Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The story changes again
Next Post: The reviews are in
Posted in:
* Some Heritage Foundation folks insist in a Sun-Times op-ed that there is rampant vote fraud in the US. Some of their examples…
1. Kentucky
In eastern Kentucky, Ross Harris and Loren Glenn Turner funneled $41,000 to the 2002 county judgeship campaign of Doug Hays for what the defendants claimed was a lawful operation to pay more than 1,200 people $50 each to drive voters to the polls.
But a jury determined that this alleged vote-hauling program was just a disguise for what was in reality a vote-buying scheme. The punishment reflected the severity of the fraud: Hays was sentenced to six months behind bars, and Harris was hit with a $100,000 fine.
2. Mississippi
Not to be outdone, William Greg Eason of Tallahatchie County, Mississippi bribed voters with beer and money to cast fraudulent absentee ballots for a district supervisor candidate in a 2003 run-off election. A jury found him guilty, and he was sentenced to two years in prison. […]
5. Iowa
Martia Yvonne Phillips and eight others in Iowa pleaded guilty to voting in the 2008 election despite being convicted felons who had not had their voting rights restored. She was subsequently sentenced to five years in prison, a sentence that was suspended to two years’ probation.
They provide a few other similar examples.
* Their solution…
That is why it is important for state legislatures to enact commonsense legislation designed to combat voter fraud before it can distort an electoral result. Voter ID laws — which many liberals love to criticize, but which a majority of Americans across ideological lines support — are an answer to many types of voter fraud, including fraudulent use of absentee ballots.
But other measures are also needed, such as requiring proof of citizenship to register and verification of the accuracy of voter registration information.
I don’t know how the vote-buying cases listed above would’ve been prevented by any of these so-called reforms.
The absentee fraud in the Mississippi case, for instance, was about how duly registered voters were told to lie about being out of town on election day and then were given a few beers for their troubles. An ID is gonna prevent that? C’mon, man.
And are governments supposed to do a criminal background check before issuing all voter ID cards? Any idea what that could cost?
Plus, they’ve documented less than 250 cases going back 15 years. And most of those cases had zero to do with their proposed reforms.
Back to the spinning wheel, kids.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 3:51 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The story changes again
Next Post: The reviews are in
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Solutions without real problems. the fraud committed is in preventing people from voting. Other countries make it easier to vote, we make it harder. kind of makes one think that we’re back to the days when proof of property ownership was a requirement to vote.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:01 pm
“And are governments supposed to do a criminal background check before issuing all voter ID cards? Any idea what that could cost?”
A bundle. And have fun asking for appropriations — even in the best of times, much less today’s atmosphere — to pay for the necessary upgrades to handle the enormous database requirements.
Comment by Nick Name Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:05 pm
= don’t know how the vote-buying cases listed above would’ve been prevented by any of these so-called reforms. =
They wouldn’t.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:06 pm
Tales of vote-buying on the east side of Springfield have circulated for years. Are they true? Don’t know.
Comment by Keyser Soze Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:06 pm
It’s the same old, tired, “massive voter fraud” song & dance. Less than 250 cases in 15 years…are you kidding? That’s the size/scope of the problem these “reforms” are suppose to solve. So called “common sense voter ID laws” do one thing- suppress voting in vulnerable groups.
Comment by Former Hoosier Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:07 pm
===Are they true? Don’t know. ===
That’s a law enforcement issue, not a voter ID card issue.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:07 pm
I mean, they would have needed IDs to get the beers, right?
Comment by Juice Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:08 pm
Maybe I missed it but did any of those cases involve someone casting a vote on behalf of someone other than themselves?
Comment by Concerned Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:12 pm
Voting shouldn’t be based on owning and carrying state issued ID cards. Plus, have proponents never heard of fake IDs?
I am sure fraud happens. Can you name a system where it does not? Has fraud ever been so rampant in modern history that it resulted in another candidate winning?
Move on.
Comment by Dirty Red Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:14 pm
In Brazil you are breaking the law by not voting. Voting day is on a Saturday so everyone shows up, and an ID is required. But the ID is federal and provided to citizens at no cost.
Requiring voters to have a photo ID is requiring some voters to pay for something they do not have. It immediately eliminates them from the election which I guess is the point.
If these think tanks and legislators want Voter ID Laws then they should make a free, federal ID part of that law. That would probably be low billions of dollars to fix a problem that is de minimis.
Comment by Chicago PR Guy Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:19 pm
~~~Has fraud ever been so rampant in modern history that it resulted in another candidate winning?~~~
Easy: Bush 2000 (via SCOTUS)
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:20 pm
Isn’t the Heritage Foundation a right wing conservative “think tank” (note their reference to liberals)? Their “reforms” sound like a backdoor way to restrict voting by the kind of voters they don’t like.
