The United States of America has taken the side of Dave Davis in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It filed a brief today in the 9th Circuit supporting Mr. Davis and his winning case against the status plebiscite that excludes voters from participation on the basis of race. This is one more sign that a race-based plebiscite will never take place on Guam. Any resolution of the status question must allow all voters to vote, regardless of their race. Defending the constitutional right to equal access to the ballot always has been the moral command of the Constitution. We are grateful and pleased that the United States of America agrees with Mr. Davis that all voters have a right to vote free from racial discrimination on Guam.
The Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity gets to work this week looking at registration and voting processes across the country to see what’s working and what needs improvement.
The commission’s first meeting is Wednesday, July 19.
If by “revamp Motor Voter” they mean keep voter registration rolls free of ineligible people, then yes.
Left-wing “advocates” like Demos that oppose removing ineligible people from voter rolls “worry” that two separate federal requests for information related to states’ voter registration lists signal what they see as an unwelcome return to enforcement of federal laws that require states to proactively maintain accurate voter lists. Such enforcement was nonexistent under the Obama administration.
One request, from the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, asks for states’ publicly available voter registration records. The other, from the DOJ Voting Section, requires states to document procedures they follow to maintain accurate voter lists in compliance with the National Voter Registration Act (aka Motor Voter) and the Help America Vote Act.
Both letters come in response to concerns about voter rolls that are bloated with outdated, inaccurate, and duplicate registrations. Experts estimate there may be millions of people on voter rolls who have died, moved, aren’t citizens, or are otherwise ineligible to vote.
Motor Voter adds to the problem by making it difficult to take ineligible people off the rolls, and easy for some to get on.
“When you’ve got a system that allows people to mark, ‘No, I am not a citizen,’ and still get registered to vote, that system is broken.”
All the usual left-wing voter fraud deniers are losing their minds at the thought of President Trump’s Advisory Commission on Election Integrity promoting clean voter rolls. The horror!
Multiple members of the commission have hands-on experience in maintaining accurate voter rolls, or holding election officials accountable for doing so as required by federal law.
Leftist groups like the ACLU, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, Brennan Center, and the rest of the anti-election integrity collective including left-wing media outlets refer ominously to the process of cleaning voter rolls as “purging” — as if that means anything other than removing people from the rolls who aren’t eligible to be there.
What’s really behind some states’ absurd opposition to requests from the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity for publicly available voter roll data?
States certainly have no valid legal or “privacy” objection to letting the commission have the same data they routinely make available to political campaigns – or to any individual who requests it. Forty-two states, including some like Maryland and Virginia that say they’ll refuse the commission’s request, also regularly share their voter roll data with one or both voter registration crosscheck programs.
Maybe it’s partisan opposition to President Trump. Certainly there’s a lack of interest in deterring voter fraud among those who continue to deny it exists — despite evidence to the contrary. Could it also be that some state officials fear the data would refute their denials and expose the sloppy condition of their voter rolls?
Voter registration rolls in some states are in sad shape. They are filled with large numbers of individuals who are ineligible to vote because they are dead, have moved away and registered in a different state, or are not U.S. citizens.
Such inaccuracies can be exploited by fraudsters who would rather cheat to achieve their political objectives, knowing that many states have lax procedures that make it extremely likely that they can commit voter fraud and get away with it.
This is not just a crime against our electoral system, but against American citizens. Every fraudulent ballot that is cast negates the vote of a legitimate voter, effectively disenfranchising that voter.
An experienced, successful champion of voters’ rights, clean elections, and government transparency is added to the commission:
“J. Christian Adams brings years of experience in protecting the rights of legitimate voters both inside and out of government to this Commission,” PILF Communications Director Logan Churchwell said. “Adams has successfully litigated against discriminatory voting districts, intimidation, jurisdictions failing to offer foreign language ballots, and counties with bloated voter rolls.
“Adams also brings deep experience in successfully dislodging voter data from states and locales that refused to disclose public records—most recently in the Commonwealth of Virginia,” Churchwell added.
Public Interest Legal Foundation President and General Counsel J. Christian Adams talks with WMAL’s Larry O’Connor about states refusing to release voter registration information to President Trump’s Commission on Election Integrity — and why their stonewalling efforts are going to fail:
Adams, a former Voting Section attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, explains that federal laws require states to provide voter registration data upon request. And those federal laws trump state laws.
“People don’t like their dirty laundry to be aired. I can understand why some election officials don’t want the information to get to the commission. But this is public information. We [PILF] had to sue three Virginia counties in federal court to get the information from them.
“The federal law under Motor Voter gives individuals, as well as governments if they so ask, the right to this information.
“Whatever happened to the transparency crowd? Or the Hashtag Science group who wants to know the facts about things?”
