Search This Blog

Saturday, June 26, 2010


UPDATED 2/14/12~

Top Union Official Caught on Tape Discussing Voter Fraud Top Official at NJEA (New Jersey Education Association) discussing what he describes as a rigged election in Hudson County, NJ.
June 26, 2010

"The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything."~ Joseph Stalin
That quote says it all!  The following articles are about voter fraud currently happening in our elections.  Voter fraud is becoming the most important aspect of our elections yet little attention seems to be paid towards it.  If you think about it, it really won't matter how much money is thrown after a candidate or how qualified a candidate is.  What will matter is if the candidate that is declared the winner of an election is the true victor or won because of fraud and intimidation. The left has figured this out (remember ACORN and Project Vote and all the fraud associated with them?) and is in the process of dismantling the election process on a number of fronts.

Why aren't we standing up and demanding that our elected officials and law enforcement prosecute those that are perpetrating fraud and intimidation.  In the majority of cases of those convicted, the penalties are so insignificant that it really isn't sending a strong message.  We need to demand that our laws be changed and that ANYONE found guilty of voter fraud faces years of prison time as well as a large fine.  We must not allow our vote to be silenced by the left!

I will be focusing on several of the manners in which they are setting up elections to be able to win through fraud and intimidation.

Before I get to the ways they intend to steal the elections, let me share a letter with you.  This letter is from Department of Justice attorney J. Christian Adams (official blog HERE) who recently resigned because of this administrations refusal to allow the prosecution of armed Black Panthers who openly intimidated voters during the 2008 Election.

Here is a statement from his resignation letter: 
"The New Black Panther case was the simplest and most obvious violation of federal law I saw in my Justice Department career. Because of the corrupt nature of the dismissal, statements falsely characterizing the case and, most of all, indefensible orders for the career attorneys not to comply with lawful subpoenas investigating the dismissal, this month I resigned my position as a Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney."

One of the ways of compromising the system is through intimidation.  There were a number of charges of voter intimidation at the polls during the 2008 election.  Some of the most striking aren't intimidation of voters for John McCain, but intimidating voters for Hillary Clinton.

Source: Washington Times by J. Christian Adams
Inside the Black Panther Case ~ Anger, Ignorance and Lies
"Based on my firsthand experiences, I believe the dismissal of the Black Panther case was motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law. Others still within the department share my assessment. The department abetted wrongdoers and abandoned law-abiding citizens victimized by the New Black Panthers. The dismissal raises serious questions about the department's enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election.
The assistant attorney general for civil rights, Tom Perez, has testified repeatedly that the "facts and law" did not support this case. That claim is false. If the actions in Philadelphia do not constitute voter intimidation, it is hard to imagine what would, short of an actual outbreak of violence at the polls. Let's all hope this administration has not invited that outcome through the corrupt dismissal.
Most corrupt of all, the lawyers who ordered the dismissal - Loretta King, the Obama-appointed acting head of the Civil Rights Division, and Steve Rosenbaum - did not even read the internal Justice Department memorandums supporting the case and investigation. Just as Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. admitted that he did not read the Arizona immigration law before he condemned it, Mr. Rosenbaum admitted that he had not bothered to read the most important department documents detailing the investigative facts and applicable law in the New Black Panther case. Christopher Coates, the former Voting Section chief, was so outraged at this dereliction of responsibility that he actually threw the memos at Mr. Rosenbaum in the meeting where they were discussing the dismissal of the case. The department subsequently removed all of Mr. Coates' responsibilities and sent him to South Carolina."
Read more:  Washington Times~ ADAMS: Inside the Black Panther case Anger, ignorance and lies

Here's the video of the Black Panthers:

letter of resignation from a former DOJ Voting Rights Section trial attorney, citing concerns about the lack of prosecution against the New Black Panther Party.
J. Christian Adams resignation letter 051910






Lawlessness at the DOJ: Voting Section Told Not To Enforce Purging the Dead or Ineligible from Voting Rolls

UPDATE: 7.8.10 ~ Julie Fernandes is the person mentioned in the interview that gave the directive to the DOJ to aid and abet voter fraud by not enforcing the laws. Here she is at a conference 10/23/07.

Julie Fernandes, Senior Policy Analyst and Special Counsel, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, discusses implications of proposed voter photo-ID laws

Full video of the event is available on the ACS web site:

Here's another example of allegations of fraud and intimidation by the Obama camp against the Clinton campaign aids and voters during the 2008 Presidential election in Texas and other states. This documentary, "We Will Not Be Silenced" was made to shine the light on the election fraud and intimidation they witnessed during the election.  For some reason "We will not be silenced" has, in fact been silenced.  Have you heard of this before?  I just happened upon these videos one night when I was searching voter of  yet, I still don't recall ever seeing anything about this.

Promo clip:

To view the entire documentary:
We Will Not Be Silenced ~ Clinton backers charging Obama with Fraud and Intimidation

More on the Texas primary election in 2008:
Source: Election Journal
Texas’ March 4th Presidential Primaries were plagued with problems. The Obama and Clinton Campaigns traded allegations of intimidation and disenfranchisement, and media investigations uncovered voter impersonation fraud and mass double voting.
Read more: Obama Campaign Director Charged With Assault of Election Judge

Additional links on Voter Fraud:
Ex-ACORN worker: 'I paid the price' for voter registration fraud

John Fund: Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy

Another very important way in which the left plans on stealing elections is through their campaign known as the Secretary of State Project which is funded by George Soros and others. They tout they they have won 11 of 13 elections in key states including Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa, Oregon, New Mexico, Montana, Nevada, West Virginia and Missouri. We lost only in Michigan and Colorado (and there by a tiny margin).

Read more about the SOS PROJECT at the following sites:
Source: Red State
"Some of the most overlooked and ultra important positions in any state are those who run the elections. Those are the County Clerk, Township/City Clerk, and the Secretary of State’s office. It takes the work of these offices and their staffs to run the elections and make sure the process is above board, competent,and with integrity."
"There project is called the Secretary of State Project. It’s goal is to get their type of democrats in charge, and then look the other way when ACORN and PIRG to commit voter fraud rigging the election for the democrats."
Read More:  Red State: Don’t let Soros and the “Secretary of State Project” take over your state 4/21/10

Source: Conservative Outlooks
The Secretary of State is the chief elections official in each state, so he/she is responsible for the conduct of elections and establishment of election day rules. A position and role mostly unknown by the majority of citizens in this country before the 2000 election.
Someone of great wealth recognized the power of the Secretaries of State. The power to ultimately decide, perhaps by manipulating and interpreting state election law partisanly, to place their chosen candidate into office.
And the name of the person I am referring to is George Soros.
Most everyone has heard his name. Most don’t know his background and don’t care. He stays behind the scenes and pulls the strings. And he didn’t like it much that Katherine Harris put GWB into office. Not his candidate. “I wanted Gore to win, and this will never happen again!
So what can I do about it?”I can create the Secretary of State Project. I can back monetarily and help propel Democratic Secretaries of States into office in the states where I feel they can help my candidate into office."
 Read More: The Secretary of State Project ~ The Dirty Dozen Minus 3

It has become increasingly clear that Al Franken's win in Minnesota was due to voter fraud.  The SOS of Minnesota, Mark Ritchie, is one that was hand picked by the Secretary of State Project.  You will find that in states that have elected the SOS Project candidate, charges of voter fraud and irregularities have increased and are sure to increase even more as they gear up to try to steal elections in 2010 and 2012.

Minnesota Majority, a grassroots organization has launched an investigation into the 2008 win of Al Franken.  Here's what they have to say regarding election integrity in their state:
"Minnesota Majority is calling for an investigation into evidence of irregularities within Minnesota’s voter rolls. We believe that poor data management practices together with lax and inconsistent verification procedures, has resulted in a voter file rife with errors, making the detection of inaccuracies and abuse very difficult. Despite hurdles that are the result of poor data management, Minnesota Majority has uncovered compelling evidence of suspected problems not being adequately addressed by election officials or law enforcement. Thousands of voter records showing errors, suspected fraudulent votes, inaccuracies, invalid addresses, duplicate entries and possible duplicate votes were forwarded to law enforcement officials in 30 counties for investigation between 2008 and 2009."
Read more: Minnesota Majority ~ Election Integrity

Related Links: American Spectator~ Soros Eyes Secretary of States



Absentee ballot fraud coming to a state/town near you.  Absentee or mail in ballot fraud is increasingly becoming the most rampant form of voter fraud.  In my state, Texas, this has been going on for years in south Texas and is now spreading across the state.  It is common knowledge that ACORN and other far left organizations are targeting Texas in order to seat more Democrats and elect Bill White for governor.  It is also well known that the left will engage in illegal tactics to win at any cost.

