The Motives of Those Refusing to Comply with Election Integrity Measures, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government concludes its examination of the reasons given by those refusing to comply with the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.

One prominent official refusing to comply with  The Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity’s is Virginia’s Democrat Governor Terry McAuliffe.  In a statement, he announced that he will not provide the information requested. “I have no intention of honoring this request. Virginia conducts fair, honest, and democratic elections.”

Virginia, an important swing state, was one of the most active jurisdictions for questionable voting tactics. Governor McAuliffe sought to overturn his states’ law against ex-felons voting without going through the state legislature by a questionable use of his executive pardon powers. The Virginia Democrat’s rough and tumble antics didn’t stop there.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation  released a report which found that voting fraud “is…much worse than simple ineffective governance…Virginia state election officials are obstructing access to public records that reveal the extent to which non-citizens are participating in…elections…the information from a few counties demonstrates a massive problem. In our small sample of just eight Virginia counties who responded to our public inspection requests, we found 1046 aliens who registered to vote illegally. The problem is most certainly exponentially worse because we have no data regarding aliens on the registration rolls for the other 125 Virginia localities. Even in this small sample, when the voting history of this small sample of alien registrants is examined, nearly 200 verified ballots were cast before they were removed from the rolls. Each one of them is likely a felony. Again, this is from just a small sampling of Virginia counties. Each of the aliens we have discovered to have registered or voted has likely committed a felony…In Virginia, like most states, there is no formal program for identifying non-citizen registrants…The most alien votes were cast in 2012, followed by 2008, the year President Obama was elected to his first term…Most discoveries of non-citizens on the registration rolls are accidental or chance. What this means is that the number of registered non-citizens thus far identified by this investigation is just the ‘tip of the iceberg’… One culprit…is glaringly obvious—federal and state voter registration forms, which ask registrants to affirm their citizenship with nothing more than the check of a box. No documentary proof of citizenship must be shown…States that have tried to remedy this problem by asking registrants to prove their citizenship with documentary proof have uniformly been stonewalled by litigation brought [during the Obama presidency] Department of Justice and legions of attorneys working with left-leaning voter groups committed to keeping ineligible voters on the rolls. This report demonstrates the serious problem that unelected election officials have refused to address and even conspired to hide…”

The Obama Administration was ardently opposed to measures designed to insure honest balloting. A newly appointed member of the Commission, Hans Von Spakovsky, described how “The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) had moved to allow Kansas, Georgia, Alabama, and Arizona to enforce their proof-of-citizenship voter-registration requirement. The Obama Justice Department moved against the action, [which was] part of its ongoing goal of allowing illegals to vote and to allow other voting violations to occur.”

Also in 2016, the True the Vote organization pleaded unsuccessfully with the DOJ to move against a clear-cut caser of alien voting. In a letter to the U.S. Attorney for the Western District Annette L. Hayes, Catherine Engelbrect, the organization’s chief, provided information concerning a specific case of non-citizen voting: “As you know, 18 U.S.C. § 611 prohibits ‘any alien’ from participating in federal elections… the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 requires individuals wishing to register to affirm their U.S. citizenship. The Washington State voter registration form also expressly notes that those unable to attest to the same shall ‘not complete this form.’  According to most recent data available from the Washington Secretary of State, [an alien described by name and address in the letter] registered to vote on September 27, 2014 and proceeded to cast and be credited for votes in the 2014 General, 2015 General and 2016 Primary.”

In the face of significant evidence about voter fraud and other inappropriate election activities, particularly concerning illegal immigrant voting, the refusal to consider remedial and protective measures is highly unreasonable.  In an attempt to explain their actions, those opposing corrective measures have charged racism.

The Regional News Network notes that “The status quo, with its laughably lax requirement of a mere verbal ‘pledge’ that an individual is a citizen, doesn’t cut it. ..Democratic politicians see an opportunity to cast Republicans as racists…Canada…requires citizens to show proof of address to vote. Sweden, Switzerland and Ireland all require some proof of identification to vote. In the Netherlands, where practically everything is legal, voters need to show both a government issued polling notification and a photo ID in order to vote…Indeed, most other countries in the civilized world look at the United States in disbelief that we don’t require proof of identification to vote. Even our own bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform recommended a voter ID requirement when they issued their comprehensive recommendations in 2005. Their report called voter identification one of “five pillars” that would “build confidence” in the integrity of federal elections… that Commission was co-chaired by…Jimmy Carter.”

Wide scale opposition by the Democrat National Committee and key Democrat leaders to measures intended to insure honest balloting, including picture ID, contradict the party’s own practices in internal matters.  Picture ID’s were required for Democrat delegates seeking entry onto the convention floor of their own presidential convention in Philadelphia.