Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Panel : Pervasiveness Voter Fraud Open to Debate

The EAC is right to alter its general assessment of voter fraud statistics reported to them. The EAC's original report was largely based on the findings and conclusions of others. In that report note it was "experts" who concluded last year that there was little voter fraud around the nation...

The EAC itself did not make such a finding.

Now the EAC has altered the wording in its report.

As they should have done at the beginning, the panel should have said the pervasiveness of fraud was open to debate.

As it is. In tight, close races, a matter of only a half-dozen fraudulent votes - usually attempted by absentee ballots - can mean the difference between the winner and the loser. Who should legitimately take office, and who shouldn't.

Even one vote cast in the name of a deceased person whose name remains on outdated and over-inflated voter registry databases is one vote that waters down the right of all of the "eligible" voters.

It happens, and more often than not, goes undetected. As well, even if attempts at fraud are caught, they are rarely prosecuted because more often than not the judge determines that the difference wouldn't affect the outcome of the election.

The EAC should be commended for now appearing to be neutral rather than take the side of one political party, or the other.

Net the Truth Online
Panel Said to Alter Finding on Voter Fraud
Published: April 11, 2007
WASHINGTON, April 10 — A federal panel responsible for conducting election research played down the findings of experts who concluded last year that there was little voter fraud around the nation, according to a review of the original report obtained by The New York Times.

Instead, the panel, the Election Assistance Commission, issued a report that said the pervasiveness of fraud was open to debate.

The revised version echoes complaints made by Republican politicians, who have long suggested that voter fraud is widespread and justifies the voter identification laws that have been passed in at least two dozen states.

Democrats say the threat is overstated and have opposed voter identification laws, which they say disenfranchise the poor, members of minority groups and the elderly, who are less likely to have photo IDs and are more likely to be Democrats.

Though the original report said that among experts “there is widespread but not unanimous agreement that there is little polling place fraud,” the final version of the report released to the public concluded in its executive summary that “there is a great deal of debate on the pervasiveness of fraud.”

The topic of voter fraud, usually defined as people misrepresenting themselves at the polls or improperly attempting to register voters, remains a lively division between the two parties...

No comments: