Iowa Refers 80 Cases of Voter Fraud to Prosecutors

[OriginalShroom]

Hmmmm

Hmmm..... so there is no such thing as voter fraud huh?

Iowa Refers 80 Cases of Voter Fraud to Prosecutors | National Review Online

Vice President Biden claimed voter ID laws were evidence of “hatred” and “zealotry” during a Black History Month event yesterday in Washington.

Ignoring the fact that voter ID laws were declared constitutional in a 2006 Supreme Court decision written by John Paul Stevens, the Court’s then most liberal justice, Biden is continuing the fact-free assault on anti-voter fraud measures.

When such laws aren’t “hateful” they are “unnecessary.” The Brennan Center for Justice says “voter fraud is essentially irrational” so it almost never happens. Voter fraud is so rare “you’re more likely to get hit by lightning than find a case of prosecutorial voter fraud,” insists Judith Browne-Dianis, co-director of the liberal Advancement Project.

Well, the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation disagrees. Not a state known for its hateful politics, Iowa’s DCI wrapped up its investigation this month and has referred more than 80 cases of voter fraud to county attorneys for possible prosecution. Since the investigation was initiated by GOP Secretary of State Matt Schultz a year and a half ago, five people have pleaded guilty to voter fraud and 15 others are facing charges.

Iowa governor Terry Branstad told IowaWatch.com that such investigations cut down on voter fraud because they increase the risks for perpetrators. “By people knowing that there is going to be an investigation and scrutiny of people that vote illegally, it serves as a deterrent to voter fraud,” he said. The number of races for Iowa’s legislature that have been decided by fewer than 100 votes has grown. A full ten races have involved margins of less than 50 votes since 2008.

Liberals aren’t convinced. They accuse Secretary of State Schultz of misusing his office resources to pursue insignificant amounts of voter fraud. “Schultz chose to spend his Secretary of State career collaring a relative handful of voters whose mistakes might have been cleared up with a public information campaign,” sniffed the liberal Quad City Times.

So voter fraud is almost nonexistent. Except when it isn’t, which is when it becomes insignificant. Or its pursuit is “hateful.”

You can never win with those who insist voter fraud is simply not an issue.

 

[TheOldSchool]

80 cases? Iowa really going for broke here

 

[Jarhead]

80 cases? Iowa really going for broke here

you are thinking national.

What if those 80 were in one district of 500 residents?

One thing for sure....those 80 votes OFFSET 80 honest Americans exercising one of their most treasured rights.

 

[TheOldSchool]

80 cases? Iowa really going for broke here

you are thinking national.

What if those 80 were in one district of 500 residents?

One thing for sure....those 80 votes OFFSET 80 honest Americans exercising one of their most treasured rights.

It's obviously a terrible thing. But the implication in the OP and Link is that voter fraud is exclusively a tactic of the Democrat party which is not correct.

 

[Uncensored2008]

But it never happens because uh, um, OBAMA AKBAR..

 

[OriginalShroom]

80 cases? Iowa really going for broke here

you are thinking national.

What if those 80 were in one district of 500 residents?

One thing for sure....those 80 votes OFFSET 80 honest Americans exercising one of their most treasured rights.

It's obviously a terrible thing. But the implication in the OP and Link is that voter fraud is exclusively a tactic of the Democrat party which is not correct.

How you could say that with a straight face is simply amazing.

The only "implication" in the OP and link is that Democrats don't want to do anything to prevent voter fraud by people of either party.

 

[Jarhead]

80 cases? Iowa really going for broke here

you are thinking national.

What if those 80 were in one district of 500 residents?

One thing for sure....those 80 votes OFFSET 80 honest Americans exercising one of their most treasured rights.

It's obviously a terrible thing. But the implication in the OP and Link is that voter fraud is exclusively a tactic of the Democrat party which is not correct.

I am sure voter fraud exists and from both sides of the ideological aisle.

What I don't get is why ANY party would be against ID requirements. The thing about people being too poor to get an ID is BS seeing as it has been put on the table to offer them for free without the left agreeing to it.

I believe that is why many on the right believe that the left is more involved in voter fraud than the right.

Maybe you can tell me....why are you against voter ID?

 

[Uncensored2008]

It's obviously a terrible thing. But the implication in the OP and Link is that voter fraud is exclusively a tactic of the Democrat party which is not correct.

Election fraud is a primary tactic of the democratic party.

The reason you support voter fraud is to promote your party. IF fraud occurred in both parties, you and other democrats would suddenly support voter ID. But because fraud is virtually exclusive to democrats, you fight against ID and purging of dead voters from the rolls.

Out of the 71 million votes cast in the 2012 election, how many do you think were "proxy votes," where an illegal alien or indigent was paid to vote using the registration of a dead voter, still on the rolls because democrats blocked efforts to purge the rolls?

2 million? 5 million? Enough that Obama would not have won without the usual democrat election fraud?

If we took the position that election fraud is the sacred right of democrats, and just gave you an extra 5 millions votes for your candidates - a fraud stipend, would you allow honest elections? Or does the very concept of honest elections offend democrats?

 

[TheOldSchool]

you are thinking national.

What if those 80 were in one district of 500 residents?

One thing for sure....those 80 votes OFFSET 80 honest Americans exercising one of their most treasured rights.

It's obviously a terrible thing. But the implication in the OP and Link is that voter fraud is exclusively a tactic of the Democrat party which is not correct.

I am sure voter fraud exists and from both sides of the ideological aisle.

What I don't get is why ANY party would be against ID requirements. The thing about people being too poor to get an ID is BS seeing as it has been put on the table to offer them for free without the left agreeing to it.

I believe that is why many on the right believe that the left is more involved in voter fraud than the right.

Maybe you can tell me....why are you against voter ID?

I'm not particularly for or against it. Though in order to have registered you have to have already shown ID. And I could see that if election day comes around and I don't currently have an ID for whatever reason; given the option between paying $50 for a new ID or just not voting why those people would stay home on election day.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Election fraud is a primary tactic of the democratic party.

The reason you support voter fraud is to promote your party. IF fraud occurred in both parties, you and other democrats would suddenly support voter ID. But because fraud is virtually exclusive to democrats, you fight against ID and purging of dead voters from the rolls.

This is a delusion shared by many conservatives.

 

[ClosedCaption]

80 cases referred?


Did it say someone was guilty or nah?

 

[Jarhead]

It's obviously a terrible thing. But the implication in the OP and Link is that voter fraud is exclusively a tactic of the Democrat party which is not correct.

I am sure voter fraud exists and from both sides of the ideological aisle.

What I don't get is why ANY party would be against ID requirements. The thing about people being too poor to get an ID is BS seeing as it has been put on the table to offer them for free without the left agreeing to it.

I believe that is why many on the right believe that the left is more involved in voter fraud than the right.

Maybe you can tell me....why are you against voter ID?

I'm not particularly for or against it. Though in order to have registered you have to have already shown ID. And I could see that if election day comes around and I don't currently have an ID for whatever reason; given the option between paying $50 for a new ID or just not voting why those people would stay home on election day.

Once you register for the first time, you no longer need ID to register. The form comes to your last known address and you register via mail.
That's where fraud possibilities come in. You move, forget to re-register, and someone else registers under your name, your wife's name and any other adult that lived where the new person lives.

Voting should be important. Just as you run around weeks in advance to find your passport before travelling, one should run around looking for their ID to vote.

If it is not that important to someone to look for their ID, then they lose the right to vote.

Something is wrong when it is more important to you to have a passport for your vacation than it is to have your ID to vote.