Chronicling GOP vote fraud & suppression

[SirNitram]

Link

A right-wing voter vigilante group, TrueTheVote [3], may be pushing their anti-democratic agenda into illegal territory in Ohio by interfering with that state’s official poll worker training regimen one week before the 2012 presidential election.

In recent weeks, the Texas-based group, with many local affiliates drawn from Tea Party ranks, has been urging poll workers in key Ohio counties—primarily Republicans—to supplement their official state training with TrueTheVote materials. These Election Day workers are not the observers chosen by political parties who can watch but not interfere with voting; they are the people who are drawn from both parties and employed by the state to run the voting process.

“A few weeks back it was reported that TrueTheVote had talked about doing trainings,” said Brian Rothenberg, ProgressOhio [4] Executive Director. “It appears that some offshoot of the Tea Party is now training elections workers in Hamilton County and we’re starting to hear that it’s happening in other counties, and that requests are being made for lists of poll workers throughout Ohio—to provide extra training.”

It is a crime [5] in Ohio to interfere with conducting an election. Moreover, after the 2004 presidential election the state signed a federal consent decree [6] that, among other things, established uniform poll worker training. Whether TrueTheVote’s interference with the state’s official trainings violates these legal standards has not been tested in court.

But the possibility that the group might be urging poll workers to use different standards other than what’s prescribed by the state is disturbing, said Dan Tokaji [7], an election law professor at Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law.

“I don’t know what TrueTheVote has planned for Election Day. It would troubling be if outside groups were giving training to poll workers that conflicts with their legal obligation,” he said. “They are effectively state officials. Anything they do would be considered state action.”

Requests for comment with the Hamilton County Board of Elections and Ohio Secretary of State office were not returned by press time.

The U.S. has a history of partisans interfering—or trying to interfere—with voting at the polls, Tokaji said. Famously, decades before William Rehnquist became U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice, he tried to discourage [8] Latinos from voting in Arizona. In 2008 in Ohio, a GOP effort to obtain statewide voter files to screen for what it said was incorrectly registered voters was blocked in court, preventing [9] so-called voter ‘caging.’

This summer, AlterNet secretly attended [10] a TrueTheVote workshop in Colorado, where attendees were encouraged to police polling places. The organizers spoke of the need to take extra steps to verify voter identity, such as comparing a poll book’s signature to a voter’s ID, as well as asking for more proof of identification. That step would exceed legal standards because when a voter signs a poll book to get a ballot, their signature is an oath under penalty of perjury. The organizers also told people to be wary when an infirm voter seeks assistance—saying that could lead to fraudulent voting.

These paranoid examples underscore the group’s concerns that there is widespread illegal voting. As a strategy, TrueTheVote has tried to align itself with election officials and seek some form of deputized role. In Colorado, they offered to help counties with their voter list purges. In Wisconsin during last June’s gubernatorial recall election, they wanted to help verify recall petition signatures. Those two efforts led nowhere. But now in Ohio, they clearly are pushing the legal line with their poll worker training.

Ohio’s GOP Secretary of State John Husted has a volatile relationship with the group. Last winter, they sued [11] Husted’s office for not purging voter rolls. This summer, he was scheduled to speak at their Ohio summit but cancelled [12]. His office has issued directives—orders to 88 county boards of elections—preventing any voter caging in 2012, which angered TrueTheVote. However, when it comes to interfering with training poll workers, ProgressOhio said Husted appears to be “looking the other way.”

“Clearly there are two problems here,” Rothenberg said. “Yes, the [Election Day] rules are the rules. But it is how you emphasize it and who is invited for the extra training and what angle they are trying to put on the training that matters. It sure seems to me that they are probably pushing more of the Republican poll workers to their extra trainings, and trying to use the poll worker training effort for partisan purposes.”

Ohio election officials should draw a firm line and reject the group’s efforts, he said.

“We are going to call on the Hamilton County Board of Elections and the Ohio Secretary of State to ask anybody who has been hired by counties or by the state in a poll position that they not attend extra trainings, and that the folks that have gone to extra trainings be retrained so that there is uniformity in the way that they are told how to administer elections,” he said.

Regardless of how the poll worker training issue plays out, there is another factor that is troublesome to voting rights advocates. TrueTheVote’s focus on illegal voting tends to focus on communities of color where voters are from lower-income brackets, not the wealthier and whiter suburbs where Republicans are more likely to be found.

