Volume 3 Number 119
In May 2017 President Trump signed an executive order creating a Presidential Advisory Commission On Election Integrity. Sounds benign enough, but if you think about it there have been few notable acts by the government that so imperiled the cause of democracy.
There was the Senate House Un-American Activities Committee back in the 1950s that chased suspected Communists, but was really a ruse to get at leftish leaning Democrats. Then there was President Roosevelt’s executive order that provided for imprisonment of citizens of Japanese descent because of unfounded spy concerns back in the 1940s. These two incidents require looking back quite a long time. So this was probably the first commission in the history of this country, expressly created by a presidential executive order, to lessen the cause of democracy.
And there have been some presidential orders that can be considered controversial. Most recently these include: the banning of funds for overseas aid that includes birth control aids, the decision to go ahead with the Keystone XL Pipeline, the suspension of activities related to climate control, the oppression of illegal aliens, to name a few. None of these entailed the president setting up a commission to actually harm the American people. This dubious commission is a first for President Trump.
Of course, The Supreme Court has come up with some doozy decisions in its history, like the infamous Dred Scott decision of the 1857 that allowed some states to be free and some slave. It also allowed a slave to be counted as 60 percent of a person for census purposes. There were others, right up to the Citizens United ruling that allowed for unfettered campaign contributions by businesses. But for presidential executive orders creating a commission Donald Trump is alone.
.And think of the name: Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. This joins the list of other bogus names like The Patriot Act (legislation eroding citizen’s rights), Right to Work Laws (anti-labor laws), Protect Life Laws (block affordable abortions), Defense of Marriage Act (prevent same sex couples from marrying), the Internet Freedom Act (seeks to destroy “net neutrality” which gives people free access to the internet). So these deceitful names go on.
Here is the mission statement of the Committee as published in their first meeting on July 13, 2017. “The Commission shall be solely advisory and shall submit a report to the President that identifies the following:
(a) Those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that enhance the American people’s confidence in the integrity of the voting processes used in Federal elections;
(b) Those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that undermine the American people’s confidence in the integrity of the voting processes used in Federal elections; and
(c) Those vulnerabilities in voting systems and practices used for Federal elections that could lead to improper voter registrations and improper voting, including fraudulent voter registrations and fraudulent voting.”
Paragraph (c) is particularly interesting. In truth this is a charade with no real reason for the commission to exist. It was said in the July 19, 2017 Los Angeles Times that, “A recent comprehensive investigation of voter fraud conducted by the Brennan Center for Justice, a public policy institute, found 31 credible instances between 2000 and 2014 of voter impersonation out of more than one billion votes cast. The study examined every federal election in that time period.” That comes to a rate of .000000031. Then there was the uncovering of perhaps 128 fraudulent voters in the state of Kansas. But this amounted to actually nine convictions in a state that has had 1.8 million registered voters over a period of years and a number of elections.
Seems like a lot of trouble for nothing because even if someone wanted to commit voter fraud, they would likely be deterred by the penalties for being caught. Under federal law, perpetrators face up to five years in prison and a fine of $ 10,000 for each act of fraud plus state penalties, which are almost as severe. That is a pretty hefty sum for a person to contemplate. It would be like risking the sentence of Jean Valjean of Les Misêrables fame for stealing a loaf of bread, so severe is the punishment for a voter fraud offense.
Then there is the question of where suspected voter fraud occurs. The President points to the state of California for severe voter fraud. So why does President Trump claim that voter fraud by 3 million occurred in that state? After all, Hillary Clinton won there by 4.3 million. Does he really think that 3 million people took the risk of going to jail for years, plus severe financial fines, to enhance a vote that was already in the bag? Who could be so stupid? Not only that, he doesn’t cite any sources for his accusations, just saying he was being told by some of his adherents, of unbelievable amounts of voter fraud in the state. Really.
Further, the notion of voter fraud doesn’t make sense, since presidential votes by state are pretty easy to predict. If there is something worth taking a risk for, it is only a handful of states that warrant this scrutiny. Certainly, at best, it couldn’t be considered a national problem.
