A “FRAUD-FRIENDLY SYSTEM”
by Paul R. Hollrah, ©2017
(Feb. 5, 2017) — It is no secret in political circles that vote fraud is rampant in US elections, and always has been. Democrats know it, Republicans know it, and the mainstream media know it… but ignore it. Unfortunately, when one major political party is the primary beneficiary of the fraud, and at least 90% of those in the mainstream media are members of that party, there is little chance that anti-fraud laws can be enacted and/or enforced. Fraud, violence, and intimidation merely become the “dirty little secret” of the greatest constitutional republic on Earth.
In the not-too-distant past, voter registration was done only in person. All it took to become a registered voter was to make a brief visit to the election board offices in the county courthouse. In some states, roving registrars set up tables in malls and shopping centers where it was possible to register while shopping. It was a time when local, state, and national elections were held on a single day. The only exception to that rule was absentee-ballot voting by those who knew well in advance that they would be traveling, hospitalized, or otherwise unavailable on Election Day.
But then, in recent decades, as Democrats strove to assemble a permanent governing majority of special interests, they developed a vast array of fraud-friendly electoral processes. Under the guise of “fairness” and “inclusiveness,” they created abominations such as postcard registration, motor-voter registration, same-day registration, electronic voting, voting by mail, and many others… all open invitations to fraud and all disguised as ways of extending the benefits of democracy to the greatest number of people. But is that what the “reformers” actually had in mind, or were they more interested in creating ways to “scam” the system? Either way, the system has become so fraud-friendly that the entire process is in need of major overhaul.
Democrats have demonstrated no shame whatsoever in their support for fraud-friendly voter registration and voting procedures. In fact, when confronted with the proposal to abandon photo ID legislation, which they invariably oppose, in exchange for a system in which voters would be required to dip a “pinkie” into a vial of indelible ink after voting… so that voters could be prevented from voting more than once… Democrats opposed even that anti-fraud reform.
But now it appears as if Donald Trump has found a way to turn the tables on them. By claiming that, were it not for the votes of more than 3 million non-citizens, he would have won not only a majority in the Electoral College, but a majority of the popular vote as well, he has caused Democrats to suddenly switch sides. They’ve abandoned their long-held claim that “vote fraud doesn’t exist,” in favor of a challenge to Trump to “put up, or shut up.” They apparently feel that by investigating his charge and proving him wrong they can put the issue to rest, once and for all.
If this turn of events was the result of careful planning by Trump and his inner circle, then he is truly a “manipulator” of unparalleled skill. But whether planned or inadvertent, the evidence is all on Trump’s side and Democrats have inadvertently walked into a political trap.
If we’ve learned nothing else from the last seventy years of political and social experimentation we’ve learned that, given a choice between doing things the right way or doing things the easy way, Americans will almost invariably choose the easy way… and to heck with the consequences. There can be no better example than our current electoral system. But if we are to reform our electoral processes so that we can once again have faith that our votes actually count, we must make some bold reforms. First, it is imperative that we go back to basic principles:
- Voter registration must be done only in person. Fraud-friendly motor-voter, postcard, and same-day registration schemes must be either repealed or superseded.
- Registrations must be done only by full-time paid registrars, employees of counties and/or township government. Third-party registrars, paid and unpaid, must be prohibited.
- Registration must be done only in the county and/or township in which the registrant maintains his/her primary residence.
- As a requisite for voter registration, each voter must show proof of citizenship (birth certificate or passport) and proof of residence (driver’s license, residential deed, apartment lease, utility bills, etc.).
- Qualified voters must be issued a voter I.D. card, complete with photo, permanent address, and precinct number, which must then be presented upon entering a polling place at each election.
- Court administrators must be required to furnish local election boards with name, address, date of birth, and Social Security number of every individual convicted of a felony. Election boards must be required to purge voter registrations of all felons at least ten days prior to any election.
- County coroners must be required to furnish election boards with copies of all death certificates. All deceased persons must be removed from the voter rolls no later than ten days prior to any election.
- Registered voters who move from one state to another, from one county or township to another, or from one precinct to another, must obtain a voter registration transfer document from their local election board. This document must be presented, in person, to county or township officials of the voter’s new place of residence.
- Absentee ballots must be received no later than ten days prior to an election. Absentee ballots must be tallied no later than the day and hour that polls close on Election Day.
- Absentee ballots completed by residents of nursing homes, elder care, and mental health facilities must be completed only in the presence of representatives of both major political parties.
- Other than absentee ballots, voting must be done in person, only on the day of the election, and only in the precinct in which the voter maintains his/her primary residence. Electronic voting and vote-by-mail schemes must be repealed or superseded.
- Provisional ballots must be limited only to the most serious instances of clerical error by election board officials. And finally,
- The national Voting Rights Act must be amended to provide fines and mandatory jail sentences for any individual who would, in any election in which the name of a candidate for federal office appears on the ballot, do any of the following:
a. Vote in the name of another person.
b. Vote or attempt to vote more than once.
c. Vote in the name of a deceased or fictitious person.
d. Vote in more than one state or political subdivision.
e. Vote without benefit of U.S. citizenship.
f. Intimidate, interfere with, or cause injury to the person or property of any other person peaceably engaged in the political process, or
g. Cause any other person to do any of the foregoing.
All of these recommendations meet the test of fairness and inclusion because they apply equally to all citizens. But what are the chances that such a program of reform could be enacted? The chances are not good because Democrats have far too much vested interest in maintaining and liberalizing the fraud-friendly system we have.
But, regardless of the reforms we might impose on the present system, there can be no substitute for an educated and informed citizenry. The election of Barack Obama on November 4, 2008 illustrated precisely the sort of government we can expect when our voting-age citizens are uneducated and/or uninformed. In a November 13-15, 2008, Zogby poll of 512 Obama voters (97.1% high school graduates and 55% college graduates) we learned that: 57.4% could not identify which party controlled Congress; 71.8% could not identify Joe Biden as the candidate who had engaged in plagiarism; 82.6% could not identify Barack Obama as the candidate who won his first primary race by having all of his Democratic opponents removed from the ballot on technicalities; and 88.4% could not identify Obama as the candidate who said that his policies would bankrupt coal-burning electric utilities and drive power costs through the ceiling.
However, 86.3% identified Sarah Palin as the candidate whose political party spent $150,000 on a campaign wardrobe; 93.8% identified Palin as the candidate with a pregnant teenage daughter; and 86.9% identified Palin as the candidate who said that she could see Russia from her home in Alaska (Actually, Palin did not say that. That quote is from comedienne Tina Fey of Saturday Night Live). Only 12 of the 512 Obama voters answered at least eleven of the twelve multiple choice questions correctly, while only 3 of the 512 interviewed answered all twelve correctly. Clearly, most Democratic voters get their political information from Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Saturday Night Live. And since we can’t do much to change that, the least we can do is to make the electoral process as idiot-proof and as fraud-proof as possible.
Paul R. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of the U.S. Electoral College. He currently lives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma’s Green Country.
Sharon Rondeau has operated The Post & Email since April 2010, focusing on the Obama birth certificate investigation and other government corruption news. She has reported prolifically on constitutional violations within Tennessee’s prison and judicial systems.