Voting Irregularity Issues
Election Board’s Outrageous Conduct Requires Action
Senator Thom Goolsby March 6, 2013
For
all those who scream, “There is no voter fraud in North Carolina!” the
silence was deafening after the latest revelation from the State Board
of Elections (SBOE) regarding online voter registration during the 2012
election season.
Four
of the five members of the SBOE recently learned that the Obama
campaign registered up to 11,000 “voters” in North Carolina via a remote
registration system. Although North Carolina law does not allow online
voter registration, Gary Bartlett, director of the SBOE, unilaterally
approved a method that allowed users to fill out and remotely sign voter
registration applications using a computer or a smart phone.
When
questioned by the press on this issue, Rep. David Lewis (R–Hartnett),
chairman of the House Elections Committee said, “This particular method
has at least the appearance of an attempt to skirt the current law.”
Rep. Lewis’s remark was an understatement, to say the least.
The
“method” to which Lewis referred was used by only one company:
Allpoint Voter Services of Oakland, California. Allpoint was founded by
Jude Barry. This is the same Jude Barry who created the “Obama for
America Draft Committee,” the first group to raise money online and
encourage then-Senator, now-President Obama to run for the nation’s
highest office.
With
Director Bartlett’s help and an opinion from Don Wright, an attorney
with the SBOE, Allpoint began registering thousands of voters in North
Carolina, despite a law against such procedures. The specific law, North
Carolina General Statute 163-82.6(b), only allows a state agency to
capture electronic signatures for voter registration. North Carolinians
routinely encounter such a device when signing for their driver’s
licenses.
In
spite of this law, Attorney Wright issued his own legal opinion.
Further, he claimed that the North Carolina Attorney General’s Office
reviewed his opinion and concurred with it. This statement was false and
his legal reasoning flies in the face of a plain reading of the law.
Nonetheless,
the illegal and unjustified process of voter registration began in our
state. In the end, Allpoint presented up to 11,000 voter registration
forms. There is no record of any other group using this process. For
their work, according to the Federal Election Commission, Allpoint
received $25,000 in August 2012 from the Obama campaign.
This
action by SBOE officials, without the knowledge of four of the five
SBOE members and in contravention of North Carolina law, is an outrage
of deceit, subterfuge and possible criminality. Interagency emails show
direct contact between Allpoint officials and employees of the State
Board of Elections to coordinate their plans.
Even
if Director Bartlett and Attorney Wright truly believed that electronic
voter registration was legal, why was this decision not communicated to
any other groups, besides the company representing the Obama campaign?
Under Allpoint’s direction, who actually registered to vote in North
Carolina? How many of the up to 11,000 applications were legitimate
voters attempting to register? Were any illegal votes cast in the 2012
election and, if so, how many?
Why
is the director of our own State Board of Elections not safeguarding
our election system from potential fraud on a mass scale? Where is the
media scrutiny and coverage? Where is the public outrage? Where is the
criminal investigation? All of these questions deserve answers.
Thom Goolsby is
a state senator, practicing attorney and law professor. He is a
chairman of the Senate Judiciary 1 and Justice and Public Safety
Committees.
Elections Bureaucrats Ran Amok
Posted on February 19, 2013 by Susan Myrick in Elections & Voting From the Civitas InstituteIn a blatantly partisan move, the staff of the North Carolina State Board of Elections (SBE) successfully subverted state law to facilitate online voter registration in North Carolina by the 2012 Barack Obama campaign. In doing so they coordinated with partisans behind closed doors, lied about the NC Attorney General’s Office concurring with the SBE staff on the issue, and dodged oversight by their own board and the legislature. The end result was to add thousands of people to the North Carolina voter rolls illegally.
The SBE staff’s audacity is so breath-taking that it’s hard to believe, so let us emphasize: The Civitas Institute has documented how SBE bureaucrats conspired with a private company, working for the Obama campaign[i], to facilitate a form of online voter registration for the 2012 General Election – in violation of state law. It’s a classic example of how bureaucrats ignore the democratic process and hijack an agency for partisan purposes.
Breaking the Law
Civitas initiated a series of public records requests to uncover this scheme concerning online registration in defiance of state law.NCGS 163-82.6(b) clearly states that the only form where an electronically captured signature can be used is one offered by a state agency:
NCGS 163-82.6 (b) Signature – The form shall be valid only if signed by the applicant. An electronically captured image of the signature of a voter on an electronic voter registration form offered by a State agency shall be considered a valid signature for all purposes for which a signature on a paper voter registration form is used. [Emphasis added]
The major use for this is for voter registration when people get their drivers licenses.
Yet the SBE staff set in motion a scheme that in the last two months of the election resulted in more than 11,000 people being allowed to register online. Civitas has confirmed this by a public records request to all 100 counties and is still compiling the total number of registrations as counties comply with the request. Thus far, 68 percent of the registrations we have received were Democratic voters, 10 percent were Republican voters and 21 percent from unaffiliated voters.
Don Wright, SBE General Counsel, played word games when answering inquires about the Obama campaign’s own re-election site Gottaregister.com, which utilized the technology that SBE staff approved. Wright repeatedly denied that the SBE allowed online voter registration, insisting that it was “web-based voter registration”[ii] instead, as if there could be a “web-based” process that wasn’t online.
The technology from Allpoint Voter Services uses remote-control pens to transmit “signatures” over the Internet, according to techpresident.com[iii]. After entering voter information in an online form, the citizen “signs” it with a stylus or a finger. The Allpoint technology records the signature and then transmits it to one of two autopens – one in California, the other in Nevada[iv]. One of the pens transcribes the signature on to a paper voter registration form. Allpoint then mails the documents to local election boards – or is supposed to, a point we’ll come back to.
To say this is not “online” registration but “web-based” is like saying a certain vehicle is not a car, it’s an automobile. The point of having a “wet signature” – one in ink – is to provide a universally accepted way proving that a prospective voter is affirming in person all the facts on the form. To have an auto pen inserted at one point in this long computerized process is a far different thing. Even the Obama campaign called it online voter registration. Because, no matter how you twist words around, that’s what it is.
North Carolina law does not authorize any kind of online voter registration, however “wet” or “web-based” it might be. Neither the term “wet signatures” nor the phrase “reduced to paper” appear in the NC General Statutes. The term “wet signature[v]” was put in use in the context of elections by Allpoint Voter Services promoting the product it was providing to the Obama campaign. “Wet signature” is a term that Wright returns to often, even in the legal opinion he authored to support the staff decision.
Following the Paper Trail
The scheme appears to go back at least three years, beginning with cautious probes into the topic. The oldest document found pertaining to online voter registration was uncovered in a previous, unrelated Civitas records request to the SBE. It is a letter to Attorney General Roy Cooper[vi] from Gary Bartlett, Executive Director of the SBE, dated September 11, 2009, formally requesting an advisory opinion of the “effect NCGS 66-311 Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) upon possible electronic voter registration.” That in itself is a bit odd, as UETA is the state law governing commercial transactions in general, and is in a totally different section of the state’s legal code from the election laws. Bartlett asked specifically whether UETA would make it permissible for a county board of elections to accept an electronically submitted voter registration application that has been electronically signed. Bartlett also asked the AG if voter registration is outside the scope of UETA.Since we did not have a reply to Bartlett’s request, we submitted a records request on January 16, 2013, to the Attorney General’s Office. In answer to our request, Special Deputy Attorney General Susan Nichols informed Civitas that Bartlett orally withdrew the written request in question before a response was prepared.
The next documents[vii] in the timeline can be attributed to the Attorney General’s Office also. Nichols forwarded to Civitas a string of emails dated April 12 – 13, 2010. The emails were a conversation between Nichols and David Becker, Director of Election Initiatives for the Pew Center on the States. Nichols, on behalf of Gary Bartlett, was seeking contact with other states that had adopted UETA. Bartlett wanted to know if the other states chose to also adopt new legislation to facilitate electronic voter registration. Yet why would Bartlett need the AG’s Office to be the go-between? Did he want to keep his profile low?
This inquiry into UETA also appeared to die after an email from Becker to Ms. Nichols. He included a list of states that had passed some form of online voter registration: Arizona, California, Colorado, Kansas, Oregon, Utah and Washington.
We could surmise from these two tentative inquiries that the SBE was hoping UETA would supersede NCGS 163-82.6, the only North Carolina election statute that speaks to the use of electronic voter registrations. We might also suspect that the conversation stopped abruptly with both these inquiries because the SBE could not risk a written decision that would prevent it from forging ahead with its online voter registration scheme.
Party Politics
The SBE staff’s following move shows their deep collaboration with Obama allies. The next document pertaining to online voter registration was dated more than a year later, on August 23, 2011. Gary Bartlett was forwarded an email from Veronica Degraffenreid[viii], SBE Elections Liaison, with the link to consulting firm Catapult Strategies, specifically the page that introduces Jude Barry. Barry is Catapult’s CEO and co-founder and is co-founder of Verafirma and Allpoint Strategies.Jude Barry’s political credentials would be considered stellar in Democratic/liberal circles. According to the Catapult site; “In December 2006, he created the Obama for America Draft Committee, the first political committee to raise thousands of dollars online to encourage then-Senator Obama to run for the Presidency.” The Catapult website elaborates on Barry’s political accomplishments[ix] by noting that he began his career in politics as Senator Edward Kennedy’s press aide and later deputy political director. He also worked on presidential bids by liberal Democrats Gary Hart, Richard Gephardt and Howard Dean.
The next day, August 24, 2011, Peter Allen, Lead Organizer for Verafirma, contacted Gary Bartlett by email[x] in reference to a phone call he had with the SBE staff. Note that Allen is also an Associate on the Catapult Strategies team.
Catapult Strategies, Inc. describes itself as “a Silicon Valley-based social media, public relations, and political consulting firm with strong ties to and extensive knowledge of Silicon Valley business and political communities.” Verafirma is a technology company whose projects include the use of electronic signatures for politics. The firm is featured on Catapult Strategies’ website as a “related company.”
On the Catapult site, Allen’s bio refers[xi] to Democratic connections too, “Peter has dedicated the past few years developing a rich understanding of online social media tools and how they can be used to empower and mobilize people on behalf of a candidate or cause. He saw this potential come to fruition as an organizer on Barack Obama’s historic 2008 presidential campaign ….” Allen was on the Obama campaign’s payroll in May 2008.
It is important to note that in a September 26, 2012 email to Civitas[xii], Don Wright insisted that the SBE had not been contacted by any campaign, candidate, legislator, or political party. That looks like another word game. Catapult Strategies could easily pass for the outreach and new media wings of the Obama Campaign.
There’s a money trail too: from October 2, 2012 to October 24, 2012, according to Federal Elections Commission data, there were 12 separate payments from the Obama campaign to Allpoint Voter Services, Inc. (See table below.)
Moreover, the number of payments raises another question. That is, there isn’t a single fee or two, but a series of fees of varying sizes as Allpoint collected signatures. Was the Obama campaign paying Allpoint Voter Services for each registration collected? Doing so would be a violation of NCGS 163‑82.6 (a) (2), which states “To sell or attempt to sell a completed voter registration form or to condition its delivery upon payment” is a class 2 misdemeanor.
SBE attorney Don Wright, in response to inquiries as to whether there was any discussion with Allpoint Voter Services in reference to payments for registrations, said that he had no direct contact with the company but Gary Bartlett, Veronica Degraffenreid and Marc Burris were the staff members who talked directly with the company. According to Wright, the company was never asked if they were being paid for each registration delivered.
