Stop the dead from voting

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

To secure our state elections and the integrity of every ballot, South Carolina lawmakers passed a Voter ID law last year supported by more than [half] of all citizens.

House Speaker Bobby Harrell said, “Lacking a photo ID requirement makes it difficult, if not impossible, to prove or even recognize some types of potential voter fraud. Many opportunities where fraud could occur would easily be prevented with Voter ID, or at a minimum, make it very difficult to cast a ballot from beyond the grave.”

A House Judiciary Sub-committee hearing was held January 11 on questionable data reported by the state Election Commission on the number of SC voters currently lacking photo IDs. The revelation of a SLED investigation into hundreds of reported cases where votes were cast by individuals after the date of their deaths raised serious questions of possible voter fraud.

• 37,295 people listed by the Election Commission as needing photo IDs are deceased.

• Of those, 957 were found to have voted AFTER the recorded date of their deaths, according to the SC DMV.

• “Dead people voting – this reeks of voter fraud tales usually reserved for Chicago political folklore, not South Carolina,” Speaker Harrell said.

A SC DMV review of the 240,000 voters (<9% of all registered SC voters) the Election Commission claimed did not have photo IDs, showed the real number could be less than 28,000:

• 37,295 are deceased.

• 20,508 did in fact currently possess the necessary photo identification.

• 154,258 individuals had previously been issued SC photo IDs but were canceled either because they had declared residency in another state or the ID had expired.

• Additionally – 334 voters were registered at the same address. One voter was listed as being 130 years old, 25 voters were registered at a Correctional Center.

“Yesterday’s breaking news of a SLED investigation into hundreds of reported cases where dead people voted raises some very serious concerns of potential voter fraud that must be addressed. It also validates our hard-fought efforts to secure our state elections by passing a Voter ID law,” Harrell commented. “The one positive thing this disturbing new information of possible fraud does, is it makes our already strong challenge of the Justice Department’s denial even stronger.”

SC’s Voter ID Law & Other Voter ID Facts:

• Voter ID was upheld as Constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

• Voter ID was recently precleared by the Department of Justice in another Southern state with voter identification requirements more strict than SC’s law.

• Voter ID laws have been adopted in both Republican and Democrat led states.

• Voter ID brings needed security to election process and integrity to every ballot.

• Voter ID employs commonly used, everyday photo identification methods also necessary to do things like: cash a check, board a plane, or buy cold medicine

• SC law made the necessary photo IDs available to citizens free of charge.

• Voters lacking the necessary identification on election day can still cast a ballot after signing an affidavit affirming their identity.

• Federal law ID requirements to obtain entitlements (like Medicaid) are stricter than SC’s Voter ID law.

Given all these facts supporting the case for a Voter ID law in South Carolina, many were surprised when the DOJ denied preclearance for our state’s new law. Further analysis has shown that the DOJ based their rejection on what has been shown to be severely flawed data and is a leading reason why strong support is being given to our state’s appeal of this decision.

Greg Foster

Deputy Chief of Staff

& Director of Communications Office of the Speaker

South Carolina House of Representatives (803) 734-3125

gregfoster@schouse.gov <mailto: gregfoster@schouse.gov>

twitter.com/gregfoster_ sc

http://www.thecolumbiastar.com/news/2012-01-20/Opinion%7CCrime/Stop_the_dead_from_voting.html

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

ACORN Group Implicated in Massive Voter Registration Fraud

With the 2012 elections just months away, the ACORN-connected group Project Vote (and Obama campaign ally) is redoubling its efforts to undermine the integrity of the 2012 elections – and they are evidently doing it with the participation of the Obama White House and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

In January, Judicial Watch obtained additional documents about meetings held between Estelle Rogers, Director of Advocacy for the ACORN organization Project Vote, and officials from the Obama White House and the DOJ.

Judicial Watch is investigating the extent to which Project Vote, which once employed Barack Obama, has been working with the Obama administration to use voter registration laws to register greater numbers of low-income voters, widely considered to be an important voting demographic for the Obama presidential campaign.

Judicial Watch was already well aware that the DOJ was heavily involved in this scheme based on documents·previously obtained, but the latest batch of records implicates the Obama White House directly!

According to the records, obtained by Judicial Watch in response to a FOIA lawsuit filed on August 19, 2011:

On April 27, 2009, Estelle Rogers·wrote to Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sam Hirsh regarding an upcoming meeting on April 30, 2009. In addition to Rogers and Hirsh, other attendees included: Nicole Kovite, Director of Public Agency Project for Project Vote; Spencer Overton, Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Policy; and two officials from the Obama White House: Celia Muñoz, then-Director of Intergovernmental Affairs and recently promoted to Director of the Domestic Policy Council; and Tino Cuellar, Special Assistant to the President for Justice and Regulatory Policy. (Muñoz, you will recall, is the former senior vice-president of the National Council of La Raza who has been·funneling tax dollars to radical Mexican separatists ever since she joined the Obama White House.)

In her email, Rogers referenced documents she forwarded in preparation for the upcoming meeting on the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), to which Hirsch replies that he looked forward to “reading these materials” and to “seeing everyone on Thursday.”

On February 23, 2011, Rogers·wrote to Associate Deputy Attorney General Robert Weiner, asking him to “make some headway with Attorney General [Eric] Holder in enforcing Section 7 of the NVRA.” The email notes that the DOJ had not yet filed any Section 7 lawsuits, which Rogers dubbed “deeply disappointing.” The first such DOJ lawsuit (against Rhode Island) was filed on March 18, 2011, less than one month later. Of particular note, is Rogers’ comment that “We have received oral assurances from [Assistant Attorney General Thomas] Perez on several occasions that enforcement action was imminent,” suggesting that Rogers was privy to internal discussions inside the DOJ regarding pending legal action.

On March 29, 2011, Rogers·wrote to Associate Attorney General [Thomas] Perrelli, urging him to review and “make improvements” to a document she was sending following another meeting held on March 17, 2011, between Project Vote and the DOJ on Section 7 compliance with the NRVA. Accompanying the document was a previous letter she had sent to the Civil Rights Division plus “additional comments on the Q and A.”

These documents raise fundamental questions about the politicization of the DOJ under Eric Holder and demonstrate that the ACORN-connected Project Vote is throwing its weight around the DOJ and driving the agency’s voting rights agenda.

And, evidently the Obama White House is now directly implicated in this growing scandal. It is now clear that Project Vote and the Obama/Holder DOJ are conspiring to file DOJ lawsuits to help re-elect Barack Obama. This collusion between Project Vote and the Obama administration is a significant threat to the integrity of the 2012 elections.

To have Project Vote involved in DOJ voting rights enforcement is like having the Mafia run the FBI! And Estelle Rogers is one of Project Vote’s key “bosses.”

As Director of Advocacy for Project Vote, Estelle Rogers ‒ a former attorney for ACORN, which was besieged with charges of corruption before declaring bankruptcy in November 2010 ‒ is a primary contact person on policy matters at Project Vote at both the state and federal levels and has been actively involved in voter registration issues. Using the threat of a lawsuit under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), Project Vote has aggressively sought to manipulate voter registration laws in various states in an effort to increase the registration of people receiving public assistance.

http://www.rightsidenews.com/2012012115433/us/politics-and-economics/acorn-group-implicated-in-massive-voter-registration-fraud.html

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Texas sues for federal approval of voter ID law

Texas' attorney general announced Monday that the state has sued in federal court for permission to enforce its controversial voter identification law.

"The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that voter identification laws are constitutional," Atty. Gen. Greg Abbott said in a statement released to The Times. "Texas should be allowed the same authority other states have to protect the integrity of elections. To fast-track that authority, Texas is taking legal action in a D.C. court seeking approval of its voter identification law."

Under the law passed in Texas last year, voters must show government-issued photo identification in order to cast their ballots at polling places. Texans who do not already have a driver's license, passport, military identification card or other identification can apply to the Texas Department of Public Safety for a free, state-issued voter identification card.

Members of the Texas Legislature say the voter identification law is meant to deter and detect election fraud. But U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. has warned that such laws could disenfranchise minority voters, as opponents have argued in Texas and other states.

In a decision upholding a similar voter identification law in Indiana, the U.S. Supreme Court found that states have an "interest in deterring and detecting voter fraud," which Abbott's office said Monday is its focus.

Federal prosecutors have secured election-fraud convictions against more than a hundred defendants since 2002, according to the Department of Justice. During the same period, Abbott's office has prosecuted nearly 50 people for violating the Texas Election Code. Those convictions include a woman who submitted her dead mother's ballot, an activist who cast ballots for elderly voters and a city council member who registered ineligible foreign citizens to vote for her, according to Monday's statement.

Although Indiana and other states have enforced their voter identification laws, Texas has had to wait because the federal Voting Rights Act prohibits changes to Texas election laws until they are granted "preclearance" by either the Department of Justice or the federal courts. The Texas secretary of state's office sought preclearance from the Justice Department last July, but federal officials were still reviewing the case this week.

More than a dozen states have passed voter identification laws, including a handful last year: Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Wisconsin. The laws have already taken effect in Kansas, Tennessee and Wisconsin.

In December, Justice Department officials refused to preclear South Carolina's voter identification law, citing the effect on minority voters.

