|
Latest Stories
Recent blog posts
|
October 10, 2008 - 5:45am.
The New York Times based its findings on reviews of state records and Social Security data, and said it had identified apparent problems in Colorado, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Nevada and North Carolina. Two states had purged voters, the Times said. Ohio and three other states were cited only for sending several requests for voter registration verifications to the Social Security Administration. The Times said voters appear to have been purged by mistake and not because of any intentional violations by election officials or coordinated efforts by any party. It says that some states are improperly using Social Security data to verify new voters' registration applications, and that others might have broken rules that govern removing voters from the rolls within 90 days of a federal election. Elections officials in several states disputed that any voters were illegally removed from rolls. Michigan elections director Chris Thomas said the state removed only people who have died, notified authorities of a move or who were declared unfit to vote, which is well within the parameters of the law. Thomas said only 11,000 voters were removed from Michigan rolls in August — not 33,000, the figure cited in the report. "There is no illegal purging going on," Thomas told The Associated Press on Thursday. The Times stood by its story. Spokeswoman Catherine Mathis said the newspaper's reporting was based on voter registration data provided by the states themselves, and in Michigan's case compared an Aug. 5 snapshot of registered voters with a Sept. 5 snapshot. She said the Times explained its methodology to Thomas on Thursday, "and he said he could not explain the discrepancy between our figures and Michigan's official numbers." States have been trying to follow the Help America Vote Act of 2002 by removing the names of voters who should no longer be listed. But for every voter added to the rolls in the past two months in some states, election officials have removed two, the Times' review of the records found. States appear to have violated federal law in one of two ways, according to the newspaper report. Some are removing voters from the rolls within 90 days of a federal election, which is not allowed except when voters die, notify the authorities that they have moved out of state or have been declared unfit to vote, The Times said. And some of the states are improperly using Social Security data to verify registration applications for new voters, the newspaper reported. Under the Help America Vote Act, many states have an agreement with the Social Security Administration requiring them to submit the last four digits of a new voter's Social Security number for verification if the person does not have a valid state-issued ID, such as a license. Colorado said it would review its practices of "canceling" voters who had moved, died or were deemed otherwise ineligible. Secretary of State Mike Coffman said he asked lawyers to determine if the state's protocols violated a federal ban on "systematic" purging close to an election, but said because people, not computers, were doing the reviews, he believed they were sound. He said nearly 2,500 voters may be restored if the procedure is found to have violated the law. Last week, amid concerns about an uptick in the number of requests for verification, Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue sent a letter to officials in Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Nevada, North Carolina and Ohio seeking to verify that the checks were run only on new voters who don't have acceptable identification. States have said the increase in checks is due partly to a stream of new voters coming in to register. Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner's office released a copy of the letter in which Astrue notes that his agency had received more than 740,000 requests for verification from Ohio since Oct. 1, 2007. "Such a volume appears to be much greater than one would expect, given that states of comparable or larger populations have a significantly lower number of verification requests," the letter said. Brunner said Tuesday that roughly 666,000 new voters had registered in Ohio since the start of 2008. Late Thursday, a federal judge ordered Brunner to not only verify the identity of newly registered voters in accordance with the Help America Vote Act, but to also establish a process by which Ohio's 88 county election boards can access the information. Brunner has been doing the verification, but has not established that process. She said the Ohio attorney general's office is filing an immediate appeal of the judge's order. The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by the Ohio Republican Party against Brunner, a Democrat. In Georgia, federal officials say some 2 million checks have been completed, but only 406,000 new voters were registered. The Department of Justice has questioned the checks, and state officials say they are trying to determine how federal authorities arrived at that figure. North Carolina elections watchdog Bob Hall, who heads the advocacy group Democracy North Carolina, defended the state's elections board and called the Times story "reprehensible." Hall said he has found that many registration forms are incomplete or partly illegible and that many prospective voters provide Social Security numbers instead of driver's licenses. Because of that, he said it's not surprising that the state would need to run so many verifications. Indiana also defended its procedures. "Using all available appropriate technology is our best way to combat voter fraud that we know exists in this state and across the country," Secretary of State Todd Rokita said in a statement Thursday. Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller issued a statement calling the Times report misleading. "I want to assure Nevadans that any suggestion that eligible voters will be denied their right to participate in this election on Nov. 4 is false," he said. If voters were wrongfully removed from rolls, they could show up on Election Day and be challenged by political party officials or election workers. Any discrepancy could disproportionately affect Democrats, who have registered voters more aggressively. Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press
Capitol Hill Blue's columnists, blogs and reader comments Capitol Hill Blue is an independent, non-partisan news site that belongs to no political party and subscribes to no political or philosophical point-of-view. Our columnists are welcome to their opinions but readers should understand that their views do not necessarily reflect the editorial policies of this web site. We also welcome comments to selected opinion columns and in our popular ReaderRant discussion forum. Please remember, however, that we believe in civility on this web site and comments may be reviewed, moderated or removed if we feel they contain obscenities, racism, bigotry, anti-Semitic remarks or attack other posters. Our goal is reasoned discussion on issues facing this nation and we do not feel that goal is served by personal attacks and by seeing how many cute adjectives you can attach to an elected official or politician's name. Copyright © 2008 Capitol Hill Blue
|
User login
|
Those states listed:
Submitted by Malibu on October 10, 2008 - 6:26am.Those states listed: "problems in Colorado, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Nevada and North Carolina" seem to be the very same states that are considered SWING STATES!
Why is it that I tend to distrust the Republican Party when these glitches are located prior to or even after a major election? Please tell me I'm wrong....
Malcolm
Also, why didn't the
Submitted by Klaus Hergeschimmer on October 10, 2008 - 6:42am.Also, why didn't the Democrappers detect this malfeasence of voter registration, why can't the D-Crappers do its job instead of the NY Times doing its job for them.
Since Chimp won in 2000, the D-Crappers have had eight years to get to the bottom of Republikaner voting fraud scams.
Screw the D-Crappers!
No More Lexus Liberals!
No More Pants Suit Wenches!
Vote Nader! (he's not Darth Vader)
As I read the story it is
Submitted by gazelle1929 on October 10, 2008 - 7:33am.As I read the story it is more a case of states floundering to do what is legal in an area where the laws are clearly difficult. The Times got it right when they said "voters appear to have been purged by mistake and not because of any intentional violations by election officials or coordinated efforts by any party."
Unless we do something really stupid like require a Federal ID card for every human in the US we are always going to have shortcomings and glitches. And at the risk of sounding selfish, I'd rather have problems at the polls than have problems with jackboots in the streets randomly demanding "your papers, please."
The people at Democracy North Carolina are right in maintaining that the Times story is reprehensible. You can read Mr Hall's statement here:
http://www.democracy-nc.org/whatsnew/2008/False.sh...
>> I'd rather have problems
Submitted by ekaton on October 11, 2008 - 7:51am.>>
I'd rather have problems at the polls than have problems with jackboots in the streets randomly demanding "your papers, please."
<<
The national id card is coming, regardless. Its just one more facet of the coming full fascist police state.
-- Kent Shaw
They can't even register
Submitted by woody188 on October 10, 2008 - 8:37am.They can't even register voters correctly. How can we expect them to count those votes accurately?
Our elections are a sham. A dog and pony show to make the masses feel like they have a say in government.
I must have missed
Submitted by gazelle1929 on October 10, 2008 - 8:40am.I must have missed something. Where does it say that "they" whoever "they" are cannot register voters correctly?
And it may be a dog and pony show (something which I don't believe) but it's the only one in town.
Why not provide some solutions to the problems as you see them?
I must have missed
Submitted by woody188 on October 10, 2008 - 2:59pm.I must have missed something.
This is happening all too frequently.
Where does it say that "they" whoever "they" are cannot register voters correctly?
There is a large discrepancy between newly registered voters and checks with SSA:
Ohio: 74,000 more checks than new voters
Georgia: 1,594,000 more checks than new voters
That is why the SSA sent the letter to the states election leaders (THEY) letting them know something wasn't kosher. Like it's some huge coincidence it's occurring in the swing states. Do you read or are you just skimming these articles?
