March 31, 2011

Politics on Voter-ID

Justin Katz

Two interesting points are buried within Randal Edgar and Philip Marcelo's article on voter-ID legislation currently under consideration in the Rhode Island House. The first is the degree to which Rhode Island ACLU Executive Director Steven Brown's inane argument implies ulterior, political motives:

"When we have no charges filed, when we have no convictions filed against anybody for this very serious felony, one just has to wonder how rampant can this really be," he said, questioning an assertion made by a representative from the secretary of state's office at the hearing that voter fraud in which a person impersonates another is "rampant."

Brown noted that the last conviction for voter fraud in the state dealt with persons voting from a place other than his or her permanent residence — not impersonating someone else.

If poll workers aren't required, or allowed, to check identification, how are they supposed to catch impersonators? Even if the criminal is so inept as to be impersonating somebody who is not dead or known not to be voting, when the impersonatee comes to vote, there would be no way to track the impersonator.

The second point has to do with the big deal that the journalists make about the broad support within the House for a voter-ID law:

It's not every day that House Speaker Gordon D. Fox adds his name to a bill with Republican Joseph A. Trillo or even fellow Democrat Jon D. Brien.

But Fox and House Majority Whip J. Patrick O'Neill, along with Brien, Trillo and Republican Tea Party member Doreen Costa, have joined together to support a bill that would require voters to show photo identification at the polls.

Of course, we learn farther along:

[Senator Harold] Metts' bill was held for further study last week by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

So the Senate killed the issue, leaving House members free to posture and gain political talking points on it, even if they ultimately wouldn't wish for it to make it to the governor's desk.

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

The real reason why there have been no cases brought forward dealing with this critical issue is the simple fact that even though there have been complaints our Board of Elections refuses to act. They are in denial. A State Representative just recently testified that herself and her daughter were challenged when they went to the polls because someone had already voted using their names. When our Secretary of State recently held his Voter Info sessions a Providence City Councilman testified that he witnessed Illegal Aliens voting in his district and when questioned by a State Rep on the panel as to why he didn't bring it to someone's attention the Councilman stated "because you never do anything about it". Testimony was also given several years ago directly to the Board of Elections by three recently naturalized U S Citizens claiming voter registration abuse and Illegal Alien voting and this to seems to have fallen on deaf ears. These abuses are nothing more than a case of political correctness and pandering on the part of OUR Board of Elections. What else is new?

Posted by: leprechaun at March 31, 2011 10:10 AM

Maybe what we really need is a James Keefe-like video to be made during our next election. Show how easy it is and mask the identities of the people actually committing the fraud.

It's very easy.

First, get a voter history list from each town's board of canvassers. Because the law is stupid and many boards are lazy, people stay on the voter lists for years after they're dead, moved out of town, or simply haven't voted in even the last two presidential elections or any in between. If you have the voter history and see people like that, want to bet that they are not going to be there to vote in the next primary? Primaries are swung in some towns by less than 100 votes. In a town like Cumberland which has 17 precincts, this could be very damaging in a campaign with a couple dedicated people.

So now that you have the names of people that you are sure will not be voting, you show up in the long line at 7 am, give the name of the person, cast your vote. Go to another precinct with another name. Cast your vote. Go to another precinct with another name, cast your vote. Continue at each precinct.

Now the people working the polls do stay there all day, but if you stick to the busiest times, when they can get really flustered, you can show up again at the same precincts later in the day wearing a different shirt, hat, glasses, etc with yet another name and vote.

So let's say you had even 5 people in on it at every precinct in a town like Cumberland. Right there is 85 illegal votes. That's very often more than enough to completely swing a primary, or sometimes even a general election for a local seat.

What if the poll worker does doubt your identity? What are they really going to do? It's not legal to ask for id, can they really refuse to let you vote? They're often 80 year old retirees who just want to keep up the chit-chat and move the day along.

Think this doesn't happen?

Vote early, vote often.

Posted by: Patrick at March 31, 2011 11:13 AM

Your mistake Patrick is that you should have done it and sold the video for some cash. Maybe O'Keefe would have bought it and you could have sold him the rights to put his name on it. You would have killed two birds with one stone, exposure and income.

Posted by: Max Diesel at March 31, 2011 3:21 PM

Max, we aren't done with elections and it seems this bill isn't getting passed. Some towns will be having elections this year and I think there are some big ones next year.

Anyone wanna help?

Posted by: Patrick at March 31, 2011 3:25 PM

I've seen the real situation-in 1982 we prosecuted voter fraud utilizing illegal aliens in Chicago.The trouble is that some activist like Jerzyk or Asen grabs a critical position in state or city government and does everything they were doing as Brown University radicaal squirts to sabotage any attempt to make sure only US citizens get to vote.
Brown is a cancer in the bone marrow of this state-worse by far than the aforementioned brewpub revolutionaries because he HATES this country.Maybe because he is a subhuman cockroach.
The other two are legends in their own minds.Trouble is,people like Fox and Taveras(whom I disagree with but do not dislike) enable them.WHY?
If Brown ever needs a tranfusion,I'll volunteer to donate a pint of piss.

Posted by: joe bernstein at March 31, 2011 5:44 PM

Hey leprechaun-and anyone else-
If you know the names of these people post them here. Either illegal aliens or people who had their vote stolen or dead people who voted.

Posted by: Tommy Cranston at March 31, 2011 7:56 PM reports that a "study" indicates that 5,000 non-citizens voted in a recent Colorado election.

If you can be required to show your driver's license to buy cigarettes, why not proof of citizenship to vote?(Sorry, I forgot that we don't "buy votes" in this country) How about showing your birth certificate to be president? To be fair, if I were not prepared for the question, I would have difficulty doing it. Birth certificates are not "photo ID's".

Posted by: Warrington Faust at March 31, 2011 10:30 PM

Warrington-and anyone else who's interested-there is and always has been an active market in real birth certificates-illegal aliens and others who want to avoid being identified are the purchasers.
This is aside from counterfeit(less prevalent today due to better security printing)and stolen blanks,which are a real danger.
Here's the deal-Federal law specifies only US citizens can vote-apparently backwaters like RI and sanctuary centers like NYC and LA don't feel the necessity of following Federal law.Honest elections are the foundation of good government,and elections tainted by voters who aren't entitled to be voters destroys the validity of many elections in this country.
Just remember:nin-citizens can vote in the elections held in their own countries,so why the hell should they get to double dip?
The US Supreme Court in Afroyim vs.Rusk decided that US citizens could vote in foreign elections as well as US elections,but never has any Federal court allowed voting by non-citizens in this country.

Posted by: joe bernstein at April 1, 2011 6:20 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Important note: The text "http:" cannot appear anywhere in your comment.