Voter Fraud ?

[Chuck S]

I was referring specifically to your "mark of the Beast - it's the extreme religious conservatives fault" argument....not the pros and cons of various forms of ID.

I'm not advocating one system over another. But it's obvious that fraud is easy to commit, and that it does happen. Anyone who is only worried about vote-counting fraud and not voter registration fraud is simply a partisan hypocrite. Both types of fraud, when committed, have an equal effect on the honest outcome of an election.

Where did I say it was religious conservatives FAULT? I said they bear SOME responsibility for not having a reliable,free, national ID system. And it is true. The conservatives seem to be the ones screaming that we need a positive ID system to prevent voter fraud, but they also firmly are against a national requirement for requiring ID for anything else...why implement an expensive system if it can only serve one purpose when, in theory, the same system could be a national database and replace passports, drivers licenses, social security card, bank accounts, credit card numbers, etc. A chip ID system could also help identify bodies in the aftermath of natural disasters or reunite familes that are separated by disaster, like all the missing children from Katrina.

 

[bsnyder]

Where did I say it was religious conservatives FAULT? I said they bear SOME responsibility for not having a reliable,free, national ID system. And it is true. The conservatives seem to be the ones screaming that we need a positive ID system to prevent voter fraud, but they also firmly are against a national requirement for requiring ID for anything else...why implement an expensive system if it can only serve one purpose when, in theory, the same system could be a national database and replace passports, drivers licenses, social security card, bank accounts, credit card numbers, etc. A chip ID system could also help identify bodies in the aftermath of natural disasters or reunite familes that are separated by disaster, like all the missing children from Katrina.

I haven't heard that conservatives were blocking an ID system, and certainly not religious conservatives in particular. What, exactly, are you talking about?

 

[Chuck S]

Well, first off, this http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-sm051397.html Here is an excerpt: I wish to remind Republicans that this idea first surfaced in a Reagan cabinet meeting in 1981. Then Attorney General William French Smith argued that a perfectly harmless i.d. card system would be necessary to reduce illegal immigration. A second cabinet member asked why not tattoo a number on each American's forearm. According to Martin Anderson, the White House domestic policy adviser at the time, Reagan blurted out: "My god, that's the mark of the beast." Anderson reports "that was the end of the national identification card" during the Reagan years. But bad ideas never die in Washington; they wait for another day.

And this People for the American Way (very conservative group) site.
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=21438

Voting Rights: Some See “Mark of the Beast” in REAL ID Act

Proponents of proposed legislation to make New Hampshire the first state to reject the “REAL ID Act” count privacy advocates and evangelical Christians who fear the “End Times” among their bill’s supporters. Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering – who oppose data-tracking supermarket “loyalty” cards – is organizing a rally against REAL ID in New Hampshire. Organizers had hoped Irvin Baxter – publisher of Endtime magazine and who maintains the NoNationalID.com website, which condemns the REAL ID as the prophesized biblical “Mark of the Beast” – could attend. Baxter, who will miss the rally, purports lawmakers have been forced to adopt policies to monitor individuals within the United States because they have failed to implement an effective border-security strategy. He suggests the construction of a high-tech fence would negate the need for national IDs. "There has to be another way to enforce security outside of our borders," said Baxter. "But our political leaders have bought into this whole idea of globalization, and this is leading us to a 'mark of the beast' system – so this all ties together." Baxter said he is particularly disappointed in President Bush, who he had hoped would be more sympathetic to Christian concerns about national IDs: "I am stunned … He either skipped over that part of the Bible, or he completely misunderstood it."

 

[TheDoctor]

The study is clear? That's a good one! You haven't even read it. You're making a laughing-stock of yourself,...

Bet you are so silly that it is so funny. It is obvious that you have never done any serious research and that studies are something foriegn to you. This is very typical for a preliminary study like this. That fact that this type of report is not posted on the free republic or whatever right wing nutcase site where you get your data does not mean it is invalid.

Again, the study is clear that the voting fraud you are discussing is rare and does not justified the disenfranchisment of the minority voters.

