Voter fraud? Why, there’s no such thing. Or, what’s there, is so insubstantial, right?
- Reflecting on Iowa Supreme Court ruling regarding felons voting
John Hinderacker at Powerline reports an “explosive” story with what he aptly refers to as stunning implications – the passage of Obamacare for one.
Rampant Voter Fraud Alleged in Minnesota
(snip)
Here in Minnesota, a case is pending in our Supreme Court that challenges same day registration and various actions by our Democratic Secretary of State that have enabled illegal voting. I haven’t yet had time to evaluate the plaintiffs’ legal arguments, but the factual allegations are explosive:
A new voter fraud case before the Minnesota Supreme Court claims 1,366 ineligible felons have cast at least 1,670 fraudulent votes in recent statewide elections, possibly tipping the outcome of close contests, including the 2008 U.S. Senate race.
(snip)
Court papers demonstrate how the incomplete list of ineligible voters provided to local election officials routinely allows felons, wards of the state, immigrants [who are not citizens] and other ineligible persons to register and vote.
“The 1,366 identified felons who have been permitted to vote is believed to be only a fraction of the true total,” the 110 page court petition filed by MVA and former Rep. Kirk Stensrud states. “Cooperation from the Secretary of State would have allowed for a more complete accounting of the number of ineligible persons who have been permitted to vote.”
Minnesota’s Secretary of State, Steve Simon, has tried to frustrate investigation into illegal voting by refusing to turn over either to polling places or to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit the complete list, which the state maintains, of those who have lost their voting rights. (snip)
This fact is particularly explosive:
MVA found 941 ineligible felons who were allowed to vote in 2008 alone, exceeding the 312 vote margin separating DFL candidate Al Franken and GOP Sen. Norm Coleman after a grueling recount.
This is stunning. It was Franken’s razor-thin “victory” over incumbent Senator Norm Coleman that allowed the Democrats to ram Obamacare down the throats of the American people.
(snip)
The Minnesota Supreme Court may or may not ultimately uphold those legal claims. But, if it is true that more than 1,600 fraudulent votes have been identified by voter name, date and poll location, the Left’s claim that voter fraud is essentially non-existent is blown sky-high. And Al Franken should be turned out of the Senate.
It is indeed stunning and the entire report is an important one to read.
Iowa Constitution and felons voting, voter fraud in general
Two days ago the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that the state’s constitution does indeed prohibit felons from voting (story here). Here is what the Iowa Constitution says. *
Disqualifed persons. SEC. 5. A person adjudged mentally incompetent to vote or a person convicted of any infamous crime shall not be entitled to the privilege of an elector.
The court essentially said that “infamous crime”, a word of art at the time and well understood for 150 years, is personified by felony conviction. It does not include aggravated misdemeanors. Call it the scale of justice. The Governor of Iowa can upon application restore voting rights to felons. We find that mechanism for restoration appropriate.
Some maintain that simply serving a judicial sentence for a felony should re-qualify someone for voting, or that the Iowa Constitution text refers only to the crime of voting fraud as sufficient to lose voting rights.
As regards the former, felony convictions do not for the most part realistically involve adequate restitution to direct victims or to society. Social costs of crime are not adequately figured in, restitution has not by and large been fully made. All that most law-abiding society gets as recompense, so to speak, from provisions in the Iowa Constitution as regards disqualifying felons from voting, is the honor of abiding by the laws and voting. The stigma to serious lawbreakers should not automatically be eliminated.
There is no logic to the latter claim by opponents of the Iowa Constitution’s removal of voting rights for infamous crimes. Consistent interpretation, as the Iowa Supreme Court maintains, says otherwise. The logic of such a position that restoration is to be denied only based on the category of offense being voting fraud, implies that the framers of the Iowa Constitution would have added that a bank robber should not be able to do business in a bank as part of their punishment, etc., etc.. The framers of the Iowa Constitution were referring to all convicted of serious crimes, not just a limited category. A stretch of social opprobrium apart from jail is not inappropriate or unreasonable.
As to the argument that restoring the right to vote allows felons to be connected to society, nothing prevents felons from working in political campaigns. Non-voting minors do so extensively and are relied on heavily. Many of us give donations to candidates in jurisdictions that we cannot vote in.
Now, with reference to the numerical implications of felons voting illegally in Iowa, we are not convinced voting procedures are adequate to keep them from voting and thereby fraudulently throwing a close election. There are, according to the reports about the Iowa Supreme Court decision, 56,000 disqualified felons in Iowa. It would only take about one half of one percent of them to vote illegally to provide the sort of margin Al Franken received in Minnesota. One half of one percent of felons, doing the wrong thing, imagine that.
Given the laxity in Iowa’s voting laws, including early voting, absentee voting, same day registration and lack of a picture ID requirement, there are several ways convicted felons and others could defraud the integrity of the vote, and not get caught. Iowa’s laws are so loose that the extent of fraud is practically unquantifiable in no small part due to official indifference. But not find-able due to laxity does not mean not present when the path to fraud is so easy. Just the fraudulent onesies and twosies per precinct in Iowa can amount to several thousand votes statewide, and enough to turn any close election in any of the state’s subdivisions.
Just as a few votes in Minnesota turned that election, impacting the control of the US Senate, so a few votes in a State Senate district in Iowa could determine the outcome of control of that body, and all that means for Iowa.
R Mall with DLH
- In 2008 the Iowa Constitution was spruced up by Amendment 47, from the original set forth below.
Disqualified persons. Section 5. No idiot, or insane person, or person convicted of any infamous crime, shall be entitled to the privilege of an elector.
The old wording was a particular sore point for Democrats who felt impugned.
