Friday, June 29, 2012

USSC Refuses Stay, 9th Circuit Supports Voter Fraud

Several weeks ago, Arizona won on many provisions of Proposition 200, a state voter integrity law. However, one key provision of the law was qualified and restricted by the 9th Circuit Court. The 9th Appellate upheld the ruling on that one provision.

Arizona Secretary Of State Ken Bennett issued this official statement on June 28, 2012:

 Supreme Court Rejects Stay

Phoenix, AZ -The United States Supreme Court has denied Arizona's request for a stay from the 9th Circuit Court's ruling that federal voter-registration law supersedes Arizona's voter registration requirements. Arizona filed the request in advance of the forthcoming appeal to the ruling in which the 9th Circuit struck down Arizona's requirement that residents provide proof of citizenship when they register to vote on the federal form.

The court fight stems back to 2004 when Arizona voters passed Proposition 200 which would help ensure that only US citizens vote in elections.

Those registering to vote in Arizona are required to prove citizenship by providing one of the following documents: a driver's license, passport, birth certificate, tribal identification or naturalization certification number. Voters seeking to register online must provide a driver's license number, where eligibility is verified through Arizona’s motor vehicle system.

"Today’s disappointing action by the Supreme Court seemingly flies in the face of the text of the NVRA which uses the term 'citizen' repeatedly," said Secretary of State Ken Bennett. "Arizonans clearly believe that people should provide proof of citizenship when they register to vote."

"There isn’t a corner of this state where people are not concerned with voter fraud and opposition to the simple act of providing proof that you are legally eligible to participate in our elections is hard to fathom. We look forward to the day when we'll make our case for fair and fraud free elections to the Supreme Court. Until then, we await the mandate from the 9th Circuit and will be working with the 15 counties as to a practical application."

The law requires voters to present valid identification at polling places in order to cast a ballot.

The law, however, does little to prevent absentee ballot fraud or Permanent Early Voter List (PEVL) fraud. Those ballots are cast via the mail or courier, usually in advance of the actual election date. However, voter fraud and perjury statutes apply to those ballots if deemed in violation. Anybody casting a PEVL ballot can be called to testify, in person, they cast that ballot. they can also be compelled by Arizona courts to demonstrate they are eligible to cast that ballot, if it should come into question.

To a law-abiding citizen, that makes sense and should not be a questionable issue. If you are doing the right thing, you have nothing to worry about.

The law also included provisions for providing proof of residency, eligibility, and citizenship when registering to vote. Those provisions are already in place when registering through the "Motor-Voter" act of 1993. Many other rights protected by both the US Constitution and the State of Arizona also require valid identification. The US Second Amendment is one such example. Arizona law requires a valid, government-issued ID card in order to carry a firearm. If you are an Arizona Resident (and a US Citizen), a state ID or Driver's License serves that purpose.

In the Supreme Court Decision Bush v Gore in 2001, the USSC determined that there is no constitutional right to vote in presidential elections. In fact, there are no provisions for a "right to vote" in the US Constitution at all. The US Constitution dictates that voter eligibility is determined by the sovereign states. Those determinations are restricted by several amendments in the US Constitution. However, within those parameters, the states determine who can vote in their states. Those parameters are dictated by the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment (no restrictions for race or condition of servitude), the 17th Amendment (changes election of senators to a popular vote), The 19th Amendment (no restrictions due to gender), the 24th Amendment (prohibition of poll taxes), and  the 26th Amendment (minimum voting age set at 18).

However, the 9th Circuit Court stated  that Arizona cannot mandate proof of citizenship in order to register for federal elections, especially when using the federal voter registration form in lieu of the state registration form. This means that if somebody wants to fraudulently register, they just use the federal form instead of the state one. Under the decision, Arizona State election officials cannot ask for proof of citizenship. The court stated that by signing the self-verification affidavit on the federal form, they fall under federal perjury statutes. They claim that is enough to prevent voter fraud.

Please stop laughing. This is serious.

The "Motor-Voter" Act of 1993, further bolstered by the HAVA of 2002 (both of which Eric Holder violated in his attempt to stop Florida from cleaning voter rolls) mandate that the states complete audits of voter rolls removing ineligible voters no later than 90 days prior to an election. Ineligible voters are felons of a certain classification or higher (as deemed by state law), deceased, and non-residents. Read that last classification again. Non-residents are not eligible to vote. This is meant to keep people from voting from multiple states. If you move from Illinois to Arizona, you cannot vote in both states. You have to claim one as your legal residency. However, illegal immigrants are NOT legal residents of ANY state, as they are not legal residents of the US.

So, the 9th Circuit Court has ruled to impede Arizona from effectively auditing and maintaining a lawful voter registration roll. They are mandated to purge the rolls of non-residents, but are prohibited from verifying citizenship at the time of registration, if the registrant utilizes the federal registration form.

Proposition 200 does not prevent any lawfully eligible voter from registering and voting. In fact, it protects the votes of those eligible by insuring their ballots are not devalued by fraudulent ballots and registrations. 

Arizona requested a stay of this ruling from the USSC pending a USSC ruling on the case. The 9th court of Appeals already stated the rest of the law is constitutional. The USSC denied that stay, leaving open the opportunity for fraudulent voter registration and voter fraud.