Is Voter Fraud Everywhere?

Bernie Thomas, the Baltimore Examiner News and Traffic Examiner, diverged a bit into the voter fraud fray. The story is worth a read and the video clips worth watching. As with everything on the internet, though, keep your critical thinking cap on.

A couple of minor points, if I may, on the combined article:

Voter ID was challenged and ended up getting to the Supreme Court. At no level in the trial process did the opponents produce one witness who was deprived of their vote because they showed without ID or stayed home because they did not have ID. It is a theory, not supported by evidence.

Registered voters are not removed from the voter rolls because of foreclosure. A person may challenge the residency of a voter, but if the voter produces acceptable evidence of residency in the precinct or election district, they will be permitted to vote without prejudice or further checking. If the voter does not have evidence, but is a registered voter, they will be permitted to vote a provisional ballot and take up to six days to show up at the election office with their evidence. What is evidence? Governments ID, a current bill from a utility or correspondence from a government agency to the claimed residence are acceptable. The challenged voter can display a voter registration card, a social security card, or an employee photo ID. The only legal basis for a challenge is the identity of the voter, not their residency.

Voter-roll purges are not an evil designed by the Republican Party. Changing your address with the Board of Elections is low on most people's priorities when they are moving. If the move takes place within the state, the system will catch up with them when they show at a poll or they will get a prod when they change their drivers' license address or vehicle registration.

The story relates no identified unlawful voters. Not true now. Voters have been identified in several states. Perhaps the AAG in the story was fired for not doing a good job. Government appointees are often fired without any explanation of cause. All of those so fired will plead no fault in their work. All of their superiors will privately find fault with the employee.

The story also mentions something that greatly concerns me. ACORN checks 100% of the voter registrations that their agents collect. Someone other than an election official is looking at those applications before the voter is registered. Who can say that the applications were completed? Who can say that the information reflects the registrant's wishes? What if the registrar advises the registrant, correctly, that they need not affiliate with a party?

Many, many people believe two things about party affiliation. One is that their party primary is always distinct from the primary for other parties. This true in some states, but not in all. The other thing is that they must vote only for candidates of their party, even in the General Election. This last belief ends up in people not voting when they are unsatisfied with party nominee. However, in this case, we have the opportunity for ACORN staffers to review applications and send on the ones they want, with the potential to assign party affiliation. Increases in a party's registrations results in the other party's members staying home. Voter suppression is the technical term for this.

Voter-roll accuracy requires a great deal of coordination between many agencies of governance and the Board of Elections in each county in the country. People who move, people who die, people convicted of felonies, people who served their punishments are all classes of voters whose records should be updated.

Some convicted felons lose the vote. (Are these the people we want choosing our leaders and setting our policies?) The courts are required to notify the Board of Elections of felony convictions. When the felon has served their time and made required restitution, the right to vote should be returned. We ask the voter to notify the Board of Elections to ensure that the voter registers in the correct Election District so that they receive the full right to vote an entire ballot.

Dead people rarely notify their local board. The folks who settle the estate rarely think about notifying the local board. Surely, the Department of Health will take care of that. Until recently, there was no requirement for such notifications. Now, when the notification comes, a typo in an eighty-year-old birth certificate may result in no-match with the voter registration record. The typo issue can work both ways, by the way. Local Boards have received notice of a death with absentee ballots sent in by spouses. Some of the ballots are voted! Can a dead person vote by absentee ballot if the Board of Elections isn't aware of the death? Can a spouse who does not like the other's vote report them dead on the ballot? Can a spouse or caretaker vote an absentee ballot after the death of the voter? Presently, there is no way the local board of elections can know.

(In Maryland, there is a ballot question to amend the state Constitution to permit early voting. If a person votes early, and dies before Election Day, should their vote count? How would we know which vote not to count since every ballot is secret? Can you say, "Early voting is another bad idea."?)