We do know that not all forms completed on the site were accepted. Some users were told to print and mail the form on their own. This shows that they were not intending to serve all citizens, but only ones that met a preselected criterion.
After a few short emails over a matter of a few days, but without ever having talked to the company himself, Wright produced a legal opinion approving the Allpoint Voter Services voter registration technology in North Carolina. His opinion dated September 16, 2011 [xiii] claimed it was reviewed by the North Carolina Attorney’s General Office, which concurred in it. That statement is untrue (as you will see later), but since this appears to be an internal SBE staff document it went unchallenged at the time.
On September 19, 2011, Bartlett forwarded Wright’s opinion to Peter Allen. The same day, Allen emailed back and asked for the point person they will be working with to make the SBE’s part “as painless as possible.” Bartlett responded that Degraffenreid and Burris would be the points of contact going forward.[xiv]
Election Year Revelations
A year went by without evidence of discussion about the new voter registration technology, however. No documents for the period from September 19, 2011 to September 11, 2012 were turned over as part of our public records request, almost a year of silence on this by the SBE staff. This silence was broken with less than two months to go before the General Election.Betsy Meads, a former Pasquotank County BOE member, was the first person to ask about the online voter registration process. It was a happenstance that her son ran across the gottaregister.com website. The next day, September 11, 2012, Betsy Meads sent an email[xv] questioning Don Wright as to the legality of the President’s online voter registration site. She wrote, “This is contrary to the Statute as I read it, and as I was just in Chapel Hill at training for local board members August 14th, I’m sure I didn’t hear anything about electronic registrations in NC being allowed.” The SBE held the Annual Training for Elections Officials on August 13-14, 2012.[xvi]
On September 13, 2012, Wright delivered an answer to Meads – which was also the answer he gave later to Civitas and one other person who would ask the question about registering to vote online in North Carolina: “There is no online voter registration[xvii] allowed in North Carolina ….” He also forwarded Ms. Meads the legal opinion he had written in 2011 which stated that the North Carolina Attorney’s General Office had concurred in it.
As previously referenced, the statement that the AG’s office had concurred is false. In an email I received from the Attorney General’s office, dated September 18, 2012, Susan Nichols informed Don Wright that she did not concur[xviii] in that decision. In fact, before she had taken her post with the AG, the AG’s office ended the procedure of allowing attorneys to state they concur in an opinion they did not author.
By the time Wright received Nichols’ email, revelations about the online registrations were breaking into the open.
In what appeared to be a move to head off any problems at the local level, on September 18, 2012 the SBE notified the 100 counties to expect a new kind of voter registration. Veronica Degraffenreid sent the email to the County Directors[xix], explaining, describing and defending the new registrations. This email explanation went out just over a month after the SBE had election representatives from across the state at a training session in Chapel Hill – at which they never mentioned this new kind of registration.
Her email went out a day after Gary Bartlett received an email from George Gilbert, Guilford County BOE Director, reporting that they had received “a good number of registration forms from Allpoint Voter Services.” Gilbert went on to say they contained signatures that were “immediately suspect.[xx]” The timing of the responses to Meads and to the counties raises the question of when, if ever, the state SBE would have brought the online registrations to the notice of the counties. Were SBE bureaucrats hoping no one would bring up the online registrations until after all the votes were certified?
Subsequently other counties questioned these forms and offered some observations about problems with them. For example, the Duplin County BOE Director said, “The part we find the most questionable is the similarity of all the signatures ….” Rockingham County wrote, “The forms have info typed in and the signatures all resemble each other and it appears the envelope was addressed with the same marking pen.” Rockingham County also noted one signature did not match the voter’s registration with the DMV.
There are many problems and questions about the decision that the SBE bureaucrats’ made in relation to registering to vote online. For instance, Betsy Meads used gottaregister.com to change her party affiliation from Republican to unaffiliated. Once she “signed” her iPhone, she was informed that her registration would be forwarded to her local BOE. That didn’t happen: 36 hours later she received an email with a link to her registration. She was told to print the form, sign it and then mail it to the SBE. Did the Obama Campaign prioritize registrations? Did they send some registrations directly to the elections board and decide that others could be sent to the voters?
Perhaps most disturbing, the SBE staff apparently tried to keep this all from the view of the public and even county elections boards until mere weeks before the election, which raises the disturbing question of whether those involved were aiding a last-minute registration surge planned by the Obama campaign.
This is not an isolated incident[xxi], but just one more example of how the SBE staff flouts the law, the legislature and their own board in order to further a partisan agenda. All North Carolina citizens should be aware of the importance of reforming the SBE so that it carries on its duties in a transparent manner, with full regard for the democratic process and in a way that instills trust in the North Carolina election system.
| cand_nm | recipient_nm | disb_amt | disb_dt | recipient_city | disb_desc |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$5,932.50
|
10/2/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$4,886.00
|
10/2/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$7,091.00
|
10/5/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$10,076.50
|
10/5/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$10,591.00
|
10/10/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$7,840.00
|
10/12/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$9,355.50
|
10/15/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$9,345.00
|
10/18/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$11,725.00
|
10/18/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$15,512.00
|
10/18/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$1,568.00
|
10/22/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
| Obama, Barack | ALLPOINT VOTER SERVICES, INC. |
$973.00
|
10/24/12
|
OAKLAND | COMPUTER SOFTWARE |
[ii] September 13, 2012 email from Don Wright with initial explanation of online voting
[iii] “Tech President” October 26, 2012
[iv] Email from Veronica Degraffenreid about the location of the two pens
[v] “Government Technology” September 21, 2012
[vi] September 11, 2009 letter from Gary Bartlett to Attorney General asking for “Advisory Opinion”
[vii] Susan Nichols letter to Civitas, email to Don Wright and email string to Pew Center on the States on behalf of Gary Bartlett
[viii] August – September 2011 – SBE and Allpoint Voter Services communications
[ix] Catapult Website – Jude Barry
[x] August, 2011 – Peter Allen emails
[xi] Catapult Website – Peter Allen
[xii] Don Wright Email to Civitas in response to inquiry
[xiii] Don Wright’s legal opinion dated September 16, 2011 – Susan Nichols concurs
[xiv] August 2011 – SBE introduction to Allpoint Voter Services
[xv] September 11, 2012 email from Betsy Meads to Don Wright
[xvi] August 13-14, 2012 Annual Training for Elections Officials –Agenda
[xvii] September 13, 2012 email from Don Wright explaining that there is no online registration in North Carolina
[xviii] September 18, 2012 email from Susan Nichols to Don Wright explaining that she did not concur in his legal
[xix] September 18,2012 email from Degraffenreid to 100 County BOE Directors registrations from Allpoint Voter Services
[xx] September 17, 18 and 24, 2012 emails from local Boards reporting that they had received suspicious registrations
[xxi] Bob Hall and the SBE
This article was posted in Elections & Voting by Susan Myrick on February 19, 2013 at 4:21 PM.
Presidential election fraud numbers are in!
Sometimes you just cannot argue with the numbers. If these numbers are correct and true, the USA has bigger problems on their hands other than who was elected President..
From Bill O’Reilly’s message board:
Most everyone suspected fraud, but these numbers prove it and our government and media refuse to do anything about it.
As each state reported their final election details, the evidence of voter fraud is astounding. Massive voter fraud has been reported in areas of OH and FL, with PA, WI and VA, all are deploying personnel to investigate election results.
Here are just a few examples of what has surfaced.
* In 59 voting districts in the Philadelphia region, Obama
received 100% of the votes with not even a single vote recorded for
Romney.. (A mathematical and statistical impossibility).
* In 21 districts in Wood County Ohio, Obama received 100% of
the votes where GOP inspectors were illegally removed from their
polling locations – and not one single vote was recorded for Romney.
(Another statistical impossibility).
* In Wood County Ohio, 106,258 voted in a county with only
98,213 eligible voters.
* In St. Lucie County, FL, there were 175,574 registered
eligible voters but 247,713 votes were cast.
* The National SEAL Museum, a polling location in St. Lucie
County, FL had a 158% voter turnout.
* Palm Beach County, FL had a 141% voter turnout.
* In Ohio County, Obama won by 108% of the total number of
eligible voters.
10-27-12
Another example of the voter fraud that the democrats say is non-exsistant in NC!!
Please watch the two-minute video clip (at bottom of this story) to see how easy it was for a dead woman to “vote” under current NC election law. It is the story of a woman (named Vicki) who got sick of telling her local election board to take her mother off the voter roll. Mom had been dead for 15 years. So, she called VIP-NC and a civic-minded broadcast journalist in the Charlotte, NC area saw the value of the story and helped us make history. A dead woman “voted” in NC.
In the end, Vicki walked in to an early voting location and impersonated her deceased mother (who was 35 years her elder) and received her Authorization to Vote (see attached), which would have next been traded in for a ballot at the next table—no questions asked.
To be clear, Vicki did not actually cast a ballot or break any laws, but there was nothing to stop her from casting a vote in her deceased mother’s name. . . except for her own conscience.
And if she HAD cast the vote and walked out of the building, there is absolutely no way for her to get caught. Nobody would have known her true identity and nobody would even have suspected a crime; so the assurances of North Carolina’s ruling party, that “there is no vote fraud in North Carolina,” simply do not stand up to scrutiny. It’s as silly as thinking that if no tickets were written today on I-85 and then nobody was speeding!
Vicki was only one woman testing the system. Vicki lives by the “golden rule,” and will not knowingly break the law. What worries a growing number of citizens is that a small group of people who do not live by such rules could steal votes. There is nothing to stop one organization from doing the same process with deceased or even “inactive” voters. Find me 50 people (who are willing to risk jail in the highly unlikely case of their getting caught) and give me ten days of “Early Voting” (where nobody knows or cares about your true identity) and this process can deliver at least 5,000 fraudulent votes. To increase that number, all you need is either more operators or more time for early voting. In the end, stealing ten, twenty or even thirty thousand votes in one NC election would not be to far a goal to achieve. THIS is why VIP-NC is pushing for REAL voter ID law as soon as possible in NC and in the entire nation.
Please consider these three action steps based on what you have just read:
1. If you haven’t already done so, watch the attached Fox Charlotte news story.
2. Pass this email along to your friends.
3. And (you knew this was coming) please surf over to our website and consider supporting our efforts to reform NC election laws and to help prevent vote fraud in this and all future elections.
Sincerely,
Jay N. DeLancy, LtCol, USAF (Ret)
Executive Director
Voter Integrity Project of NC
919.429.9039
Twitter: @VoteChecker
http://www.voterintegrityproject.com/
VIP-NC is a trans-partisan, volunteer organization that works for “free and fair elections” by bringing more transparency to the process in order to ensure that no voters are disenfranchised.
http://www.foxcharlotte.com/news/top-stories/New-Concerns-About-The-Ease-Of-Accomplishing-Voter-Fraud-175898881.html
8-13-11: This Info is From the North Carolina Federation of Republican Women:
| Voter Photo ID (HB 351)Finally,
voter fraud has been substantiated by an investigation in North
Carolina. The Wake County Board of Elections determined fraud had been
committed in the 2008 Presidential election and alerted the Wake County
District Attorney. The State Board of Investigation (SBI) was also
involved in the investigation, according to ABC News in Raleigh. ABC
News reported that, “Four people were charged with voter fraud in the
last presidential election.” The NC Republican Senate Caucus has stated
that all four are Democrats. Three have admitted to voting twice.