Comment by Streator Curmudgeon Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:21 pm
You Say Voter ID Laws; I Saw Voter Disenfranchisement.
Whatever works for you…
Comment by Dee Lay Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:23 pm
Requiring an ID that isn’t free to obtain and that doesn’t cause undue hardship to get it — yes, there are 118 Secretary of State offices in Illinois, but none are open Sundays, and only a few are open later than 5, and those only once a week — is tantamount to a poll tax.
Comment by thunderspirit Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:26 pm
The Heritage Foundation has been consistent in its voter suppression efforts for more than 30 years. Phantom voter fraud is just the beard this time around.
It’s a disgrace.
You can use the google to find film of Heritage co-founder Paul Weyrich saying this in 1980, at a “Religious Roundtable”:
“So many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome. Good government. They want everybody to vote. I don’t want everybody to vote…… As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:35 pm
The easiest and cheapest way to prevent voter fraud is for qualified voters to take the time to learn the issues and candidates’ positions and then vote. Any voter fraud would be diluted to a meaningless percentage. And as an additional benefit, high voter turnouts would make any fraud more apparent.
Comment by Cook County Commoner Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:40 pm
A bad solution in search of a unbelievably minimal problem. But hey, those folks over at Heritage have to justify their existence like everyone else in the working world.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:41 pm
-they’ve documented less than 250 cases going back 15 years-
How many millions of votes have been cast in all of the elections held in 15 years time? And only around 250 cases of voting fraud?
Time to move on to more important issues…next!
Comment by Bulldog58 Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:43 pm
If they are truly worried about vote buying fraud and absentee fraud, Heritage would focus on solutions for those two problems—neither of which an ID solves.
It’s like saying see all these people robbing banks? Yeah, we are going to crack down on littering.
Comment by ArchPundit Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:50 pm
Bulldog, the issue isn’t vote fraud.It’s voter suppression.
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:50 pm
requiring voters to sign their name, and showing that their signature matches the one on file, IS a form of voter ID. It’s worked for over 200 years, and doesn’t discriminate against the rich or poor.
Comment by Capitol View Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:54 pm
In all five examples given in the op-ed, it looks like the perpetrators were caught and punished — without the benefit of voter IDs. Did the writers of the piece not notice that?
Comment by Nick Name Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:55 pm
Word, I understand that their end game is suppressing voting rights…if they want to use voter fraud as an argument I’m more than happy to use their own argument and numbers against them.
Comment by Bulldog58 Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 4:57 pm
“Plus, they’ve documented less than 250 cases going back 15 years. And most of those cases had zero to do with their proposed reforms.”
To be fair, the Heritage Foundation didn’t include the serial vote fraudster, Ann Coulter in their count so there may be more!
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 5:03 pm
Hey Capitol View - It worked like a charm expect for periods in history when Black voters in the South were asked to sign their names on wax paper. Dig a little deeper before you make such a sweeping generalization.
Comment by And I Approved This Message Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 5:10 pm
We DO require ID in Illinois–we do it on the front end, when a person registers to vote (showing ID proof or matching the SoS file). I won’t claim there is never a bad vote–but a bogus vote due to impersonation has got to be reeeeeally rare.
Comment by Mike Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 5:12 pm
Only a small amount of voters commit fraud. We find that there is not a need to scrutinize voters to insure they are eligible to vote in our elections by not being prohibited by law because it would be considered attempting to suppress the voting rights of certain segments of society.
Very few firearm owners will use a firearm in a crime. We find it okay to scrutinize people, have them pay for special licenses, produce ID’s, and to ensure they are eligible to own a firearm by being a citizen and not otherwise prohibited by law and it is not considered suppressing the same segments of society from practicing a right.
All of our Rights should be treated the same, no exceptions.
I don’t think there is a problem that Voter ID will solve, but I do believe in consistency.
Comment by FormerParatrooper Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 5:16 pm
Read it in a book (the name of which escapes me) decades ago that Thomas Jefferson stood outside the polls offering little brown jugs of bourbon in exchange for a vote for him. Voter ID laws wouldn’t have prevented that, either.
Comment by Cheswick Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 5:30 pm
“enact commonsense legislation…which a majority of Americans across ideological lines support.” Yeah, right after America sees some gun control. Do you think the right would support that “commonsense legislation?”
Comment by World Traveler Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 6:11 pm
There was a NPR story a couple of weeks ago about a FBI office in southern Texas set up specifically for voter fraud. This isn’t particularly newsworthy or interesting.