 

[reeeoga]

Something to think about:
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=493490

 

[TheDoctor]

It appears that the illegal robocalls used by the RNC may have help the Republicans to keep a couple of seats in the House. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001974.php

As we did our best to document, the National Republican Congressional Committee was responsible for repetitive, often harrassing robo calls in more than two dozen districts across the country in the runup to the election.

In at least seven of those districts, the Democrat failed to unseat the incumbent by only a couple thousand votes. The NRCC's calls may have been the difference in those races.

Consider, for example, Florida's 13th District, where Christine Jennings is currently locked in a recount battle. The final tally shows her down 386 votes. In the last three weeks of the election, the NRCC spent $58,326.78 on robo calls against Jennings, according to FEC reports. At five to fifteen cents a call, the NRCC bought itself between 388,000 and 1.17 million calls in the district. Approximately 250,000 people voted in the 13th on Tuesday.

Voters there report being inundated with calls -- so much so that some decided not to vote for Jennings. From The Herald Tribune:

"We're just glad it's all over," said Betty Beatty...
"They bugged us with their phone calls something terrible," said Betty, who voted for Buchanan because "with all her calls, Jennings, Jennings, Jennings, I wouldn't have voted for that woman if she were the only one running."​

The NRCC's calls, you'll remember, began by saying something like "Hi, I'm calling with information about [the Democratic candidate]," then continued to give negative information about the candidate. They did not identify the true source of the calls until the very end, when they informed the listener (if he/she bothered to stay on the line until the end of the call), that the NRCC had paid for it. Voters reported being called again and again. A number of Democratic campaigns reported receiving complaints from voters who thought that the calls were coming from the Democrat, because of the calls' lead-in. We catalogued a number of the calls here.

Democrats have asked the FEC, FCC and Justice Department to probe the calls. DCCC spokesman Bill Burton told me that the Dems are still "committed to pursuing the issue of these calls" and are "discussing the next steps.... We are absolutely not letting this drop."

Since the Democrats have control of the House and the Senate, they may get something passed on this issue. If nothing else, I hope that the DNC sues the heck out of the RNC. This tactic worked in New Hampshire including putting a couple of GOP operatives behind bars.

 

[TheDoctor]

Here is more on the election in Florida where the electronic voting machines at 18,000 votes or 13% of the outstanding votes. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001990.php

Lawyers for Democratic House candidate Christine Jennings threw down the gauntlet yesterday, asking a state court to secure electronic voting machines and data used in the election.

The move would preserve the equipment in Florida's Sarasota County for scrutiny by Jennings' legal team. A hearing on the suit is scheduled for this afternoon.

It's just the first step of what is likely to be a litigious aftermath to a close and ugly election (thanks in part to the NRCC's rampant robo calling in the district). The state began a recount and audit of the election yesterday. Once the audit and second recount is completed and the results certified on November 20th, the Jennings campaign has ten days to contest the results of the election if they still show Jennings down. Before the recounting began, she was down 386 votes.

The fight will center around the district's Sarasota County, where the electronic machines did not register a vote in the Congressional race for 18,000 voters (13%) -- what's called an "undervote." That's compared to only 2.53% of voters who did not vote in the race via absentee ballots.

A study by the local paper, The Herald Tribune, found that one in three of Sarasota election officials "had general complaints from voters about having trouble getting votes to record" on the electronic machines for the Congressional race. Since 53% of voters in Sarasota County picked Jennings over the Republican Vern Buchanan, those missed votes would likely have put Jennings in front.

Kendall Coffey, a lawyer for the Jennings campaign, told me yesterday that any court challenge of the results is likely to focus on problems with the electronic machines. He said that the campaign has a wealth of "compelling testimony" from "sources that you simply can't discredit" who had trouble registering a vote for Jennings in the county. That challenge would likely come later in the month, if the recount still shows Jennings down and the state's audit does not turn up any problems. So stay tuned.

These voting machines need an audit trail or paper record.

 

[Gary M]

These voting machines need an audit trail or paper record.[/QUOTE]


So the voting machines need an audit trail or paper record, but the liberals say voters don't need to show a paper ID. I'm in Indiana and the ID's that are required to vote are free, so the "poll tax" doesn't apply here.

