NC Election Worker Indicted for Altering Voter Registrations

A former temporary election worker in North Carolina has been indicted for altering voter registration records:

The State Bureau of Elections said in a news release on Tuesday that says 41-year-old Joy Yvette Wilkerson of Henderson faces charges of unlawful voter registration and unlawful altering of voter registrations. Wilkerson was indicted by a Granville County grand jury on Tuesday. . . . 

In June 2016, county elections director Tonya Burnette found in a review that voter registration records were changed without authorization. Burnette told the elections board, which investigated the matter and sent a full report to the district attorney's office.

The former worker attempted to alter as many as 250 registrations to allow ineligible felons to vote:

Joy Yvette Wilkerson, 41, of Henderson is facing multiple counts of fraudulently altering voter registrations, which is a felony charge. 

According to a Granville County Sheriff’s Department report, the county’s Board of Elections discovered the fraudulent activity last June and contacted law enforcement. The report says Wilkerson accessed the county’s voter registration database and restored – or tried to restore – active voting status to 250 convicted felons who had been removed from voter rolls while they served their sentence. 

North Carolina law bans convicted felons from voting while serving an active sentence – in prison or on probation – but their rights are restored after their sentence is complete.

This story illustrates how important it is for states to properly vet and train election officials, even temporary ones, and have procedures in place to protect against tampering with voter registration records or ballots (as temporary election workers did in Florida last year) and how susceptible the election system is to manipulation by a person with bad intent.  But the diligence of the North Carolina officials in catching and investigating this fraud should be commended.

New Report: Thousands of Non-Citizens Voting in Virginia

Today, the Public Interest Legal Foundation released a disturbing report about non-citizens registered to vote and actually voting in Virginia:

After three lawsuits, scores of record requests, and reviews voter history files across 133 Virginia jurisdictions, the Public Interest Legal Foundation has uncovered the following:

• Virginia election officials quietly removed 5,556 voters for non-citizenship between 2011 and May 2017;

• 1,852 of those removed as noncitizens cast ballots;

• A total of 7,474 illegal ballots were cast from the pool of removed noncitizens;

• Some records of illegal voting date back to the 1980s before their respective removals;

• Virginia election officials routinely fail to alert law enforcement about these illegal votes or registrations.

“At the instruction of Governor McAuliffe’s political appointees, local election officials spent countless resources to prevent this information from spilling into the open,” PILF President and General Counsel J. Christian Adams said. “Virginia hid critical information that would have improved election integrity while a political operative-turned-governor vetoed numerous proposals that would’ve prevented alien registration and voting. From NoVa to Norfolk and all urban and rural points in between, alien voters are casting ballots with practically no legal consequences in response. 

“In this election year, aliens must not cast illegal ballots, and if they do they must be prosecuted. Let’s pray that Gov. McAuliffe’s veto pen did not invite a close election tainted by fraud,” Adams added. 

In the absence of regular data-sharing arrangements between federal officials and the Commonwealth, the ability of election officials to identify aliens on the voter rolls is almost nonexistent. The most that happens in Virginia is that an alien on the voter rolls will sometimes tell the state DMV they are not a citizen. Without those leads, counties and municipalities must accept false claims of citizenship on their face.

This report gives lie to those who claim that there is no problem with ineligible voters voting and determining the outcomes of elections.  In addition to other close races detailed in the full report (page 12), the winner of the 2013 attorney general election was determined by just 907 votes statewide.  As PILF noted, the methods for removing non-citizens from the voter registration rolls are far from effective or complete and the existing methods are rarely followed.  So there are likely far more non-citizens registered to vote and additional votes by non-citizens that PILF was unable to identify through their data review.  

This problem is duplicated in nearly every state across the country but has largely not been studied because it requires a tremendous amount of time and resources.  Sadly, PILF had to litigate against local election officials who refused to disclose voter registration data as required by the NVRA.  We can only hope that President Trump's Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity can conduct or prompt similar studies in a number of states and that state and local officials will cooperate, as required by law, in efforts to improve the accuracy of voter registration rolls.

ICYMI, 458+ Likely Fraudulent Votes in New Hampshire 2016 Election

The Democrat New Hampshire Secretary of State is verifying voters who registered at the polls on Election Day last November, and so far his review has turned up 458 votes with a high likelihood of being fraudulent (emphasis ours):

New numbers from New Hampshire’s Secretary of State’s office indicate that 458 people who voted here on Election Day may have possibility committed voter fraud. . . . According to data released earlier this year from the Secretary of State’s office following apublic records request from NHPR, 5,903 first time New Hampshire voters who registered on Election Day last November used an out-of-state license as their form of identification. That’s 0.78% of all people who voted in the election.

