Issues Archives - Page 174 of 222 - Voting Integrity Institute

Terry McAuliffe vs. the Rule of Law

By Charles J. Cooper Virginia's Gov. Terry McAuliffe recently signed an executive order restoring, with the stroke of a pen, the right to vote for all 206,000 Virginia felons who have completed their terms of incarceration and supervised probation. This includes more than 40,000 felons convicted of violent crimes. The order also restores the rights to serve on a jury and to seek and hold public office, and it makes each of them eligible to ask a court to restore their right to own and carry firearms. The sweeping order has no precedent in Virginia history, and last week Virginia's Republican House Speaker William J. Howell and Senate Majority Leader Thomas K. Norment Jr. and four other state voters filed a challenge to its constitutionality. Their petition asks the Virginia Supreme Court to invalidate the governor's order before votes are cast in November, lest the validity of the general election be cast into doubt. Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the state's high court issued an order on June 1 calling a special session of the court to hear argument in the case on July 19. The executive order defies the text of the Virginia Constitution. Article II flatly prohibits all felons from voting, but it grants the governor a narrow power to restore voting rights to deserving felons on an individual, case-by-case basis. Nothing in the constitution gives the governor power to restore political rights en masse to virtually all felons, no matter how heinous or numerous their crimes. Gov. McAuliffe, a Democrat, has acknowledged that for 240 years none of the state's 71 other governors exercised wholesale clemency power. In 2010 another Democratic governor, Tim Kaine, expressly declined to issue a blanket restoration order like Gov. McAuliffe's, concluding that such an order would "rewrite" the law rather than follow it. Three years later, a bipartisan committee convened and headed by Virginia's then-attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, advised Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell that a blanket order restoring voting rights would be unconstitutional. Gov. McAuliffe has attempted to justify his order by claiming that Virginia's felon-disenfranchisement provision was introduced into the Constitution after the Civil War in a racist effort to disenfranchise African-Americans. He told the Nation magazine in April that "in 1901 and 1902 they put literacy tests, the poll tax and then disenfranchisement of felons into the state's constitution." This is not true. The prohibition on felon voting dates back to 1830--a time when African-Americans were prohibited from voting altogether. The felon disenfranchisement provision could not have been introduced for the purpose of disenfranchising them. No wonder the federal courts have uniformly rejected the claim that Virginia's prohibition on felon voting discriminates on the basis of race.

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:38:01+00:00June 6th, 2016|ACRU Commentary, Voter ID|

California’s Zombie Voter Apocalypse

By Hans von Spakovsky and Jana Minich Hollywood has always loved making films about the walking dead, but in Southern California it appears they have a real life problem with "zombie" voters. An investigation by CBSLA2 and KCAL9 found that hundreds of deceased persons are still on voter registration rolls in the area, and that many of these names have been voting for years in Los Angeles. For example, John Cenkner died in 2003 according to Social Security Administration records, yet he voted in the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008 and 2010 elections. His daughter told the station that she was "astounded" and couldn't "understand how anybody" could get away with this. Another voter, Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014. According to CBS, the county confirmed they have "signed vote-by-mail envelopes" from Abutin since she passed away. So either someone has been forging her signature or her ghost has quite an earthly presence. The investigation revealed that 265 deceased persons voted in Southern California, 215 of them in Los Angeles County. Thirty-two were repeat voters, with eight posthumously-cast ballots each. One woman who died in 1988 has been voting for 26 years, including in the 2014 election. This report comes twenty years after the contested election of Rep. Loretta Sanchez. D-Calif., from this same area. An investigation by a U.S. House committee found that hundreds of illegal ballots were cast by noncitizens and improper absentee ballots

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:22:29+00:00May 27th, 2016|Absentee / Mail-in Voting, ACRU Commentary, Vote Fraud|

Hundreds of Dead Voters Found in California — Will Media Cover It?

