Interpreter Program in NYC Organized by a Candidate on the Ballot

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, a candidate on the ballot tomorrow, is sending Russian and Haitian Creole translators paid by the City to the polls over the objections of the City Board of Elections:

The mayor, who is up for reelection, will have his own Office of Immigrant Affairs station 40 Russian- and Haitian Creole-language interpreters outside 20 polling places in southern Brooklyn on Election Day, at a total cost to taxpayers of around $8,000 in funding from the City Council. . . . But Board of Elections President Frederick Umane said the plan “causes a problem for us because…it’s a City Council- and mayor-sponsored program that may look to affect that election.” 

“It sort of raises perhaps an issue of the smell test or whatever, you know, that this is the year they want to do it,” he said, according to a recording of the Oct. 10 meeting. . . . 

De Blasio's challenger also believes that it is unrealistic to expect interpreters paid for by one of the candidates on the ballot to act as neutral translators:

De Blasio’s Republican challenger, Nicole Malliotakis, cried foul when told about the Democratic incumbent’s plan. . . . “It is inappropriate for an agency that is under the control of the mayor to be assisting individuals when they’re casting their ballot.” 

“Everything is controlled by the mayor — that makes it a concern,” the Staten Island assemblywoman added.

While we hope that the interpreters will only be assisting voters to vote as the voters desire, there have been reports in previous elections of interpreters pressuring voters to vote for a certain candidate or party.  The RNLA will be monitoring events in New York City tomorrow and posting updates about the state and local elections happening around the country on its Twitter feed.  

Left's Fear of Opposing Speech

RNLA Executive Director Michael Thielen wrote today citing examples of how the liberal establishment fears and tries to stifle speech by its opponents:

In 2017, in an effort led by Hillary’s former lawyer Marc Elias, establishment Democrats are now attacking Democrats on the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity for having the temerity to try to bring bipartisan balance to the investigation of the electoral system.  Elias implied that long-serving Democrat Secretary of State, Bill Gardner of New Hampshire, is not a real Democrat because he accepted an appointment to serve on the commission. 

Next, Elias’ ally Rick Hasen wrote an op-ed calling on another Democrat, Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap, to resign from the commission because Hasen, like other liberals, has pre-determined that what the commission will do and say will be offensive and wrong before the commission has even begun its work.  Instead of wanting Democrats to have a seat at the table on President Trump’s commission — to hopefully represent the Democrats’ perspective and engage in an intellectual discussion for the benefit of the country as a whole — Hasen declares that Dunlap’s speech and participation would serve no purpose.  The speech of the commission must be opposed before it even occurs, because of its association with President Trump. These lions of the law, known for their skills of argument, are apparently fearful they will be unable to counter the findings if they allow the commission to do its work. . . .  

In New York, for example, liberals have declared war on 501(c)(3) nonprofit charities, requiring them to disclose their donors if the organization gives donations or in-kind support to 501(c)(4) groups that are lobbying in New York.  Disclosure of the 501(c)(3) organization’s donors is required even if its grant was to be used specifically for non-lobbying purposes.

Partisan Democrats like Marc Elias are naturally opposed to anything involving Republicans, but it is disappointing that Prof. Hasen has pre-judged the report of a commission that has not even begun its work, when he has been willing to point out the shortcomings of a flawed report that supports his policy preferences.  There is likely to be something in the Election Integrity Commission's report and findings that even liberals can agree with, but they are not willing to wait for the commission to do its work and see what it finds.  The commission is going to examine improper voter registrations, which is something even liberals and Democrats agree is a problem.

Instead of welcoming robust debate so that the best ideas are honed and prevail, a concept that is at the very core of our American system of government, modern liberals want to silence speakers who don't share their views.  This is a frightening impulse that should disturb both liberals and conservatives, especially when backed with the power of government as in New York.

The New York Times Shows Its Agenda on Vote Fraud

After years of ignoring vote fraud within New York City and state, The New York Times finally wrote a story on it, in Texas.  Of course, the story was incredibly biased and instead was, again, only written to make it harder for vote fraud to be prosecuted.