Yes, people with out-of-state licenses can show up and vote on Election Day in New Hampshire. . . . But to vote with an out-of-state license, you need to prove you hold domicile in the state. Showing a utility bill, a lease or a pay stub, can work to prove you actually live in New Hampshire. . . . Voters without any proof that they live New Hampshire are allowed to cast their ballot, but they have to sign a legal document confirming they’re telling the truth about where they live. Signing that document opens them up to the possibility of prosecution if it’s proven they lied. 

Within 90 days after the election, the Secretary of State’s office mails letters to those people signing those affidavits. According to documents provided to NH1 News this week by the Secretary of State’s office, 6,033 letters were sent to people who voted in New Hampshire last November without proof of domicile. As highlighted earlier, 458 of those letters came back undeliverable. Many of the names of those people will be sent to the state Department of Justice for investigation and possible prosecution. . . . 

The Secretary of State’s office also sent out 764 letters following this past November’s election to voters who cast a ballot without a satisfactory photo identification. The is no information yet on how many of those letters were returned undeliverable.

There may be many more truly out-of-state voters who voted last fall in New Hampshire, in addition to the number of follow-up postcards sent to voters without photo ID that are returned as undeliverable.  Fortunately, the New Hampshire legislature is working on a bill to plug the hole in New Hampshire's laws that allow out-of-state voters to vote so easily, and with a Republican governor now in the Granite State, it likely won't be vetoed as similar measures have been in the past.

President Trump claimed that he and former Senator Kelly Ayotte lost the November 2016 election in New Hampshire due to fraud, earning an official letter requesting evidence from FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub.  This is likely just the start of the evidence that will continue to accumulate as New Hampshire election and Department of Justice officials investigate voters who lacked proper documentation in the 2016 election.

Florida Vote Fraud: A Case Study of the Need for Open, Fair and Honest Elections

The Republican National Lawyers Association (RNLA) fights for open, fair and honest elections. 

A prime example of the need for this is what is going on right now in Florida. Let us explain.

Open Elections

The Broward County Supervisor of Elections “engaged in ongoing violations of Florida law governing the canvassing of vote-by-mail ballots [absentee ballots]. [T]ens of thousands of vote-by-mail ballots in Broward County are being opened by your staff: (1) before they have been canvassed by the county canvassing board; and (2) without providing the public the opportunity to review or file a protest against the canvass of a ballot believed to be legally deficient. These illegal actions must stop immediately.”  [Letter from the Republican Party of Florida to the Broward County Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes, Nov. 2, 2016.]

Under pressure and possible legal action, Snipes is now opening the processing a little bit but not enough.  An RNLA member was key to shining sunlight on this process.  

How can there be confidence in the system when one election official is counting ballots illegally behind closed doors? 

Fair Elections

Election officials in Florida have already been caught committing vote fraud. 

Gladys Coego, 74, a temporary Election Support Specialist for the Miami-Dade Elections Department tasked with opening mail-in ballots and scanning them into the machine, is accused of marking ballot choices that were originally left blank, according to CBS4 News partner The Miami Herald. . . . In a second arrest, police said Tomika Curgil, 33, filled out voter-registration forms for five citizens without their consent and submitted at least 17 forms for people believed to not exist, including several who are dead.  

Honest Elections

Vote Fraud has already disenfranchised Florida voters. 

By mid-October, Susan Halperin became concerned that she and her husband hadn't received their absentee ballots in the mail.  So Lawrence Halperin called the Seminole County Supervisor of Elections Office to find out what was going on. He was stunned to learn their ballots had already been cast. Someone had stolen the Halperins' ballots, faked their signatures and voted. . . .Supervisor of Elections Mike Ertel said they were among five voters in three homes in Spring Valley whose absentee ballots were stolen and then fraudulently submitted with votes cast by someone else. 

No one thinks these are the only cases; just the only ones who got caught.  Why does this matter?  Every fraudulent vote overrides a legitimate, real vote and disenfranchises an honest, eligible voter. 

Florida is just one state but it shows the need for open, fair and honest elections.  The RNLA seeks to promote open, fair and honest elections at all levels of American society in a non-discriminatory manner and to provide access to the polls to all qualified and eligible voters. Through its efforts, the RNLA strives to strengthen the faith and confidence of all citizens of the United States in their government and the electoral process.

Democrats Fighting for Zombies, While Republicans Try to Protect the Living

There are problems with the dead registering in Virginia and voting in Colorado and California.  The most common way that the dead are fraudulently "voting" is via absentee ballot.  It is hard for zombies to actually get the polls.  The respective parties could not take a more radically different approach. 

