Secure balloting - One person, one vote doesn’t hold true in Milwaukee
My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. It’s called, “Secure balloting - One person, one vote doesn’t hold true in Milwaukee.”
Guess what it’s about?
Over the last 40 years I have been on numerous committees that have investigated this problem and I can tell you that it is there. The trouble is that there is not a co-ordinated effort to do it, all individuals doing it on their own.
First, group homes, nursing homes etc. I have stood there as the 7th ward committeman and as an election judge on numerous occasions when large groups of ballots came in, all cast absentee, all in the same pen, same writing and the same votes. We have challenged them but they count them anyway.
A big problem is absentee ballots. We have seen that exposed many times but most of it lies undeground.
People register, sign up absentee than vote and you can never find them again. The people registering people are paid by the head and they phoney up names, vote them etc.
Go back and trace the absentee ballots and see how
many people are missing.
A lot of people that have moved from apartments get voted, dead people are voted.
In the case of Stan Zurawski’s election there was whole sale fraud with ballots missing. That evedience was compiled and the DA just shrugged.
In the Jim Sullivan double voting case. We have 45 pages of evidence that show what happened and they do nothing. When I watched Sullivan and Chisholm testifying about the loss of money for DA’s I knew why.
it is no accident that no democrat has been indicted over the last 40 years except for those that McCann had to indict like the ones Blanchard gave him or tire slashing.
The good old boys stick together. The only way this can be stopped is to stay on top of game. Check out the absentee ballot registrations, clean lists right before election with post cards and send people underground to spy. This election could go either way depending on how Wisconsin goes. They could easily steal another.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2008 at 1844 hrs
It’s about how the majority of what little vote fraud there is concerns absentee balloting?
Posted by scott on March 04, 2008 at 2026 hrs
I have noticed that with Dohnal it is always someone else’s fault and some big conspiracy.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 04, 2008 at 2315 hrs
Dumb comment. The problem with finding the corruption is that it is not a big conspiracy but a series of unconnected little ones that amount to thousands of votes.
If there was a big conspiracy someone would rat them out.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 0853 hrs
Yesterday I talked bout the abentee ballot fraud, John made some dumb comment, then this morning, in the McGee trial, the opening statement by John Chisholm talked about McGee’s uncle paying people $5 to cast their absentee ballots.
Feel dumb, John?Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 0917 hrs
I see the brain-dead as well as the dead are voting i.e. wins by McGee, Doyle, Lena Taylor etc. etc. I wonder how many of the losers would be in office if the count was legit.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 0947 hrs
They employ a different system in absentees which make it more prone to loopholes. These election runners should watch out though. People are watching.
Posted by JJ on March 05, 2008 at 1023 hrs
Loopholes? I don’t know what that means. It’s my understanding, though, that the majority of what little vote fraud there is in America is done via absentee balloting. Which is why I find it so telling that the number one reform demanded by the right to combat this problem voter ID. A solution which does absolutely nothing for absentee ballot fraud, but does have an oh-so-unfortunate side-effect of depressing Democratic turnout.
Posted by scott on March 05, 2008 at 1029 hrs
Dohnal- and he was prosecuted for paying people to vote. Kind of blows your whole theory out of the water.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 1126 hrs
Scott,
Most people on the right who I know see Voter ID as one tool to help secure our election system. The reason that it is getting more press right now is because there is actually an amendment regarding it being held up in the Senate. It’s a timing thing. If I had my druthers, I’d implement the following suite of changes:
- Voter ID
- Abolish same-day registration.
- No registration within 30 days of election.
- More training and oversight of poll workers (yes, I know it will cost money).
- Every voting machine must have a paper trail.
- Have to have a reason to vote absentee.This is basically how it is in many other states and it works fine. Why not here?
Posted by Owen on March 05, 2008 at 1146 hrs
Eh, I like being able to vote early via absentee ballot. It’s much more convenient. That doesn’t mean I think something shouldn’t to be done to help curb all vote fraud including absentee ballot fraud.
Posted by Matt on March 05, 2008 at 1158 hrs
I don’t think it’s entirely accurate to say most people on the right see voter ID as one tool in a multifaceted approach to secure voting. Other things seem more like afterthoughts. Have there been big pushes in across the country to pass other measures, or has it mostly just been voter ID? Sure seems that way to me.