More arrests may be announced. During the 2008 election in NC,
President Obama narrowly beat Senator John McCain by about 14,000
votes. (USA Today)Will this sway Democrats needed to override the
governor’s veto of the Voter Photo ID bill? The following four
Democrats have voted with Republicans a significant number of times on
important legislation, they are Representatives:William Brisson (Bladen,
Cumberland) tel: home (910) 862-7007 Jim Crawford (Granville, Vance) tel: busi (252) 492-0185 and home (919) 693-6119 Dewey Hill (Brunswick, Columbus) tel: busi (910) 642-6044 home (910) 646-4297 Tim Spear (Chowan, Dare, Hyde, Wshington) tel: home (252) 797-4481All four of the Democrats listed herein voted for the override of the following bills: The Budget, “Abortion-A Woman’s Right to Know” (HB 854), “Regulatory Reform Act of 2011″ (SB 781), “Employment Security Commission Jobs Reform” (SB 532), and “Medicaid and Health Choice Provider Requirement” (SB 496).Representatives Brisson, Crawford and Hill also voted to override the “Medical Liability Reforms” bill (SB 33), although Representative Spear did not. In other voting, Representative Spear was the only Democrat to vote for the “Consular Documents Not Acceptable as Identification” bill (HB 33) in March of this year.As former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory recently said, “North Carolina will have some very close and hotly contested races in 2012, including local races, congressional races, the governor’s race, and the presidential race. The U.S. Supreme Court has noted that voter ID protects the integrity and reliability of the electoral process. Don’t we deserve that in North Carolina?” |
Contact the Democrats listed herein and ask them to vote for the override of the Voter Photo ID bill, when it is brought up for a vote in the NC House of Representatives.
| Sources: abclocal.go.com, “Four Wake residents charged with voting twice,” Aug 12, 2011; The Daily Caller, “Three North Carolina Democrats admit voting twice for Obama,” by Matthew Boykle, Aug 11, 2011; NC Republican Senate Caucus, “Voter Fraud Arrests Reiterate Need for Voter ID,” Aug 12, 2011; USA Today,“N.C. goes for Obama; Dems unseat governor, senator,” Nov. 6, 2008; NCFRW Legislative Reports dated Jun 24 and 25, Jul 29, and Aug 4, 2011 |
Dateline 8-11-11
We want to alert you to some news that broke today. In Wake County, 3 registered Democrats were charged by the Wake Co. District Attorney for voter fraud. This issue raises the importance of more secure Voter ID laws. Perdue called having to show an ID at a polling center a “constitutional obstacle.’’ Our friends at the State House uncovered that last month she hosted a party to honor summer interns, and you guessed it: “Picture ID required for Admittance.” We hope that providing an ID for admittance there wasn’t too high of a hurdle to overcome for attendees.
Please share this story with your friends and on Facebook/Twitter, as it highlights an unfortunate truth about our current voting system. The link is here:
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=8301269
NCGOP Chairman Hayes Statement on Governor Perdue’s Veto of Voter ID Bill
Governor’s veto another example she is more concerned in boosting her re-election chances
For Immediate Release Contact: NCGOP Press Office
Thursday, June 23, 2011 (919) 424-5555
RALEIGH, NC – Today, North Carolina Republican Party Chairman Robin Hayes released the following statement after Governor Perdue vetoed the common-sense Voter ID bill requiring voters to show a photo ID before they voted.
“When given a chance to boost voter confidence, Governor Perdue again chose to appease her liberal base to boost her floundering re-election campaign while ignoring an overwhelming majority of North Carolinians who supported this common-sense bill. Governor Perdue’s veto is not surprising and as unemployment in North Carolina remains at 9.7% for the third straight month, it is clear ‘The Jobs Governor’ is only concerned with one job, her own.”
“Restore Confidence in Government”Update
March 21, 2011
A vote on the “Restore Confidence in Government” bill is expected this week, as early as Wednesday.
Ahead of the expected vote for the “Restore Confidence in Government” bill, NCGOP Chairman Robin Hayes filmed the following video message. Please watch the video message and share with members of your organization and post to your Twitter, Facebook, blog and website.
Please remind members of your organization to show their support for the common-sense “Restore Confidence in Government” bill by calling or emailing your representatives, writing Letters to the Editor and posting to your social networks.
If you or your members need more information on the bill, go to www.ncgop.org/RestoreConfidence.
Here is the summary/response prepared by Karen Brinson, District BOE Technician, addressing many of the items we had concerns about before, during and after this past election. We have very little new information to report regarding the SBI’s ongoing investigation into the election problems in Madison. All we know is that the SBI has requested substantial information regarding the problems in Madison from the State Board of Elections as part of their evidence gathering phase. Please note, if you click on the copied pages below, you should be able to enlarge them for better viewing. You will see that the State Board of Elections agreed with us on many of the concerns we had!! Therefore, the statement made by County Board of Elections Chairman Jerry Wallin in which he stated we were just “nit-picking” now seems like a major understatement on his part.
Here is an article published by Rosslyn Smith for www.americanthinker.com:
November 15, 2010
Voting Integrity Also a Rural Issue
By Rosslyn SmithMadison County, NC:
Mayberry It’s Not
Several days after the election, a thousand votes are discovered to have been “inadvertently omitted” from the election night tally. As a result, the loser in a three-man contest for two superior judge seats suddenly becomes one of the winners. That candidate, a local assistant state district attorney, is said to have received a $1,100 contribution from the chairman of the board of election in the county where the ballots were found.
To make matter more intriguing, the son of that chairman is awaiting trial next week on multiple felony charges. The prosecutor on record? The same assistant DA who will become a superior court judge should the new vote total stand.