Republicans like those in Virginia have proposed making absentee ballots less susceptible to fraud by measures such as 2015’s HB1318, which stated:

Applications for absentee ballots; photo identification required. Requires that any voter submitting his application for an absentee ballot by mail or by electronic or telephonic transmission to a facsimile device shall submit with his application a copy of one of the forms of identification acceptable under current law. The bill exempts from this requirement military and overseas voters and persons with a disability. Currently, only a voter who completes his application for an absentee ballot in person is required to show a form of identification.

This was vetoed by former DNC Chair and friend of the Clinton’s, Governor Terry McAuliffe. 

Democrats on other side continue in their efforts to bring chaos and discord to the election process regarding absentee ballots.  As the nonpartisan Lawyers Democracy Fund describes it:

The Tampa Bay Times reports that the Democratic Party has filed a lawsuit against Florida on equal protection grounds to remove a key integrity check of Florida’s mail voting process. The signature review requires a comparison of the mail ballot signature and the registration signature on file by the Florida Supervisor of Elections. If the signatures do not match, the ballot is rejected. The plaintiffs seek a last minute judicially created cure period for only some of these non-signature match voters because the truly absent voters or military overseas voters would not have an opportunity to update their signature. The lawsuit comes less than 35 days prior to the November 8 Presidential Election with millions of ballots already being mailed to voters. The current mail ballot rules have been in place for years, and mail ballots have already been sent to tens of thousands of overseas and military voters.  Absentee or mail balloting is already vulnerable to fraud and abuse without an ID requirement. Removing one of the key integrity measures increases the likelihood of potential fraud.  

So in a nutshell, the Democrats are supporting efforts to disenfranchise legal voters through vote fraud; Democrats are trying to take away even the few safeguards there are for absentee ballots.  Zombies or the dead are not a protected class under the Constitution and should not have their votes counted. 

You are Likely Looking at Ground Zero of a 2016 General Election Meltdown

California held its primary on June 7, 2016, or at least it tried. The LA Times highlighted the nearly statewide debacles that left many wondering exactly what happened and why. Recently we discussed some of the issues facing California voters whose election officials have horribly mismanaged HAVA funding almost since its inception.

California voters faced a tough time at the polls Tuesday, with many voters saying they have encountered broken machines, polling sites that opened late and incomplete voter rolls, particularly in Los Angeles County.

The result? Instead of a quick in-and-out vote, many California voters were handed the dreaded pink provisional ballot — which takes longer to fill out, longer for election officials to verify and which tends to leave voters wondering whether their votes will be counted.

This year’s presidential primary race has already been one of the most bitter in recent memory. Before Tuesday’s vote, Bernie Sanders supporters accused the media of depressing Democratic turnout by calling the nomination for Hillary Clinton before polls opened in California.

Those feelings haven’t gotten any less raw Tuesday as hundreds of Californians complained of voting problems to the national nonpartisan voter hotline run by the Lawyers’ Committee For Civil Rights Under Law.

The seeds of dysfunction and disarray were on full display during the primary. Issues were plentiful and it leads you wonder if the issues were not intentional, serving as a distraction from the all too real issue of fraudulent zombie voters. The issues spawn confusion and more and more provisional ballots making it far more difficult to sort through the ballots and prove fraud. But that most likely will not stop some of the voters from trying. Especially Sanders’ supporters who feel that the election was rigged to begin with…

Sanders supporter Jonathan Daniel Brown accused Democrats of “purging votes” when he discovered he was not on the voting rolls at his polling station despite being registered.

Brown, an actor, refused to take a provisional ballot, and his complaints drew the attention of Los Angeles County Registrar-County Clerk Dean Logan, who intervened. Eventually, Brown said he was allowed to cast a regular ballot — though not before Brown said a poll worker called the police on him.

Writer Allison Bloom, 41, took her kids with her when she went to vote at the Kahal Joseph Congregation synagogue in Westwood on Tuesday morning.

“I wanted to show them what voting means,” Bloom said. But when she arrived, she said workers couldn’t boot up the vote-counting machine. Bloom left behind her ballot, with a worker promising it would be counted.

Bloom said her kids asked, “Is this what it’s always like?”

“It was just chaos,” Bloom said. “It was kind of an unfortunate first experience at the polls for them.”

Sowing chaos, generating confusion, and general misdirection . . .  sound familiar? It should. Nothing to see here. Pay no attention to the woman in the pant suit behind the curtain. If this sounds an awful lot like the result that is likely to occur in Ohio in November, there is likely a reason.

