« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Double and Triple Checking in Swing States Could Lead to Voters Blocked from Polls
As state officials scramble to rebut claims of voter purging and blocked registrations made in a recent report, they're also revealing their missteps. Officials in two swing states have admitted that they are double -- and sometimes triple -- checking new voter registrations, which could lead to eligible voters voters being turned away from polls.
In North Carolina, one of the states fingered in the New York Times investigation published yesterday, Gary Bartlett, director of the Board of Elections defended his state's handling of new voter registrations, claiming the BOE was verifying both drivers license numbers and social security numbers if new voters provide both on their application.
In Indiana, a swing state that has also had a large uptick in requests to the SSA for voter registration verifications, Matt Tusing, the deputy secretary of state and a Republican, told the Indianapolis Star that Indiana officials have been verifying the Social Security number on every card, as wells as running checks with the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, the Department of Correction and death records.
"Some states don't check against all those sources," he told the paper.
In both cases, that's far more verification than is required under federal law, and the superfluous checking of both numbers could lead to eligible vote registrations not being verified -- something that could disproportionately affect Democrats, who have registered in higher numbers this year.
According to the Help America Vote Act of 2002, states must exhaust checks in their own identification databases -- like drivers licenses and ID cards -- before turning to the often unreliable federal database with the Social Security Administration. Yesterday's Times report alleges that states like Colorado have been improperly relying on the SSA to verify voter registrations.













We've got to be careful. Some of those terrorists could be trying to harm our democracy by voting!
October 10, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Watch the Supremes throw out the election on equal-protection grounds when they get a claim from the McCain campaign that all those new voters really would have gone for him.
October 10, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
If that happens, we shut the whole thing down. Democrats can not let that happen; block everything and shut it down.
October 11, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's the story on voter protection? Who is working on behalf of the potentially disenfranchised? Is there a ground game here? Would like to see some reporting on that.
October 10, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is all this linked to ACORN or no?
October 10, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama should make a statement on this soon. First, to explain what is really going on (a la John Marshall's fine article); second, to affirm his commitment to the integrity of the electoral process, which will not only give him the moral high ground, but have the salutary side-benefit of allowing an aggressive Democratic response to the inevitable Republican shenanigans at the polling places. In fact, I would not be surprised to learn that the Republicans are promoting this story in part to gain license for dirty tactics comes election day: Hey, anything goes. Obama should deal with it now and take it off the table before the debate.
October 10, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I understand correctly, the HAVA act calls for states to check voter registration information against driver's license lists and other state records and then if the registrant is not found there, they can contact the SSA as an additional attempt to get verification of eligibility, then approve the registration if the registrant appears in EITHER database.
Instead, some states are checking both both state and SSA records for all registrants and excluding them unless they appear in BOTH databases.
Or is it that some are ONLY checking the SSA database, which has a history of being inaccurate or incomplete, and not checking state databases?
Either way, it looks like eligible voters being turned away from the polls will outnumber illegally cast ballots by a huge margin, as usual.
October 10, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
One thing that we can do is spread the word:
If you or someone you know is denied the right to vote, don't just go home.
call the Election Protection Hotline
at 866-OUR-VOTE
Their Web site is www.866ourvote.org
There are some other suggestions in the following article on protecting voter’s rights:
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=protecting_voter_rights
And campaign offices may be able to assist.
October 10, 2008 11:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is so bad about about checking the Social Security Death Index?
I would question allowing anyone ot register who's SSN matched wouldn't you?
This a standard check when you suspect identity theft.
(Typically I would add a joke about the Dead voting in Chicago and San Francisco -- but now that Jerry Garcia is gone it just isn't the same)
October 11, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whenever a winger suggests we need to do all this background checking I suggest that in exchange we make the voting period over an entire weekend Fri-Sun from 6AM to 9PM every day. That way those not fortunate enough to have a salaried job and who have issues finding time to vote or who are delayed by paperwork snafus have time to correct the situation legally and get to vote.
I've not found ONE winger who is willing to make the trade? Wonder why? Is it possible they only want certain people to be able to vote? (Answer if you haven't figured it out: yes).
October 12, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink