Posted on 09/21/2017 10:32:09 AM PDT by jazusamo
If you have no idea what happened at the second meeting of President Donald Trump’s Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in New Hampshire on Sept. 12, I’m not surprised.
Though a horde of reporters attended the meeting, almost all of the media stories that emerged from it simply repeated the progressive left’s mantra that the commission is a “sham.”
Almost no one covered the substantive and very concerning testimony of 10 expert witnesses on the problems that exist in our voter registration and election system.
The witnesses included academics, election lawyers, state election officials, data analysts, software experts, and computer scientists.
The existing and potential problems they exposed would give any American with any common sense and any concern for our democratic process cause for alarm.
The first panel included Andrew Smith of the University of New Hampshire, Kimball Brace of Election Data Services Inc., and John Lott. They testified about historical election turnout statistics and the effects of election integrity issues on voter confidence.
Lott also testified that his statistical analyses show that contrary to the narrative myth pushed by some, voter ID does not depress voter turnout. In fact, there is some evidence that it may increase turnout because it increases public confidence in elections.
In a second panel, Donald Palmer, the former chief election official in two states—Florida and Virginia— testified about the problems that exist in state voter registration systems.
He made a series of recommendations to improve the accuracy of voter rolls, including working toward “interoperability” of state voter lists so that states “can identify and remove duplicate registration of citizens who are registered to vote in more than one state.”
Robert Popper, a former Justice Department lawyer now with Judicial Watch, testified about the failure of the Justice Department to enforce the provisions of the National Voter Registration Act that require states to maintain the accuracy of their voter lists.
He said there has been a “pervasive failure by state and county officials” to comply with the National Voter Registration Act, and complained about the under-enforcement of state laws against voter fraud.
Ken Block of Simpatico Software Systems gave a stunning report on the comparison that his company did of voter registration and voter history data from 21 states. He discussed how difficult and expensive it was to get voter data from many states—data that is supposed to be freely available to the public.
According to Block, “the variability in access, quality, cost, and data provided impedes the ability to examine voter activity between states.”
Yet using an extremely conservative matching formula that included name, birthdate, and Social Security number, Block found approximately 8,500 voters who voted in two different states in the November 2016 election, including 200 couples who voted illegally together. He estimated that “there would be 40,000 duplicate votes if data from every state were available.”
Of those duplicate voters, 2,200 cast a ballot in Florida—four times George W. Bush’s margin of victory in 2000. His analysis “indicates a high likelihood [of] voter fraud” and that there is “likely much more to be found.”
As a member of the commission, I testified about The Heritage Foundation’s election fraud database. That non-comprehensive database has 1,071 examples of proven incidents of fraud ranging from one illegal vote to hundreds. It includes 938 criminal convictions, 43 civil penalties, and miscellaneous other cases.
Heritage is about to add another 19 cases to the database. This is likely just the tip of the iceberg, since many cases are never prosecuted and there is no central source for information on election fraud.
The commission also heard about a report published by Shawn Jasper, the Republican speaker of the New Hampshire House of Representatives. That report stated that over 6,500 individuals in 2016 used an out-of-state driver’s license to take advantage of New Hampshire’s same-day registration law to register and vote on Election Day.
Despite a law that requires an individual with an out-of-state license to obtain a New Hampshire license within 60 days of establishing residency in the state, only 15.5 percent have done so.
Many have tried to explain this away be saying those voters must all have been college students living in New Hampshire. Perhaps that is true.
But it may also be true that voters from Massachusetts and other surrounding states decided to take advantage of New Hampshire’s law to cross the border and vote in a presidential and Senate race, which were decided by only 3,000 and 1,000 voters, respectively.
Of course, we won’t know the truth of what happened unless we do what should be done, and what the commission’s critics don’t want to be done: investigate these cases.
Finally, the commission heard from three computer experts— Andrew Appel of Princeton University, Ronald Rivest of MIT, and Harri Hursti of Nordic Innovation Labs. Their testimony about the ability of hackers to get into electronic voting equipment and just about every other device that uses the internet (and even those that don’t) was chilling.
As Appel stated, our challenge is to ensure that when voters go to the polls, they can “trust that their votes will be recorded accurately, counted accurately, and aggregated accurately.” He made a series of “technological and organization” recommendations for achieving that objective.
All in all, the Sept. 12 meeting, which was hosted by Bill Gardner, New Hampshire’s longtime Democratic secretary of state, was both informative and comprehensive. But anyone who didn’t attend would never know that based on the skimpy and biased coverage it received in the media.
The hearing is evidence of the good work the commission is already doing in bringing to light the problems we face in ensuring the integrity of our election process.
Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative.
Good report, thank you.
Trump should tweet one vote fraud factoid per day - just to send the MSM into hysterics. :)
Your reasoning that there isn't a significant amount of voter fraud is based on the small number of prosecutions. Never mind that you can't have prosecutions if you don't have enforcement, and you can't have enforcement if you don't have voter ID requirements.
FYI, 17 states don't have a voter ID requirement.
Your comment is naive. Apparently, given the time you spent thinking about it, I find that astonishing.
When you have a sitting president of the United States telling illegal aliens that voting make them citizens, why would they worry?
Interesting.
What do they do if two voters claim to be the same person?
Count both votes?
Re: “Your comment is naive. Apparently, given the time you spent thinking about it, I find that astonishing.”
I've been making the same argument at Free Republic since the Bush-Gore Florida fiasco in 2000.
So, if I understand your analysis, dozens of Republicans run for political office each election knowing in advance that they will lose because of voter fraud, none of them even mention voter fraud during the election, and after they lose the election, none of them attempt to reform the election process, or punish the offenders?
Re: “When you have a sitting president of the United States telling illegal aliens that voting make them citizens, why would they worry?”
Perhaps because the voter card they have to sign to vote says it’s a felony if they are not a citizen?
Registering to vote and falsely claiming to be a citizen is a felony. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence to support the assertion that there is virtually no checking of citizenship status once the registration form is signed.
My state requires that I sign a book every time I vote, and the poll workers verify my signature. Not once have I read anything in that book about a possible felony. It might be there somewhere, but I have never bothered to look.
I doubt anyone else does, whether legally or illegally registered.
My state, Washington, prints the state and federal voting statutes right above my signature, and you sign for every election.
But, you have changed the issue I was responding to.
You said in your earlier post that no voter ID was required.
But, if illegal voters are already registered, they don’t need ID, just a matching signature.
I was responding to the idea that illegal voters pretended to be other registered voters.
Re: “...there is virtually no checking of citizenship status once the registration form is signed.”
That’s a problem that could be easily countered by an energetic state Republican Party.
The fact that no state Republican Party has ever tried to stop voter fraud means we have only ourselves to blame.
Or, it means the voter fraud problem is less serious and less pervasive than many Free Republic comments suggest.
Who says they now? And who will they get to investigate an prosecute even if they suspect? All they can hope for if they complain is ridicule.
now = know
Easily? In Kalifornia? ROFL!
Or having the race card played on them. That terrifies most mainstream Republicans.
Exactly
“none of them even mention voter fraud during the election, and after they lose the election, none of them attempt to reform the election process, or punish the offenders?”
Trump talked about the “rigged” election many times. And he is doing something.
You need to keep in mind that elections are winner-takes-all. In other words, it does not make a difference if a candidate wins by a 2% or 80% margin. So, in close races, a small about of cheating can make a 100% difference in the outcome.
The Democrats are cheaters. They want illegals to vote. They want felons to vote. They want people in the military to NOT vote.
You seem to think that the issue is whether millions of people will knowingly vote illegally. That’s not the main issue.
The main issue is that potentially many offices are being or have been held by a Democrat candidate due to illegal voting. This does not mean that massive numbers of people voted illegally. It means that the Democrats used all means at their disposal to win by cheating. And this often includes manufacturing enough votes to eke out a win.
How? First, they make it impossible to detect when voter fraud is occurring. Second, they use any number of techniques to identify voting identities they can use to manufacture votes.
For example, if they can compile a list of people who have moved out of state and registered to vote in another state, they can intentionally NOT purge them from the voting roles and someone can vote under the names of the absent voters. This can be fairly easily done with early voting by mail. This is just one simple example.
Because there is no paper trail and often no way to even verify the identity of the person voting, there could potentially be millions of illegally cast votes.
In context, a single vote prevented Republicans from filibustering Obamacare. If Al Franken, who was elected fraudulently, had not been there to cast his vote, the legislation would have failed. Because hundreds of felons illegally voted for Franken (or had their identities used to vote for him) we now have Obamacare.
This is just one example of why the issue is very important.
Bttt.
5.56mm
No society can exist without the integrity of the common man.
Our country’s gov’t was formed for a “deeply religious and moral people”. “It is wholly unsuitable for any other” John Addams, paraphrased. As a nation, we are neither right now.
btt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