The left has little desire to make elections smoother. That simply does not help their cause. Requiring identification, actual citizen registration, and purging voter rolls all ensure that the process is efficient and fair as possible and yet they continue to actively work against such measures. If this was the result in the primary, I can only begin the fathom the cataclysmic catastrophe that will occur in November.

Quite frankly, California’s inability to manage HAVA funding should have already sent  a clear message to the legislature. The state needs to take action to fix the process, and fix it really. The election should be fair, honest, and free of zombies and fraud generally. 

Virginia Voter ID Law Upheld

A federal judge has just upheld Virginia’s voter ID law. This decision serves as yet another devastating judicial haymaker for opponents of common sense voter ID laws across the country.

"Mindful that the court's mission is to judge not the wisdom of the Virginia voter ID law, but rather its constitutionality, this court cannot say that plaintiffs have met their burden of proof in showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the Virginia voter ID law ... contravenes the Voting Rights Act, the First Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment, or the Twenty-Sixth Amendment," U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson wrote Thursday.

Hudson's ruling concluded: "While the merits of this voter identification law, and indeed all aspects of Virginia's voting regime, can be reasonably debated, it remains true that Virginia has created a scheme of laws to accommodate all people in their right to vote. From in-person voting, to an absentee option, to provisional ballots with the ability to cure, and the provision of free voter IDs, Virginia has provided all of its citizens with an equal opportunity to participate in the electoral process."

Simply stated, the law was found to be firm, fair, and consistent to all voters of the state. It protects the integrity of Virginia elections and ensures that all citizens have an equal opportunity to have their voice be heard. Judge Hudson took a minute to clarify the question presented in the case.

The judge added, "The evidence also revealed that the Virginia voter ID law has created a layer of inconvenience for some voters. But the question squarely presented in this case is whether (the law) is unconstitutional either in its adoption, implementation, or enforcement. Does it, by design or otherwise, adversely affect the opportunity of minorities to vote or is the burden evenly spread?"

The short answer, No. The stakes involved in the selection of our leaders are too significant to leave susceptible to fraud. The ability to ensure an election is free of vote fraud is crucial to voter confidence. Once again, the Court has found that mere inconvenience to a select few, inconvenience that we as citizens are all already subject to, will never outweigh the need for the absolute integrity of our election system.

Five Super Tuesday States Are Protecting the Integrity of Elections with Voter ID Laws

It is “Super Tuesday.” Five out of the thirteen states voting in the presidential primary today will do so requiring at least some type of voter identification: Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. 

Given the issues that have already occurred during this presidential cycle (Iowa, New Hampshire), it is hard to imagine why the laws themselves are being targeted by the left, especially since voter turnout has continued to soar this cycle. Currently, 17 states have not established some sort of identity verification in order to vote. 

Nonetheless, the Virginia Voter ID law is still under fire:

Last year, the Democratic Party of Virginia filed suit challenging the 2013 law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls. They said the law illegally depresses minority and young people voting.

Monday in federal court in Richmond, a black woman who grew up in a small, segregated town wept on the witness stand as she testified about the trouble she had voting in the 2014 election in Virginia.    

Josephine Okiakpe, 69, said she produced several forms of identification, but did not have a photo ID that was considered acceptable. She cried as she recalled others looking at her and snickering, leaving her upset and frustrated.

She was given a provisional ballot, which ultimately was counted, but said the experience undermined her confidence in the way Virginia conducts elections.

It’s unfortunate that people were unkind to Ms. Okiakpe; however, as the lead witness in this case, she was still able to vote via provisional ballot. She was not disenfranchised, which is the main argument of voter ID opponents against voter ID laws.  Moreover, the integrity of the election was maintained. The exaggerated claims of mass disenfranchisement have yet to be substantiated in any of these suits challenging voter ID laws. 

The trial in the challenge to Virginia's voter ID law is ongoing.

Part 2: Is Automatic Voter Registration for Potential Fraud Not Turnout?

Over the New Years break, we got in a twitter debate over automatic registration.  As always some on the left argue for automatic registration.  They say this is for increased turnout.  The problem with this is there is no evidence that turnout is increased.  For example, Canada actually saw a downturn in voter turnout when it went to automatic registration. 

However there are some negative things that can happen with automatic registration such as increased costs and vote fraud.  This is because automatic registration guarantees clogged and inaccurate voter rolls.  Accurate voter rolls were a priority to President Obama’s bipartisan Presidential Commission on Election Administration (PCEA) when it stated (emphasis added):

Improving the accuracy of registration rolls, for example, can expand access, reduce administrative costs, prevent fraud and irregularity, and reduce polling place congestion leading to long lines.

