http://online.wsj.com/articles/hans-von-spakovsky-here-comes-the-2014-voter-fraud-1414450805 Here Comes the 2014 Voter Fraud Progressives and the Justice Department are doing all they can to stop improvements in election integrity. Hans von Spakovsky In the past few months, a former police chief in Pennsylvania pleaded guilty to voter fraud in a town-council election. That fraud had flipped the outcome of a primary election. Former Connecticut legislator Christina Ayala has been indicted on 19 charges of voter fraud, including voting in districts where she didn’t reside. (She hasn’t entered a plea.) A Mississippi grand jury indicted seven individuals for voter fraud in the 2013 Hattiesburg mayoral contest, which featured voting by ineligible felons and impersonation fraud. A woman in Polk County, Tenn., was indicted on a charge of vote-buying—a practice that the local district attorney said had too long “been accepted as part of life” there. Now come the midterm elections on Nov. 4. What is the likelihood that your vote won’t count? That your vote will, in effect, be canceled or stolen as a consequence of mistakes by election officials or fraudulent votes cast by campaign workers or ineligible voters like felons and noncitizens? Unfortunately, we can’t know. But one thing is almost certain: Voter fraud will occur. Many states run a rickety election process, lacking rules to deter people who are looking to take advantage of the system’s porous security. And too many groups and individuals—including the NAACP, the American Civil Liberties Union and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder —are doing everything they can to prevent states from improving the integrity of the election process. Their refrain is that voter fraud either doesn’t exist or is so insignificant that nothing needs to be done to improve ballot security. Yet in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 ruling that upheld Indiana’s voter ID law, Justice John Paul Stevens acknowledged “flagrant examples of such fraud” throughout the nation’s history and observed that “not only is the risk of voter fraud real” but also that “it could affect the outcome of a close election.” Polling shows that the November general election will likely have many close races, particularly on the local level. Nothing new there. In 2014, 16 local races in Ohio were decided by one vote or through breaking a tie. In 2013, 35 local races in Ohio were that close. ENLARGE Getty Images Voting by noncitizens alone could swing such races. A new study by two Old Dominion University professors, based on survey data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, found that 6.4% of all noncitizens voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election, and 2.2% voted in the 2010 midterms. Since 80% of noncitizens vote Democratic, according to the survey, the authors concluded that these illegal votes were “large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections.” Those that might have been skewed by noncitizen votes included Al Franken ’s 312-vote win in the Minnesota race for the U.S. Senate. As a senator, Mr. Franken would cast the 60th vote needed to make ObamaCare law. We’ll never know what role noncitizen voting has played in past elections, but the problem is real. While states like New York ignore this problem, other states have passed rules to deal with it. In addition to voter ID laws, Kansas and Arizona have put in place new proof-of-citizenship requirements for registration to prevent illegal voting. It is a common-sense and needed reform. In recent weeks North Carolina found more than 100 illegal aliens, still in the country thanks to the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, registered to vote. Yet opponents including the League of Women Voters and Common Cause are challenging citizenship requirements in the courts. Some states have also tried to eliminate same-day registration, which is a recipe for fraud since it prevents election officials from verifying the eligibility of voters and the accuracy of voter-registration information. States also are reducing early voting days, a relatively new phenomenon that has its share of election-administration problems. These moves to shore up election integrity have been resisted by progressives at every turn, claiming without evidence that such efforts suppress minority turnout. While the lawsuits have largely failed to overturn the rules, they have succeeded in delaying their implementation and made it costly for states to improve election security. South Carolina’s voter ID law will be in place in the November election, but it cost the state $3.5 million in 2012 to beat Eric Holder’s Justice Department in court. The U.S. Supreme Court just upheld a decision throwing out an injunction against a Texas voter ID law, which was in place in state elections in 2013 and primary elections this year. North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin are still battling progressives and the Justice Department in court over their election rules, although North Carolina and Ohio also got favorable decisions from the Supreme Court, allowing them to implement their rules for this election cycle. As John Fund and I outline in our new book on Attorney General Holder, the Justice Department refuses to enforce the federal law requiring states to keep accurate voter rolls—even though a 2012 Pew study found that the rolls are riddled with errors and ineligible voters. How far are some liberals willing to go in undermining ballot integrity? This month, the conservative guerrilla filmmaker James O’Keefe caught a director of the “social change” organization Work for Progress and an employee for the Greenpeace environmental group voicing their approval of absentee-ballot theft and fraudulent voting in Colorado. Recent polls indicate that the state’s governor and U.S. Senate races are statistical ties. Greenpeace fired the worker who was caught approving voter fraud, but too many on the left shrug at the prospect of tainted elections. At a Cincinnati “voting rights” rally in March, Rev. Al Sharpton and other liberal activists celebrated Melowese Richardson, who was convicted last year of voter fraud by using her position as a poll worker to vote more than once in the 2012 presidential election. Her five-year prison sentence was amended to five years of probation earlier this year—a delayed wrist-slap that further erodes respect for the ballot box. For too long, America has basically used the honor system in the voter-registration and election process. That approach is increasingly being revealed as indefensible in a vibrant democracy, where we should make it easy to vote and hard to cheat. Mr. von Spakovsky, a Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow and former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission, is the co-author, with John Fund, of “Obama’s Enforcer: Eric Holder’s Justice Department” (HarperCollins/Broadside 2014).