Works fine? I guess it depends on what you mean by fine. Elections continue to happen, I guess you could certainly say that. And possibly a few wrongfully cast votes are prevented. But meanwhile many thousands of votes cease to occur because, as silly as it seems to middle-class suburban types like you and me, there are a lot of citizens who do not have government-issued IDs. The hurdle of having to get and present one depresses legitimate votes. That’s a fact.
Is it worth it? That’s the question we should be asking. When i look at reports which say that what little vote fraud does occur is happening through absentee ballots—a problem which voter ID laws do nothing about—I have to say no, it’s not worth it. It’s not worth depressing a large number of votes to remedy a problem that is in fact very minor.
The alternate view seems to be an overly pedantic, rule-based one: nobody is actually preventing grandma from going and getting an ID card, so it’s fair!
Let’s be honest here for a minute. First, there’s no indication that this is a big problem. Second, voter ID doesn’t really address the problem that does exist. Which leads me to the following conclusion: we’re having this debate for one reason: politics. Republicans believe that it will depress Democratic votes, so they want it. Democrats obviously don’t want it, and for the same reasons. It isn’t about fraud, or fairness. It’s about who wins and who loses politically.
Posted by scott on March 05, 2008 at 1204 hrs
The left doesn’t want to do anything about Voter ID or any of the other things that will stem voter fraud. They deny and minimize the impact, because they are the beneficiaries of it.
Everything that Owen has suggested will work and has been proposed time and time again, but the left keeps standing in the way with poor excuses or denying the issue.
The report released (I should say unsanitized report, thanks to some brave people in MPD who went around the system) from MPD covers all of this in great detail.
Why do 70% of the people in Wisconsin want to have Voter ID, but the left won’t even bring it up for a vote?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 1209 hrs
Say, Bill, you might want to read the comment just above yours in which this crazy, unreasonable lefty rants and raves about voter ID and why he thinks it’s not such a hot idea. Might give you an indication of where they’re coming from. And if you think he’s wrong, why not respond to some of his points and explain how?
Posted by scott on March 05, 2008 at 1216 hrs
Let’s be honest here for a minute. First, there’s no indication that this is a big problem. Second, voter ID doesn’t really address the problem that does exist. Which leads me to the following conclusion: we’re having this debate for one reason: politics.
I respectfully disagree. I am having this discussion because I do believe it to be a serious issue in need of a solution. The report from the MPD was disturbing, but it should not be taken in isolation. There have been reports for years of problems with the system. The limited number of prosecutions should not be seen as an indicator that it is not happening - only that it is very difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
That being said, if we look at the voting problems cited by the MPD report, the number of extremely questionable votes number in the thousands. And it’s pretty common in any criminal activity that only a fraction of the perpetrators are ever caught. In the case of voter fraud where it is nearly impossible detect sometimes, the fraction is likely smaller.
But even given the number, yes, I think that 200+ unaccountable votes in a single ward is a big deal. And I think that it is something to fix.
I suppose it’s just a matter of threshold. When do you consider it a serious enough issue to do something about it? 10 fraudulent votes? 100? 10,000? My threshold is pretty low because in many races, a handful of votes changes the result. Look at many Aldermanic and County supervisor races where the total vote count is less than 500 votes cast. A dozen fraudulent votes can sway that election. And I think that’s important.
You seem to be saying that as long as voter fraud is not widespread, then it’s better to ignore a few fraudulent votes rather than inconvenience people. I disagree.
But I come back to my original point. I advocate on this issue because I think it’s a real issue. Most righties I know also see it as a legitimate issue. Don’t be so quick to be dismissive just because you don’t believe that someone actually cares about this stuff.
Posted by Owen on March 05, 2008 at 1336 hrs
Owen,
I have no problem with any of your suggestions in #10 except the first one, and maybe the last one. Scott’s already laid out the arguments against Voter ID, and I don’t really have anything new to add other than the state’s going to furnish a bunch of IDs, or else it’s going to be a poll tax. That’s a lot of tax dollars being spent manufacturing ID cards.
As to the absentee vote, do y’all have early voting in Wisconsin? We have about a two week period ahead of elections with polling places set up where anyone can vote ahead of time. It’s really successful, with practically no problems and the added bonus of driving up turnout. For example, on this election early voting ran until February 29. This also cuts down on the number of absentee ballots filed, because it’s so much easier to go to the polls if you’re not limited to doing it on election day alone.