You even quoted: "voters appear to have been purged by mistake and not because of any intentional violations by election officials or coordinated efforts by any party."
Oh great, so they (election officials) are just incompetent, not malicious. Either way their errors in registering voters doesn't give me confidence that they won't make huge million count discrepancy errors just like this in the actual election.
And it may be a dog and pony show (something which I don't believe) but it's the only one in town.
That's why we need real reform like abolishing the two party system and forcing real equal time standards on the public's airwaves instead of the current Republicrat monopoly on the process.
Why not provide some solutions to the problems as you see them?
See above. And I don't see you providing any solutions, only denials that a problem even exists.
Perhaps you have to see an election get stolen like I have before you will believe the whole system is rigged. I've waited 5 hours to vote, and I have friends that waited 13 hours to vote. We watched thousands of people leave in disgust. We didn't have enough machines placed at the polling locations, and many of them were broken. But out in the suburbs there were no lines or waiting, only in the cities. And the 13 hours wait was at a liberal art college. All the long lines were in areas that were leaning Democrat.
My father was challenged even though he had resided at the same address more than 10 years and works for the VA. Yet someone had caged (purged) his name from the records.
This all happened under Ken Blackwell who was Ohio's Secretary of State and also Chairman of Bush's 2004 campaign in Ohio, a clear conflict of interest. John Conyers after investigating the problems said:
"Blackwell made Katherine Harris look like a cupcake. He saw his role as limiting the participation of Democratic voters. We had hearings in Columbus for two days. We could have stayed two weeks, the level of fury was so high. Thousands of people wanted to testify. Nothing like this had ever happened to them before."
So don't tell me to believe in this system. I know it doesn't work from first hand experience. You might check out this article if you are still having trouble believing it.
The repbubs try to paint
Submitted by adamrussell on October 10, 2008 - 11:37am.The repbubs try to paint this as a conspiracy by dems and acorn, but its always been a problem that some of the canvassers getting paid pennies per registration are not honest. It is more like employees padding their time card than like voter fraud. But already one republican congresscritter at least is trying to cut off funds to acorn, without trial.
Democrats are not and have
Submitted by DejaVuAllOver on October 10, 2008 - 2:45pm.Democrats are not and have very seldom been liberals. A liberal is someone who supports liberal rights for the working class. That was the definition of the term in 1840 and it's still the definition today. Some Republicans can rightly claim to be liberal, believe it or not. A Democrat, on the other hand, is a we-want-everything-for-nothing spineless loser with less courage than a pre-school toddler. I'm ashamed that I was stupid enough to have expected more.
Klaus, Nader is a LYING
Submitted by Baal on October 10, 2008 - 4:09pm.Klaus, Nader is a LYING HYPOCRITE.....You are just to dense to notice.... If you want to throw your vote away, vote for Dennis. He is @ least HONEST.
Anybody who votes for Nader is a puppet of the GOP...
http://www.realchange.org/nader.htm
"Nader wraps himself in the mantle of "public interest" with a personally ascetic style and a focus on structural or "apple pie" issues -- consumer safety, corporate accountability, "citizen power" -- rather than traditional partisan issues. He opposes not conservatives, but arrogant corporate leaders who amass money through public tax breaks, deny any democratic input or inquiry, and viciously attack anyone who challenges them. It's a brilliant strategy.
Unfortunately, Nader has become exactly what he attacks. His organizations allow no public input, intimidate foes and journalists, bust unions, hide almost all details of their finances (to the point of breaking laws), and have amassed millions of dollars - all under Nader's direct and autocratic control. Meanwhile, Ralph has gotten rich off of investments in stock; in other words, by owning and profiting off the very corporations he is attacking."
I think dems should consider
Submitted by adamrussell on October 11, 2008 - 9:01pm.I think dems should consider hiring security for election day to prevent intimidation and/or violence at the polls. Yes it could get that nasty. And yes that should be the police's job, but if they wont do it we should.