Wednesday, October 1, 2014

RNLA Responds to Dirty Tricks by Arkansas Official Illegally Cancelling Registration of Republican Attorney General Candidate


The RNLA has responded to news that Larry Crane, a Democratic County Clerk in Arkansas, has cancelled the voter registration of the Republican candidate for Attorney General, Leslie Rutledge, a step almost certainly in violation of federal law. The clerk, citing Rutledge’s registration in both Washington, DC and Arkansas, cancelled the candidate’s registration on Tuesday, only 34 days before the November election notwithstanding the fact that Rutledge renewed her voter registration and voted in Arkansas after no longer residing in Washington, DC. The National Voter Registration Act prohibits officials from conducting these types of activities within 90 day period before a federal election. 

RNLA Chairman J. Randy Evans stated the following:

“Having served on a state election board, I know that one of the most fundamental rules is that under the National Voter Registration Act voters cannot be systematically removed from voter rolls within 90 days of a federal election.  Yet, that is exactly what the Democrats have done in Arkansas.  The fact is that it is a clear and unmistakable attempt at the most harmful kind of voter suppression in violation of federal law – removing a qualified female voter from the rolls notwithstanding her valid registration and actual votes in the last 4 elections in violation of her civil rights.  Democrats should be embarrassed.”

State and federal law provide for very specific procedures for removing a voter from the voter rolls and places significant restrictions on local officials from cancelling voters’ registration records within a 90 day period before a federal election. The Arkansas Secretary of State has already commented on this issue and in a statement to local press recognizes as much:

"My role as Chief Elections Official is to protect all voters' rights, whether you're a candidate on the ballot or a citizen of Arkansas. There are very limited circumstances in which a county clerk can remove a voter from the voter registration rolls. The law is clear under the National Voter Registration Act Section 52 USC § 20507 and Arkansas Constitution Amendment 51 § 11," said Secretary of State Mark Martin. "If a county clerk violates federal election law, then it becomes a matter for the U.S. Attorney."

Luckily enough there is also a private right of action under the National Voter Registration Act. Perhaps if the U.S. Attorney takes no action, one of the left wing so-called “voting rights” groups who have wasted no time in in the past suing election officials for actual valid voter registration list maintenance activities will step in on behalf of Rutledge and take action against the Pulaski clerk for his illegal action? We will see how concerned these groups are when the target is a Republican running for office.

Moreover, Crane never notified officials in Washington, DC when Rutledge registered in Arkansas, thereby neglecting his affirmative duty under state and federal law to notify the election jurisdiction where the new voter was previously registered. In sum, Crane's inaction and incompetence created the very scenario that he then cited as reason to cancel Rutledge's voter registration in Arkansas. 

Here is a link to Rutledge's statement. 

Obamacare Loses Again

Yesterday, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt won a victory for the rule of law when he successfully challenged illegal subsidies used to compel states to accept Obamacare. In a decision in favor of the State of Oklahoma's motion for summary judgment, US District Judge Ronald White ruled that the IRS provision enacted outside of congressional authority was "arbitrary, capricious, and abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with the law."  In 2012, General Pruitt was the first to file a lawsuit challenging the use of taxpayer-funded subsidies to enforce Obamacare in states that had chosen to not establish a healthcare exchange under the law. General Pruitt said of the victory:

The administration and its bureaucrats in the IRS handed out billions in illegal tax credits and subsidies and vastly expanded the reach of the health care law because they didn’t like the way Congress wrote the Affordable Care Act. That’s not how our system of government works   The Obama administration created this problem and rather than having an agency like the IRS rewrite a law it didn’t like, the administration should have done the right thing and worked with Congress to amend the law. Oklahoma was the first to challenge the administration's actions and today's ruling vindicates what we recognized early on and that is the administration can't rewrite the Affordable Care Act by executive fiat.

The decision is the third on this issue with the other two by appellate courts splitting.  (The DC Circuit Court came down on the side of General Pruitt.)  General Pruitt is RNLA’s October member conference call guest.  

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Another Democrat State Representative in Hot Water Over Voter Fraud

Connecticut State Representative Christina Ayala (D-Bridgeport) was arrested September 26 on 19 charges of voting fraud.

Ayala, who was elected in 2012 to replace her cousin, Andres Ayala, is charged with voting in districts she did not live in both local and state elections, and

fabricati[ng] evidence to state Election Enforcement Commission investigators show[ing] she lived at an address in a district where she voted while actually living outside the district.

Among the charges are: eight misdemeanor counts of fraudulent voting, ten felony county of primary or enrollment violations and one felony count of tampering with or fabricating physical evidence. Each of the felony counts carries up to five years in prison and a $500 fine.