To add an extra dash of spice to the tale, all the missing ballots are said to be from the controversial practice of one-stop voting, and the sole Republican on the board of elections has gone on record that, among other irregularities, the early voting machines in question were improperly secured.
Where did this happen? Chicago? Detroit? Newark? Philadelphia? St. Louis? New Orleans? How about Madison County, North Carolina, a rural county of 20,000 people spread over 452 square miles of southern Appalachia frequented by hikers on the Appalachian Trail and rafters on the French Broad River? I am always amused when people assume that politics in rural America must be less corrupt than politics in urban areas simply because of the rural location. It’s been my experience that Madison County has operatives who could give lessons to Chicago political bosses on community organizing and turning out the vote on election day, not to mention keeping it all in the family.
Here in Madison County, not only do the stories stay the same, but the names don’t change, either. The same dozen surnames show up again and again in local history, as the children, grandchildren, great nephews, and great nieces of officeholders long gone on to their maker continue in the family tradition. “Bloody Madison” has been notorious for contentious politics since the Civil War.
So where does the above matter stand almost two weeks past Election Day?
The Madison County Board of Elections recessed Friday afternoon without completing its planned canvass of the election results, based on the advice of the staff of the state board of elections.
The recess was suggested to give the state board the opportunity to consider a protest filed by Spruce Pine attorney Hal G. Harrison, a candidate in the 24th judicial district election of Superior Court judges.
The District Attorney is in a pickle. His assistant has been implicated in what appears to be at best an unethical conflict of interest. His response was to punt.
The district attorney for the 24th Judicial District said Thursday that he has asked state and federal authorities to investigate allegations of irregularities in the election.
“I talked to Jim Coman, head of the prosecution unit in the attorney general’s office,” District Attorney Jerry Wilson said Thursday. “He is going to have the SBI and someone from their office direct the investigation.”
Federal authorities are involved because of an earlier incident in another county in which people early voting on touchscreen machines noticed that voting a straight Republican ballot caused the printed ballot next to the touchscreen to record votes for each Democrat in a given race.
Wilson said he contacted the U.S. Attorney in Charlotte after complaints that Madison County voters were not given court-ordered guidance in the wake of a federal settlement ordering that poll workers in Madison and 34 other North Carolina counties post signs regarding possible problems with the electronic vote machines.
“I notified the federal authorities concerning the allegation that proper warnings weren’t given” as required by the court settlement.
After the early voting problem was brought to light, a federal court ordered not only that written warnings be posted in polling places of the need for voters to check the machine printed results against the touchscreen, but also that verbal notice be given to voters to check the touchscreen with the printed ballot. In his letter to the county’s newspaper, the News-Record & Sentinel in Marshall, about improperly secured machines and ballots, Republican board of elections member Andy Gibson also noted that the verbal notice ordered by the federal court had not been given while he was present at several of Madison County’s voting locations, including the two locations involved in the irregularity.
I have heard stories of hanky-panky in strictly local races since almost the day I moved into the county. What makes this particularly interesting is that the results most in doubt are from a race that involves four adjacent counties: Avery, Mitchell, Watauga, and Yancey. A whole lot of people in those counties don’t have much respect for politicians from Madison County. Indeed, all across North Carolina, voters are increasingly unhappy with Democrat control of an entire state with a growing reputation for corruption.
As a result on Election Day Republicans became the majority party in the North Carolina state legislature for the first time since 1870. That’s not a typo. Democrats have controlled the state legislature for 140 years. Although North Carolina judicial races are nonpartisan, Hal Harrison has been known to support Republicans. The new state senator for the district that includes Madison County, Republican Ralph Hise, is the mayor of Spruce Pine, which is where Harrison lives. At a little over 2,000 people, Spruce Pine is the largest community in Mitchell County. Between this race, stories about one stop voting abuse in 2008, and pundits noting that North Carolina is one of the most heavily gerrymandered states in the union, I expect the Republican state legislature to spend a lot of time looking into election integrity issues next session.
Readers who want to start a laundry list of what can go wrong with security of one-stop early voting and touchscreen machines would do well to start with this letter, which originally ran in the print edition of the News-Record & Sentinel in Marshall, North Carolina.
My name is Andy Gibson and this is an open letter to the citizens of Madison County.
I love Madison County and I am proud to call it home. I am writing to you as a voter and as your Republican board of elections member for Madison County, NC. At this time I feel it is my moral obligation to bring to your attention significant, systematic, and ongoing issues with potential voting irregularity in Madison County. I ask for your assistance in an open, honest, and legal discussion of how elections are conducted in Madison County. Many members of the public have been working over the past month to ensure an honest election this year and have been ignored when we have raised serious questions about procedures to protect our voting process.
Many of us have been concerned for decades about the alleged corruption in the Madison County electoral process. What I will discuss with you today are events that I have observed and worked to change not only as a voter but as a board of elections member. As a voter I personally do not trust whether my vote or your vote has counted this year. This is not an issue about any particular candidate, party, or individual voter, but instead about our collective right to a free and fair electoral process.
On October 30th, 2010 the NC board of elections, headed by Larry Leake and Gary Bartlett, lost a federal court lawsuit pertaining to the use of electronic voting machines utilized by 35 counties across the state. Madison County is one of the thirty five counties that uses a one touch electronic voting machine, with our vendor for the machines being Print Elect, which has close, unethical ties to the State Board of Elections. Print Elect controls most of the voting business in NC. The issue in the federal court case was direct evidence of voters across many of these counties casting a ballot for the candidate of their choice and a different candidate’s name appearing as being voted for. Unfortunately, this only appears to happen to voters when they are choosing Republican candidates. Their vote comes up for a Democratic candidate. The federal lawsuit mandated that the 35 counties utilizing the one touch machines tell every voter in writing and orally, “please read the voter alert, and if you experience any problems voting, let a poll worker know and we will help you.” The Madison County board of elections sent specific instructions to the poll workers in regards to this notice but failed to ensure that it was implemented. I personally observed numerous instances of this federal court order not being followed at Mars Hill, Beech Glen, Ebbs Chapel, North and South Marshall. The Madison County board of elections director, at my request, had to make an emergency call to these precincts on Election Day at 2 p.m. to ensure compliance with a court order. It is a sad day for all voters when a Federal court order can not be implemented correctly.
