Just three points to add to Mr. Rylander's excellent
response, with which I agree.
First, Jim's original (I know, tongue-in-cheek) exhortation
to not bother reading the article is among the worst advice
I've heard him give. In any allegation of fraud, _please_
read the article -- and it's best to check a few other sources
too, just to be sure.
As Jason points out, in this case, you don't have to do
much further research The actual article doesn't support the
headline's suggestion of rampant voter fraud in the slightest.
And that actually makes a slightly different point.
Responsible analysts very rarely claim "that there is no such thing as voter
fraud." Instead, we (and I like to think I'm in that group)
claim that while scattered incidents of real voter fraud do
exist, the incidence of voter fraud is vastly overstated by
wild and unsupported claims. And that particular statement
is nicely supported by the hyperbolic headline of the cited
article itself.
Finally, there are several reasons to
believe that any fraudulent registrations uncovered (some of
the registrations are indeed likely to be fraudulent, and
others are very, very, very likely to be legitimate) won't
result in fraudulent votes. Among these is the fact that
fraudulent registration forms submitted by those evaluated
for the number of forms they submit have everything to do
with individuals shirking on their commitments to the voter
registration drive, and nothing whatsoever to do with
wanting individuals to try to vote in the name of those
registrations.
But even if you don't believe the
incentives (or Jason's point about 24,000 fake voters
showing up in one precinct), believe federal law. Every
single one of those forms, if submitted by mail, has to be
screened under HAVA. Either the driver's license number or
the SSN digits on the firm has to match DMV records, or the
registrant has to provide some form of ID document
(including, but _not_ limited to, specific photo ID). All
before the registrant is allowed to cast a regular ballot.
Justin
Voter registration fraud and voter fraud are two
different things. One doesn't necessarily lead to the
other. If those 24,000 phantom voters had shown up at their
precinct en masse, you'd think people would have noticed.
A similar thing happened here in Arlington, VA this year. A
strange coalition of public safety unions, the GOP, and the
Green Party attempted to get a change-of-government
referendum on the ballot to oust the Democratic county
leadership. They hired out of state petition gatherers in
violation of Virginia law. Their roster included local
convicted felons who were themselves ineligible to solicit
signatures.. Arlington residents living in a homeless
shelter attested to petitions that on their face could not
have been circulated by them on the days indicated. Nearly
a third of signatures gathered ended being tossed once the
voter registrar became aware of these abnormalities. The
registrar notified the police and Commonwealth's attorney,
but alas no arrests have been made. That's unfortunate. Of
course in the Arlington case, most (but not all) of the
actual signatures were legit, it was the mode of
solicitation that broke the law. Still.
The fact is when groups pay people to collect signatures, be
it for referenda or for registration, some people will
commit fraud (and the problem may not just be limited to
paid circulators). Registrars should really catch examples
as egregious as the one in this article. Eternal vigilance
is indeed the price of liberty.
But the interesting thing is there is not one sentence in
this article suggesting that any person voted multiple
times, or voted despite being ineligible, or that the
outcome of any election was ever in doubt as a result.
It's a nice slight of hand that the GOP attempts every
election season to cast doubt on the validity of America's
elections, but registration irregularities do not
necessarily lead to fraudulent votes being cast. Are such
incidents problematic? Sure. Can we conclude from this
that organized efforts are underway to steal elections? Not
remotely (and in fact it would be a rather difficult
conspiracy to carry out in practice).
So, Mr. Bopp, when you get some evidence of actual VOTER
fraud, your sarcasm will be warranted. Until then ...
Regards,
Jason Rylander*
*licensed in DC and Virginia
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 1:14 PM,
<JBoppjr@aol.com>
wrote:
Don't bother reading this article, because we
have been assured that there is no such thing
as voter fraud. It is a figment of the GOP's
imagination. No, it is really an effort at voter
suppression. In any event, it is Bush's fault (it
is Houston after all). Jim Bopp
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law