In theory, election day registration sounds good, but it seems to me the possibilities are just too ripe for fraud. 30 day residency/registration seems reasonable, and a paper trail seems like a no-brainer to me. How can anybody be against transparency?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 1341 hrs
Just another thought. It’s not that those of us on the left aren’t concerned with voter fraud; we are. We have the same vested interest in honest elections as anyone. We simply think that most of the solutions from the right attack the wrong problem with the wrong tool. It seems that when voter fraud is mentioned, the only solution usually heard is voter ID. But, as has been mentioned above, the vast majority of fraud involves mail and absentee ballots, which voter ID does absolutely nothing to address. It’s not that we don’t think it’s a real issue; it’s that the we’re usually only being given one option for a solution, and we think that option is both ineffectual and damaging to our constituency.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 1426 hrs
It is interesting when yesterday I was talking about the absentee voter fraud and the first thing that Chisholm comes out with in the Mcgee trial is how they paid people to vote absentee.
It’s easy. Sign up someone that is fake or bribe them, then request an absentee vote a little later, than send in vote and they disappear. No one to trace, impossible to catch unless each person that signs up from these canvassers is checked immediately.
These canvassers have committed more fraud over the years cause they are paid by the head.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 1547 hrs
It’s this kind of thing, by the way, which causes me to believe that there isn’t much fraud. And that what fraud does exist is not the kind which voter ID laws would do anything to stop.
Posted by scott on March 05, 2008 at 1600 hrs
Owen, most of your suggestions are not very valuable. some have been tried and proved to be worth less. Voter ID, from a partsian standpoint my hurt the GOP more than the dems. All of those that feed at the ovnerment teat will vote for sure so if you depress voter turnout it could hurt the GOP. to date I have not seen one reliable study done as to what will happen to the two parties if we have voter id. It is not smart to run off and demand something that could bury you. this has been my position for years, yet everyone eseems to think that voter id will somehow help or husr thteir side. No one knows.
Same day registation elimination also can suppress turnout and hurt GOP. The old saw about the GOPers coming out to vote more reliably has long gone out the window. Now the dems are out more relaibly.
I suprvised poll workers for 20 years. they were dman good, but they are unable to stop fraud cause they do not have any authroity to do so.
I have stood at polls as many of my compatriots have and watched these things go on, we have challenged voters and there is nothing that anyone can do unless you call the cops and have some solid proof. if for instance Owen came to vote in my precinct under a name of someone that had moved from an apartment and I saw him, challenged him and called the cops you could do something but any others are impossible.
We have to have a paper trail but I have seen many elections where there are more votes in the box then there are are people that actually voted and nothing happened. The worst was the Zurawski Mayor race.
Anyone can come up with reason to vote absentee.
There is only one way to do this and we have talked about it for years but the GOP leaders would rather cry about fraud than spend the money to do what has to be done. That is go over every registrant in the problem areas, send out cards to them, check every request for absentee ballots and every new registrant. It can be done but no one does it, they just cry fraud and then go on to next election.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 1608 hrs
I have not seen one reliable study done
This one looks pretty solid. And there’s this.
Posted by scott on March 05, 2008 at 1625 hrs
According to the first article linked to in 21, I have to wonder why the authors aren’t also claiming that Men are being disenfranchised as well…
According to Table 1.1
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Men 82.5 84.8 81.5 81.3
Women 84.2 88.5 85.7 83.9Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 05, 2008 at 1816 hrs
The city of Milwaukee used to post police officers at most polling places on election day. I remember my first election day assignment during the tenure of Chief Harold Breier. It was at a library in the inner city.
Now, I have to confess that I was far more politically attuned than most young police officers.
Therefore I was quite suprised when the police sgt. that gave us our orientation for the assignment told us to sit upfront and be very NOTICABLE, and that we were given a radio and that it should be NOTICABLE, and that as “shaky” individuals approached the election judges to give their names to vote we should appear as if we were doing a parking ticket warrant check.
I did this at first until I noticed a number of younger voters leave the line without voting. Realized that they were leaving because they probably had unpaid parking tickets.
Then I told the election judges if there were any problems they should call for me and went in back so my presence wouldn’t be supressing the vote.
When I read about the Milwaukee Police Department report, I wondered why they didn’t mention this old practice.
Posted by John Siefert on March 07, 2008 at 2102 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 116
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 07:56 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).