For the past month I, among others, have been begging the Madison County board of elections for simple, systematic procedures for the one stop voting sites. Numerous public meetings have been held regarding the security and integrity of the election process. Needless to say lip service was given to the recommendations. I among others have directly witnessed the following issues.
1. Unsecured flash drives on the one stop machines. This means the electronic device that controls the voting machine is able to potentially be taken out and or manipulated because the flash drives have not been secured in the board of elections lock up. Also, the flash drives were not zip tagged and numbered as many members of the public and myself requested.
2. Unsecured storage of the one stop machines from the close of business on 10/30/10 to 11/2/10. The one stop voting machines, and there were ten of them, sat in the locked administration conference room, which is accessible to numerous people. The Madison County board of elections voted in public session to have the machines locked and stored in the board of elections secure closet due to there only being one key to this closet. This did not occur and the machines sat unattended for at least three days in the administration conference room.
3. Unsecured storage of the master PEB’s for the one stop machines on Election Day itself. The master PEB’s store all the data off of the electronic voting machines. The master PEB’s were out of site for a significant portion of the day after voting data had been downloaded. The written tapes for the one stop voting machines were not printed as the board of elections director transferred the data. This is a significant procedural issue.
4. Replacement keys were copied on Monday 11/1/10 for distribution to the Election Day voting sites by a locksmith. This means that the original set of keys that were sent out to the different precincts in the county were mismatched and more keys had to be copied and sent out, which resulted in more than one set of keys to access the Election Day voting machines.
5. Four out of six one stop voting machines were not closed down to voting on 10/30/10, and were left open until the afternoon of Election Day on 11/2/10. These were the four machines in question from Beech Glen and Hot Springs that reversed the unofficial outcome of the judicial race. Since the one stop machines were left open to voting on 10/30/10 and placed in the unsecured administration conference room, they were potentially open for manipulation.
6. The continual presence of candidates and unauthorized persons at the board of elections office throughout the election cycle of almost a month. This is after repeated written and verbal requests that only authorized personnel have access to the board of elections office during one stop voting and Election Day. On Election Day itself it was discovered that Herb Ponder was hired with no discussion, no communication, and no vote to assist Shirley Ponder and Laura Ponder Smith in the board of elections office. This was done over my objection, at 2 p.m. that afternoon, and the objection of others present for a public meeting. Personally I like Herb and we both love NC State but that is not the issue here.
7. No paper tally of any of the one stop machines has ever been done in my presence or the presence of witnesses, which is a total of 10 machines. The integrity of our votes is potentially at risk if there is no paper backup and tally. I have yet to see a paper print off of the one stop machines. This is another significant procedural error and a legal issue as I have never signed off on the one stop machine written totals.
8. Unapproved observers were present and active at a one stop voting site. Poll observers have to be approved five days in advance by the board of elections. This did not occur as per the legal requirements.
9. The incorrect uploading of voting totals for one stop, curbside, and Election Day votes. The incorrect uploading of votes is a significant issue and leaves open the question of who actually wins any particular contest. There were so many individuals creating chaos in the board of elections office on Election Day and Election Night it is no wonder more mistakes did not occur either intentionally or unintentionally.
10. The unauthorized vote total change, by the director of the board of elections, of the one stop curbside ballots totals that the board of elections personally counted, tabulated, and signed off. I do appreciate the personal apology on this issue but vote total changes are a serious issue. This means vote totals were changed with no witness and no approval. This is a significant procedural error as well as bringing into question issues with federal and state law.
11. An Election Day voting machine remaining open to vote after the polls had closed on 11/2/10 up to the night of 11/3/10. It was discovered around 10 p.m. on the night of 11/3/10, more than 24 hours after the polls had closed, that a voting machine was again still open for voting from the Mars Hill precinct. Again, another significant error.
12. A majority of the Election Day curbside ballots were submitted to the board of elections office as not being tabulated and signed off on by the on site election day officials. The majority of these ballots were of course opened as were the curbside ballots bags with no witnesses. No one can verify whether these are legal votes as numerous procedures were not followed by the chief democratic judges at the individual precincts. I refused to certify these votes but was overruled by the board. The fact that votes cannot be protected for the elderly, medically fragile, and disabled is appalling.
13. Required legal notices to the media in terms of absentee ballot counts were not correct. The board of elections is required by law to notify the public of numerous items, including absentee ballot counts. The director of elections sent in a legal notice to the newspaper from the year 2008, which is not in compliance with the law for public notification.
At this time I am asking the citizens of Madison County for assistance regarding how our elections are conducted in this county. I will personally refuse to certify what appears at this time to be the second and third set of ballot totals at the canvas meeting on 11/12/10 at 11 a.m. Although I do not agree completely with the first set of ballot totals that were uploaded to the state Board of Elections website, and released to the media as unofficial results, I at least have a modicum of confidence in those totals. I have no confidence in the second and third set of vote totals, nor the Election Day curbside ballots. I do have high confidence in the written, mailed, absentee ballots, which we had to count twice for accuracy.
I am calling for the following steps to be taken in terms of the oversight of the Madison County Board of Elections:
1. As many members of the public, as possible, should attend the canvass meeting on 11/12/10 at 11 a.m. to observe and comment on the process. The public has to hold this board accountable for their votes. We have to open the doors and let the light into this process for it to be open and honest.
