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 Institute
In 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 14
th, 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 |
[i] August 2011 –
SBE introduction to Allpoint Voter Services
[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?” |
Yes we do. In the US, 29 states require identification for voters.
Voter fraud has been substantiated in NC where no identification is
required.
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 Smith
Madison 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, 2010
With 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?