From a journalistic standpoint, the story is flawed.  Keep in mind a jury, who, unlike The New York Times, was there for the entire trial, convicted Rosa Ortega.  Yet the Times story features a picture of her family and lawyer and focuses on her side of the case: "She said in court that she had not known she was ineligible to vote and was confused by registration forms and explanations by election officials."

A side the jury did not find persuasive.  As was reported elsewhere: “The jury took a few hours to find her guilty on both counts.”

While the Times focuses on Oretega's alleged confusion, the jury clearly put more weight on other matters.  For example (emphasis ours):

The Tarrant County indictment stated that she voted in the November 2012 General Election and the May 2014 Primary Run-off, knowing she was not eligible to vote because she is not a U.S. citizen. Ortega had previously applied to vote, but Tarrant County officials rejected her application because she admitted on the form to non-citizen status when asked. She filled out an application five months later and alleged she was a citizen.

Obviously the jury did not feel this was a confused person but rather a person who knew what she was doing and was trying to get around the law.  She was a person who changed her citizenship answer after she was rejected and told she was ineligible. 

The Times briefly quotes the Assistant AG in the case:

Jonathan White, an assistant attorney general who helped prosecute the Ortega case with Tarrant County officials, said the evidence of fraud was unambiguous. “She told the elections office she was a citizen,” he said. “She told everyone else she wasn’t,” including a recorded statement to prosecutors in which she said she was a citizen of Mexico.

The jury obviously believed the prosecutors. 

Regardless, the national focus the Times gives this story is in stark contrast to its stance on vote fraud locally.  The New York Times has ignored vote fraud in its own neighborhood for years.  It has become comical how it ignores vote fraud.  Here are just a few examples:

ICMYI: NY Ballot Box Stuff Scheme Now Importing People from Israel
More on NY Vote Fraud Scandal, Apartment Manager Vote Fraud?
Hard to Tell Where the Incompetence Ends and the Fraud Begins
Police Prove How Easy it is to Impersonate Voters in Hometown of Vote Fraud Deniers
Brazen Voting Fraud Alleged Among Ultra-Orthodox In Williamsburg

We could even list the vote fraud in New York by famous New Yorkers such as Al Sharpton and Geraldine Ferraro if we went back further.  Vote fraud is rampant in New York and instead of covering it, they present a biased view of one case in Texas. 

Fake News?  

NY BOE Sends Dead Voters Absentee Ballots; Keeps Dead Voters on Rolls

The New York Board of Elections has kept deceased voters on the voter registration rolls and keeps sending them absentee ballots:

Queens resident Michelle Dimino has a simple request for the city’s Board of Elections: Please remove my late dad from the voter rolls. . . . “In 2013, 2014, 2015 and again this year, I received absentee ballots for my father. I could have fraudulently voted with those ballots, but I shredded them instead,” an exasperated Dimino told The Post.

Fortunately, this deceased voter's family is honest.  But unfortunately, the Board of Elections has kept Ms. Dimino's father on the voter registration rolls despite his family's efforts to have him removed:

What’s upsetting, Dimino said, is that she called the elections board shortly after her father’s death to ask that he be purged from the rolls. 

She said election workers insisted she would have to show up in person at an agency office with a death certificate to confirm her dad was no longer alive. 

Dimino, 48, told the workers she’s been on dialysis and asked if she could mail in her father’s death certificate to put the issue to rest. 

She says she was told she couldn’t [contrary to Board policy]. 

And this problem is not isolated to Ms. Dimino's father:

Queens resident Stewart Marden told The Post that the city’s Board of Elections has been sending him absentee ballots for his son, Russell, for the past eight years — even though the 38-year-old died of multiple sclerosis in 2008. 

Marden said he told the BOE that his son was dead in 2008. But he kept getting ballots for him. . . . 

The son of Helen Petersen, Jonathan, a Brooklynite who died in 2010 while suffering from dementia, shared a similar tale. . . . 

State law requires that the Board of Elections get monthly updates from the city Health Department on residents who died, a New York election official said. . . . The BOE declined to discuss its procedures for purging dead voters.

When concerned citizens do more to keep the voter registration rolls accurate than the Board of Elections and when the Board of Elections puts obstacles in the way of voter registration roll accuracy, it creates the opportunity for fraud.  As the Lawyers Democracy Fund notes, this is a common problem "that occurs when state and local election officials fail to identify and remove deceased voters from the voter rolls.  Absentee or mail ballots are sent year after year, election after election and the deceased person may remain on the rolls for decades."

2nd Circuit Cancels Special GOP Primary In NY 3rd Congressional District

After months of back and forth, the Second Circuit overturned a district court decision that had scheduled a special Republican primary on October 6 in the race for New York's 3rd congressional seat:

U.S. District Court Judge Frederick J. Scullin set the Oct. 6 primary in an Aug. 17 ruling and ordered the state Board of Elections to apply for an exemption to a federal law setting deadlines for mailing absentee ballots to overseas military voters. 

Martins appealed to the Second Circuit after Scullin later rejected his request to delay the general election to Dec. 6, arguing only a month between the GOP primary and Nov. 8 general would disenfranchise military voters and disadvantage his campaign. 

Pidot went to federal court after the state Supreme Court ruled June 24 that there was not enough time to put him on the ballot for the original June 28 primary. Martins supporters knocked him off the ballot in May, but the court later found he had enough petition signatures from Republican voters to qualify as a candidate. 

The Second Circuit's decision relied, in part, on the roles of federal and state courts in election matters:

Wednesday’s ruling falls in line with nine other cases in which federal courts denied candidates’ request to get on the ballot after losing in state court, according to a Sept. 1 case study by the Federal Judicial Center. . . . In court filings, the state Board of Elections . . . asked the Second Circuit to cancel the primary because federal courts have no jurisdiction over election matters.

“The Second Circuit has long recognized that state forums are the appropriate place to litigate disputes about the mechanics of election administration,” lawyers for the board wrote in a court filing. 

Last Wednesday's ruling has important implications for ballot access, election administration, and the state-federal balance in control of elections. 

NY GOP Calls for Investigation of Pay to Play Violations by AG Schneiderman

New York Republicans are calling for an investigation of Democrat Attorney General Eric Schneiderman after emails were uncovered showing that his campaign to silence critics of the theory of man-made global warming may have been motivated not only by his political animus but also by potential campaign donations for a gubernatorial run:

The New York Post obtained emails showing Schneiderman reaching out to former hedge fund manager Tom Steyer in March — about four months after Schneiderman began investigating ExxonMobil for allegedly misleading investors about the risks of global warming. 

Steyer, a major funder of environmental causes and an Exxon critic, spent more than $73 million in the 2014 election cycle supporting Democratic candidates and opposing Republicans. 

Schneiderman also wanted to talk to Steyer about his ongoing Exxon investigation, which is being pushed by environmentalists who want to see the company punished like the tobacco industry.

State Republican Chairman Edward Cox called for an investigation of Schneiderman for using his office for improper political gain:

Another day, and more evidence Eric Schneiderman is using the Office of the Attorney General for political purposes. Just last week we learned he is allowing his close ally Hillary Clinton to subvert New York charity laws by refusing her to disclose the Foundation's foreign donors, and now we learn he sought to leverage his investigation of ExxonMobil to secure support from billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer in his potential run for higher office. 

Mr. Schneiderman has established a long and disturbing pattern of abusing the power of his office for political gain. Both of these cases indicate sufficient evidence to warrant an independent investigation by US Attorney Preet Bharara. Mr. Schneiderman must also comply with a subpoena issued by the U.S. House Science Committee requesting information about his ExxonMobil investigations amid allegations that the investigation is politically motivated. To date, he has chosen to defy the subpoena, leaving many troubling questions unanswered. As the highest ranking law enforcement officer in the state, the Attorney General must be above politics and until this matter is investigated by an independent body, there will be an indelible stain on the office.

In addition to the troubling free speech implications of General Schneiderman's investigation of climate change deniers, he may be using government power to advance his political career and court wealthy donors.  "Disturbing" indeed.