I can't emphasize enough how devastating this can be to an election.  Here is a story that just happened in my neighboring city of Fort Worth.  As you can see, mail-in ballots were the deciding factor in this election. :
"Charlotte Hogan-Price lost her bid to be the next Justice of the Peace for Precinct 8 to Lisa Woodard. But Woodard's win immediately prompted questions over the results.
Usually, the candidate with the most in-person votes ends up winning the election. Hogan-Price won the early vote and election-day vote by 181 votes, or 56 percent to 44 percent. But she lost the race because she trailed in the mail-in vote by a wide margin: 652 to 335, or 66 percent to 33 percent."
Update: Judge asked to call for new election:
"Among the issues in the trial is how more than 60 ballots reached the Tarrant County Elections Center even though they lacked stamps or had stamps but none of the markings that show it was processed by the postal service.
Hammett argued that the postal service is instructed to prioritize political mail in an election season.
Wyde suggested those ballots were hand-delivered to the Tarrant County Elections Office, which is illegal.
Lydia Thomas, a Forest Hill Councilwoman who worked for the Postal Service for 25 years including seven years in Fort Worth, told the court that the chances of dozens of mail-in ballots being delivered but lacking stamps or postal markings was “slim to none.”
Another issue was mail-in ballots in which the two signatures didn't match."
Mail in ballot fraud has been rampant in South Texas.  A watchdog organization, Texas Watchdog, has been following these stories.  Check out their video:

Source: Election Journal
Mail in ballot fraud in New Jersey was incentivized by paying off voters with a prepaid calling card in exchange for an absentee vote. Last year, The New Jersey Attorney General’s Office indicted Councilman Marty Small and 13 of his campaign workers for election fraud. In an investigative report obtained by the Press of Atlantic City, it has been revealed that investigators had an informant inside of Small’s campaign, Edward Colon Jr.  Not only did he provide information to law enforcement authorities, he secretly videotaped meetings and taped telephone conversations.
Crumble: “I just have the people bring the ballot to me and I fill them out. I just did it myself, that way I knew.”
Storr: “Just get the ballot and have them sign it,”
Crumble: “Make sure you don’t let nobody sees (sic) you.”
Storr: Right, because that’s not … you’re not allowed to do that.”
Read more: The Wire: Secret Recordings Shed Light on Voter Fraud in NJ

See More: Election fraud stories by state

Heritage ~ Absentee Ballot Fraud: A Stolen Election in Greene County, Alabama

What is universal voter registration? It means all of the state laws on elections will be overriden by a federal mandate. The feds will tell the states: 'take everyone on every list of welfare that you have, take everyone on every list of unemployed you have, take everyone on every list of property owners, take everyone on every list of driver's license holders and register them to vote regardless of whether they want to be...'

Visit David Horowitz TV for more videos:
John Fund of the Wall Street Journal warns America on the next trick from the Obama administration.

According to Fund, the Democrats aim to pass a Federal mandate to force all states to register everybody to vote-welfare beneficiaries, illegal aliens, convicted felons-everybody.

ACORN will be by-passed, the Federal Government will do their corrupt work for them.

The Dems know that the wider the franchise, the better chance they have in 2010 and 2012. Damn the long term consequences to the country.

UPDATE: In the video, John Fund states that Barney Frank was going to introduce legislation in January to push universal voter registration through.  Barney Frank has denied those charges in an article to The Hill.