Voter ID Myth Crashes By Mona Charen - October 28, 2014 Democrats want everyone to vote: old, young, white, black, Hispanic, Asian, citizen, non-citizen. Wait, what was that last one again? We'll get to that. Voter ID laws, passed by 30 states so far, are efforts by legislatures to ensure the integrity of votes. Being asked to show a photo ID can diminish several kinds of fraud, including impersonation, duplicate registrations in different jurisdictions and voting by ineligible people including felons and non-citizens. The Democrats have made a number of arguments against voter ID laws. They argue a) that the problem of voter impersonation or in-person voter fraud is nonexistent, b) that black and poor voters are more likely than others to lack a valid ID and c) that Republicans are attempting to "suppress" the votes of Democratic constituencies in a bid to revive Jim Crow. To believe a), you must assume that Americans, who engage in widespread tax evasion (an estimated $2 trillion in income goes unreported), insurance fraud (an estimated $80 billion worth in 2006), identity theft (15 million victims annually) and thousands of other deceptions and crimes large and small, are perfect angels when they step into the voting booth. Vote fraud simply "doesn't exist," pronounced Attorney General Eric Holder. It's extremely difficult to track vote fraud. Most states put only halfhearted efforts into purging their voter registration rolls of the dead or those who've moved out of state. Prosecutions for vote fraud are rare. But prosecutions for perjury are rare, too -- and not because it "doesn't exist." Earlier this year, the Virginia Voters Alliance found that more than 44,000 people were simultaneously registered to vote in Maryland and Virginia. Catherine Engelbrecht's True the Vote found some 6.9 million overlapping voter registrations in the 28 states they examined. For those unburdened by conscience who live close to the border, it's more than possible to vote early and often. Being registered in more than one jurisdiction doesn't prove you committed fraud, only that you've arranged things to permit it or that you've overlooked this detail of good citizenship by absentmindedness. But convincing evidence that vote fraud is both real and consequential has appeared. A new academic paper published in the journal Electoral Studies provides evidence of voting by non-citizens that directly contradicts the Democrats' "nothing to see here" mantra. Under the neutral headline "Do Non-Citizens Vote in U.S. Elections?" three professors from Virginia universities answer in the affirmative. Using an enormous database of voters nationwide (32,800 from 2008, and 55,400 in 2012), the authors find that about one-quarter of the non-citizens who participated in the survey were registered to vote. Studying survey responses, the authors judge that non-citizen voters tend to favor Democratic candidates by large margins. In many states, their participation wouldn't be large enough to make a difference, but in North Carolina in 2008, the authors calculate, non-citizens may well have tipped the state into Barack Obama's column. "So what?" you may say. Even if John McCain had won that state, it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the national election. True, but remember the presidential race in 2000? Remember "hanging chad" Florida? Several House seats, and one very significant Senate seat, were probably won by Democrats on the strength of illegal votes. In 2008, the authors note, Sen. Al Franken won by just 312 votes in Minnesota. That seat was the 60th vote to give Democrats a filibuster-proof supermajority to pass major legislation like Obamacare. "(Voting) participation by just 0.65 percent of non-citizens in Minnesota is sufficient to account for the entirety of Franken's margin. Our best guess is that nearly 10 times as many voted." Voter ID laws will not prevent non-citizens from voting. Green card holders and even illegal aliens get driver's licenses. But that's not an argument against voter IDs. It's an argument for issuing driver's licenses that specify non-citizenship. As for blacks being "targeted" by voter ID laws, a study by Reuters found almost no difference (2 versus 3 percent) in the number of white and black voters who lacked ID. Voting is a semi-sacred act of civic religion. Trust that only those eligible are determining our future as a nation is the foundation of civic peace. Voter ID laws should be just one part of ensuring voter integrity. When Democrats resist those measures, it only feeds suspicion that they're trying to steal elections.