NY Times Goes to GA to Make Up Story While Ignoring Real Vote Fraud in Its Neighborhood

The New York Times today did something it never does: it mentioned vote fraud in a headline (see picture, we are not going to link to the “story”).  Of course, the story has nothing to do with vote fraud or the integrity of the election.  The New York Times has a long history of ignoring vote fraud, and instead the purpose of the story was to scare African Americans that their vote is being taken away from them.  Ironically, while the story focuses on the alleged bigotry behind the voting laws in Georgia, The New York Times ignored the actually anti-Semitic bigotry of Georgia Democrat Congressman and Super delegate Hank Johnson last week. 

We thought we would take a moment to list some of the actual vote fraud that has happened in New York that has been completely ignored by The New York Times:

ICMYI: NY Ballot Box Stuff Scheme Now Importing People from Israel

More on NY Vote Fraud Scandal, Apartment Manager Vote Fraud?

Hard to Tell Where the Incompetence Ends and the Fraud Begins

Police Prove How Easy it is to Impersonate Voters in Hometown of Vote Fraud Deniers

Brazen Voting Fraud Alleged Among Ultra-Orthodox In Williamsburg

We can go and on.  We could even list the vote fraud in New York by famous New Yorkers such as Al Sharpton and Geraldine Ferraro if we went back further.  Vote fraud is rampant in New York and instead of covering it, The New York Times goes to Georgia in an apparent effort to scare voters nationwide.  Shame on the Times.   

ICYMI: NY Punishes GOP Election Official For Democrat Errors

It seems like anything goes in New York elections.  New York City's election on April 19 was an election administration disaster with massive problems reported in Democrat precincts.  So how did New York Board of Elections deal with the problem?  (emphasis ours.)

The city’s Board of Elections suspended the top official at its Brooklyn office without pay as they probe the mysterious purge of more than 120,000 Democratic voters from the borough rolls that wreaked havoc on Tuesday presidential primaries.

The solo suspension of Diane Haslett-Rudiano from her $125,000-a-year post over widespread polling problems is raising eyebrows that extend beyond party lines.

Democrat Betty Ann Canizio, the BOE Deputy Clerk for Brooklyn, is the official primarily responsible for overseeing the borough’s Democratic voting rolls while Haslett-Rudiano, a Republican, oversees her party’s rolls, sources said.

“It sounds like they cut a deal to make the Republican the scapegoat and protect Betty Ann,” said an elected Brooklyn official who’s a Democrat.

So a Democrat official makes massive errors in the Democrat primary resulting in disenfranchisement and a Republican official is being suspended.  At least she is not being referred to the District Attorney for prosecution as were the Police Officers who uncovered massive and systematic problems with New York’s voting system:

In fact, the Board thinks investigators who were allowed to cast ballots even though they posed as deceased people and felons should themselves be investigated.

The BOE voted to ask the city’s district attorneys to examine whether the Department of Investigation violated laws in its exhaustive inquiry.

New York remains one of the most corrupt election authorities in the country. 

Hard to Tell Where the Incompetence Ends and the Fraud Begins

Democrats have been working to disenfranchise Republicans in many ways, whether it is by vote fraud or systems that enable fraudulent voting like automatic voter registration or same-day registration.  But the Democrat election officials in Harlem, New York, took it to a new level today.  

CORRUPTION IN FULL FORCE in Harlem...I'm told there are NO republican ballots available and I was given this one pic.twitter.com/qaDrctjhOG

— John Burnett (@IAmJohnBurnett) April 19, 2016

And to be clear, Mr. Burnett was a properly registered Republican:

After showing voter card I signed book and given @democrat ballot. I asked for @GOP ballot, told no more and to wait pic.twitter.com/iFBo3whmI8

— John Burnett (@IAmJohnBurnett) April 19, 2016

As one famous Republican election law expert is fond of saying, it is hard to tell where the incompetence ends and the fraud begins. On the latter, see this final tweet by Mr. Burnett:

Hope ballots are NOT like petitions that require everything to be correct. It's "Affidavit" not "Affidaivt" pic.twitter.com/Bhypi7rh9z

— John Burnett (@IAmJohnBurnett) April 19, 2016

Does the Left Care About ACTUAL Voter Disenfranchisement?