While, that may be true, it does not mean that Universal Voter Registration is a myth.  Quite the contrary.  The Brennan Center for Justice, has published a 16 page publication titled Voter Registration "Modernization".  (Don't you love how the left use words to make things sound so warm and fuzzy)  What this publication should be titled is "How to steal elections through chaos in the election process."

As recently as March of this year, another 14 page publication, Modernizing Voter Registraion: Momentum in the states was published highlighting the step states have taken and continue to take to register voters.
"The past year has seen gathering momentum in the states to modernize the voter registration system. In various ways, states have begun to move toward a system in which voters are automatically and permanently added to the rolls, with fail-safes in case of government mistakes."
While the Brennan Center for Justice uses the phrase "Bi-partisan" throughout their propaganda, you must understand who they really are.  You will notice all of the "code" words used to describe this "bi-partisan" organization.  Words like "economic justice", "think tank", "living Constitution", "progressive", "democracy", "justice" and "social justice".  Do you really believe they are bi-partisan?

Source: Wikipedia
The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School is a progressive,non-partisan public policy and law institute that focuses on issues involving democracy and justice. The Center is "dedicated to strengthening democracy and securing justice, through law, scholarship, education and advocacy."
The organization is currently headed by Michael Waldman, former Director of Speechwriting for President Bill Clinton from 1995–1999.
The Brennan Center for Justice was founded in 1995 by the family and former law clerks of Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan. Justice Brennan’s idea of a living constitution figures largely into the center’s work. The Brennan Center is involved in issues such as voting rights, redistricting reform, economic justice, and presidential power in the fight against terrorism. The organization is part think tank, part public interest law firm, and part advocacy group.

Source: NY Times Blog 1/19/09 

On Tuesday (Innauguration day) , all eyes and ears will be turned to the man whose oratorical skills have been compared to Abraham Lincoln’s, Franklin Roosevelt’s and John Kennedy’s. What does Barack Obama need to do in his inaugural address? We asked William Safire and other former presidential speechwriters for their ideas.

Here's what Michael Waldman had to say:

Add a Bit of Militancy

Michael Waldman
Michael Waldman, former director of speechwriting for President Bill Clinton, worked on two inaugural addresses and four State of the Union Addresses. He is author of “My Fellow Americans: The Most Important Presidential Speeches From George Washington to George W. Bush” and the executive director of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.

When I was working on Bill Clinton’s first inaugural address in 1993, I taped some rules above my computer screen. “No quoting dead people.” “No reversible raincoat sentences.” (Ask not, etc.) Every one of the rules was broken by the time we were done drafting the address. So I hesitate to give advice to a speaker who has such a clear sense of self and moment.
As we know, few inaugural addresses have been memorable. What made FDR’s inaugural, Lincoln’s, Jefferson’s exceptions? Eloquence yes, but context mattered more. Crisis? Collapse? War? Anxiety? At the very least, Barack Obama has the raw materials for a memorable speech.
“This is also a chance to repudiate a failed governing philosophy.”
He has wielded oratory as a political weapon in a way not seen since Reagan, and he’s shown impressive discipline, fitting the style to the occasion. For his convention speech, the political imperative demanded not a soaring talk, but a meat-and-potatoes list of promises. (A senior Obama campaign staff member told me at the time that “all the Lexington and Concord stuff” got cut for length.) This speech, of course, calls for far more vivid writing, bigger themes and a touch of formality.
Inaugural addresses tend to fall into two categories: those that demand “action now,” as F.D.R. did, or those that seek unity and summon the “better angels of our nature,” as Lincoln’s did. Much suggests he will give a “bring us together” speech. But personally, I crave a bit of militancy and a compelling argument.
Perhaps there’s a generation gap in how such speeches are heard. I suspect younger listeners might find calls for unity the heart of his appeal. But this is also a chance to repudiate a failed governing philosophy. He should consider replying to Reagan, who declared in his first inaugural address, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” With the world listening, what better time to make a forceful argument for activist government? We need the balm of unity, but we also need a passionate president able to take on the chaos now enveloping our economy.
The Obama administration has been holding behind-the-scenes talks to determine whether the Department of Homeland Security can unilaterally grant legal status on a mass basis to illegal immigrants, a former Bush administration official who spoke with at least three people involved in those talks told Check out what's going on today with this administration. 
The former official said it's unclear what specific avenues the administration is considering, but that one potentially feasible option would be to use either deferred action or parole to legalize at once the millions of immigrants who have overstayed their visas -- not necessarily those who crossed the border illegally. The Department of Homeland Security estimated last year that 10.8 million undocumented residents live in the United States -- the Pew Hispanic Center, which has a similar count, estimated in

2006 that at least 4 million of them overstayed their visas. 
Read More: Fox News~Source: Administration Weighs Bypassing Congress to Let Illegal Immigrants Stay

"Accusing Arizona of trying to "second guess" the federal government, the Justice Department on Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging the state's immigration policy -- claiming the "invalid" law interferes with federal immigration responsibilities and "must be struck down."   Read More: Justice Department Files Suit Against Arizona Immigration Law
To think that our tax dollars and the state of Arizona's tax dollars are having to be used to defend their right to protect their borders and citizens absolutely makes me want to SCREAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Democrats have been known to run a third candidate just to take votes away from the opposition candidate. These third candidates are called  'faces.' They're shills. Just a face that's thrown in as a bogus candidate. This is one of the greatest games played in Chicago. Today, the most powerful alderman in Chicago brags about having phony candidates run in certain races to take away votes that would otherwise go to an opponent.

In an article today in American Thinker, a whistleblower warns Sharon Angle to be on guard in her election against Harry Reid in Nevada.  His accounting of tactics used to win elections through FRAUD is chilling.  Please read this article to get a better understanding about just how evil these people are.  To think that our votes are no longer legitimate because fraud and criminal acts are being used to win elections should send chills down your spine! 
"You can bet that any third-party candidate in the race between Reid and Angle will be used to take votes away from Angle."
What follows is a non-verbatim account of an interview with Mr. X. His exact language is in quotes. Mr. X was deeply involved in Chicago Machine politics for many years. He has intimate knowledge of those responsible for manipulating the Cook County electoral process toward the outcome intended by the Machine. He eventually went undercover for the FBI and testified in trials that resulted in multiple convictions. He now lives outside Illinois. Mr. X has reason to believe that Nevada GOP Senatorial Candidate Sharron Angle, who is running against Sen. Harry Reid, will face a level of corrupt electioneering practices equal to what he witnessed for many years in Chicago. This is his warning to the Angle Campaign.
 Read More: American Thinker~Former Chicago Machine Player Issues Warning to Sharron Angle Campaign

Democrats in Congress are pushing for a new law that would allow nearly 4 million people currently banned from voting to cast their ballot, and most of those millions, studies show, will vote Democrat.
And where will these new voters come from? From the ranks of convicted felons. A House subcommittee heard testimony on H.R. 3335, the "Democracy Restoration Act." The bill seeks to override state laws, which vary in how they restrict when convicted felons released from prison can vote.

"Deborah J. Vagins, American Civil Liberties Union legislative counsel adds, "Felony disfranchisement laws are rooted in the Jim Crow era and were intended to bar minorities from voting. To this day, they continue to have a disproportionate impact on minority communities. Moreover, revoking the right to vote for millions of citizens is not only undemocratic, it is counterproductive to the rehabilitation and reintegration into society of those released from prison."
Read More: World Net Daily

This article gives a play by play of the tactics the left will use in order to undermine the next elections. All of the points of this plan are already in the works.


UPDATE 8/8/10~ New allegations of the DOJ being more interested in felons being able to vote than our military stationed overseas.

Soldier overseas? No voting for you
DOJ scandal reveals how thousands of military ballots may go uncounted

Posted: July 24, 2010
12:25 am Eastern
By Drew Zahn
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
In the wake of the Department of Justice's New Black Panther Party scandal, a second former DOJ attorney has now come forward, blasting the department for failing to protect American soldiers' right to vote.
What's even more alarming, the attorney claims, is that despite congressional mandates passed in 2009 to ensure military personnel overseas can participate in elections, the DOJ's Voting Section is ignoring the new laws and may allow thousands of ballots to slip through the cracks uncounted in November.
Everybody talks about the problems, but "Taking America Back" actually offers some solutions for what the nation faces. Get it now.