Automatic registration has no benefits but many minuses.  One of those minuses is it would make vote fraud easier.  As the PCEA said, accurate voting rolls help prevent fraud.   Adding people who have no interest in elections or intention to vote (in some cases because they don’t intend to stay long in the area or are voting elsewhere) to voting rolls certainly presents the opportunity for fraud.  

Chris Christie Vetoes Automatic Voter Registration Bill

California and Oregon both passed mandatory voter registration laws this year and, if Democrats have their way, they are only the first of many. A Democratic group called iVote which is led by Jeremy Bird, a top Obama campaign aide, plans to spend millions of dollars in an effort to push mandatory voter registration laws.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie recently vetoed a mandatory voter registration effort by Democrats in the state.  Regarding the veto, Governor Christie said: "New Jersey taxpayers deserve better than to have their hard-earned tax dollars spent on thinly-veiled political gamesmanship and the State must ensure that every eligible citizen's vote counts and is not stolen by fraud."

As the Heritage Foundation points out, mandatory registration is nothing but a "'solution in search of a problem," and, as Governor Christie said, increases the potential for fraud. Mandatory registration is unlikely to help increase voter turnout because it is a lack of interest that keeps most voters from registering. In fact, the Census Bureau reports that only 4% of individuals claimed that they had not registered to vote  because they didn't "know where or how to register." Mandatory registration may not solve any problems, but it certainly has the potential to create one. These policies often involve permanent registration which has the potential to increase fraud because ineligible voters, voters who have moved, and the deceased would be more difficult to remove from the voter rolls.

Congratulations Governor Christie, and thank you for taking a stand and maintaining the integrity of the electoral system. 

NH Governor Overrules Democrat Secretary State Efforts to Prevent Vote Fraud

Democrat New Hampshire Governor Maggie Hassan vetoed a bill that would require a 30-day waiting period to vote claiming the bill “places unreasonable restrictions upon all New Hampshire citizens’ right to vote in this state…”

Also the bill would redefine domicile to a person’s primary residence or abode in a state where people could vote in an election although they may be simply visit for a short time and intend to move. Even political campaign workers or consultants could vote in New Hampshire under the current laws.

Requiring voters to be in the state for 30 days before voting would have prevented this type of voting that goes against the spirit of the law. Democrat Secretary of State Bill Gardner supported this bill. Gardner knows that every New Hampshire vote counts. He stated:

We had three ties in the last election cycle, one in the primary and two in the general election, and we had six other recounts that were in the single digits.

Gardner also emphasizes that in order to vote in New Hampshire, “…working on political campaigns is not sufficient evidence.”

Other Republican lawmakers were disappointed in Hassan’s veto. House Majority Leader Jack Flanagan said,

Our citizens should have a reasonable expectation that their vote will not be cancelled out by temporary visitors," he said. "Under our existing laws our doors are still technically open for people with little intent on staying here to participate in (the presidential) primary. That seems unfair to most people, and it’s unfair to the process we hold so dear.

The state legislature will vote on vetoed bills in September and hopefully Democrats will follow Secretary State Gardners lead to prevent vote fraud and "drive by voting" instead of the Governor's efforts to allow vote fraud and out of state political consultants voting.  

Elections Overturned by Vote Fraud

For those who believe voter fraud does not exist, here are some of the bizarre stories of voter fraud that took place in just the past six months as compiled by The Daily Signal:

Magoffin County, Kentucky:

In the November 2014 race for county-judge-executive, “people sold their votes” according to evidence. Larry Perkins saw Simon Marshall, a fellow resident of limited intellectual ability, with a new $50 bill, and asked where it came from. Marshall replied, “It is Election Day.” A judge threw out the election results for this and other violations ruling the election a result of fraud and bribery.

Perth Amboy, New Jersey:

Leslie Dominguez-Rodriguez, Democratic Chairwoman, took advantage of nursing home residents and coerced them into voting for her husband, Fernando Gonzales, for Perth Amboy City Council. Gonzales won by only 10 votes, which included a blind man, a resident who could not remember her address or voting, and others who testified of the coercion. A Superior Court judge overturned the election results and ordered a new election to be held.

While the Democrats like to claim that Republicans concocted voter fraud, these cases prove otherwise. The initial election results in both races also indicate why every vote counts. The judges correctly chose against rewarding dishonest election practices when they overturned the results wrongly won elections, and we should continue to fight for honest elections.

The RNLA sends out a weekly email highlighting state and national voter ID issues.  To be added to this list, click here.