At their Colorado summit, organizers—including Republican Secretary of State Scott Gessler—told the volunteers to be prepared to be attacked as racist for their so-called election integrity work. That charge is even more volatile in Ohio, where in 2004 many barriers to voting appeared in the state’s African-American urban centers.

ProgressOhio’s Rothenberg was asked if their voting vigilante strategy was racist.

“Call it what you want. It’s basically trying to game the system in a way that will help the candidates that they prefer,” he said. “In this case, it’s very clear that they have a goal of pursuing an agenda and that agenda doesn’t include an overwhelming amount of people of color and how they’re voting. No one single race votes the same way every single time. Clearly, because of the way that they are approaching this, their actions will have a disproportionate affect on the African-American population… It is what it is.”

This groups' history makes it troubling. Ohio will be close, and a bunch of folks who have a history of voter intimidation and outright lies directing voters is worse.

[Ahriman238]

This is the second time I've heard this group's name in N&P, who in Valen's name are they (beyond Tea Party, I got that) and what do they think they're doing?

Leaving aside the paranoia that you need to presume a conspiracy to allow extra votes for a candidate, and if you want to rebuff that simply ask yourself if the risk of being caught and the heavy jail-time involved is justified by the couple more votes you could get for your candidate. Leaving all that aside, I have to demand an explanation for how helping an infirm voter to the booth if they ask will lead to voter fraud.

[FSTargetDrone]

"TrueTheVote"? Couldn't they have chosen a more awkward-sounding name?

[SirNitram]

True The Vote is a Tea Party group which is focused on 'voter fraud'. They train 'poll watchers', only instead of real ones, they train themselves, and the information is often incorrect.

The NYT covered their claims of a stealth-bus full of fake voters. Source. The Koch funded Americans For Prosperity has sponsored events for this so-called nonpartisan group. The leader even puts her impetus for starting the group like this..

“Then in 2008, I don’t know, something clicked,” she said. “I saw our country headed in a direction that, for whatever reason — it didn’t hit me until 2008 — this really threatens the future of our children.”

In short, she saw Obama get elected.

The Atlantic also has a peice on them, Link, mentioning the influx of complaints against them the first time they went out into minority areas. In 2010, in the Houston area, they garnered 800 complaints of intimidation. They even make claims of poisoning, getting locked in bathrooms, and all saying 'It's shocking to US, but THEY have all these tricks..'.

In short, angry older whites who saw Obama get elected, and now want to change that, under the perpetual guise of voter-impersonation fraud.

[Tanasinn]

"TrueTheVote"? Couldn't they have chosen a more awkward-sounding name?

It's deliciously Orwellian, too. "We're not committing voter fraud. We're truing it, you know, like a wheel on a bike."

[AMT]

I'm going to send this to my TV Anchor friend in Cincinnati

[Flagg]

In more voter intimidation news:

Think Progress

Wisconsin Election Official Confirms Romney Poll Watcher Materials Are Inaccurate

By Scott Keyes on Oct 31, 2012 at 9:00 am

On Tuesday, ThinkProgress reported on how the Romney campaign is training poll watchers to mislead voters in Wisconsin. Now, an election official in the Badger State has weighed in to criticize the Romney campaign’s practice of hiding their poll watchers’ affiliations and confirm that the materials they used in trainings are misleading.

Reid Magney, a spokesman for Wisconsin’s Government Accountability Board, spoke with the Washington Post about the story Tuesday and corrected the Romney campaign’s claims:

Pronouncing Election Day observers “the first line of defense” against illegal voting, the primer gives trainees some questionable advice. It says, for example, that convicted felons are ineligible to vote in Wisconsin. Not exactly true, according to Reid Magney, spokesman for the state’s Government Accountability Board, which administers elections. Felons who are out prison and have completed probation can vote, he said.

“Once you have completed the terms of your sentence your voting rights are restored in Wisconsin,” Magney said.

The materials cautioned observers not to assist voters, even though the law says voters can ask for help from anyone.

Magney also criticized the Romney campaign for instructing their poll watchers not to disclose any affiliation with the campaign when they sign in at the polls (they were told to list themselves as a “concerned citizen” instead). “We would hope that people would accurately represent who they are with,” he said, though he added that state would not card people as a means of enforcement.

The Obama campaign has sent a letter to Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen requesting he open an investigation into the trainings. “These acts of willful misinformation to individuals sent to polling locations to enforce the law raise serious concerns under Wisconsin law,” Bob Bauer, general counsel for the Obama campaign, wrote. “I ask that your office review this matter urgently, and take all necessary steps to protect the rights of our state’s voters.”