It's telling that the League of Women Voters is opposed to citizenship confirmation. I suppose they were respected at one time decades ago, but now they are clearly part of the democrat vote fraud industry.
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2014/10/28/ballot-switch-claims/ Md. Board of Elections Probe Republican-To-Democratic Ballot Switch Claims October 28, 2014 5:45 PM Share on email 784 View Comments Meghan McCorkell ANNAPOLIS, Md. (WJZ)—Early voting just started last week in Maryland, but there are already accusations that some voting machines are changing Republican votes to Democrat. Now Republicans are calling for an investigation by the State Board of Elections. Meghan McCorkell has more on the machine controversy. As Marylanders go to the polls, there are concerns that the vote you cast may not be for the candidate you want. “We’ve heard from scores of citizens in our district and around the state who have had this problem where they hit one button to vote for one person, and when they go to the summary they see that the other person was checked,” said Del Nik Kipke, (R) Anne Arundel County. Republicans say they’ve received several dozen reports of Republican votes being changed to Democrat. Del. Kathy Szeliga says it happened to her. “I kept pushing the Republican guy’s name and the machine kept going beep, beep, beep,” said Szeliga, (R) Baltimore & Harford Co. Now GOP leaders are calling for an investigation. But the State Board of Elections tells WJZ they received less than 20 reports of calibration issues with machines. Twelve have been thoroughly tested– and the problem could not be replicated. The others are out of service. Democratic candidate Anthony Brown says he’s confident the board will address all issues. “I think we should always be vigilant to make sure that voters can cast a ballot and that it’s accurately recorded,” said Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, (D) Maryland. In a statement to WJZ, board officials say “election officials receive similar reports in every election. Post-election analysis has shown that this is caused by voter error. Voters with large fingers or long nails or voters who hold the touchscreen with their palm resting on the screen seem to report this issue more frequently.” The State Board of Election advises voters to find an election judge immediately if they have any problem with the machines. Members of the state Republican Party are calling for the state Democratic Party to join them in calling for an investigation into the machines.
Faked? Video: Machine Switches Votes from Republican to Democrat in IL Video has emerged from Illinois of a "calibration error" that causes voting machines to switch votes from Republican to Democrat. The video, posted on YouTube, purportedly shows voting machines in the public library in Moline, IL registering votes as Democrat when the Republican is clearly the intended choice. Several voters in Rock Island County have already claimed publicly about similar problems with local voting machines in early voting. One local voter, Christina Kirk, told local NBC News affiliate KWQC 6 last week: "When I went to cast my vote and touch the screen for my Republican candidate, the Democrat candidate was the one that would pop up with my x, even though I pressed the Republican candidate." The YouTube footage is the first visual report of the alleged problem with the voting machines. The error appears to occur when the voter's finger is slightly off center in the Republican box, which appears below the Democrat box. It is apparently still possible to vote for the Republican candidate, and it is possible for a vigilant voter to correct the mistake and vote again, but a voter in a hurry might easily register a mistaken vote for the Democrat by mistake and fail to notice. The problem seems to recur throughout the ticket of races. (No test involving a voter trying to choose the Democratic candidate and selecting the Republican instead is shown.) Former Rep. Bobby Schilling, who is running for his former seat in a district redrawn by Democrats after 2010, has held a press conference to tell reporters he that has heard many similar complaints throughout the county. The complaints mirror those of voters in Cook County, on the other side of the state, where GOP state representative candidate Jim Moynihan tried to vote for himself and the machine cast his vote for his opponent. The Cook County Clerk's office told non-profit monitor Illinois Watchdog that the voting machine experienced a "calibration error" that "improperly assigned" Moynihan's vote. A similar calibration error seems to be at issue in Rock Island County. Schilling claimed last week to have received "17 calls of people saying the exact same thing." TT: From watching the video, it appears the voter is pressing right on the border - which could be indicative of a larger response area for one than the other. Dunno, not an IT guy.
I assure you, they're genuine as can be! (though you do realize it wasn't me who made that comment to you, right?) Don't be affected!
Surely you didn't believe that comment wasn't coming? I know, I recycled his, you recycled mine, it's all good.