In the home of one of the leading vote fraud deniers, the Brennan Center, a week ago a massive vote fraud scheme was brought to trial.  The Brennan Center spent months wailing about massive mythical disenfranchisement of voters by voter ID in Texas, yet remains silent about actual disenfranchisement in their own neighborhood.   

Hector Ramirez was arrested Tuesday on massive voter fraud charges in his failed 2014 Assembly bid.

Ramirez and his allies went door-to-door in his west Bronx district duping voters into letting the veteran pol’s campaign staff vote on their behalf, a prosecutor charged as the 242-count indictment was unsealed.

“Victim after victim after victim testified to the grand jury that members of the Ramirez campaign knocked on their door, including Hector Ramirez himself, and said ‘Hey, you don’t have to go to the polls for this election, just sign here,” Assistant District Attorney Pishoy Yacoub said in Bronx Supreme Court.

The Brennan Center and other vote fraud deniers will no doubt argue that Mr. Ramirez sill lost the election so what does it matter?  However, that argument fails for two reasons.  The lesser of the two reasons is the fact the election was just two votes away from an alleged criminal being elected is hardly comforting.  If he was just a slightly better cheat, he would have won. 

However, the bigger reason is that it disenfranchised voters and entire ballots. 

Those voters never got their ballots back, Yacoub said.

Unlike the mythical claims of voter ID disenfranchising people, this really did happen.  They lost their votes.  The Brennan Center is silent.  Is it because they don’t care about disenfranchisement?  It seems likely.  The Brennan Center and other vote fraud deniers focus on issues such as voter ID to scare and fundraise off rather than issues such as vote fraud that actually disenfranchise voters.  

A New York Democrat Explains Why Voter ID is Necessary

Councilman Vincent Gentile of New York spilled the beans and said what all HONEST candidates in New York know, Elections need ID.

The candidate said his personal experiences as a politician in New York, one of the 18 states nationwide with no voter ID laws, had made him a supporter of the measures.

“All of us who’ve run before are, can tell you stories about what happens on Election Day,” he said.

We have often detailed the problems in New York with election fraud.  Vincent Gentile is not just a local councilman.  He is the Democrat Party Nominee for the open Congressional seat in the eleventh district.  Gentile added:

“There should be some kind of identification when a person presents themselves to vote,” Mr. Gentile said. “Whether it’s a photo, or something, there should be some kind of identification presented that is secure on Election Day before you’re able to vote.”

Of course other liberals, including his own campaign staff disagreed with him. Gentile will be taken to the woodshed for speaking the truth openly.  Gentile let the cat out of the bag.  Vote fraud is real and Voter ID can help stop it. Don’t take our word for it; take the word of this elected Democrat running for Congress.  

Republicans Poised to Win Special Election in New York

  

District Attorney General Dan Donovan is running in the country’s NEXT special Congressional election.  The election for New York's 11th Congressional District being held on May 5, 2015 where Donovan has been in the national eye for several years.

House Speaker John Boehner called District Attorney Daniel Donovan in 2008 to ask him if he would consider running for Congress.

Donovan, the Republican DA on Staten Island, said, thanks, but no thanks.

"At that time, I wasn't prepared to go," he said in a recent interview. "There were still things I wanted to do in the DA's office."

Since taking office as District Attorney in Staten Island, Donovan has been a champion for diversity matters. 

In 2006, Donovan won the New York City Bar Association's Diversity Champion Award. When he took office, no assistant district attorneys there spoke Spanish, unable to work with Spanish-speaking people on Staten Island. The first three ADAs Donovan hired were Spanish-speaking. He subsequently added Korean, Hindi, Italian and Chinese speakers. More than one-third of new assistant district attorneys in his office have been racial-ethnic minorities.

Even Mayor Bill de Blasio, who has an approval rating hovering in the mid-20s on conservative-leaning Staten Island couldn’t help but pay Donovan a compliment.

"In my previous, personal work with the district attorney, it's been respectful and professional for sure," de Blasio said when asked about the Island prosecutor at an unrelated press conference in Queens. 