 

[TheDoctor]

Majority Leader Reid is going to propose a comprehensive bill to solve some issues including robocalls and the voter suppression tactics used by the GOP. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002000.php

The Senate Democratic leadership team plans a long, laborious slog for the Senate next year even as party leaders continue to formalize their legislative agenda for the 110th Congress — an agenda that already includes a couple of surprises.

'"At a breakfast with reporters Tuesday, incoming Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV] warned that the “do-nothing” Congress, as his party has labeled recent Republican rule in the chamber, will soon be over....

"Principally, Reid said that would mean passing a bill to create criminal penalties for election fraud, including offenses such as voter misinformation campaigns carried out by robo-calls and misleading flyers.

"Noting that such tactics were used in both the Missouri and Maryland Senate races, Schumer said, “I think the person or people who authorized that should go to jail for 10 years.” Currently, civil fines usually are the most serious penalty assessed for such ploys. Schumer added that a separate unit should be created within the Justice Department to deal with cases of election fraud." (Roll Call)

I am not sure how the GOP will able to win any elections if the GOP can not cheat. I would not be surprised to see this bill vetoed.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Did you check out the NY Times today? You seem pretty adept at finding articles about voting issues, I'm surprised you aren't referencing it. Oh, that's right-the Times article referred to irregularites and corruption by BOTH parties and that doesn't exist in your world.

 

[Marie17]

Was their voter fraud in the Murtha vs Hoyer election?

I thought the early exit polls said that Murtha had the votes.

 

[TheDoctor]

Here is more on the Democrats plans to outlaw most of the illegal methods used by the GOP. http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/137928,CST-EDT-sweet16.article

With their new power, Democratic leaders want to craft a constitutional way to stop voters from being flooded with robo-calls peddling deceptive information. They are floating the notion that authorizing calls with fraudulent content should be a crime. "These robo-calls, somehow, constitutionally, we are going to have to find some way to stop this," Reid said.

Schumer said he and Rep. Rahm Emanuel -- the boss of the House Democratic campaign committee, who is expected to be elected to a leadership spot today -- made a list of what they consider abusive campaign practices. In some cases, the volume of calls that went out to targeted likely Democratic voters was so heavy as to constitute harassment.

In other examples, the calls peddled disinformation -- whether about a candidate or the location of a polling place. Criticizing the robo-call dirty tricks, Schumer was blunt. "It's despicable" and the perps "should go to jail for 10 years."

Schumer said he and Emanuel are looking at legislation applying criminal penalties to certain kinds of campaigning and creation of a separate unit at the Justice Department to prosecute.

 

[TheDoctor]

Senator Obama is also pushing for a bill to stop robo calling. Here is a press release from Senator Obama http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002009.php

U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) this week introduced legislation to protect Americans from tactics that intimidate voters and prevent them from exercising their right to vote on Election Day. The legislation builds on similar legislation he introduced last year by including specific language to address misleading fliers and harassing robocalls that occurred during the 2006 cycle.

The legislation, the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2006, would make it illegal for anyone to knowingly attempt to prevent others from exercising his or her right to vote by providing deceptive information and would require the Attorney General to fully investigate these allegations. The legislation would also require the Attorney General, in conjunction with the Election Assistance Commission, to provide accurate election information when allegations of deceptive practices are confirmed.

"One of our most sacred rights as Americans is the right to make our voice heard at the polls," said Obama. "But too often, we hear reports of mysterious phone calls and mailers arriving just days before an election that seek to mislead and threaten voters to keep them from the polls. And those who engage in these deceptive and underhanded campaign tactics usually target voters living in minority or low-income neighborhoods. This legislation would ensure that for the first time, these incidents are fully investigated and that those found guilty are punished."

In last week’s election, mailers distributed by Republicans in predominantly African American counties in Maryland wrongly implied that African American Democrats had endorsed Republican candidates. The fliers were paid for and authorized by GOP Senate candidate Michael Steele and Republican Governor Robert Ehrlich.

In House races across the country, reports surfaced of Democrats receiving dozens of harassing robocalls designed to imply that they came from Democratic candidates. In fact, the calls were paid for by Republicans and were intended to suppress turnout among Democrats. (The calls were thoroughly documented on www.TalkingPointsMemo.com.)

