by Jeanine Vecchiarelli
August 20, 2013
The topic of voter fraud invariably surfaces during electoral dissections, with participants conjecturing on how a nation that was so markedly worse off four years after Obama was elected could have given the man an additional four years to continue and double down on his failed strategies. Indeed, ample verified instances of fraud and intimidation exist.
Ohio pollworker of 30 years Melowese Richardson recently earned a 5 year prison sentence for voting multiple times in the names of various family members.
Polling precincts in Philadelphia as well as cities in Ohio and Nevada reported over 100% returns versus registered voters; some recorded every vote cast for the same candidate: Obama.Voters in multiple states took videos of themselves touch-screen voting for Romney, only to have Obama’s name light up.
Yet maintenance crews, who happened to be SEIU members, declared the machines properly operational.
New Black Panther members stood menacingly outside polling stations in Philadelphia in a clear attempt to intimidate voters.
Voter fraud and intimidation pose serious risks for the integrity of our elections. But the root of the issue lies in the electoral process itself, with its flexibilities and allowances that open too many opportunities for improprieties.
These gateways to system abuse must be addressed if our process is to once again truly represent the voting public’s will.
US citizens are obligated to produce positive identification when they apply for driver licenses and passports, cash checks, buy cigarettes and liquor, and check in at airports. Why then is furnishing proof of identity not required to ensure integrity when those same citizens perform our political system’s most important civic duty?
Attorney General Eric Holder is actively pursuing every state that demands proof of identity from its voters. The first one to be very publicly in his crosshairs is Arizona; the second is North Carolina. Texas and Alabama are also on his list.
This stance defies explanation, considering our federal government is constitutionally mandated to protect our electoral system. There can only be one explanation for this irrational position: our federal government wishes to facilitate and protect voter fraud.
Early voting is another procedure that is ripe for abuse by the less ethical in our political system. Convenience is the excuse most often cited when it is implemented. But the more flexible the process becomes the more opportunity presents itself for fraud.
This civic duty is too important to allow such a relaxed approach. Election Day voting hours are generous. Those who are completely unavailable may request absentee ballots. There is no reason to set more than one day for voting. Adhering to one day helps safeguard the system’s integrity.
Same day voter registration
The inherent issue with same day voter registration should be self evident. What is to stop a new registrant from going to multiple polling precincts and submitting fraudulent identification, only to be long gone after having cast several ballots before his/her deceit is revealed?
Fusion voting is another big gateway to abuse of our electoral system.
Seven states currently allow it, though it was once widely embraced across the USA. Many believe it gives a beneficial edge to minor parties vying for influence against the two major ones.
But the fusion system is ripe for corruption. It can easily be manipulated by unethical members of one or both major parties, thereby defeating its original intent.
New York serves as a prime example.
In Rockland County one major party leader openly brags about recruiting loyalists to stack the committees of minor parties. These loyalists ultimately cede control over those minor lines to this party leader. He then employs an authorization known as the Wilson Pakula to offer the lines to whichever candidates award him the most lucrative backroom deals.
This guy’s counterpart in the other major party controls the lines he doesn’t, and he uses them in the same manner. Both frequently conspire to control electoral outcomes.
In fact, they will actively work against viable candidates to facilitate a path to victory for their highest bidders – usually corrupt incumbents.
Finally, many observers have witnessed serious issues stemming from careless handling of absentee ballots. There are clearly defined requirements for applying to use them; use for any other reason constitutes a felony.
Yet they are frequently peddled by party bosses to voters who don’t need them. The enticement is to “vote from the comfort of their own homes.”
These same bosses may even arrange to deliver and pick up the absentee ballots. Yet they somehow manage to miss their plane rides to or from our overseas veterans.
Instead of treating these necessary tools with the respect and care they deserve, absentee ballots are often used as pawns in the game of electoral rigging.
Losing control of the electoral process equates with losing control of our country. Politicians will continue to be illegitimately elected and impervious to the voters’ will if we do not restore integrity to the system and guard it vigilantly. How much farther down this spiral must we descend before we put an end to the perversion