Please join us from Noon-2pm next Wednesday at St. Andrew’s Restaurant in Manhattan.  Buy tickets online in advance and save! Only $15 for RNLA Members and $25 for-non-members (prices increase at the door).

St. Andrews Restaurant
140 W 46th St

New York, NY 10036

With questions or to RSVP for a pay at the door tickets, email ny13@republicanlaywer.net.

Even if you cannot attend the luncheon, please consider helping his campaign.  Daniel M. Donovan, Jr. was elected Richmond County District Attorney in November 2003, becoming the first Republican elected District Attorney in New York City in over fifty years. He was overwhelmingly re-elected in 2007 and 2011 with nearly 70% of the vote.

This is not a fundraiser.

More Vote Fraud in the Home of Vote Fraud Deniers the Brennan Center

While some New York based groups such as the Brennan Center are busy trying to deny vote fraud nationally, there is so much vote fraud in New York that it is hard to keep track of it.  In this election cycle, we have seen corrupt election officials, attacks on police officers for trying to stop vote fraud, voter impersonation schemes, busing in live voters to vote for the dead, voters from other countries, and much more. 

However, once again New York proves that there is an unlimited amount of hubris when it comes to vote fraud.  For currently the Bronx District Attorney is looking into vote fraud allegations in a race to fill an assembly member who had to resign because of, you guessed it, vote fraud.

The Bronx DA is investigating claims of voter fraud in a hotly contested Democratic primary for the Assembly that was decided by two votes.

. . .Ironically, Pichardo, by winning a special election, succeeded Assemblyman Nelson Castro, who was nailed for election fraud after nine voters were discovered registered at his one-bedroom apartment.

The New York ironies continues with the Brennan Center’s denials of vote fraud.  I would like to suggest that leading vote fraud deniers the Brennan Center move their location to another state.  It is really hurting their argument that vote fraud does not exist when it is continually happening in their own neighborhood.  

ICMYI: NY Ballot Box Stuff Scheme Now Importing People from Israel

In the last two years in New York we thought we had seen it all when it comes to vote fraud but apparently not. In the tiny town of Bloomingburg, New York, voters are even coming from Israel in a scheme, in the words of a judge to “stuff the ballot box.”

In the tiny village of Bloomingburg, New York, the votes on whether or not to dissolve the 420-person village’s government and fold the village into the neighboring Town of Mamakating were reportedly sealed by Sullivan County Supreme Court Judge Stephan Schick.  . . .

The potential dissolution of the village government would strongly favor opponents of a high-density occupancy 396-unit townhouse development that is being markets as Kiryat Yated Lev, an all-Satmar hasidic village that backers clearly intend to subsume and overwhelm Bloomingburg’s existing 420 residents. The development was originally pitched to the village by a Lamm front-man working for the actual developer, Shalom Lamm, who claimed it would be a low-density retirement and vacation home complex complete with a golf course.

Lamm was accused of voter fraud in the village elections held this past spring. He, his family and almost 100 hasidim tried to vote in the election even though they were not village residents. Lamm’s daughter and son-in-law, who had never lived in the village and who both live and work full time in Israel, flew in and tried to vote. Close to two dozen hasidic adults claimed the same Bloomingburg house owned by Lamm as their legal residence, and Lamm – who had in court documents filed in late December in an unrelated case claimed that his legal residence is in West Hempstead, New York miles away from Bloomingburg also tried to vote. All those votes were excluded and a judge lashed out at Lamm and the hasidim for apparent “ballot stuffing.”

Also this past spring, the FBI raided Lamm’s Bloomingburg office and several of his local properties, and Lamm is believed be under criminal investigation.

More vote fraud in the home of vote fraud deniers the Brennan Center and Al Sharpton.  More they will ignore, but fortunately the courts in this case are not.  

Training Woes in New York Underscore Need for Oversight in the Polling Place

A piece in yesterday’s New York Daily News recounted a sobering story from an observer of the training of election officials in New York City:

“There was an assistant trainer who arrived for an afternoon class wearing a letter carrier uniform. She also had her wheeled mail cart. While the lead trainer and other assistants taught the class, she used a table to sort her mail.
Then, around 5 p.m., she left and returned a little bit later in street clothes.”

