"Dead people are less likely to vote if they have to show some ID," he said. "It becomes a discriminatory obstacle against pets, the deceased, and deceased pets."
Posted on 06/20/2002 3:02:06 AM PDT by kattracks
Washington (CNSNews.com) - Experts on election reform and voting fraud overwhelmingly agree that election fraud is a problem that needs to be corrected immediately. That was the message at a debate on election reform held at the Cato Institute Wednesday.
Sen. Christopher Bond (R-Mo.) said the election reform bill introduced by Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), which is currently sitting in the Senate, is urgently necessary.
Dodd's bill, the Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act of 2001, would set aside $3.5 billion in funding to establish a nationwide standard for voting systems. The bill was introduced in light of the 2000 presidential election.
"We had our eyes opened a great deal" by the 2000 elections, Bond said. "We need a bill to make it easier to vote and tougher to cheat."
Bond went on to explain that voting irregularities took place all over the country and not just in Florida. He offered the example of Missouri Democrats, who filed a motion, which was later granted, to keep polls open in the city of St. Louis on election night.
The fraud didn't stop there.
According to Bond, individuals were registered to vote from empty lots, some residences had as many as eight voters registered from the same location, dead people were recorded to have voted in the election and a dog named Ritzy was allowed to vote simply because someone signed and returned her mail-in voter registration card.
St. Louis became "the laughing stock of the nation because of vote fraud," Bond said.
He said individuals should be forced to show some sort of identification to prove that they are alive, an adult and in the jurisdiction of the election. Bond also called for prosecutions in the case of fraudulent voting.
"We believe prosecution of fraudulent voting is very, very important," he said.
Hilary Shelton, the director of the NAACP chapter in Washington, D.C., agreed that election reform was long overdue and needed immediately.
"Our patience has run thin," Shelton said. "We need to pass competent election reform legislation."
However, he said he disagrees with several aspects of the Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act. Shelton said calls for identification could, in fact, disenfranchise more African-American voters.
"The NAACP feels strongly that ID could be used in a racially discriminating way," he said.
Shelton explained that in a number of cases Caucasians were allowed to continue with the voting process without identification while African-Americans were forced to return home to produce ID.
"Minorities are less likely to vote if they have to show ID," he said. "It becomes more of a hurdle and obstacle."
Shelton added that more than 6 million voters were disenfranchised in the 2000 elections and minorities are having their right to vote robbed.
"We need to make sure this kind of embarrassment in the global community never happens again," he said.
John Fund, columnist for the Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com, agrees that something needs to be done to better ensure people's right to vote. His suggestion, however, was to take a long look at early voting and absentee voting.
Fund said that the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 was a completely different kind of election than what takes place now, because then, people had to go into a voter's booth and stuff a ballot in the box.
"That is a different kind of election, in kind, than we have now," he said.
Bond stressed that the main objective of any legislation was to make sure that the appropriate people were able to vote, and to make sure that all people who want to vote are given the opportunity.
"We need to make sure that the voting of dogs, dead people and multiple registrations don't continue," he said.
E-mail a news tip to Matt Pyeatt.
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
My analysis shows that there was approximately 7% voter fraud in the 2000 Presidential election. That turned a landslide for Bush into one of the closest elections. Some staff in the Bush campaign estimated it at nearly 10%. I'm sure the Gore staff was shocked when they didn't win. With a no holds barred fraud campaign, I'm sure they thought it was in the bag. What is also a worry, it that Zogby knew of the fraud effort. Lauded for his nearly right on prediction, his assumptions that helped him arrive at that conclusion were all grossly wrong. The most accurate poll (running 3 day) had Bush ahead by 7% in the last days.
What we need is a high quality poll the day after the election that asked how they actually voted. That will help expose the level of vote fraud.
By requiring an ID would level the field. Both caucasians and african-americans would be turned away if they are without one.
The Dems just don't want to disenfranchise non-citizen voters.
ROTFL! That's the lamest excuse I've ever heard. Tell us the truth, OK?
How?!? This is a lot of Bull! Life's full of obstacles. Deal with it!
Suuuure. Maybe you can find one of them to testify to that effect under oath, right after you find one of those disenfranchised Florida voters.
"Dead people are less likely to vote if they have to show some ID," he said. "It becomes a discriminatory obstacle against pets, the deceased, and deceased pets."
Lets just make up some more bullsh!t, why don't we.
Actually, my vote was canceled by students at Bethune-Cookman University who voted multiple times and by New York residents voting in my State. I guess I am one of the six million disenfranchised voters.
You brought up an issue that many forget when talking about the 2000 election. Polls showed Bush with quite a wide lead up until election day, then all of a sudden, we get a virtual tie. 7% to 10% vote fraud would be the only explanation.
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.