VoterID and Voter fraud

The purpose of this aimless article isn’t to convince people of any particular solution, it is to meander through the facts, eviscerate the fallacies, and give everyone the data to come to their own conclusions about Voter fraud and VoterID.

There are a lot of fallacies and noise about voter fraud and whether voterID (requiring ID at voting places would fix it). I’ll list just a few of the many examples of voter fraud, and reasons for concerns below — yet, there’s are a lot of DNC fronts (media outlets) that claim there’s virtually none. Why the discrepancy? Well the reason is that voter fraud overwhelmingly benefits the Democrats (DNC). If you were them, would you want it to stop? 

So naturally here’s a list of things they do: 

  • (1) pretend it doesn’t exist, and it’s absurd to think it might.. 
  • (2) And even if it did exist, it couldn’t possibly sway an election… 
  • (3) And even when it does, it’s absurd to think VoterID would fix it… 
  • (4) And besides, the only people that would want VoterID are racists/bigots (to suppress the minority vote)… 
  • (5) Then they support the first 4 with things written and published by DNC supporters… 
  • (6) and if that doesn’t work, they call you a racists and start back at #1.  

It’s very circular referencing gish gallop (which is slang for the debate style of Duane Gish, who could spew out so many bullshit arguments at once, that people give up). But whether you agree or not, in order to understand the issue, we need to know the facts. Not that I think this will do much — a few people that read this just claim, "see no evidence" despite many pages of it. But for those with open eyes and minds, here’s a list of evidence that it’s a problem. 

How popular is Voter ID?

Where’s the beef?

There are multiple books that offer many chapters of evidence to detail how bad voter fraud is. This article is only covering a fraction of what’s out there that shows what’s real. New York, Chicago, Detroit, DC, and many cities are infamous for their voter corruption that goes back to the rise of progressives (Tammany Hall, Boss Tweed, Chicago Political Machine), though much of that political corruption goes beyond just cooking elections and into what they do with their power once annointed. 

But even if all the books, examples and common knowledge was wrong (which their evidence implies they are not), the popularity of the books and people that believe that it is a problem proves that the public doesn’t trust the insecurity in our election process. 

Books and experts

Examples of voter fraud

Wikileaks – There’s not only speculation of coordinated voter fraud, in emails from DNC operatives we catch them trying to coordinate it for their advantage, including from top DNC operative John Podesta.

James O’Keefe ran underground stings on his project veritas site (for many years), a blogger doing what Journalists used to do. He showed that ACORN was corrupt, that NPR was beyond biased, that Abortion Clinics were farming fetus parts for profit. And of course recently asked Obama/Hillary and the DNC’s top campaign folks if they’d help him corrupt elections. They explained that not only could they help him, they’d done it before, and detailed all the ways to get around the systems in place (proven in the past)

2016 a simple test in Nevada (by a 3rd party candidate) showed that of 200 voters that don’t live at the addresses listed, 185 had voted. http://www.theblaze.com/podcasts/third-party-candidate-in-nevada-uncovers-voter-fraud/

2105 Joseph Vanderhulst with the Public Interest Legal Foundation sued Philadelphia to get voting role information and quickly found 40 illegal aliens that had voted. And efforts to get 46 others, or various felons off the roles was near impossible. The city automatically registered people, or sent them materials to register, don’t cross reference against convictions (49,914 inmates means a lot of potentail illegal voting), and they make little or no effort and removing voters just because they aren’t eligible or even ask to be removed. The law group that found that went on to look at Virginia, and found 1,046 non-citizens on that role (and that at least 200 ballots had been cast by them between 2005-2015).