And: “They wheeled in a woman to take the class in a walker wearing a nightgown. She needed to be in a hospital, not in a training class.”

And: “A woman who had taken the training gave answers to a friend who was taking the test. The trainer said she could stay. 

This is a distressing report to say the least. The adequate training of local poll workers, the very officials responsible for ensuring the election is run smoothly and with integrity at the polling place, is a prerequisite to a well-functioning electoral system. Poll workers are responsible for running the election from setting up the equipment, verifying the eligibility of voters, triaging voting equipment breakdowns, accurately reporting totals after the polls close, and following procedures to ensure the proper chain of custody of ballots and other election materials. If these folks are not adequately trained and able to perform their jobs competently, there is little reason to have confidence in our elections.

Certainly, we believe this is not the norm, either in New York City or nationwide. The vast majority of trainers and local poll workers are dedicated to their jobs and take pride in the civic duty of working an extraordinarily long day for little money. However, as we have seen in many past elections, a few bad apples can spoil the whole bunch. In a close election, one dysfunctional polling place can cast into doubt the results of the entire election.

This all underscores two important points. One, it is essential that candidates and political parties be given reasonable access to observe the election from within the polling place. Observers and monitors can ensure that the election is run transparently, competently, and without fraud and that both sides can accept the results regardless of who wins. Observers provide added legitimacy to a process that is complex and, unfortunately, has a long history of fraud that leads many voters to view our election process cynically. For our part, RNLA works tirelessly to ensure Republican attorneys and volunteers are trained and given the opportunity to volunteer to assist in these election integrity observation efforts. We will continue these efforts so long as there is the risk for fraud and election official incompetence.

Second, is the importance that election officials place a higher priority on its training efforts. Both the RNLA and the Presidential Commission on Election Administration’s reports recommended as much. You can find RNLA’s thoughts on the importance of improved training here. 

Indicted NY City Councilman Pushes Criminal Voting Over Needed Election Reforms

The NY Post has an interesting piece today about Ruben Wills, a NY City Councilman who is pushing legislation in the City Council to require the city Department of Corrections to “publicize the right of prisoners — awaiting trial or convicted of misdemeanors — to vote.” This is, at best, a questionable use of limited government resources. More interestingly, the Councilman is under indictment for “allegedly swiping government funds from a nonprofit that he once ran”

There is obvious absurdity and irony in an indicted Councilman pushing legislation to help imprisoned likely criminals to vote. Certainly, those incarcerated, non-convicted prisoners should be able to vote if they are otherwise qualified to vote. We do believe in innocent until proven guilty in the United States. However, we really have to ask if it is appropriate for an indicted Councilman to push this legislation, and secondly, if this is really the best use of taxpayer resources? We know New York City has serious deep-seeded and systematic problems with its elections so it’s perplexing why a City Council member would be focusing on superfluous priorities such as pushing voting for city prisoners.

NYC’s longstanding election administration problems were uncovered in a recent investigation and subsequent audit report from the New York Department of Investigations (DOI). During the course of its audit, the DOI identified a number of individuals who should have been removed from the city’s voter rolls, including ineligible felons, but were not. DOI investigators then appeared at NYC polling places to vote in the name of the ineligible voters. Undercover agents were cleared by poll workers to vote for the ineligible voters 97% of the time. DOI investigators were able to vote for 14 out of the 15 felons they impersonated at the polls. DOI would have had complete success if it weren’t for one amazing coincidence recounted in the audit report: 

In the one instance where an investigator failed to vote as a felon listed in the registration book, the investigator was unable to vote because the poll inspector at the election district 18 table stated that she was the mother of the felon voter for whom the investigator was attempting to vote.

The DOI’s audit report was nothing short of an indictment on New York City’s electoral system. You think the Councilman whose body is responsible for oversight of the city’s Board of Elections would be focusing his attention on holding the BOE accountable for fixing the dozens of problems identified in the report, including the charges of nepotism, inadequate training, and vulnerabilities to fraud. Instead, he is pushing for voting rights for prisoners, a position he may very well find himself if incarcerated for his alleged crime.