Trump says Pence will lead commission to investigate voter registration fraud

In a pre-Super Bowl interview with Fox News, President Trump announced plans for Vice President Pence to lead a commission investigating voter registration fraud.

“You take a look at the registration, you have illegals, you have dead people … it’s really a bad situation. . . . I’m going to set up a commission, to be headed by Vice President Mike Pence, and we’re going to look at it very, very carefully,” he said.

Election integrity groups say a private effort simply cannot do the job of thoroughly vetting all states’ voter rolls nationwide, whereas it would be fairly simple for a federal task force to do an initial analysis of the data.

“For the president of the United States to hope for a private answer to this question, he’s going to be waiting long after he leaves office,” said Logan Churchwell, research director at the nonpartisan Public Interest Legal Foundation. “If you want to answer this question, the only people who can answer it are federal bureaucrats with security clearances. . . . if the administration is waiting to see that kind of research is done in the nonprofit sphere or some other research entity, it’s not going to happen. It has to be an interagency task force [by the federal government].”

 

The government watchdog group Judicial Watch said a “full-scale, nonpartisan federal voter fraud investigation is long overdue.”

 

“Initially, such an investigation would be a simple matter of analyzing voter registration databases against federal databases of aliens and deceased individuals,” the group said.

Why the North Carolina voter ID case matters

By hearing North Carolina’s voter ID appeal, the Supreme Court can stop the Left’s transformation of the Voting Rights Act into a partisan political weapon.

They may never admit it, but the civil rights industry is tired of spending millions of dollars only to lose most voter ID fights in court. Instead of declaring defeat, the strategy has shifted to changing the rules of engagement, and trying to transform the Voting Rights Act into something it isn’t. . . .

 

The civil rights industry, which includes swarms of career employees in the Justice Department, has been losing voter ID fights for the better part of a decade. . . .courts have acknowledged that such laws do not target minorities and are equally applied to all. It certainly does not hurt that federal judges are aware that polling shows how voter ID is more popular among poorer minorities than wealthy liberal whites.

 

Because voter ID is overwhelmingly popular, and because courts have largely supported it, they are trying to change what the Voting Rights Act means. They are trying to transform the law away from a protecting against real world disenfranchisement, to a statistical game that aims to protect Democratic political power. If an election theoretically has a disparate impact on Democrats, then the Voting Rights Act is violated.

 

They can press this ugly transformation of America’s most important civil rights law because they have spent 30 years stoking the flames of racial polarization and trying to make “black” synonymous with “Democrat.”

In April 2016, U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder issued a 485-page ruling dismissing all claims in the challenge to the state’s 2013 omnibus election reform bill that included voter ID, but in August the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that ruling “by substituting its own version of the facts, even though appeals courts don’t see witnesses, and even though experts for the United States were found to be not credible. This difference between two courts was because of how the Voting Rights Act was read.”

Before the Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County v. Holder that existing federal preclearance obligations were based on outdated justifications — an action in popular press falsely branded as “gutting the Voting Rights Act” — North Carolina was held to a standard of guilty-until-proven innocent any time that it wished to change even the slightest election procedure. . . .

 

North Carolina’s election laws are no longer supposed to be judged on those unconstitutional standards, thanks to Shelby. But that didn’t stop the court of appeals from using a bold new version of the Voting Rights Act that imported those obsolete standards. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the surviving provisions, requires real world causality, where someone actually suffers electoral defeat or denial of the right to vote. The law requires a real world “totality of circumstances” inquiry, not statistical games.

 

The dispute over how to read and enforce the most critical component of the Voting Rights Act has now landed on the Supreme Court’s doorstep. The Public Interest Legal Foundation and others have submitted briefs to support North Carolina’s request for a hearing on its voter ID law. The court of appeals transformed the Voting Rights Act into something it is not. In doing so, it converted the law into a raw partisan weapon that will be used to help Democrats.

“Voter Fraud a Myth? That’s Not What New York Investigators Found”

In 2013, the New York City Department of Investigation tested the city’s voting system to see how susceptible it is to voter fraud. The results weren’t encouraging:

Ninety-seven percent of the barely disguised phony voters were allowed to vote unimpeded, and none was referred for criminal charges or officially reported to the Board of Elections. One can only imagine what a sharp operator trying to fix an election could do by flooding polling places with ineligible voters.

North Dakota House easily passes voter ID bill

State legislatures around the country are busy passing election process reforms that make voting more secure, and in North Dakota – the only state that doesn’t require voters to register – a bill that revises the state’s voter ID law passed the House by a big margin.

Lawmakers are again considering changes to the state’s voter ID requirements after laws passed in the 2013 and 2015 were challenged in court. In September, a federal judge ordered the state to provide affidavits to voters who couldn’t provide a valid ID.

HB 1369 eliminates that affidavit provision for voters who don’t present an accepted form of ID and replaces it with a more secure provisional ballot option.

