Over Thanksgiving weekend, Donald Trump falsely claimed that millions of people had voted illegally in this year’s general election. Without a credible source to cite, Trump’s assertion set off fears that the incoming administration was laying a foundation of disinformation ahead of a potentially unprecedented push to restrict voting access across the country. After being asked to back up his claim, Trump berated journalists for being unable to prove the negative that millions of illegal votes hadn’t been cast this year — a rhetorical tactic often deployed by conspiracy theorists.
The source of Trump’s claim was apparently his immigration adviser, Kris Kobach, who on November 20 was photographed holding a “strategic plan” that appeared to call for the deportation of “a record number of criminal aliens.” Kobach quickly endorsed Trump’s claim of mass illegal voting.
As Kansas’s two-term secretary of state, Kobach himself has been a pioneer of raising the specter of voter fraud to curtail access to the ballot box. Since he is likely under consideration for some form of leadership in the Trump administration, Kansas may serve as a guide for the sort of experiments in voting restrictions the incoming administration could pursue.
Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach testifies during a meeting of a legislative study committee on election issues, Nov. 21, 2014, at the statehouse in Topeka, Kansas.
Photo: John Hanna/AP
In 2011, citing the need to prevent voter fraud, Kobach succeeded in pushing through legislation that requires residents to produce documents such as birth certificates to prove their citizenship before registering to vote. Voting rights attorneys argued the restriction, which went into effect in 2013, amounted to voter suppression because it disproportionately affected minorities. In September, after a federal court blocked the requirement, Kobach was on the verge of being held in contempt of court for failing to comply with a separate court order requiring that he allow thousands of eligible voters who lacked such forms of identification to cast regular ballots.
In July 2015, Kobach pulled off something of a coup by using claims of widespread voter fraud to convince the Kansas legislature to grant him prosecutorial powers. Kobach’s unprecedented move alarmed voting rights advocates, who for years had been fighting his previous attempts to restrict voting.
Yet when Kobach’s theory of mass illegal voting was finally put to the test, it came up spectacularly short.
The few cases Kobach has announced focus more on minor — and possibly unintentional — breaches of voting rules, far from the flagrant electoral manipulation he has publicly obsessed over.
Today, a year and a half after the Kansas legislature gave Kobach free rein to pursue his legions of illegal voters, he has announced a mere half-dozen prosecutions related to voting, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, largely against elderly voters — and none involving voting by non-citizens.
Only four of Kobach’s six cases have been successful.
Last April, Kobach dropped all charges against a 61-year-old woman just days before the state was scheduled to bring her to trial. In December 2015, her husband, a Vietnam veteran named Steven Gaedtke, pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor count after Kobach’s office dismissed two other charges against him.
“He’s an otherwise law-abiding citizen who made a mistake,” said Gaedtke’s attorney, Scott Gyllenborg. The couple had apparently voted in both Arkansas and Kansas in 2010, but because it was not a presidential year, neither had cast multiple votes for any one candidate. In May, Kobach dropped two serious felony charges against a 77-year-old man in exchange for guilty pleas to two lesser voting-related misdemeanors.
In short, Kobach’s vaunted voter fraud amounts to no more than “American citizens with homes in two states voting in both states,” said Mark Johnson, a lecturer at the University of Kansas School of Law who has litigated voting rights cases against Kobach. Johnson said that Kobach’s adversarial approach to voting simply added to Kansans’ overall feeling of uneasiness with the electoral process.
“In the 17 months that the secretary has had that prosecutorial power,” said Johnson, “he hasn’t brought a single case of voter impersonation or alien registration or voting.”
Top photo: Election Clerk Marilin Malson marks the spot for a voter signature with a presidential ruler on Nov. 4, 2014, in Hayes Township, Kansas.
Mr. Woodman, “election fraud” and “voter fraud” are two completely different phenomena. The headline you chose for your article is misleading and deliberately seeks to obfuscate the severity of actual election fraud that took place on a massive scale in the primaries. In Arizona, 1.2 million voters were suppressed, illegally purged from the voter rolls. 3.2 million voters suppressed in the same exact manner in New York. There were nearly 500,000 California voters purged from the registration rolls in California from Feb 2015 through Jan 2016.
To the editors of the Intercept and Mr. Woodman, show your readers the respect they deserve and cease the misleading “attention grabbing”headlines. We turn to the Intercept for investigative news and you will drag the Intercept’s credibility down to a CNN or MSNBC level if you don’t hold yourselves to a higher standard. And it reflects poorly on what is a very informative article.
So in over a year he couldn’t find a case.
– Is this blazing incompetence?
– Malicious lying and slander about supposed illegal registrants?
– Or is it successfully scaring evil-doers out of Kansas?
Bet the Republicans go for Door #3!
I’m a bit surprised at the absence of any mention of the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program. According to a Rolling Stone article from August (“The GOP’s Stealth War Against Voters”), “[t]he man behind Crosscheck is Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a Yale-educated former law professor…He co-wrote the ultraconservative 2016 RNC party platform, working in a recommendation that Crosscheck be adopted by every state in the Union.”