Obama's legislation would provide a criminal penalty for deceptive practices, with penalties of up to $100,000 or one year imprisonment, or both. The legislation would also require the Attorney General to work with the Federal Communications Commission and the Election Assistance Commission to determine the feasibility of using the public broadcasting system as a means of providing voters with full and accurate Election Day information.

 

[Chuck S]

Personally, I think robo calls should be outlawed for almost all purposes. The exception would be perhaps order confirmations, like Mom gets on her prescription orders "This is Medco calling for Mrs. Xyz, we have received your order and it is being processed, shipment is expected on 00/00/00."

 

[TheDoctor]

On election day, I was in my car and I heard Laura Ingram tell her listeners to jam the DNC voter hot line. At the time, I thought that this was really dumb in that three or four republicans have been convicted in New Hampshire for doing something similar. Well, yesterday the Democrats have asked the DOJ to investigate Laura Ingram for her attempt to jam the DNC voter helpline. http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/17/leahy-ingraham-vote/

On election day, ThinkProgress posted audio of right-wing radio host Laura Ingraham urging her listeners to obstruct efforts to protect voting rights by jamming a free voter protection hotline.

Yesterday in a Senate Judiciary Commmittee hearing, Pat Leahy (D-VT) asked Wan Kim, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, whether his department would be investigating Ingraham’s phone jamming. Kim said Ingraham’s actions sounded like a “voter fraud scheme,” but that they didn’t fall under his division’s responsibilities, which cover “voter access"

Ms. Ingram may find that her stunt is not so funny. She have better find a good criminal defense attorney. I doubt that the GOP will pay for defense (the RNC is still paying to defend one of the defendants in the New Hampshire case). The New Hampshire stunt has cost the RNC over $5 million in legal defense costs to date. Ms. Ingram may regret her "joke."

 

[sha_lyn]

Did you check out the NY Times today? You seem pretty adept at finding articles about voting issues, I'm surprised you aren't referencing it. Oh, that's right-the Times article referred to irregularites and corruption by BOTH parties and that doesn't exist in your world.

So Dr , we are stilling waiting to hear your reasoning for not pointing out fraud committed by the dems

 

[TheDoctor]

Did you check out the NY Times today? You seem pretty adept at finding articles about voting issues, I'm surprised you aren't referencing it. Oh, that's right-the Times article referred to irregularites and corruption by BOTH parties and that doesn't exist in your world.

I have looked and have not seen this article. Do you have a link? I will be glad to read the article but I could not pull on a couple of google searches and this article was not on any of the liberal blogs that I read.

 

[Fitswimmer]

I have looked and have not seen this article. Do you have a link? I will be glad to read the article but I could not pull on a couple of google searches and this article was not on any of the liberal blogs that I read.

sad to say, I have no idea how to post articles the way you do. I still read the paper the old fashioned way.

It was in yesterday's issue, the National section. It discussed the Democrat plan and raised the question of how many will support it because there were districts where Democrats have benefited from the lack of accountability as well. (probably why it's not on the liberal blog)

Don't get me wrong here, I'm all for preventing voter fraud. The only place I differ is that I see it as a problem on both sides.

 

[TheDoctor]

sad to say, I have no idea how to post articles the way you do. I still read the paper the old fashioned way.

I really did look for your article. The only thing that I found is this article which is just a repeat of much of the same information that I have already posted on this thread.
http://www.nytimes.com/cq/2006/11/16/cq_1957.html I will look again and if I find the article, I will post it.

 

[Fitswimmer]

That was one of the ones I read, but the one I was really thinking of was from 11/11. Sorry, wrong day.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/11/opinion/11hasen.html

I don't believe that any political party is immune to the temptation to do whatever it takes to stay in power. The Republicans have been in power for 12 years and they wanted it to stay that way. Had the shoe been on the other foot, somebody would be clipping articles about Democratic voter fraud. The temptation is just too great and our system makes it much too easy. If the Democrats are smart, they'll take the advice of the Times and create that bipartisan commission to close the existing gaps and make it harder for fraud to occur. The system needs to be changed, otherwise the two sides will just keep hurling accusations at each other and wasting the taxpayers time. The Republicans had 12 years, they failed and the people have voted for change. It would be nice to actually see some.