 

More than 16,000 ballots were cast using affidavits instead of ID the November 2016 election, a 55 percent increase over the 2012 election, and those affidavits are still in the process of being verified long after the ballots have been counted, the elections certified, and officials sworn into office and governing.

There were 5,005 affidavits filed in Cass County alone during the most recent election, according to information provided Thursday by DeAnn Buckhouse, the county’s election coordinator. Of those, 2,964 voters returned the postcard that acknowledged they executed an affidavit, but 86 of them listed a Minnesota residential address. A handful of others listed other states as their address, according to Buckhouse, and 1,837 have not been returned or verified.

The bill also raises the penalty for intentional voter fraud to a Class C felony. Democrat Rep. Mary Schneider called it “mean-spirited” to raise the penalty for voter fraud, though she claimed fraud doesn’t happen so it’s unclear to whom she thinks it’s mean.

 

But Republican Rep. Chris Olson cited the Cass County data on unverified and problematic affidavits used to cast ballots in last year’s election, adding that 102 affidavits were returned undeliverable and five people said they didn’t execute an affidavit. “If this isn’t a problem I don’t know what is.”

J. Christian Adams on The Larry O’Connor Show: Virginia has a problem with non-citizens on voter rolls

“Only citizens should vote. Why is that controversial?”

 

J. Christian Adams talks with WMAL’s Larry O’Connor about Virginia’s problem with non-citizens registering and voting, a bill passed by the state House that would fix the problem by requiring registrants to provide proof of citizenship, and why Democrats don’t want to fix the problem.

Virginia has a problem with non-citizens getting on the rolls because there’s no proof of citizenship… something more than nothing, which is what we use now, is what passed the Virginia House.

The bill, HB 1598, requires Virginians to provide proof of U.S. citizenship, such as a copy of a birth certificate, when registering to vote. Those who do can vote in all federal, state, and local elections; those who don’t can only vote in federal elections. Why the distinction?

Motor Voter, which is getting aliens on the rolls in the first place – it’s just a promise, you just say ‘I’m a citizen’ and you don’t have to provide any proof – Motor Voter doesn’t let states put on their federal voter registration form this question. But if you use a state voter registration form, or if you’re registering  in state elections, Virginia has the power still under the Constitution to ask for proof of citizenship. . . .

 

Congress needs to fix this. Motor Voter is working out exactly as the institutional Left had hoped. It’s polluted the rolls with ineligible voters.

Virginia’s Democrat Governor Terry McAuliffe knows this and is sure to veto the bill.

He understands this helps Terry McAuliffe win elections, this helps Democrats win elections. The Left, the Democrats realize when you change the process rules, the rules of the game, you can help change the outcomes. . . .

 

The problem for Terry McAuliffe is that people overwhelmingly support this. They only want Americans picking American leaders. If he wants to stand on the principle that we shouldn’t ask the question whether or not you’re eligible, let him do it.

 

That’s the divide in this country. One side enables lawlessness, the other side tries to fix it.

Listen here starting at the 2:19 mark.

Virginia House passes bill requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote

Virginia’s House of Delegates passed a bill on Wednesday requiring voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in state and local elections.

 

HB 1598, sponsored by Del. Mark Cole, does not extend the proof-of-citizenship requirement to federal elections.

“I would have made it a requirement for any election; however there is a federal court ruling that says you cannot require proof of citizenship for federal elections, which really makes no sense to me,” Cole said.

Registration lists would indicate whether each voter is registered to vote in federal, state, and local elections or in federal elections only.

 

The bill also directs the Department of Elections to use the federal Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program to verify that registered voters are U.S. citizens.

 

“Committing a felony to vote in an election is something that no non-citizen in their right mind would do,” Democrat Del. Mark Sickles argued in opposition to the bill. Sickles might be surprised to learn that, in fact, non-citizens have registered and voted in Virginia, and there’s no record of any of them being prosecuted.

 

The bill now goes to the Senate, but if passed is all but certain to be vetoed by Democrat Governor Terry McAuliffe.

“Trump’s Gorsuch pick assures integrity of America’s elections process”

The rule of law is back in style:

 

And just in time. President Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, who “considers the Constitution a document that limits the power of government, not as a mere suggestion to be argued around,” will join the Court as it is set to deliberate on a number of voting cases that will affect how states safeguard the integrity of their elections.

From voter ID to redistricting to obligations to keep clean voter rolls, the Court is primed to decide how we vote in the 21st century.

 

In an array of voter ID cases, the Court may decide if the treasured Voting Rights Act has morphed into a tool not to protect civil rights, but to protect the interests of Democrats.

 

North Carolina enacted measures designed to preserve the integrity of elections, including voter ID and limits on the registration of voters on Election Day before their eligibility could be verified. Newfangled theories of the Voting Rights Act led one appeals court to graft disparate impact tests onto the law that formerly required actual victims of racial discrimination in order to win a case.

