JudicialWatch’s (JW) Election IntegrityProjectyielded a major victory in January when JW and our client True the Vote reacheda historic settlement with the state ofOhio, resulting in an agreement by Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted to take aseries of actions to further ensure that the state clean up voting rolls asrequired under Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act.
Thatwas a good start.
Lastweek Judicial Watch held a press conference to announce a whole new group ofstates under our election integrity microscope. JW sent notice letters to top electionofficials in Iowa, Colorado, and the District of Columbia calling on them tofollow Ohio’s lead and comply with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA)or face a Judicial Watch lawsuit within 90 days. (Judicial Watch attorneys Chris Fedeli andRobert Popper joined me at the press conference, which you can watch here.)
JWalso sent inquiries on March 6, 2014 to officials in California, New Mexico, Kentucky, West Virginia, NorthCarolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri, and Illinois notifying them ofpotential “apparent problems” and asking these states to provide records ofsteps taken to assure the accuracy of voter lists. (If you live in any of these states, youshould know that your home state also has voter list issues.)
Here’sa brief excerpt from my statement announcing this new initiative, whichreceived widespread news coverage (click here to read the Washington Times piece):
Dirty voter rolls can mean dirty elections.Many states are shirking their legal responsibilities to maintain clean voterrolls. This undermines confidence in ourelection system. Outrageously, the ObamaJustice Department simply refuses to enforce the federal law that requiresstates to take reasonable steps to clean voter rolls. Judicial Watch is now doing the job of theU.S. Justice Department.
JudicialWatch’s notifications to Secretaries of State in Iowa and Colorado and the Boardof Elections Supervisors in the District of Columbia specifically warn:
We write to bring your attention toviolations of Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (“NVRA”)… Thisletter serves as statutory notice that Judicial Watch will bring a lawsuitagainst your office if you do not take specific actions to correct theseviolations of Section 8 within 90 days. In addition, by this letter we areasking you to produce certain records to us which you are required to makeavailable under Section 8(i) of the NVRA. We hope that litigation will not benecessary to enforce either of these claims.
Ineach state (and DC) we supported our accusations with specific evidencegathered by JW investigators indicating that each jurisdiction is “failing tocomply with the voter registration list requirements of Section 8 of the NVRA.”Judicial Watch examined United States Census data and compared it with voterregistration data sent by states to the Election Assistance Commission, a federalgovernment entity:
In Iowa: A comparison of 2012 Census data and 2012 Election Assistance Commission (EAC) data shows there were more people registered to vote than there were adults over the age of 18 living in each of the following 24 counties: Fremont, Johnson, Madison, Adams, Scott, Pocahontas, Kossuth, Poweshiek, Lyon, Cass, Dickinson, Clay, Chickasaw, Shelby, Boone, Worth, Hancock, Ida, Dallas, Audubon, Sac and Greene. A comparison with 2010 Census population estimates and 2010 EAC data shows that this trend has only worsened.
In Colorado: A comparison of 2012 Census data and 2012 EAC data shows there were more people registered to vote than there were adults over the age of 18 living in each of the following 22 counties: Mineral, Ouray, Hinsdale, San Juan, Jackson, Gilpin, Summit, San Miguel, Gunnison, Dolores, Teller, Grand, Clear Creek, Elbert, Cheyenne, Archuleta, Pitkin, Boulder, Douglas, Routt, and Baca. A comparison with 2010 Census population estimates and 2010 EAC data shows that this trend has only worsened.
In the District of Columbia: A review of Census data and EAC data shows there were more people registered to vote in DC than there were adults over the age of 18 living there as of 2010, and as of 2012, which is the most recent data available.
Meanwhile,the Judicial Watch notifications to election officials in Iowa, Colorado,California, New Mexico, Kentucky, West Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama,Mississippi, Missouri, Illinois, and DC demand a response within 45 days,including the specific steps taken to comply with the law.
Forexample, as JW notes in its letter to election officials in California:
As you may know, under Section 8 of theNVRA states must “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort toremove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligiblevoters,” including voters who become ineligible by reason of death or a changein residence of the registrant.
Accordingly, we ask you to please respondto this letter to address the apparent problems… as well as what additionalsteps [the state] plans to take to ensure its voter rolls are current andaccurate in light of the above information.
Section 8 also requires states to makeavailable for public inspection “all records concerning the implementation ofprograms and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy andcurrency of official lists of eligible voters.We ask you to provide this information along with your written responseno later than 45 days from today.
JudicialWatch’s warning notifications are part of our continuing Election IntegrityProject, which includes pushing states to comply with Section 8 of the NVRA, requiringthat reasonable efforts be taken to maintain accurate voter registration lists.
Inaddition to suing Ohio, JW joined with True the Vote to sue the state of Indiana underSection 8 of the NVRA as well. The litigation in Indiana is continuing and, aswe made clear Monday, we are prepared to bring additional lawsuits ifnecessary.
Theleft is prepared to get their candidates elected by hook or by crook. The onlyantidote to this corrupt strategy is the rule of law.