Ethan Book, the Republican nominee for Ayala’s House District seat believes justice is following its course, saying:

She has been rather silent on many issues and not that responsive to things, even some I have brought to her as a constituent

Ayala’s mother, Santa, was also investigated by the Elections Enforcement Commission – and criminal charges were also recommended against her. It is evident dishonesty and criminal activity run rampant in this left-leaning politically active family.

As reported in the Connecticut Post, the case is being prosecuted by the Statewide Prosecution Bureau of the Chief State’s Attorney’s Office, who is assisted by the State Elections Enforcement Commission.

Christina Ayala’s arraignment in state Superior Court is scheduled for October 7.

Monday, September 29, 2014

Washington Post’s Reckless Reporting on Virginia’s Photo ID Law


On Friday, The Washington Post took a page from the playbook of left-wing groups such as the Brennan Center in some seriously irresponsible reporting hyper-inflating the number of Virginians who lack a proper photo ID to vote. In reporting on Virginia’s new photo ID law to take effect this November, the article reported that over 450,000 voters in Virginia may lack a proper ID to vote. After Virginia’s Department of Elections called them out on the inaccurate number, the Post issued a correction and revised the number downward to 200,000, an improvement but still not the actual number.

This is not the first time we have seen supposed-objective reporting outlets like the Post hyper-inflate the numbers of those without a proper ID. The same thing has been done in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and other states by left-wing groups where local major papers have happily quoted their completely wrong numbers as gospel. The press have parroted figures from groups like the Brennan Center and others citing the very highest possible estimate of voters with no ID without corroborating it with election officials or other sources. The Post follows the same tired scheme. Here are three example of how these articles quote inaccurate statistics in unfairly and hysterically painting these laws as draconian and vote-suppressing:

First, the articles insinuate that only Driver’s Licenses or DMV-issued IDs can be used by voters to vote. Typically these inaccurate estimates of those without IDs will include everyone who does not have DMV-issued ID. Virginia’s law for example permits several other forms of ID, including college student IDs which are issued to other 500,000 students currently attending an institution of higher learning in Virginia. The Post made no effort to estimate how many voters without Driver’s Licenses possess another form of ID. Given the Post’s criteria, it would have been just as accurate to state: “Potentially zero voters do not possess proper ID to vote” since we know that almost all of the 500,000 students have been issued a proper photo ID by the college or university, thus making up the supposed 500,000 shortfall single-handedly.

Second, the Post took the irresponsible step of using an inflated total of registered voters in analyzing how many voters did not have ID. This will inflate your estimate wildly since most inactive voters have moved, died, or otherwise not actual voters and remain on the rolls in a separate category per federal and state requirements. Virginia, for example, has over 416,000 inactive voters, approximately 8% of all voters. Officials have already identified these voters as having moved or otherwise no longer residing in Virginia. The Post article, pre-correction, cited a statistic which included the inactive voters in the total, thereby adding hundreds of thousands of voters who likely no longer exist in Virginia.  

Third, fail to mention (or bury in the story) the fact that election officials are offering free photo IDs to the few voters who do not possess one. Local election officials who know their communities very well are actively promoting the free IDs to those who do not possess one. Thus far, slightly over 1,000 voters have asked for one. The Post article waits until the very end of the article to mention that registrars will provide an ID to a voter who needs one, and fails to mention that the IDs will be provided to the voters free of charge.

For an additional takedown of the Washington Post, click here for a piece by Senator Mark Obenshain, patron of the photo ID legislation, who goes into more detail on this irresponsible piece of reporting.


Friday, September 26, 2014

Eric Holder’s Disgraceful Voting Legacy

There is a big distinction between White House Counsel and Attorney General.  The Attorney General is supposed to be the country’s lawyer while the White House Counsel is the President’s lawyer.  Yet, Eric Holder was more political than the White House Counsel.  Actually, he was more like a political party counsel.  Three quick examples. 

  1. In the New Black Panther case, Holder overruled a career DOJ Attorney (who formerly headed a state ACLU chapter) to stop a conviction against two people clearly trying to intimidate voters.  While Holder and Democrats have never been able to find  a documented case of intimidation by Republicans (since it’s non-existent), , they let these perpetrators off.
  2. The Presidential Commission on Election Administration came out strongly in favor of interstate voter registration list maintenance and cleaning up the voter rolls.  This committee was co-chaired by President Obama’s campaign lawyer and former White House Counsel Bob Bauer.  Yet the Department of Justice under Holder had previously announced that they would not enforce laws regarding cleaning up the voter rolls with one of his deputies going so far as to state in a DOJ meeting: “We have no interest in enforcing this provision of the law.
  3. Holder again overruled career DOJ attorneys to file a purely political challenge to appease the far left on South Carolina Voter ID.  Not only did the Department of Justice lose the case but they lost so badly they had to pay legal fees, with American taxpayers footing the bill for Holder’s ideological crusade. 