By Tim Graham With the presidential candidates arriving in California to campaign and raise funds, this report from the Los Angeles CBS affiliate should become national news: "A comparison of records by David Goldstein, investigative reporter for CBS2/KCAL9, has revealed hundreds of so-called dead voters in Southern California, a vast majority of them in Los Angeles County." Voter fraud? But liberal Democrats like to claim there is zero evidence of voter fraud. CBS2 compared millions of voting records from the California Secretary of State's office with death records from the Social Security Administration and found hundreds of so-called dead voters. Specifically, 265 in Southern California and a vast majority of them, 215, in Los Angeles County alone. The numbers come from state records that show votes were cast in that person's name after they died. In some cases, Goldstein discovered that they voted year after year. Across all counties, Goldstein uncovered 32 dead voters who cast ballots in eight elections apiece, including a woman who died in 1988. Records show she somehow voted in 2014, 26 years after she passed away. It remains unclear how the dead voters voted but 86 were registered Republicans, 146 were Democrats, including Cenkner.

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:36:33+00:00May 25th, 2016|ACRU Commentary, Vote Fraud, Voter ID|

Virginia Assembly Republicans Sue Governor over Felon Voting

Virginia Republicans on Monday asked the state's highest court to block more than 200,000 felons from voting in November, arguing that Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe abused his power by restoring the voting rights of thousands of convicts who've completed their sentences. In a lawsuit GOP leaders filed in the Virginia Supreme Court, they say McAuliffe violated the separation of powers by effectively suspending the state's ban on voting by felons. They say McAuliffe is ignoring decades of practice, which has made clear that governors can restore voting rights only on a case-by-case basis. "Gov. McAuliffe's executive order defines the plain text of the Constitution, flouts the separation of powers, and has no precedent in the annals of Virginia history. The governor simply may not, with the stroke of the pen, unilaterally suspend and amend the Constitution," their lawyers wrote in the suit. The lawsuit is being brought by House Speaker William Howell and Senate Majority Leader Thomas Norment along with four other Virginia voters. They're asking the justices to prohibit election officials from registering felons and to cancel all such registrations since April 22. As of last week, election officials said nearly 4,000 felons had signed up to vote, media outlets reported.

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:38:01+00:00May 23rd, 2016|Early Voting, In the Courts, News, Voter ID|

Judge Rules against Kansas Proof of Citizenship to Vote

WICHITA - A federal judge said Tuesday that Kansas can't require people to show proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote for federal elections at motor vehicle offices. U.S. District Judge Julie Robinson ruled that the state's proof-of-citizenship requirements likely violate a provision in the National Voter Registration Act that requires only "minimal information" to determine a voter's eligibility. She ordered Kansas to register thousands of voters whose paperwork is on hold because they did not comply with the requirement. But she put her preliminary injunction on hold until May 31 to give the state a chance to appeal. The state immediately said it would appeal. Unless a higher court halts Robinson's order before the end of the month, it would take effect then, clearing the way for those residents to cast a ballot in the upcoming federal elections.

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:38:01+00:00May 18th, 2016|In the Courts, News, Proof of Citizenship, Voter ID|

Poll: Most Voters Support Voter ID Laws

Election Law Blog -- (Quinnipiac poll) Florida voters support 77 - 20 percent, including 60 - 36 percent among Democrats, requiring voters to show photo ID. [Ohio] Voters support 75 - 22 percent requiring voters to show photo ID. Democrats are divided with 50 percent in favor of photo ID and 48 percent opposed. [Pennsylvania] Voters support 64 - 34 percent requiring voters to show photo ID. Support is 94 - 6 percent among Republicans and 63 - 35 percent among independent voters. Democrats are opposed 56 - 40 percent.

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:34:40+00:00May 17th, 2016|News, Voter ID|

Missouri Lawmakers Pass Voter Photo ID Bill

JEFFERSON CITY • A measure laying out photo ID requirements at the ballot box won final passage in the Missouri Legislature on May 11. The bill still needs either Gov. Jay Nixon's signature or, if he vetoes the bill, a successful veto override in the Legislature. It would take effect only if voters approve to a change to the state constitution. A separate resolution putting the proposed constitutional change on the ballot this year is awaiting approval in the Senate. Both pieces of legislation advanced out of the House early in the legislative session, but they had been stalled in the Senate until last week. Democrats launched filibusters every time the bill came up but agreed to stop stalling a vote in exchange for compromise language. With the Wednesday action, the House approved the Senate language. Under the compromise, anyone who shows up to the polls without an ID can sign a form attesting they are who they say they are and recognizing that photo ID requirements are the law. The state would also pay for photo IDs and any birth certificate needed to obtain them. Voters who don't sign the form could cast a provisional ballot, which would count if they can prove their identity.