2013 New York City’s DOI (Department of Investigations) did a fraud test. In 63 polling places they tried, in 61 of them (97% of the time), they were allowed to take the identities of dead, incarcerated or people who moved away and vote anyways. After publishing a scathing 70 page report on the incompetence of the system, they were ignored

2012, 2008 Obama – While these aren’t proof that voter fraud swayed the election, they do show the problem. Without good auditing and the ability to manage who votes, there’s a valid concern (distrust) when you get 140% turn out, and or 100% of the vote going for Obama. And while it is possible that the population grew massively and un-reported since the last census/registration a few years before, it’s dubious. A few tried to prove that nothing untoward was going on, by half-hearted sampling to and not finding anyone that claims their vote was recorded wrong. But those low quality samples aren’t going to convince anyone. Even if they did a comprehensive review of every voter (which they didn’t do), an error rate should be higher than 0%. And it still leaves that there’s reasonable doubt in our processes that could be easily improved with voter validation steps. The more we do to sanitize the voter roles, the more trust in elections (even high turn-out ones) we should have. 

2012 Pew survey

2012 True The Vote

2012 North Carolina – their  elections board found 35,570 people who voted in the state in 2012, whose names and dates of birth match those of voters in other states. Republicans got excited about the proof of valid concerns. The Democrats circled that wagon and pointed out “only 765 North Carolinians who voted in 2012 had matching last four digits of their Social Security”. Why? Most states don’t provide that information. Also they argued that lots of people have the same names and birthdays. But VoterID would help build confidence that there’s no problem with either the larger and smaller numbers quoted by opposing interests. 

2012 South Carolina – had gone through a similar exercise and scanning 7 years of elections found 900 dead people that voted. They handed this off to their SLED (State Law Enforcement Division), which did a statistical scan of 207 of the 900 results, and were able to find 10 questionable cases they investigated, and 5 that remained “unresolved”. But they found hundreds of clerical errors, and considered things like an unregistered wife voting for her dead husband and things like that, as not a case of voter fraud, so there’s some implications that they were more interested in proving there wasn’t a problem, than exposing if there was. Of course partisans like WaPo decided to spin this as proof that despite widespread errors, that this wasn’t proof of widespread fraud — even though concepts like VoterID would make it harder for many of these clerical errors to have happened. 

2010 Al Franken (D) won a contested election against Norm Coleman (R). Norm was ahead by over 700 votes, but after a series of recounts (in a Democrat controlled state) which threw out some votes for Norm and allowed the dead, felons, or other questionable votes, Al squeaked a win by 312 votes votes. When Coleman challenged, the liberal leaning courts threw out his appeals. However, in 2 counties alone 393 felons voted, and other studies showed that ≈86% of the felon vote goes to the Democrats. Nothing to see here, move along. Of course Franken has been a staunch advocate against anything that would improve voterID.

2006: United States Election Assistance Commission Report on Outcomes of Court Cases of Voter Fraud – This document contains 197 pages detailing the facts of voter-fraud cases across the United States:

2000 Bush-Gore Florida – This actually needs to be a separate article. But the point is that the election was won by a 537 vote margin. There are an estimated 925,000 illegal immigrants, which have ≈6% voter turnout in major Presidential elections (and 80% democrat votes). That’s 44,400 likely illegal votes for Gore in Florida alone. Tell me again how voter fraud can’t swing an election.

Another topic for a different article is whether Bush or Gore rightly won the election. The facts are, that according to any of the official recount methodologies in process when the Supreme Court ruled to stop the recouting, Bush won by between 154-537 votes (not matter which methodology used) – this includes all the in-process recounts (for the 3rd or 4th time). But there were some theoretical recounts where if you tweaked standards of undervotes (not punching all the way through) and overvotes (allowed people to vote for 2 candidates and counted them towards both), by those standards, then in very loose standards Gore would have won by between 60-171 votes, otherwise by strict standards (as used traditionally) Bush still would have won. Of course, that’s only how the media wanted to recount them unofficially and statewide (which wasn’t being done by Florida at the time). And if Gore had won by these means, then the Bush camp would have gone back and had to contest the election for illegal aliens and dead people voting — and that would have easily swung the vote well into Bush’s camp (by 40K+ votes), even if it took months without a decision to do it. Any standard that filtered invalid votes would have secured the election for Bush. So the point is not that Bush stole an election: he and the Supreme Court were successful at thwarting another 1960 type stealing of the election by Democrats, again. 