 

That appeal is now moving toward an evenly divided Supreme Court — divided no more when Gorsuch is confirmed.

On election process issues like voter ID, verifying voter citizenship, maintaining clean voter rolls, and redistricting, “[w]hen it comes to how states run their own elections, Gorsuch should be refreshing.”

Arkansas House passes photo voter ID bill

The Arkansas legislature is on track to again pass a photo voter ID requirement.

 

On Tuesday, the Arkansas House of Representatives passed HB 1047, which amends Amendment 51 of the Arkansas Constitution by requiring voters to “provide verification of voter registration” in the form of one of several types of government-issued photo identification.

 

The verification requirement applies to both in-person voting and ballots cast by mail.

 

County clerks will continue to issue free voter verification cards to voters who don’t have an accepted form of photo ID, something Amendment 51 already requires.

 

Under HB 1047, a voter who doesn’t show ID will cast a provisional ballot that will be counted if the voter later presents identification or signs an affidavit that the voter can’t afford a photo ID or has a religious objection to being photographed.

 

The bill also allows county election boards to provide information on voters who fail to verify their registration to prosecuting attorneys, who may investigate for possible voter fraud.

 

The bill now heads to the Senate.

Why Do Democrats Fear Trump’s Probe of Voter Fraud?

Why are voter fraud-denying Democrats so opposed to the Trump administration taking a look at the problem of voter fraud if they’re so certain an investigation will turn up nothing and prove the Left right, Deroy Murdock wonders.

In their hearts, the Left knows Trump is right, at least on the existence of voter fraud. And that’s what terrifies them. . . .

 

It would help if Democrats, Left-wing activists, and the hyenas in America’s newsrooms explained just how “widespread” voter fraud must become before they consider it an injustice. Every ballot cast by a cadaver or an illegal alien negates a ballot completed by a legitimate voter. How many such genuine votes is it OK for fraud to obviate? Is it 100? How about 1,000? Maybe 10,000 — or ten times that figure?

“The Obama Administration had the tools to fight voter fraud but let them gather dust,” says J. Christian Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation and a former Justice Department Voting Section attorney. But with the new administration signaling a return to enforcing federal laws, including those that require clean voter rolls and bar non-citizens from registering and voting, Adams “recommends a machete that would help Trump chop quickly to the center of much of this fraud.”

The Homeland Security Department’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database lists all non-citizens in America. These include green card holders, foreign tourists, exchange students, and those on work visas as well as illegals who have broken the law or otherwise surfaced on Uncle Sam’s radar. Adams tells me: “This is the ultimate alien database.”

 

Comparing SAVE’s names with registered and actual voters should demonstrate, rather swiftly, the extent of non-citizen involvement in America’s election system. It also would identify violators, who should be punished.

 

“If that federal database were used to scrub the state databases,” Adams predicts, “all sorts of illegals would pop out. That’s what the Left fears the most. It would reveal rats everywhere.”

A “not insignificant” number of non-citizens voted in the presidential election, expert study extrapolates

How many non-citizens voted in the November presidential election? Less than 3 million but significantly more than zero, reports the Washington Times:

Political scientist Jesse Richman of Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, has worked with colleagues to produce groundbreaking research on noncitizen voting, and this week he posted a blog in response to Mr. Trump’s assertion.

 

Based on national polling by a consortium of universities, a report by Mr. Richman said 6.4 percent of the estimated 20 million adult noncitizens in the U.S. voted in November. He extrapolated that that percentage would have added 834,381 net votes for Mrs. Clinton, who received about 2.8 million more votes than Mr. Trump.

 

Mr. Richman calculated that Mrs. Clinton would have collected 81 percent of noncitizen votes.

If 6.4 percent of 20 million adult non-citizens voted in November, that would mean 1,280,000 non-citizens were able to illegally register and cast ballots in the presidential election.

 

These figures are just estimates extrapolated from 2008 data, as Richman makes clear in his blog, but they point to a real problem of ineligible non-citizens being added to voter registration rolls around the country.

 

Another source quotes Richman citing a much smaller but still significant number of illegal votes cast by non-citizens – certainly enough to affect the outcomes of close state and local elections, and worth looking into:

“Maybe 100,000 (ballots), maybe a little more to the Hillary Clinton margin. Not insignificant, but on the other hand, way below the kind of levels of fraud that Trump is alleging,” said Richman.

 

Richman believes an investigation into voter fraud would prove that.

So what is the actual number of non-citizens registering and voting? And how is it happening? Maybe a check box and the honor system aren’t sufficient safeguards against federal felonies. Let’s find out.

 

Richman at least agrees with the Trump team that a federal government review of voting rolls to find out how and how many non-citizens are registering and voting (as both Vice President Pence and President Trump have indicated the new administration will pursue) will give America’s voters an accurate picture of the problem.