This looking for a needle in a haystack hardly seems worth the effort. So why do it? The answer is: they are not looking for fraudulent voters. Rather what they want to do is to suppress voters, under the guise of looking for potential frauds. This is because, usually, when voter turnout is low, Republicans win elections. When it’s high Democrats win. So the logical thinking is to keep voter turnout low, especially in areas that favor Democrats.
It’s no secret that Republicans are faced with a shrinking or static base of potential voters. At the same time there is a surge in minority people. Their needs are more closely allied with the social safety net the Democrats promise. Conveniently, for those who would seek to minimize their vote, these people tend to live and congregate in contiguous areas.
So the Republicans have used a number of devices in recent years to minimize the votes coming out of these areas. Some of them work, because according to The Washington Post of October 7, 2011, “State photo ID restrictions disproportionately affect African-Americans, Latinos, young voters, people over 65 and people with disabilities. Advancement Project studies show that 11 percent of eligible voters, or about 21 million people, don’t have updated, state-issued photo IDs.”
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, “After the 2010 election, state lawmakers nationwide started introducing hundreds of harsh measures, making it harder to vote. The new laws range from strict photo ID requirements to early voting cutbacks to registration restrictions.
“Overall, 20 states have new restrictions in effect since then — 10 states have more restrictive voter ID laws in place (and six states have strict photo ID requirements), seven have laws making it harder for citizens to register, six cut back on early voting days and hours, and three made it harder to restore voting rights for people with past criminal convictions.
“In 2016, 14 states had new voting restrictions in place for the first time in a presidential election. Those 14 states were: Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin.”
And even that is not enough for them. Some of the techniques used by those wishing to suppress voting includes: gerrymandering (creating artificial voting areas to minimize the effects of certain areas on the election), drawing up state mandates that attempt to exclude certain people from voting, like arbitrary voter identification, minimizing polling places in low income areas, minimizing voting hours, etc. Many of these arbitrary state rulings have been struck down by the courts, but some are still in place.
So now the Trump administration has come up with a new wrinkle. Why not go after voter suppression on a national scale? Out of this came the creation of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. The panel consists of about one dozen current and former secretaries of state, clerk and recorders and judges. Vice President Mike Pence is chairman and Kansas Secretary of State Republican Kris Kobach is vice chairman. Kobach, who is running to become governor of Kansas, is partially responsible for some of the strictest voter ID laws in the country. While the leaders of the panel are Republicans, five members are Democrats. Their presence symbolizes an attempt to keep the panel in check and minimize its harm, rather than recognition of the problem.
The committee got off to a rousing start in June, 2017, with a letter to top elected officials of each state, requesting that they provide such information as voter names, addresses, social security numbers and political party affiliation. Kobach wrote, “It is crucial for the commission to consider your input as it collects data and identifies areas of opportunity to increase the integrity of our election system.” No real information was given on why this information was being collected but it reminds one of a totalitarian regime.
The recipients were pretty much universally up in arms. Twenty-one states declined to provide the data. Others will partially provide some of the data requested. Even Kobach admitted that Kansas law forbade him from providing social security numbers. A flurry of law suits has ensued. The commission has agreed to stop collection of the data pending the court’s decision.
And on Monday, July 26, 2017, a Federal judge ruled it was okay for the commission on voter fraud to proceed in gathering personal data on the nation’s voters. The panel has said they will use the data to compare a state’s voter information with other databases to try to uncover possible voting irregularities.
Whether the individual states will have to comply with the request for such data is yet to be determined.
In the end the commission is charged with providing the president with a written report. Their work is expected to be completed next year. Since the findings will be governed by its leaders it is bound to recommend steps that will lead to further dubious laws for voter suppression, most of which will probably be thrown out by the courts. What a vicious circle, waste of taxpayer money, and a disgrace to these writers of the recommendations for targeting minority voters.
