bopp

In a message dated 10/1/2016 6:24:28 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu><mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu> writes:
Trump Again Raises Voter Fraud, Tells Supporters to Go to the Polls, Raising Risk of Voter Intimidation<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87054>
Posted on September 30, 2016 3:53 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=87054> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

>From a speech today<https://twitter.com/SopanDeb/status/781988539458326528> via Sopan Deb:

[http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/hell.jpg]<http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/hell.jpg>

See my earlier LA Times oped<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hasen-vote-rigging-20160816-snap-story.html>, on the risks of Trump’s dangerous rhetoric.

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu><mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

<image002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/unknown
Size: 493524 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161003/a83ff7de/attachment-0001.bin>