The commission’s request letter specifically asks states only for “publicly available voter roll data… if publicly available under the laws of your state,” and clearly articulates the purpose for its request: “to fully analyze vulnerabilities and issues related to voter registration and voting.”
Yet some states, like Maryland, are claiming their state laws prevent them from sharing the data. The most important thing to understand about those claims, Adams says, is that federal law is supreme to state law.
“Federal law says that states upon request have to give this information to the federal government. . . . Not just Motor Voter but civil rights laws going back to 1960… That law is still the law. And that’s why these state stonewalling efforts are going to fail.”
Other states are suggesting they’ll ignore the request simply because they disagree with the commission’s purpose – or its personnel. Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who’s not even the state official with authority over the request, says he won’t comply because “the commission is based on the specious and false notion that there was widespread voter fraud last November.”
Misleading media reports to the contrary, most states in fact are only withholding what they consider “private” data as is specifically exempted from the request – primarily Social Security numbers, which Adams says aren’t critical for the commission’s purpose.
Adams notes that the people who don’t want to give up voter roll information are usually the same people who say there’s no voter fraud.
“It’s funny to suddenly have people who don’t want to get to the truth – it’s going to be a short-lived resistance. . . .
“This is public information under federal law… It’s really unfortunate that, whether it’s Democrats or Republicans, some folks are opposed to getting to the truth.”
The usual left-wing voter fraud deniers are in a lather over President Trump’s appointment of voting rights expert Hans von Spakovsky to his Advisory Commission on Election Integrity – evidence enough that he’s a great pick.
Media outlets from the Left to the far Left including the Washington Post are joining the freakout, despite von Spakovsky’s stellar qualifications and open-minded approach to the scope of his and the commission’s task:
Hans told the Post that he does not enter this role with the assumption that voter fraud is a nationwide epidemic. “I think the answer to that is what we hope to find out,” he explained. “What I would say is that I think it’s a danger to the way our democratic system works anytime people are either kept out of the polls or their vote is stolen through fraud.”
From media to academia to advocacy groups aligned with Democrats’ anti-integrity stance, the institutional Left is united in attacking von Spakovsky – and attacking the commission’s goal of identifying ways to improve the quality of the nation’s voter rolls.
“It’s going to be fun watching all the liars smear him” and “reacting like Pavlov’s dog” at his appointment, added Adams.
“Who would be for bad voting rolls? Why are they afraid of improving the system?”
Leftists like Kristen Clarke of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law are agitated about the commission’s intent “to encourage state officials to take action and purge voter rolls.”
Why wouldn’t a federal commission “encourage” states to comply with federal law?
It’s the responsibility of the federal government, namely the Department of Justice, to enforce compliance with the National Voter Registration Act’s mandate that local election officials proactively maintain accurate voter rolls. Yet enforcement of the NVRA’s list maintenance requirements was non-existent under the Obama DOJ, even as the Left busily sued states to enforce provisions requiring welfare offices to push voter registration.
Prior federal election commissions offered states suggestions for better list maintenance processes with little uproar. WaPo reported favorably on the results of President Obama’s 2013 Commission on Election Administration – including its recommendation to “share voter registration records across state lines to protect against fraud.”
Putting a negative spin on the same recommendations simply because they come from Trump’s appointees is pure partisan hackery.
Deniers keep denying, but evidence of voter fraud is plain to see for anyone willing to look:
This week, The Heritage Foundation is updating its Voter Fraud Database with 89 new entries, including 75 convictions and a slew of overturned elections and civil fines targeting vote fraudsters.
With these latest additions, the database now documents 581 cases of proven voter fraud and 848 criminal convictions.
Heritage’s database proves not only that voter fraud is real and ongoing, but also that it is not isolated to any particular state or region.
Nothing like a lawsuit to get local election officials to agree to do their job.
After nearly a year of litigation, the Wake County Board of Elections signed a settlement with watchdog group Voter Integrity Project NC agreeing to do more to maintain accurate voter rolls and to respond to future requests for list maintenance information as federal law requires.
Public Interest Legal Foundation filed the federal lawsuit on behalf of VIP-NC after the group found Wake County’s voter rolls contained more than the number of residents eligible to vote, including tens of thousands of inactive voters.
North Carolina’s state law requires local elections boards to remove inactive voters from registration rolls if they don’t respond to mailers and fail to participate in four consecutive federal elections.
“Inactive voters are the modern-day ‘dead voter,’ meaning that anybody can walk in and vote in their name simply by reciting the name and address of that voter, with no ID required,” VIP-NC director Jay DeLancy said.
PILF President J. Christian Adams said they were pleased with the results.
“Other counties in North Carolina should take note that requests for public information and obligations to maintain clean rolls must be met. In the future, election officials across North Carolina should take seriously their obligation to comply with all provisions in the National Voter Registration Act.”