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:35:34+00:00May 17th, 2016|News, Voter ID|

Swing State Voters Support Voter ID

Voters in swing states Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are strongly in favor of requiring photo identification in order to vote, a Quinnipiac poll revealed Tuesday. Potential voters in Florida were most supportive of voter ID laws, with 77 percent supporting and 20 percent opposing voter ID requirements. Among likely Democratic voters in the Sunshine State, 60 percent supported voter ID laws while 36 percent opposed the laws. Support for voter ID laws in Ohio was almost as pronounced. Seventy-five percent of potential voters in Ohio favored photo ID requirements while only 22 percent opposed the laws. Democratic voters were more evenly split, with 50 percent supporting and 48 percent opposing voter ID laws. "Ohioans ... are overwhelmingly in favor of requiring a photo ID for anyone wanting to vote," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac poll. Opinions on voter ID laws in Pennsylvania were more split than the other two states, but supporters of voter ID laws still outnumbered opponents by 30 percentage points, with 64 percent supporting and 34 percent opposing the laws.

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:34:40+00:00May 10th, 2016|News, Voter ID|

Giving Violent Felons the Automatic Right to Vote Is Not Morally Defensible

By J. Christian Adams Giving violent felons the automatic right to vote is not morally defensible. In elections, just as in society, it is important that everyone follow the rules. Automatically restoring the right to vote for felons is a bad idea. Before felons enjoy the full measure of citizenship, at a minimum, they should seek an individualized determination that they deserve the right to vote. Redemption loses its value when redemption is automatically bestowed. If the goal of felon voting restoration is to integrate felons back into society, it should be an active and contemplative exercise by the applicant seeking redemption, not an automatic one. Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe's decree that felons will enjoy automatic voting rights in the swing state of Virginia was a bad idea and contrary to state law. When the integrity and credibility of American elections is involved, it is essential that everyone follow the rules. Breaking the rules is particularly corrosive when it appears to have a brazenly partisan aim, as in Virginia. Giving violent felons the automatic right to vote is not morally defensible. Violent criminals who have shown contempt for other members of society and our laws should not have a voice in the process of writing laws. When a violent felon helps to choose lawmakers, laws will invariably skew more toward the criminal to the detriment of the law-abiding citizen. If you commit violent crimes, in nearly every state you forfeit multiple constitutional rights, including the right to vote and the right to own firearms. Most advocates for restoring rights never seem to get around to Second Amendment rights. That's no accident because the national campaign to restore felon voting rights is first and foremost an effort to help Democrats win elections. Studies have shown that felons vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, and the advocates for felon voting know it, and usually like it. Automatically restoring felon voting rights is the latest instance of normalizing criminal behavior. Voters with violent criminal tendencies are the last thing we need anywhere close to the American election process

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:38:01+00:00May 9th, 2016|ACRU Commentary, Early Voting, Proof of Citizenship, Voter ID|

Wisconsin Democrats Ask U.S. Justice Dept. to Oppose Voter ID Law

Wisconsin's Democratic congressional delegation urged the U.S. Department of Justice on Monday to consider a legal challenge to the state's voter ID law or joining ongoing litigation against it. The letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch cites reports of long lines at polling places in Wisconsin's April 5 primary -- the first high-turnout statewide election in which the state's voter ID requirement was in place. It also points to reports of "troubling statements by individuals closely connected to the state Legislature's consideration of the law indicating that its passage may have been motivated, at least in part, by a desire to reduce youth and minority participation in elections." The latter may be a reference to two recent public statements -- the first coming from Republican Congressman Glenn Grothman, who said the Republican presidential nominee has a chance to win Wisconsin this year because "photo ID is going to make a little bit of a difference." The other came from former state Senate GOP staffer Todd Allbaugh, who recounted sitting in on closed-door meetings of Republican lawmakers during the voter ID debate in 2011 in which he said "a handful of GOP senators were giddy about the ramifications and literally singled out the prospects of suppressing minority and college voters." At least one Republican lawmaker who participated in those meetings, Sen. Van Wanggaard, denied any recollection of hearing such comments. The letter to Lynch was signed by U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Madison and U.S. Reps. Ron Kind of La Crosse, Gwen Moore of Milwaukee and Mark Pocan of Black Earth.

ACRU Staff2020-05-03T23:34:40+00:00May 4th, 2016|News, Voter ID|

SUBSCRIBE