2. An immediate federal and state investigation into the Madison County Board of Elections to ensure the integrity of the ballots for all voters.
3. Based on the outcome of the investigation, continued state and federal oversight of the elections process in Madison County to ensure the integrity of future elections.
4. The removal of the electronic voting machines from Madison County with proper approval and oversight of new machines for voting from a third party vendor who has no ethical issues with the state board.
5. The removal of the direct conflict of interest of Laura Ponder, Herb Ponder, and Shirley Ponder running elections for Madison County. This is a direct conflict of interest, and is highly unethical and would not be tolerated anywhere else in the country.
6. The certification of the first set of vote totals that were released on election night as the above examples show no confidence in any subsequent vote totals.
7. Any individual board member or election worker who has donated to the judicial race in question needs to excuse themselves from any impact on the judicial race. To be part of the process at this point since there are numerous legal questions would be very unethical.
8. If answers to these issues are not forthcoming I plan to file a complaint, as a voter, with the state board of elections.
I love this county and I love my right to vote as an American citizen. I am proud to help protect the right of any citizen to vote in the county. I need your help to ensure the right of all Madison County citizens to a free and honest vote now and in the future. We have to stand together to ensure our collective rights are protected in an open and honest examination of the elections process in Madison County.
Respectfully submitted to the great citizens of Madison County,
Andy Gibson, MPA
Voter
Republican Board of Elections Member
This is an article from the fine folks at Civitas.
This also echos the concerns we have about the election process here in Madison County!!
Crisis of Confidence
Susan Myrick | November 1, 2010With Election Day here, North Carolina finds itself in the midst of yet another bout of election problems. Gary Bartlett, Director of the NC Board of Elections, wants to brush these problems under the rug while remaining in denial about the perceived partisan and arbitrary nature of the Board.
In a condescending letter responding to the North Carolina Republican Party’s letter of complaint regarding voting machine irregularities in multiple counties, Bartlett brazenly attempts to dismiss the GOP’s concerns as an attempt to gin up doubt about the election’s integrity.
Bartlett wrote; “Your letter emailed to this office this afternoon is apparently intended to elevate isolated occurrences with touch screen voting equipment into a crisis of confidence in the integrity of the election.”
The GOP’s complaint addressed the problems encountered with the touch screen voting machines in several counties early voting sites this year. Bartlett characterized the number of counties reporting problems as “isolated occurrences,” while the complaint cited Mecklenburg, Randolph, New Hanover, Craven, Cumberland, Wilson, Pender, Forsyth and Lenoir counties. Bartlett wrote that the problems were due to a loss in calibration of the touch screen. In the letter, however, state GOP legal counsel John E. Branch III allowed that while the GOP understood there was a calibration problem, they did not understand why that, in every reported instance of a faulty voting machine, the default vote would go to Democrat candidates or straight Democrat ticket.
Less reassuring is Bartlett’s third sentence in his letter to state GOP Chairman Tom Fetzer; “The concerns you have expressed are no different than the ones that must be addressed every election.” If this sort of thing occurs during every election, then we have already lost the integrity of our election process. But Bartlett appears unconcerned.
Gary Bartlett did get one thing right in his letter to John Branch; there is a “Crisis of Confidence” regarding the integrity of our elections. That loss of confidence, however, can be blamed largely on the actions of the Executive Director and the NC State Board of Elections itself.
During the past two years, we have witnessed the partisan State Board of Elections (3 Democrats and 2 Republicans) operate in an exceedingly partisan manner while investigating Governor Beverly Perdue’s campaign wrongdoings. After it was reported that the Chairman of the State Board of Elections (Larry Leake) had interfered into his Board’s own investigation into undisclosed campaign flights by Gov. Beverly Perdue, the Board went ahead with a hearing into the matter.
And, after all three Democrats on the Board voted against holding public hearings into Perdue’s campaign wrongdoings, the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) opened an investigation into the matter at the request of Wake County District Attorney Colon Willoughby. Willoughby said, “The elections board may have been “a little hasty” in its decision” and went on to say, “I believe there were some issues the elections board did not address.”
From District Attorney to the SBI and then on October 22, 2010, Beverly Perdue announced that the Federal authorities were also investigating her campaign. All the while, the State Board of Elections attempted to deny any further investigation.
The loss of confidence in our election process facilitated by the incompetent Board of Elections has trickled down to the local level too. In Wake County, poll observers have been accused of being overenthusiastic in their duties and as a result have been accused of intimidating voters. In fact, it is the duty of the State Board of Elections to supervise these poll observers and educate them about North Carolina’s election law if needed. Election rules and law can be confusing to individuals new to the system and especially so considering the State Board of Elections has a penchant for changing the rules in the middle of the game.
For instance:
On October 24, 2008, the State Board of Elections issued a memorandum (nine days into one-stop voting) permitting the “use of electronic devices such as computers personal digital assistants, blackberries or similar devices” as long as the use of the devices did not disrupt the voting process.
Then on October 18, 2010 (four days into one-stop this year) the Board of Elections issued a new memorandum that “supersedes the October 24, 2008 memorandum on this subject.” This memorandum changed the rules by requiring the Chief Judge to establish a wireless communication location outside the voting enclosure.
We may never know whether the 2008 decision to allow the use of electronic devices in the polling place was based on Presidential Candidate Barak Obama’s unprecedented online campaign organization and we may never know if the reversal of that order was based on this year’s political climate, but to accuse citizens for questioning an election process that is very rarely questioned is a disturbing commentary on the Board of Elections.
Given such partisan and inconsistent behavior being exhibited by State Board leadership such as Gary Bartlett and Larry Leake, what reason is there for North Carolinians to have much confidence in our election process?
No comments:
Post a Comment