Magney told NBC News that “Our plan is to contact the Romney campaign and tell them there are issues” with the material.

Please move if it's not appropriate for this thread with my apologies but I didn't think it merited it's own thread.

[Ahriman238]

Again with "don't help the elderly/infirm vote" because...? Do they think people use them as a distraction so they can grab extra ballots?

For that matter, what the hell is a poll watcher if not someone who watches the polls and takes notes on who votes? How can they mislead or intimidate voters if they have nothing to do with the process except being physically in the gym/commmunity center/parking lot?

[SirNitram]

Again with "don't help the elderly/infirm vote" because...? Do they think people use them as a distraction so they can grab extra ballots?

For that matter, what the hell is a poll watcher if not someone who watches the polls and takes notes on who votes? How can they mislead or intimidate voters if they have nothing to do with the process except being physically in the gym/commmunity center/parking lot?

Sorry, but the only entities that just watch are election monitors from the UN.

[SirNitram]

More GOP fraud!

A Clackamas County elections worker is under criminal investigation for tampering with ballots, WW has learned.

The underlying allegation is that the woman, whose name has not been released, filled in blanks on ballots turned into the county for the Nov. 6 general election.

Sources familiar with the incident say their understanding is that the woman filled in a straight Republican ticket on the ballots where preferences had been left blank by voters.

Elections law makes marking another person's ballot a class C felony.

"ORS 260.715(1) states that a person may not knowingly make a false statement, oath or affidavit when required under election law. For purposes of voting, this means a person may not vote or sign any other person's (including a spouse's) ballot - not even with a power of attorney," says the secretary of state's elections manual.

Clackamas County Elections Clerk Sherry Hall could not be reached. Tim Heider, public affairs manager for Clackamas County, declined to comment.

The secretary of state's Elections Division handles civil complaints regarding elections matters but does not do criminal investigations. Deputy Secretary of State Barry Pack told WW via email that his agency referred the Clackamas County matter to the Oregon Department of Justice but says he cannot not comment further.

DOJ spokesman Jeff Manning confirms that his agency is on the case.
"We are investigating felony violations of Oregon election laws which allegedly took place in Clackamas County and involved a temporary county elections' employee's tampering with cast ballots," Manning told WW.

The Clackamas County Elections office is no stranger to controversy. Two years ago, Elections Clerk Hall mistakenly put a county commission race on the May ballot, although it was not scheduled until November. That error resulted in county commissioners and Hall battling in court over the $118,000 cost of printing ballots and also fighting over inaccurate voter's pamphlets and an 85-page elections complaint Hall subsequently filed against the commissioners.

To provide maximum transparency in front of the Nov. 6 election, DOJ's Manning says his agency hopes to resolve the Clackamas County case quickly.

They can't win on policies, emotions, or demographics anymore. They're just going to cheat like crazy. Also, could a mod change the name? It's becoming the go-to thread for GOP election fraud and suppression.

[Dalton]

Title changed.

[Ahriman238]

Sorry, but the only entities that just watch are election monitors from the UN.

What else can they do? Stand their with signs? Already lots of people doing that, and it doesn't exactly fall into under the heading of concealing your political allegiance? Harass the voters and the cops get called.

[Rogue 9]

Sorry, but the only entities that just watch are election monitors from the UN.

What else can they do? Stand their with signs? Already lots of people doing that, and it doesn't exactly fall into under the heading of concealing your political allegiance? Harass the voters and the cops get called.

Depending on state law, not even that. In Indiana it is illegal to campaign within three hundred feet of a polling precinct on Election Day.

[Lost Soal]

Sorry, but the only entities that just watch are election monitors from the UN.

What else can they do? Stand their with signs? Already lots of people doing that, and it doesn't exactly fall into under the heading of concealing your political allegiance? Harass the voters and the cops get called.

Depending on state law, not even that. In Indiana it is illegal to campaign within three hundred feet of a polling precinct on Election Day.

And in some states the people their training could be certified to be inside the voting station and be allowed to challenge a persons right to vote.