1996 Bob Dornan and Loretta “Dirty” Sanchez – Illegal aliens do vote, and they do swing elections. One example was it happened to be my district (46th District) in Santa Ana, California (circa 1997), and I watched the whole thing go down. The DNC sponsored a Latina named Loretta Sanchez to run a dirty campaign against Bob Dornan — with “vote early and vote often” appeals to the latino community, community organizers and activists showing them how to commit voter fraud. They turned out in droves and Sanchez won by 984 votes. California wouldn’t touch Bob Dornan’s complaint — but a preliminary House investigation quickly discovered that there were 748 votes that had been cast illegally, and the INS investigation had showed another 4,700 questionable registration affidavits that should be investigated. But amidst allegations of a cover-up or payoff, the House decided to drop the investigation and let Sanchez stay. And all of her later career: helping her sister get elected, running for Senate, her various scandals and questionable ethics, should be stained with the election fraud that got her into office.

1993 Motor Voter – the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 was passed and called "motor voter” act, because the point was to make it easier to register by doing so when people were getting their ID’s at the DMV, with the following four objectives:  (1) Increase registered voters (2) enhance participation (3) protect election integrity (4) ensure states sanitize their voter roles (make them accurate).

The Obama administration and Democrats refuse to do anything to encourage enforce #3 and #4 (like filing a single lawsuit), and only support increasing voter roles, not sanitizing them. When asked why, they said because 3 and 4 would interfere with 1 and 2. Missing the whole point that democracy isn’t valid unless it is trusted, and a way to enhance participation is to do your due diligence in election integrity, so people feel their vote matters and won’t be drown out by voter fraud. It’s this obstinance at integrity that gives VoterID efforts some legs.

1982 Adlai Stevenson III and Republican James Thompson – Adlai Stevenson came within 5,074 votes of capturing the governorship out of 3.67 million votes. Chief Judge Frank Mc­Garr of the U.S. District Court for the Northern Dis­trict of Illinois publicly released the federal grand jury’s report (one of only 3 times in history that had happened), and the evidence re­vealed substantial vote fraud in Chicago during the November 2, 1982, election and found "that similar fraudulent activities have occurred prior to 1982.” Based on FBI agent Ernest Locker investigation, he was struck how routine voter fraud was in Chicago. Locker believes the claims, that Mayor Daley threw the 1960 presidential election for John Kennedy with massive ballot stuffing in Chicago. This type of voter fraud, stated Locker, "was an accepted way of life in Chicago.”  Conclusions: 3,000 votes had been cast in the names of individuals who were dead, and more than 31,000 individuals had voted twice in different locations in the city. Thousands of individuals had supposedly voted despite being incarcerated at the time of the election, and utility records showed that some individuals who voted were registered as living on vacant lots. 100,000 phony votes were counted in total, bringing the defendant within 5,000 votes of stealing the governorship. 

1960 John F. Kennedy vs Richard Nixon: There’s of course the 1960 election that Nixon claimed he was robbed in (and contributed to Nixon’s caustic paranoia). This was because mayor Daily of Chicago is widely believed to have manufactured 8,858 voted needed that swung the election. FBI agent Ernest Locker investigations into the 1982 election fraud in Chicago, lead him to believe this was true (as most others at the time believed). Remember, the corruption doesn’t have to be valid, the concerns that it could have been swung just have to be. And even popular liberals admit that it was corrupted. So we know that there’s no confidence in our election process because of lack of voterID. 

Questionable voter roles 

Now just because the voting roles aren’t accurate, doesn’t mean they’re being abused — it just means it might be easy to do so. The anti-voterID folks argue that due to the dilegent checking of distracted octogenarians at polling places, no one untoward gets by their eagle eye. (How they’re supposed to know who to stop without ID boggles the mind, but that’s their claim). Yet, when investigations are done, both sides have a point. While only a handful of provable voter frauds are in evidence, there’s widespread evidence of slop, clerical errors, misattributed votes, and confidence that could be improved with basic VoterID. 