Abbott says he still plans to pursue approval of the voter ID law with the Justice Department and, if it's granted, plans to drop the federal suit.

"The dual track approach is intended to facilitate the fastest possible resolution so that Texas can implement the new law as soon as possible," Abbott's office said in Monday's statement.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/2012/01/texas-sues-voter-id-law.html

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

You notice how none of the usual lib trolls on here have replied to your thread? I'm thinking that's because there is no way to defend going after a state that wants to require ID for voters. I'm all for that law 100%. The Daley for mayor elections in Chicago are proof enough about dead people voting.

Dead people and illegals...

Edited January 23, 2012 by Why_Me

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It's fun peddling that myth, isn't it?

[Boiler 43,527]

Vote early, vote often!

[Pooky 3,353]

THE ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE IS HERE!!!

And apparently, they vote Democrat

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

How many dead people were voting before this new law ?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

How many dead people were voting before this new law ?

In South Carolina:

• 37,295 people listed by the Election Commission as needing photo IDs are deceased.

• Of those, 957 were found to have voted AFTER the recorded date of their deaths, according to the SC DMV.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

In South Carolina:

Oh I misread it. I thought this is how many dead people they caught after passing the law.

[Robby999 1,024]

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In South Carolina:

957 / 2,495,000 = 0.038% - assuming that these 957 alleged dead voters voted in a single election.

250,000 / 2,495,000 = 10.02% - number of legitimate voters adversely impacted by legislation

January 12, 2012, 3:09 pm

Dead Voters in South Carolina? Maybe. Maybe Not.

By ANDREW ROSENTHAL

Some readers have been calling my attention to a new report stating that the Department of Motor Vehicles in South Carolina found over 900 votes recorded in “recent elections” from dead people. These comments are intended, sometimes in a well-meaning way and sometimes not so well meaning, to show me that the things I have written about voter fraud and voter ID laws are wrong.

I have often said that there is no problem with voter fraud in this country. But Republicans pretend there is, and use this fantasy menace to disenfranchise certain groups, especially the elderly, minority voters and young people—i.e. Democrats—by imposing unnecessary and burdensome ID requirements to cast a ballot.

Let me be clear: I’m not saying that there have never been and never will be any case of voter fraud in American politics. But these cases do not remotely approach a scale that would justify efforts to systematically block access to the polls by many, many more voters.

The shocking news from the cemeteries of South Carolina doesn’t change my mind about that.

This is the story: South Carolina passed a voter ID law in 2011. The Justice Department has blocked implementation of that law, saying it will create an unconstitutional impediment to voting by certain groups.

That’s true, of course, but South Carolina officials wanted to fight the ruling, which is their right. So they set out to assemble data to bolster their case. One question was whether a significant number of eligible voters doesn’t have the government-issued photo ID required by the law. A comparison between voter rolls and state-issued drivers licenses or IDs revealed that nearly 250,000 people fell into that category. That number troubled some supporters of the ID law.

Kevin Schwedo, director of the Department of Motor Vehicles, looked at the data and said he found 37,295 cases in which the person was listed as dead. Of that number, he said, 957 voted in “recent elections.”

If 957 people went around pretending to be a dead person in order to cast a ballot, that’s fraud. But it’s a tiny problem–such a minute percentage of the state’s 2,495,000 registered voters that it’s not even worth calculating. It’s not in the same space-time-continuum as the potential disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of voters. And yes I know there was an 8 vote margin in the Iowa caucuses.

But we don’t know enough about Mr. Schwedo’s statement to even reach that conclusion. Mr. Schwedo testified in the state legislature the other day that he did not know how long a period the data covered – just that it was “recent elections.” So it could have been 957 people in the last election, or the last 10 elections.

And, to compound the problem, no one even knows if those people are actually dead, or if they’re just listed as dead in state records, which everyone seems to admit are in a terrible state. The solution here is better record keeping and regular purging of voter rolls.

Let me say it again: We don’t need to worry about zombie voters. We need to worry about government efforts to block participation in elections by members of minority groups. That problem has not gone away.

[Pooky 3,353]

957 / 2,495,000 = 0.038% - assuming that these 957 alleged dead voters voted in a single election.

250,000 / 2,495,000 = 10.02% - number of legitimate voters adversely impacted by legislation

To most people, 1 fraudulent vote is 1 too many

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Oh I misread it. I thought this is how many dead people they caught after passing the law.

Funny thing is, they can still vote under these new voter ID laws. Just not in person on election day.

To most people, 1 fraudulent vote is 1 too many

To many, one disenfranchised voter is one too many. Of those, we have potentially a quarter million. Not a tough call.