Holder regularly overruled career appointees (who by the way were often Democrats) to make political decisions.  He was so political even the Obama campaign lawyer disagrees with him.  A shameful history for a US Attorney General without even going into his record on non-voting matters or voting related matters such as the IRS targeting scandal.  

Thursday, September 25, 2014

The Real Reason for Eric Holder’s Resignation?

Today news of Eric Holder’s resignation became public.  While there are a lot of reactions across the country, is the real reason for his resignation being obscured?  Eric Holder was the most unpopular politician in America today.  As this story by John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky details from just 9 days ago:

There is no doubt that the American public has also recognized just how politically corrupt Mr. Holder is, given this month’s very embarrassing poll conducted by Hart Research for NBC News and The Wall Street Journal.

The poll asked respondents their opinions about 10 different national political officials, ranging from Bill Clinton to President Obama to Eric Holder, as well as the Democratic and Republican parties. They were given choices of very positive, somewhat positive, neutral, somewhat negative, very negative and “don’t know the name.” About a third of respondents didn’t know who Mr. Holder is (37 percent). However, those Americans who knew Mr. Holder gave him the second-lowest “positive” rating of anyone or any organization on the survey at a mere 15 percent. Only Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio had a lower “positive” rating than Mr. Holder. The attorney general’s “positive” rating was less than half of the positive rating of the Republican Party and 27 points behind that of his boss, Mr. Obama, who was rated favorably by only 42 percent of respondents.

Mr. Holder’s combined “negative” rating of 32 percent was higher than that of Mr. Clinton, Sen. Marco Rubio, Sheriff Arpaio and Sen. Rand Paul. In fact, the poll balanced the total positive feelings survey participants had against the total negative feelings to figure out what the participants as a whole thought of each of the politicians in the poll. Mr. Holder, at 17 points, had the highest negative gap of any individual in the survey — only the Tea Party had a higher negativity gap at 23 points.

The reasons for this are many.  And while his dwindling number of supporters will cite him being the first African American Attorney General, certainly a notable fact, it is worth mentioning that he was also the first to be held in contempt.

From his misbehavior in everything from the New Black Panther voter-intimidation case to Operation Fast and Furious to the IRS targeting scandal, Mr. Holder has shown the public why he is the first and only attorney general in our history to be held in contempt by the House of Representatives.


Holder may not have resigned because of his record unpopularity but many vulnerable Democrats must be happy that he did. 

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

The Same Day Registration Lie

The lie is out.  Same Day Voter Registration is hopelessly corrupt and presents massive opportunities for fraud.  If there was ever any doubt it is erased by what is happening in the bluest of the blue states, Illinois.  Illinois’ Democrat Governor is very unpopular and losing a tight race with a Republican according to the polls.  Illinois Democrats knew this was going to be a tough election, so they planned in advance. 

So what do Democrats do?  They created a way to cheat.  They passed “Same Day” registration to attempt to fraudulently make the difference in  a close race.  Now, some liberals may argue that Same Day Registration is the best system for voting.  Fine.  The facts disagree but what is more interesting is Illinois’ Democrats disagree.  They oppose Same Day Registration in all other elections EXCEPT this November.  That’s right; the Same Day Registration law Illinois passed did not apply to the primaries this year or any future Illinois elections!

Illinois Democrats know that Same Day Registration is ripe for someone to steal an election.  In November, it is Democrats who could use it to drag their unpopular Governor across the finish line.  But in the future it could be used in a Democrat primary against fellow Democrats.  (A similar reason is why Rhode Island Democrats passed voter ID; there is no threat from Republicans but there is a long history of fraud in the Democrat primaries.) 

This summer we missed this great quote on the topic from Chris Christie which we highlight now:

New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie today accused Gov. Pat Quinn and the state’s ruling Democrats of manipulating efforts to enhance their ticket, using techniques such as legalizing same-day registration on Election Day in an effort to boost turnout and blunt a GOP challenge from Bruce Rauner.

Christie, the head of the Republican Governors Association, said that he has been “reading about the race in Illinois every day” and said the manipulations of Democrats here would “make New Jersey blush.”

. . . “Same day registration all of sudden, this year comes to Illinois. Shocking. It’s shocking. I’m sure it was all based on public policy, good public policy to get same day registration here in Illinois just this year when the governor is in the toilet and needs as much help as he can get,” Christie said.


Christie’s sarcasm is obvious.  Unfortunately to many reporting this story, the motives of the Democrats are not.  It’s amazingly coincidental the Democratic-dominated legislature and Governor pushed Same Day Registration as a one-time only offering at the same time they were in endanger of losing the Governor’s mansion.  Same Day registration is hopelessly corrupt and Illinois Democrats know it and are trying to take advantage of it.