I think for the most part, elections are open and honest. As far as voter ID is concerned, when ever I try to present my driver’s license and voter registration card at the polls, the poll judges wave them off and don’t want to see them.
In my polling place, the poll judges compare the signatures.
Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 7:14 pm
What are the arguments against having Voter ID laws again?
Why isn’t it like so many other instances where a cop or other government official or even private actors (building security staff or airline check in for example) request that I present a government issued ID to verify that I am who I say I am.
Comment by Rondo Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 7:23 pm
– What are the arguments against Voter ID laws again?–
Rondo, you obviously haven’t read a word of the original post, the comments, or anything else on the subject.
So you really can’t be asking for the arguments “again,” as you’ve made no effort to find out what they are in the first place.
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 7:41 pm
=== You can use the google to find film of Heritage co-founder Paul Weyrich saying this in 1980, at a “Religious Roundtable”: ===
Google video showing someone doing something you consider despicable that is ignored by others. Nothing new here.
If there is no voter fraud going on then requiring ID won’t have any effect on elections. The vast vast majority of folks who vote already have the ID. Make it possible to acquire an ID, that can be used for so many other things, free of charge for the vanishingly small number of folks who don’t have any ID.
Where is the downside to this?
Comment by dupage dan Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 8:37 pm
=Where is the downside to this?=
The downside is that you are enacting a law to solve a problem that empirical data says doesn’t even exist. This suggests that this isn’t about voter fraud at all. It’s about voter suppression. Put another way the only reason for requiring an ID to vote is to prevent those without an ID from voting.
Comment by pundent Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 8:45 pm
–If there is no voter fraud going on, requiring an ID won’t have any effect on elections.–
That statement makes sense to you?
The downside is voter suppression, which has been revealed as the motivation in state after state for the “solution to no problem” from the get-go.
I’m surprised as such a rock-ribbed conservative sort like yourself is eager for expensive programs with no real good purpose.
Because IDs required to vote will have to be free, or it’s a poll tax.
Feel free to read up on the subject. There’s lots of material. It’s quite simple to find the answers to your questions.
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 22, 15 @ 9:56 pm
The thing that amazes me is that the response when proponents of this are pressed is, in essence, there is no proof because the fraudsters are so good at hiding it. but, make no mistake, it’s out there, and it’s worse than we think. it’s ridiculous. this is an issue promoted by people who don’t understand why their ultra-conservative views aren’t mainstream.
Comment by TS Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 7:28 am
Fraud is only useful when elections are competitive. With few competitive elections, there is little need for voter fraud.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 7:58 am
Adults need an ID to function in their everyday lives. You can’t do anything without one. You cannot drive a car, pick up a prescription, open a bank account, rent a hotel room or apartment, buy a house, buy a car, buy certain over the counter medication. You can’t apply to SNAP or Social Security benefits, Medicare, or Medicaid. So we can require the poor to have an idea to receive benefits and assistance, but not to vote?
Last year after the passage of a Voter ID law in North Carolina, the organizers of a protest distributed a flyer that instructed their potential protesters to bring a photo ID and keep it on them at all times. You can’t make stuff like that up.
At least in my view, saying that old people and poor people are so incapable of caring for themselves that they can’t get a government issued photo ID is a far greater insult than asking them to show their ID before they vote. Unless, of course, you share the same indignation for them having to show an ID for any of the reasons above.
When the Democratic Party in Indiana challenged the states voter ID law there, they presented the argument that perhaps 1 in 10 eligible voters did not have a form of ID. District Court Judge Sarah Evans Barker called this claim ‘incredible’ and ‘totally unreliable,’ and noted that a quick look at Indiana’s driver license records suggests the number is probably closer to 1 percent. The Democratic Party of course could not muster even a single person who had been preventes from voting because of the law. Not one.
Asking a person to show their ID may not prevent any voter fraud, but it is completely benign and totally sensible.
Comment by Jay Gatsby Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 8:50 am
thunderspirit - has Jesse White been imposing a poll tax for the last 16 years he’s been in office? Gatsby is right; you can’t even get into state offices without an ID.
Comment by Put the fun in unfunded Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 9:23 am
@jay:
The 250 cases of voter fraud, over 15 yrars, have all
Been committed by the White Community!
Not only should these perpetrators have to show also they should submit a DNA sample and Retina scan, at their own expense to confirm their identity.
This crime of 250 cases of voter fraud out of millions and millions of votes cast is a serious threat to our democracy.
Hard to believe we lock up Pot Smokers but not Voter Fraud!
Comment by Jack Stephens Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 9:33 am