M. Eric Eversole is a former litigation attorney for the Voting Section of the U.S. Department of Justice and an advocate for military voters. In an opinion piece in The Washington Times, Eversole explains how soldiers in the field may be disenfranchised in the 2010 election.
"Absentee ballots must be sent to overseas military voters at least 45 days before an election to give those voters sufficient time to receive and return their ballots," Eversole explains. "The Military Postal Service Agency goes one step further and recommends that absentee ballots be sent to war zones 60 days before an election."
But legal complaints, news stories and studies all showed dozens of states failing to give soldiers enough time to vote in the 2008 election – resulting in tens of thousands of soldiers' mailed ballots that arrived too late to be counted, perhaps enough to swing, for example, Minnesota's closely contested election of Democrat Senator Al Franken.
Read complete article at World Net Daily

America's Military Voters: Re-enfranchising the Disenfranchised

Published on July 28, 2009 by Hans von Spakovsky and M. Eric Eversole
Revised and updated March 9, 2010

For many Americans, the 2008 presidential election was historic, both in its outcome and the number of citizens who voted, many for the first time. The overall turnout of the votingeligible population was 61.7 percent, the highest turnout since the 1964 presidential election.[1] Local election officials in many states reported high levels of voting by many individuals who have not traditionally participated in the election process. The same, however, cannot be said for America's military members and their votingage dependents ("military voters"). For these voters, especially those serving in dangerous combat zones like Iraq and Afghanistan, the 2008 presidential election was an embarrassing reminder of the difficulties faced by America's men and women in uniform when they attempt to vote.
Military voters have long been disenfranchised -- both at the state and federal level -- by a voting process that fails to recognize the unique challenges created by a military voter's transitory existence or the delays associated with delivering an absentee ballot to a war zone halfway around the world. Given these soldiers' daily sacrifices and their willingness to defend this nation's freedom, it is incumbent on Americans to remedy this problem and provide U.S. soldiers with the same rights they are being asked to protect. Unless Congress (and the states) finally act to remedy this problem, military personnel will continue to be the largest group of disenfranchised voters in the United States.
Current Law
All military personnel and their dependents, as well as overseas citizens, are guaranteed the right to vote by absentee ballot in federal elections by the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA).[2] President Ronald Reagan designated the Department of Defense (DOD) to administer the statute, and the department organized the Federal Voting Assistance Program office (FVAP) to provide support to UOCAVA voters.[3] Enforcement of the UOCAVA is the responsibility of the U.S. Department of Justice.
In short, the UOCAVA requires all states to "permit absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters to use absentee registration procedures and to vote by absentee ballot in general, special, primary, and runoff elections for Federal office."[4] The UOCAVA does not specify the exact number of days prior to the election that absentee ballots must be mailed to overseas voters. However, since 1988 the Department of Justice has filed 35 civil lawsuits against states and local governments arguing that the statute's guarantee of the right to vote by absentee ballots requires states to mail out such ballots in time to be received and returned by overseas voters.[5] In 1986, Congress found that "[b]ased on surveys of the U.S. Postal Service and of military postal authorities, ballots should be mailed to overseas addresses at least 45 days prior to an election in order to ensure adequate time for a ballot to reach a voter and be returned."[6] The U.S. Election Assistance Commission recommended the same 45day transit time in 2004 when it released a report on the best practices for facilitating voting by overseas citizens covered by the UOCAVA.[7]
Disenfranchised Heroes
Despite many states reporting record turnout in 2008, data from the election demonstrates a shockingly low level of participation among military voters.[8] Take, for example, the treatment of military voters in Minnesota. In a state that prides itself on the nation's highest voter participation rate -- 78.2 percent of the eligible population participated in the 2008 presidential election -- only 15.8 percent of Minnesota's 23,346 military members and their votingage dependents were able to cast an absentee ballot in the same election.[9] To make matters worse, even if the military voter in Minnesota cast his or her absentee ballot, that ballot was nearly two times more likely to be rejected by local election officials, as compared to other absentee voters statewide.[10]A vast majority of the rejected military and overseas ballots -- nearly 70 percent -- were rejected because the ballot was returned after the election deadline, whereas only 10 percent of non-military and regu­lar absentee ballots were rejected for being received after the deadline. Ultimately, only 14.5 percent of Minnesota's eligible military voters were able to cast a vote that counted in the 2008 presidential election.