The article also claims that “twenty-eight participating states share their voter lists” and that “there have been signs that the program doesn’t operate as advertised.”
Essentially the RS article argues that this “anti-voter-fraud program” could be used to “deny tens of thousands their right to vote.” I would guess that Kobach’s “theory of mass illegal voting” rested (at least in part) on the program’s faulty identification of Kansas voters who were supposedly registered to vote in more than one state.
In fact, Mr. Woodman suggests as much when he writes, “Kobach’s vaunted voter fraud amounts to no more than ‘American citizens with homes in two states voting in both states'”. Except that another big problem with the use of the Crosscheck program is that it regularly confuses two (or more) people with similar names…leading to the possibility that state election authorities might mistakenly remove some some of them from the voting rolls based on the erroneous assumption that these two people are one and the same (and that this “one” person may be attempting to vote twice).
Unfortunately, the RS author doesn’t provide concrete numbers (just “estimates”) as to how many voters have been mistakenly purged from their state’s voter rolls based on Crosscheck. I find it interesting nonetheless. Especially since Mr Kobach is apparently still promoting its use in more states…despite his finding that instances of actual “voter fraud” in his own state are almost nonexistent.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-gops-stealth-war-against-voters-w435890
There are multiple problems here, but the largest problem is that the Left and the Right do not agree. I would say that the Left totally ignores that there are issues with voter registration and the potential for illegal aliens to vote in US elections. There are studies that can be referenced, see:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/do-illegal-votes-decide-elections-1480551000
The only thing the Left seems to be able to do is “debunk”, that is to say they just repeat “these studies are flawed”. Yet, there is no real counter evidence presented that would actually provide workable data.
Between outdated and inaccurate voter rolls, to some of the easier registration processes, to the lax checking at the voting booth, there are problems in the system that can be exploited that affect the vote. If you can make it on to the voter roll, it’s trivially easy to vote. Supply a name, confirm your address, and maybe supply a driver’s license. As long as your name is on the registered voter list, you’re good. I think a majority of US citizens don’t have a problem with citizens only voting, and having a reasonable way to prove citizenship.
My son registered to vote for the first time in Kansas and the process was ridiculously easy online. In fact it’s a bit scary how easy it was, as it required no face-to-face interaction with anyone–just filling out a web form of demographic info, driver’s license number, and a scanned image of “citizen” documentation like a birth certificate, passport, or the like. I’m sure all the State does is a cross check on entered data against driver’s license data (and maybe birth certificate data) in the background, and one wonders how closely they examine the scanned image. It can be exploited, but what they are doing seems to balance reasonableness, convenience and risk.
That being said, it was not very burdensome, granted that we had the birth certificate on hand. However, to say that providing proper documentation is impossible or a hindrance to the point of “voter suppression” is nonsense. Just like anything else in life, if it’s important, people will find the time and effort required to make things happen. No birth certificate? A call to the hospital or the State you were born in will get you started. A mailed in form, a few dollars, and a few days wait will get you a birth certificate. Not enough time? People generally have 2 years between election cycles to get this done! Come on.
Are people arguing that minority voters are not capable of obtaining a birth certificate or driver’s license? Are there assumptions that minorities don’t have birth certificates or driver’s licenses? I’m sure minority voter’s would be appalled by some of the perceived inadequacies and stereotypes being pedaled by the Left in their defense. It’s the bigotry of low expectations, and it’s just as bad as any other form of bigotry. If you have time, please watch this: https://youtu.be/odB1wWPqSlE
To the larger accusation of harassment brought up in the article. Is it harassment to prosecute people who break the law? We can argue about the penalties, but you can’t vote twice, you can’t vote in two different states, you can’t vote under the name of a different person. These are crimes on the books. This is not harassment.
The Left’s lack of prosecution argument is used to justify that there is no real problem. Voter fraud is, at times, difficult to spot. As I said earlier, if you can get on the registered voter list, it’s trivially easy to actually vote on election day. No, voting judge is going to think twice about it if your name matches the roll. We are all operating on the honor system when it comes to voting. That works fine when there is a low number of illegal aliens in your country, but at a certain point there must be changes in order to secure the integrity of the vote. We have upwards of 11M illegals here, equating to 3% of the population. That’s within the margin of error of most polling, and enough to change election outcomes in certain areas of the country.
As you well know, it’s not a “left vs. right” issue – it’s a “Republican Party disenfranchising people who tend to vote Democrat” issue*, which is why a bunch of states with Republican-dominated legislatures all started playing the Voter ID game about the same time. North Carolina got caught using race explicitly as a marker for likely Democrats, instead of the less obvious markers like poverty, or gun licenses being accepted ID but college student IDs not being accepted.
(*I’m a Libertarian, so I get to pretend to be neutral in Democrat vs. Republican games like this.)
Look at the states that closed most of their motor vehicle department offices so that people who didn’t drive and needed to get voter IDs had to get rides to other counties to get them. My Republican mom doesn’t see well enough to drive, but she can afford to take a taxi to the other side of the main city near her to go to the DMV (busses take about half a day each way to make those connections.) My brother, who lives in Mike Pence’s Indiana, got his wallet stolen. The DMV wouldn’t replace his driver’s license without a good-enough-for-the-Birthers stamped birth certificate; the state he was born in won’t issue those unless you show up with a driver’s license, and to add to the Catch-22, he couldn’t fly there or legally drive there without the license. He eventually took a bus and brought Mom in to the office with her photo ID and they gave him a replacement birth certificate, but he couldn’t vote in the meantime.
I think suppression is conspiracy talk. I think Republicans are the only one’s that take seriously the right of citizens to vote and work to protect that right. There are no doubt issues with getting certain forms of documentation, but that only speaks to the important and related issue of identity theft. A state’s procedures and requirements to shore up the security and process of obtaining those documents are part of the equation of voter registration. Everything that you wrote about goes to show that proof of identity is important (and not just for voting) and that states are beginning to take it seriously. But that doesn’t equate to intentional “suppression” or “disenfranchising” since these procedures are affecting Republican and Democrat alike. It sounds like there needs to be some flexibility in some state’s processes, rather than the typical bureaucratic responses. The irony in this is that Kansas actually seems to try to balance reasonableness and risk in obtaining the necessary forms of ID, yet Kobach is somehow a monster.
Are you aware that internet penetration is not 100% in the US?
Good thing there’s the ability to walk-in to the county offices or use the old fashioned postal mail. I would hate to think us backward Kansans would only rely on the Internet for voter registration.
I needed to renew my driver’s license which I had since the age of 19 in Florida. It required nine different pieces of identifying documents. My birth certificate, marriage certificate, two separate bills in my name at my address, social security card, my expiring driver’s license, divorce decree, and a couple others that escape me since this was a few years ago. My marriage license was from Minnesota, they would not send it to me and required an immediate family member to get it. My mother, father, me or my husband were the only ones allowed. My mother is dead, my father can no longer drive and a trip to Minnesota costs hundreds of dollars along with the fees for the forms. So, getting that ID is not as easy in some areas as it has been made to seem. Nor is it free as some claim when you need that many documents that all cost some fee to obtain.
As I posted in another response, I’m not saying that some state’s have difficult procedures, but that is a related issue with identity theft in general, not specific to voter registration. Those issues affect everyone, not just minorities and there is no targeting for suppression. In your case, it seems quite unreasonable to require 9 forms of ID for a renewal, especially since you’ve had the DL previously (presumably in good standing and not expired). But that’s a Florida procedure to ensure adequate proof of identity which can be changed by law. Minnesota is simply protecting your identity, as a marriage license is an important document that has a lot of protected, identifying information associated with it (birth date, place of birth, names, maiden name, etc.). It seems majorly inconvenient if you need to get a copy, but again, this is the result of identity theft and fraud related protection.
Speaking of Kobach and supposed election fraud:
“FREDERICK, Kan. (KSNW) – Some may not be familiar with Frederick. The few residents of the town told KSNw-TV that it has a population of nine. Last month, town members voted on whether or not the town should remain incorporated or dissolve. Most residents, including the former mayor, said they don’t think Frederick should remain a town. However, the election results said something different. According to Rice County clerk, Alicia Showalter, 13 people voted to keep Frederick a city and seven voted against it. In total, 20 ballots were collected.
“Of those, there are only nine registered voters in Frederick,” said Showalter. The county clerk said it was a ballot distribution mistake , 11 people received ballots with the Frederick question, that weren’t supposed to vote on it. The Rice County commission canvassed and certified the results a week after election, and that’s when the clerk realized the numbers didn’t add up. She talked to the State election office, but they said the results were official.”
It’s just a dumb ballot screw-up, but kinda amusing.
http://ksnt.com/2016/12/05/election-mistake-in-tiny-kansas-town-kobach-stands-by-results/
Kobach was the main architect of Arizona’s ill-fated SB 1070. Kind of a blessing in disguise, as it eventually led to the political demise of Russell Pearce and Joe Arpaio. Assholes, all.
Donald Trump falsely claimed that millions of people had voted illegally in this year’s general election.
Oh gee wiz. Read my lips, no new taxes. I did not delete any classified email and i turned in all classified email. I did not have sexual relations with that woman. This is going to be the most transparent administration ever. We dont kill civilians…..
Do dictators get the money? Do dictators lie? Do dictators rendition and torture and spy on everyone? Americans could save a ton of money if we only had ONE.
This is a smart and effective strategy to stop dems from voting through intimidation and limiting access to the ballot. Many people will not be able to find the time to dig up a birth certificate and bring it to a government office that may only be open during their work hours.
The Dems are a loser party – they will fight against this ineffectually through high minded rhetoric and weak lawsuits that will take years to process through the courts.