[Edi]

And now for some ex post facto bullshit from GOP Ohio:

Sunday, Nov 4, 2012 05:49 PM +0200
Ohio GOP official seeks to engineer vote again
The secretary of state is making a last minute effort to purge provisional votes in the key battleground
By Alex Halperin

Jon Husted, Ohio’s Republican secretary of state, has made news throughout this election cycle for trying to limit voting in the crucial swing state. He has sought to limit voting hours and expunge likely Democrats from the voting rolls. Now Think Progress reports that he is trying to throw out provisional votes that have already been cast.

Husted has issued a directive that could limit which provisional ballots are counted:

The directive, issued Friday, lays out the requirements for submitting a provisional ballot. The directive includes a form which puts the burden on the voter to correctly record the form of ID provided to election officials. Husted also instructed election officials that if the form is not filled out correctly by a voter, the ballot should not be counted.

Voting rights advocates believe this is contrary to a recent court decision and indeed to Ohio law which requires election officials to record the ID provided by the voter. They have filed a lawsuit which is expected to be resolved before November 17, when provisional ballots will be counted.

Provisional ballots, according to the AP, “include those cast when voters don’t bring proper ID to the polls or cast them in the wrong precinct.

In September the Los Angeles Times reported on a speech Husted gave to a Tea Party group:

“I get a little frustrated when I hear some folks use terms like ‘Jim Crow’ and ‘voter suppression’ and ‘disenfranchisement’ when it comes to Ohio elections,” Husted told the tea party members. “No responsible person can hear about how easy it is to vote in Ohio and think that it’s hard to vote in Ohio, wouldn’t you say?” The crowd applauded.

So after provisional ballots have already been cast, then the rules are suddenly changed and in the process the GOP official responsible also gives explicit instructions to break the election laws in order to tamper with the results.

Par for the course for the GOP, naturally.

[weemadando]

So, how much does the rest of the world laugh/cry and how much of a shit fit does the US cry if the electoral bullshit goes through and UN observers declare the election neither free nor fair?

[Covenant]

No idea what the international reaction would be, but Liberals here are pre-disposed to believe the Republicans are looking for ways to engineer a win. We are that way because they're repeatedly proven through act and admission that they are indeed trying to engineer a Republican win, so yeah. If the UN observers were brought in and undeniable proof was given that the Republicans had successfully muddied the waters enough that the election results were in doubt, the Liberals would probably buy it and the Republicans might go apeshit in the "New World Order seizing control of American Presidency!!" frothing at the mouth style. Republicans have such a insular political view that they could probably convince their base that "Fighting Fair against an Evil Liberal Conspiracy is not a virtue" and make a case for it. There would be a huge fallout from the law&order sorts who want constitutional leadership and strength of character, but I'd say there are less "character" voters in the Republican base than there are ones with a battery of other political goals that they feel transcend issues of electoral fairness.

If you believe the current president is an America-hating manchurian candidate from a Communist Muslim Race-War teaching madrassa in Kenya then you probably could understand why a true American would try and make sure that he didn't win an election. I don't think you'd see armed rebellion in any areas, but there'd be a huge reaction against the UN trying to interfere in a US election. People are already fairly politically divided in an intellectual sense (even if they aren't down-right hostile to their neighbors of a different political bent) but if you focus that political rage at a literal "outsider" and "other" like the UN then most of the stuff they'd never dream of doing to their neighbor they might suddenly feel entirely justified doing to the UN. Expect lots of demonstrations, local governments in lockdown, and absolute turmoil in most branches of government. Any riots that happen are probably less about the politics and more about "hey, something happened, let's go set some cars on fire" like the way people behave when they win a Baseball or Basketball game.

If it was the Democrats found out to be the sole guilty part in a vote-rigging scheme it would probably destroy the Democratic party as a functional political force. Liberals already vote against republicans more than they vote for democrats, and while tribalism might keep some on the Democratic ticket you might need to start a new centrist party to attract the right/middle centrist voters that make up a good portion of the Democratic base and just try to grab as much of the Left as possible.

Depending on how good the evidence is, it may or may not turn into a gigantic civil clusterfuck of massively litigious proportions, but you'd probably have to re-run the elections if the besmirched party didn't withdraw their candidate and cede the election. Undeniably there'd be a huge witchhunt afterwards. We saw something similar to this in the wake of Watergate and it usually ends up being a huge public outcry, a few sacrificial lambs, followed by widespread dissatisfaction on the scope of the investigation and a return to partisan offense/defense that keeps just about anything from moving forwards.

[Ahriman238]

And in some states the people their training could be certified to be inside the voting station and be allowed to challenge a persons right to vote.

Ok, clearly a big difference from here. Next question is, then what? I get it may be scary to have someone challenge you publicly, but if one of these poll watchers demands to see my ID and I tell him to go shit in his hat, then walk up to the table to flash my ID and get my ballot, what can he do about it?


Ok, I checked out TruetheVote's website, they tout their success at identifying over 90 cases of voter fraud, which means they found cases where someone may or may not be registered to vote in two states and wrote angry letters about it. Hardly seems the sort of thing to justify their perceived importance.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

It's one thing to say "haha I could totally stand up to them and not be influenced it's not like they're using force" and another to realise that real people can get intimidated and unduly influenced even if no one is physically forcing them. Sure, you might think less of those people who would give in in some way under that pressure, but that doesn't change the fact that they are being personally intimidated which is not something conducive to healthy democracy.

[Rogue 9]

What else can they do? Stand their with signs? Already lots of people doing that, and it doesn't exactly fall into under the heading of concealing your political allegiance? Harass the voters and the cops get called.

Depending on state law, not even that. In Indiana it is illegal to campaign within three hundred feet of a polling precinct on Election Day.

And in some states the people their training could be certified to be inside the voting station and be allowed to challenge a persons right to vote.

I've been a precinct inspector before, and probably will be again at some point (not this year, though), and have never had anyone do that. If I ever do, their ass will be out of my polling station just as fast as I can have them ejected. Verifying eligibility to vote on the spot is the inspector's job and his or her's alone; I for one neither want nor need some yahoo harassing duly registered voters when I've been charged with ensuring the election goes smoothly and according to the law.

[Ralin]

It's one thing to say "haha I could totally stand up to them and not be influenced it's not like they're using force" and another to realise that real people can get intimidated and unduly influenced even if no one is physically forcing them. Sure, you might think less of those people who would give in in some way under that pressure, but that doesn't change the fact that they are being personally intimidated which is not something conducive to healthy democracy.

He did say that he understands that and that he's specifically asking what they can do to people who aren't intimidated/fooled.

[Spoonist]

So, how much does the rest of the world laugh/cry and how much of a shit fit does the US cry if the electoral bullshit goes through and UN observers declare the election neither free nor fair?

There is usually some articles afterward with a list of countries with less instances of fraud and tampering, like dictatorships and 3rd world shitholes.
Then everyone promptly forgets it for another 4 years.

[weemadando]

Yes, but when it turns out that Tin Pot McShittistan has rigged another election it surprises no one

If the Bastion of Democracy (TM) and Global Policeman (TM) failed, I have to imagine there would be some reaction.

Not that I expect it to. At worst we'll probably hear about a few cases of voter intimidation by idiots and some attempted fraud by even worse idiots.

[Spoonist]

But weemadando, this is not new. The US has had this trend for the last 20 years. Its just that everyone seems to forget about it when its over, until next time etc. Well except the russkies who are especially gleeful to point it out every time. You see they usually have less "points" overall (they are just higher up in the chain so to speak).
http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/usa/

[Ahriman238]

It's one thing to say "haha I could totally stand up to them and not be influenced it's not like they're using force" and another to realise that real people can get intimidated and unduly influenced even if no one is physically forcing them. Sure, you might think less of those people who would give in in some way under that pressure, but that doesn't change the fact that they are being personally intimidated which is not something conducive to healthy democracy.

I'm not trying out the 'internet tough-guy' routine. Hell, if I didn't think the guy was seriously challenging my right to be there I'd probably just show him my damn ID and get back to voting for whoever the hell I was going to vote for anyway. I'm just trying to understand. We have nothing like this in my state, or at least my home town where I vote.

So what can they really do to influence things? I'm assuming they can't a.) overtly harass or threaten voters or b.) follow them to the booth and sort of loom over them. Yes, there are ways to intimidate someone without saying a word, but those can be pretty obvious if you're looking for them, doubly so if you keep doing it. It's also hard to silently intimidate someone while communicating something as abstract as what party they should vote for without revealing your own party affiliations which, IIRC is one of the things people complain poll watchers aren't doing.

Maybe they could reduce the number of voters by making voting more of a hassle, but they're more likely to piss people off against their party.

Put it another way, what happens if one of the poll watchers cries out "I got 'un!" Can he eject a voter on his own authority? I doubt it, that's the inspectors job. If the inspector overrules him, what can he do? What is the point of poll watchers in the first place, much less trying to skew their loyalties?