Minnesota Majority uncovers evidence of voter impersonation, claims ACLU's $1,000 bounty

Categories: Voter ID
ACLU voter impersonation poster.jpg
The ACLU talked the talk -- to walk the walk they may end up giving $1,000 to arch-nemesis Minnesota Majority.
Last month, the ACLU of Minnesota announced they'd give $1,000 to anyone who could produce proof of a voter impersonation conviction from the last decade.

The idea, of course, was to illustrate the pointlessness of the Minnesota Majority-led Voter ID amendment drive, which would require all state voters to provide photo identification at the polls come election time.

At the time, the ACLU expressed confidence that nobody would be able to collect their bounty, but today, Minnesota Majority announced that it has uncovered evidence of a voter impersonation conviction from 2008.

Dan McGrath, Minnesota Majority executive director, told CBS his group will present the ACLU with court documents "that clearly show a charged case of one voter fraudulently voting in the name of another in the 2008 election."

The case involves an Andover resident who voted once in person using her own name, but also completed a forged absentee ballot under a variation of her daughter's name. The daughter, away at college at the time, also voted in another precinct. Election officials noted the duplicate vote and contacted the daughter, who confirmed that her absentee vote was forged. The mother eventually admitted to voter fraud and was charged with three felonies, but was only sentenced to temporary probation and ordered to repay the costs of her prosecution.

Minnesota Majority plans to use their $1,000 windfall for the Vote Yes for Voter ID campaign. Said McGrath:
MPR
McGrath plans to take the ACLU's bounty and use it against them.
The moral of the story is, that if you look for voter fraud in Minnesota, you'll find it. This is a clear-cut case of voter impersonation. It's unusual that it was caught, because ordinarily there's no connection to be made between a false identity and the actual voter. In this case, there was a connection to be made.
Chuck Samuelson, ACLU of Minnesota executive director, said he'll review Minnesota Majority's findings and get back to them about the claim on April 5.

One case of voter impersonation is certainly more of a molehill than a mountain. After all, even in this day and age of razor-thin election margins, no statewide contests are that close. Still, Minnesota Majority must feel good about possibly being able to collect the ACLU's bounty, especially when the $1,000 will go toward stifling the anti-voter ID cause so near and dear to the civil liberty union's heart.

Related coverage:
-- Minnesota ACLU places $1,000 bounty on voter-impersonatin' "rascals"
-- Minnesota Majority scrubs race-baiting imagery from website
-- Minnesota Majority, pro-voter ID group, blasted for using race-baiting imagery
-- Keith Ellison on voter ID approval: "Today is a sad day for democracy"

My Voice Nation Help
29 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Garyi
Garyi

she counseled kids and then has the guts to try and cheat in an election. she should have her license suspended

Amy klobuchar
Amy klobuchar

At first Norm Coleman won on election night by 762 votes. But in 2008, Al Franken beat Norm Coleman by 312 votes after six months of re-counting. During which 4,000 absentee ballots were suppressed by Al Franken because the majority were from veterans and probably favored Coleman. 341 votes by felons were identified to have voted. Dean Barkley and the independent party took 15% of the vote (mostly from coleman). Thanks to Dean Barkley, felons and the suppression of veteran votes we have senator fraud.

Senator Fraud gave Obama a filibuster proof senate for the first two years of his administration. Anything Obama wanted he got. No republican could stop him.

If our economy sucks blame Obama and the democrats who stole an election.

webcelt
webcelt

 "Amy's" facts are about as real as her handle. I guess somehow "Amy" know better than every judge on the canvassing board, every judge on the contest court, and every judge on the supreme court, including the Republican appointees. Of course, they only had evidence to go by, not the alien signals picked up by the fillings in "Amy's" teeth.

Ben Nihana
Ben Nihana

Dude, we'd only care about this if it worked the other way around.  Then we'd want DNA testing before you got a ballot.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

Mark Richie is working on his Democrat version of Voter IDAccording to Ritchie, he has a proposal that will get photo identification. He has proposed electronic poll books, a system of adding voter photos to the traditional voter lists used at every polling place.  Instead of voters producing photo ID cards, polling places would have photos already in place for every voter with a Minnesota driver's license or state ID. Since the MN Department of Motor Vehicles maintains records for at least 12 years, said Ritchie.

and for the "poor" with out a photo on state records, Fu*k ya.  No ballot for you!the Republican version of voter ID would buy an ID for every person without one.

webcelt
webcelt

So they found one after assuring us for years they had evidence of many --- and a case photo ID wouldn't have stopped. Is even another shred of evidence needed that this is a solution seeking problem? We're supposed to disenfranchise how many people to justify stopping one instance?

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

They were only required to submit one. 

Besides did you know your own party is also pushing for voter ID? Mark Richie is working on his Democrat version of Voter ID.  According to Ritchie, he has a proposal that will get photo identification. He has proposed electronic poll books, a system of adding voter photos to the traditional voter lists used at every polling place.  Instead of voters producing photo ID cards, polling places would have photos already in place for every voter with a Minnesota driver's license or state ID. Since the MN Department of Motor Vehicles maintains records for at least 12 years, said Ritchie.

webcelt
webcelt

 And just why should we believe the Republicans will provide an ID to everyone when their record in the states with photo ID is they make it harder to get an ID, not easier. I'll think I'll trust their record over their promises. Disenfranchisement is a funny sort of lie, that has real-life instances. There's a compromise that gets you want you want, if verification with photos is really what you want, and not disenfranchisement of people you think are inclined to vote the wrong way. Be smart enough to grab it.

Regarding "Democrat" or "Democratic", show people so much respect as to call them what they want to be called. It's why I don't refer to tea partiers as "teabaggers".

webcelt
webcelt

Ritchie's idea is still unnecessary, but it's a lot cheaper than requiring people to get photo IDs, and since it solves the disenfranchisement problem, DFLers won't have strong objections. If Republicans will agree to electronic poll books instead of putting current and inevitably obsolete technology into the constitution, we might have something mutually acceptable. We might even have a model for other states considering photo ID requirements and looking for something both parties can live with.

By the way, "Democrat" is a noun. The adjective you're looking for is "Democratic".

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

There you go again with the misrepresentation of what is the Republican's Voter ID bill.The Republicans bill WILL provide a state Photo ID for EVERY man and woman in the state that does not have a photo ID on record with the state. (the "disfranchisement" argument is a lie, or merely stupid people parroting a lie)Again, the Republicians bill WILL provide a state Photo ID for EVERY man and woman that does not have a photo ID.  There are providentially 100,000 people in the state that currently do not have one. (according to the MN DMV)

And if "democratic" is the adjective for democrat, what is the adjective for republican?Did the "scholars" forget about creating a adjective for the OLDEST POLITICAL PARTY in America?  Or is the name "republican" that much better of a word because it's all encompassing?

Ya, I'll just keep using democrat because "democratic" is primarily a word referring to a political process. 

green23
green23

This voter impersonation was committed through an absentee ballot. The proposed voter ID legislation does NOT affect absentee ballots.

So, even with Minnesota Majority's legislation, no one would be prevented from impersonating a voter with an absentee ballot.

Essentially, Minnesota Majority just proved that their proposed legislation is *completely ineffective* in preventing the single case of voter impersonation that they discovered. And that's supposed to be some kind of 'victory' for them in someone's mind.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

Did you know your own party is also pushing for voter ID? Mark Richie is working on his Democrat version of Voter ID. According to Ritchie, he has a proposal that will get photo identification. He has proposed electronic poll books, a system of adding voter photos to the traditional voter lists used at every polling place.  Instead of voters producing photo ID cards, polling places would have photos already in place for every voter with a Minnesota driver's license or state ID. Since the MN Department of Motor Vehicles maintains records for at least 12 years, said Ritchie.

Yabba
Yabba

Meanwhile, a Sec. of State in Indiana was convicted of five counts! The problem: he had a photo ID. 

Dan Frye
Dan Frye

Wow that one vote must have really affected that election. Must be worth the trouble they're going to. 

commonSense
commonSense

One case from 2008????  And these idiots are spending dollars that could be used to help people, on this moronic campaign?  One freaking case?????

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

 They only submitted one.  There are many...

amiller92
amiller92

Many what?  Convictions?  Don't think so.  Many voter impersonation cases?  How do you know?

amiller92
amiller92

Or it shows that some minority of Democrats are sufficiently concerned about the damage that voter ID is going to do to their base to suggest a less odious alternative and/or some Democrats realize that our voting system is antiquated overall and make far too little use of technology.

Neither factor suggests to me that fraud is a serious problem, given that there is essentially no evidence of vote fraud on any scale in Minnesota.

Oh, and btw, according to this what Ritchie is talking about wouldn't disenfranchise anyone as poll workers would be able to add photos to the book on the spot. http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/n...

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

Even the Democrats are pushing for their own version of "voter ID"That's how YOU should figure out voter fraud is a serious problem.  I one the other hand, well just say, I am on the inside looking out.

amiller92
amiller92

Not only one case, but one case that was discovered and prosecuted without vote ID.

HurdyGurdy
HurdyGurdy

Congratulations. It took them a month to find one case of the crime they want us to spend millions of dollars preventing. I doubt the $1000 will even cover the man-hours they put into the hunt, but we must always remember the thousands of counted fraudulent votes that definitely exist despite the complete lack of any evidence. Donal Rumsfeld would be so proud.

Kirk the Conservative Jerk
Kirk the Conservative Jerk

 It's not about "man hours" or even money.  It's about proving democrats are either naive, dumb, or liars.   Success!

amiller92
amiller92

You missed the irony, eh?  This challenge was a win-win for the ACLU.  If nothing turns up, well, great.  If something turns up, well, I guess we didn't need voter ID to find it, did we?

Now Trending

Minnesota Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...