Sunday, March 18, 2007

The Big Problem With Voter Fraud That Wasn't

Kos explains the origin of this voter fraud claim and why the US Attorney's did not prosecute. The US Attorney, David C. Iglesia,s is accused of not doing his job. Once you look at the facts, you find that he actually did it quite well.

Here is the link to the Dailykos post.

"In both states, Republicans seized on these registration follies as incidents of massive voter fraud. ACORN became "Democratic operatives," and every twelve-year-old and animated dog scribbled down on a page sent back to ACORN was trumpeted as further evidence of an attempt by Democrats to subvert the election. When Inglesias, and other US attorneys, failed to validate this great central tenet of Republican mythology -- that Democrats are out to stuff the ballot boxes -- the hue and cry went out for his dismissal.
Ignored in all this is that there has never been any evidence that a single one of these false registrations appears to have been made for the purpose of casting an illegal vote.

Mr. Iglesisas said, prosecutors would have had to prove that the [ACORN
registrar], who had been fired for other reasons, had falsified the applications
with the intent of influencing the election. Mr. Iglesias said "it appeared she
was just doing it for the money."

  • The great majority of such false registrations never reach the rolls, because states have mechanisms in place to filter out just such false registrations.
  • No evidence has ever been presented that these registrations have either been for the cause of any illegal votes.
  • Someone walking into a polling place and claiming to be Daffy Duck is likely to be met with a bit of skepticism, and a pre-pubescent waving registration card will get nothing but a pat on the head -- which makes all these false registrations of highly questionable value."

1 comment:

voyageur said...

There's always a certain of voter fraud. That's why certain groups oppose the use of ID's or any form of verification to make sure that only properly enfranchised voters (as opposed to, say, illegal aliens or someone who has already voted once that day) are allowed to vote.

Those who oppose the IDs think that they benefit from voter fraud tilting the elections in their favor.