Editorial.  When Florida lawmakers authorized the expansion of
database searches for voter registration purposes, they put into place a
mechanism that would produce exactly this result: finding voters who
had died in other states but whose passing was not previously noted by
local elections officials. In Florida, that’s an all-too-common
occurrence, because many older voters live in other states during the
summer months but have Florida addresses come November, when Election
Day arrives.

What the showing from Florida reveals is that
increased linking of databases will help to clean up voter registration
rolls much more efficiently for cases where people have multiple
addresses or part-time residences. States such as Arizona and Texas also
face many instances of split residencies.

The Hamilton county Democratic Party wants a federal investigation into
the purging of some 8,000 voter names from the local roles.

Link

Link

A Minnesota voter gives his perspective.

The Justice Department filed suit in response to the state’s failure to
send absentee ballots to thousands of California’s eligible military and
overseas voters for the June 5, 2012, federal primary election at least
45 days prior to the election, as required by UOCAVA. The complaint
also alleges that the state failed to ensure that ballots were sent by
the voters’ preferred method of transmission (by mail or
electronically), as required by federal law.  Link

Another warning sign that the states are still trying to comply with the 2009 law and that the 2010 fiasco and failure was a sign of structural problems, not an anomaly.  There remains little time to fix the problem.

State Representative Aaron Pena writes in texasinsider.org of potential problems with individuals using the assistance laws to improperly influence voters in how to mark their ballot.  Pena intends to offer legislation to curb the abuse. 

In the 2010 Democratic Primary, nearly a third of the votes case in the Delta Area were assisted.  In the city of Hidalgo’s May 2012 election 22.5% of votes cast were assisted.  Reports are coming in from across Hidalgo County that the practice is rampant in certain communities during this primary election.

 Here.  “A source inside the Justice Department sent me an internal posting showing the ‘Administrative Review Teams’ in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division for Section 5 submissions under the Voting Rights Act.  Section 5 is the tool that Justice used to object to the voter ID laws of Texas and South Carolina.“

And that’s just the beginning. 

 “What’s the big deal?”

 Editorial: “That didn’t mollify partisan Democrats and liberal activists, who blasted the measure as nothing less than the return of Jim Crow. They should take a few deep, calming breaths — because it is actually more like a return to the administration of Gov. Mark Warner. Virginia first adopted a voter-ID requirement in 2000, not long before Warner took office, and it has remained in effect since. Liberal Democrats screamed bloody murder then, too. “Let’s not erect barriers!” insisted Del. Jerrauld Jones, joining a chorus led by then-Del. Donald McEachin and others.

Then, as now, they argued that there was little evidence of need for such a measure. It’s a fair point — but it cuts both ways. Voter-ID measures have now been on the books for a decade. Where is the evidence of voter suppression?”

My latest at Breitbart.com:

“When a gang employs sophisticated physical attacks designed to cause a confrontation that may result in death, simply because their target is worshiping or speaking freely, the species of evil is the same. Whether the gang plots street mayhem to make political opponents and Jews tremble, or sparks midnight visits to political opponents by armed men with the warrant of expediency to kick in doors, the goal is the same.