Dead people voting:

Non-citizens voting:

Felons voting:

General voting fraud concerns:

Even Democrats scream voter fraud or the election was rigged, when they lose:

Voter Suppression

The knee-jerk anti-voterID response is, “but Voter Suppression”. Their argument is not that photo ID being required to do any of the following is suppressing our freedoms — only voterID would do that. These others things are all OK and even encouraged by them (for those that don’t know what hypocrisy or double-standards looks like, that is the perfect example): 

  • buy alcohol, cigarettes, gun, video game, cellphone, car or house (or rent the same)
  • apply for unemployment, foodstamps, welfare, medicare, Social Security, a loan or mortgage
  • open a bank account, get married, adopt a pet (or child), get a fishing or camping license
  • get a job, on an airplane, or drive a car, visit a casino, fill a prescription, get healthcare, donate blood
  • to enter many government buildings to meet with public officials

On top of it, that fallacy is disproven by places that have VoterID (no evidence of suppression). 

 

Conclusion 

The point isn’t that VoterID fixes everything. There are many kinds of voter fraud. But locking a door might not keep out a determined criminal, yet it still makes it harder to get robbed and decreases the frequency, and it certainly gives the occupants a little confidence that they’re at least doing something to prevent it. So we can only make it harder, never eliminate it. But those claiming that it doesn’t exist or isn’t a problem are fools or frauds. They’re ignorant of the rich history of it in the United States, how it swung local, regional and nation elections, and/or actively choosing to keep their head in the sand about it. 

All you have to do is remember that it would have swung the 2000 election if the Supreme Court hadn’t step in for other reasons, it probably swung the 2008 or 2012 elections, it definitely swung balance of power in many State and local elections. And despite a lack of convictions, there are hundreds of thousands of voters on the roles that shouldn’t be, and very poor policing of them. And one party fighting voraciously to prevent any improvement in quality controls on our election quality. 

Where’s the rotten beef? 

The left will claim that multiple comprehensive studies have been done, and they almost all link back to one bad one, done by liberal NYU Justin Levitt (or the link to WaPo articles, which all refer to Justin’s “study”). But there are a few softer “investigations” that started with high numbers of dead, people with same name & birthdays voting across states, and other forms of potential fraud, that once investigated (which is often cursory scans of subsets of the data) they do find a handful of fraud cases, but a small enough number that the left claims, “See. Who cares?”. Of course if there was VoterID we wouldn’t have these doubts in the first place, and we would reduce the fraud that is happening.

Justin’s flim-flam is that in his research he found only "31 instances” of convictions between 2000-2014. And since there’s no convictions, there’s no problem. (With a side argument that few elections are close enough to matter). So ignore the problem, it’s just evil racist republicans that want to suppress the vote. 

But of course anyone with a brief understanding of the topic would laugh out loud at that reasoning. 

  • Q: Why aren’t there any convictions? 
  • A: Because there’s poor monitoring and no voter ID to catch frauds in the first place. 

How can you prove someone isn’t who they say they are (and convict them), if you don’t check their ID’s? They walk up to a list of names, and point, and say, “that’s me there”, and they get a ballot. And if the real person comes in later, they have no way of getting back to the fraudulent voter for conviction. 

And voter ID isn’t just about at voting, but at registration. You can register under any name you want without ID, and then have a mail-in or absentee ballot — that’s harder to do if you’re required to show ID to register. So the only way to catch someone without ID, is when they post what they did on social media, or brag about it to someone who checks out the story. At the point of voting there’s virtually no way to catch them. 

So any study with the “methodology” of only looking at convictions, should be openly laughed at and mocked. No credible academic, institution, publisher, or journalist can defend the holes in reasoning required. Fortunately for WaPo or NYU, their readers and alums don’t care.

References

2 Replies to “VoterID and Voter fraud”