Military personnel move frequently and receive scant assistance from both the military and state voting officials. Consequently, the absentee ballot request rate is extremely low. In the three states with the largest number of military voters -- Florida, Texas, and California (accounting for nearly 40 percent of all military voters) -- data from each state shows that less than a quarter of military voters and their dependents requested an absentee ballot for the 2008 presidential election. Florida had the highest number of requests with 27.8 percent of nearly 324,000 military voters requesting an absentee ballot. Texas was second with 22.9 percent and California was third with 17.8 percent. All told, of the estimated 943,879 military voters in these three states, only 23.4 percent or 220,595 requested an absentee ballot to vote in the 2008 presidential election. The rate of return of those same absentee ballots was even lower. Only 11.3 percent of the eligible military voters in California actually returned their ballots compared to 20.6 percent in Florida and 13.1 percent in Texas.
These low participation rates, however, were not isolated to Florida, Texas, and California. Other states, like Alaska, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, and Pennsylvania -- all of which have significant military populations -- experienced similar levels of disenfranchisement. The number of military voters that requested an absentee ballot in these five states ranged from 18.5 percent in Alaska to 25.2 percent in Pennsylvania. However, the number of military voters that were able to cast and have their absentee ballots counted was much lower, ranging from 11.9 percent in Maryland to 19.1 percent in Pennsylvania. Said another way, nearly 80 to 85 percent of military voters were unable to cast an absentee ballot that counted during the 2008 presidential election and, thus, were likely disenfranchised during the election. This low participation rate is as severe as any in the nation's recent history, including that which resulted in the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to strike down the barriers to registration and turnout that kept black Americans out of the polls.[11]
The state data further shows that a large number of ballots were mailed, but never returned by the absentee military voter or were returned undelivered to local election officials because they had the wrong mailing address. For example, in California, Florida, and Texas, nearly 34.8 percent of the military absentee ballots that were requested were not returned to the local election official or were returned because of an undeliverable address (i.e., the military voter no longer lived at that address). According to a recent study by the Overseas Vote Foundation (OVF), many of these overseas military ballots may have been lost or significantly delayed by the postal service. The OVF found that nearly 22 percent of respondents to a survey, which included military and overseas voters, never received their requested absentee ballot for the 2008 presidential election.[12] In addition, 10 percent received their absentee ballots less than seven days before the election and 1 percent received their ballots after November 4, 2008. In other words, the 2008 OVF Report found that nearly onethird of its respondents either did not receive their absentee ballot or received it with insufficient time to return it to election officials.
Unfortunately, the 2008 presidential election was not an anomaly. Data collected by the Defense Manpower Data Center and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission showed a similar pattern of disenfranchisement of military voters in the 2006 election. In particular, the Defense Manpower Data Center stated that only 22 percent of active duty military members (which does not include military dependents) voted in the 2006 election.[13] Of that 22 percent, approximately 16 percent attempted to vote by absentee ballot and 7 percent voted in person.[14] This data corresponds with data collected by the Election Assistance Commission, which found that only 16.5 percent of the estimated 6 million eligible military and overseas voters requested an absentee ballot and only 5.5 percent of these ballots were returned and counted.[15] As was the case in 2008, many military and overseas absentee ballots (nearly 70 percent) were not returned by the voter or were returned as undeliverable.[16] The Election Assistance Commission also found that many ballots were rejected because they were received after the deadline for receipt.[17]
Read entire article from the Heritage Foundation

7/31/10 Interview with former DOJ attorney and whistleblower Christian Adams on the DOJ playing politics with the military's rights to vote.

8/8/10 Interview with Quin Hillyer with the Washington Times
Battle over troops votes

Related Links:
 Get involved:  
"The people who cast the votes decide nothing. 
The people who count the votes decide everything."

No comments:

Post a Comment