# ACORN submits fraudulent voter registrations en masse **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 8, 2008, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984 "2008-10-08T13:55:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 25
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/481 "2008-10-15T16:24:35Z")
> [@Mighty\_Girl](#): > > I can see how the mandatory ID idea might not be appealing to US voters. But it can be worked around that (mandatory registration sans ID, perhaps?). > > \*Bolding mine One little problem with the mandatory registration thing, our constitution. Freedom means the freedom not to register if we don’t want to. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/482 "2008-10-15T16:27:26Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > One little problem with the mandatory registration thing, our constitution. Freedom means the freedom not to register if we don’t want to. Eh? Are you talking about the federal constitution? What part? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/483 "2008-10-15T16:43:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Of course, if the poor person simply came to court and explained he didn’t have the money, it’s unlikely that he’d be jailed for failing to pay it. The court would work out a payment plan. > > I was very poor growing up. Somehow, though, I never had an arrest warrant issued. Not the point. A lot of poor people do. They can lose their right to vote. They can get thrown in jail. Poor people, for some reason, do not trust the court system. ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/484 "2008-10-15T16:45:20Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Eh? Are you talking about the federal constitution? What part? See Kansas City v. Whipple (1896) it is a Missouri Supreme Court case but the SCOTUS has had over 100 years to overturn it but has not done so. also see: [http://moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/updates/other\_related\_legal\_developments.html?AID=790](http://moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/updates/other_related_legal_developments.html?AID=790) ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/485 "2008-10-15T16:50:53Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > See Kansas City v. Whipple (1896) it is a Missouri Supreme Court case but the SCOTUS has had over 100 years to overturn it but has not done so. > > also see: [http://moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/updates/other\_related\_legal\_developments.html?AID=790](http://moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/updates/other_related_legal_developments.html?AID=790) The case you cite is about a poll tax for not voting. And it is based on the Missouri Constitution. And it was not appealed to the Supreme Court, so it did not have the opportunity to overrule it. The also see doesn’t mention any legal arguments against mandatory voting, much less mandatory registration. I think you’d have a pretty tough time arguing that mandatory registration is unconstitutional. Your best bets would be that there is some First Amendment right to express your disapproval by not registering, or some substantive due process right about not being in a national database. But I think both arguments are probably losers. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/486 "2008-10-15T16:53:12Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Not the point. A lot of poor people do. They can lose their right to vote. They can get thrown in jail. Poor people, for some reason, do not trust the court system. That falls into the category of “too damn bad.” Not trusting the court system is not an “impediment” to voting. It’s a choice. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/487 "2008-10-15T16:57:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Is there some evidence that any office is in the position of making such a choice (i.e., “We have $X and have to allocate it. How much should go to the voter fraud of registrations and how much to the state officers’ investigations?”) > > No? > > Then it’s a false dilemma. > > We can (and should) do both. Why? Like any issue that faces society we need to decide where to best spend limited resources to address a problem. At some point you reach a law of diminishing returns point where even massive infusions of resources produce barely noticeable results. I think you are creating a false dilemma by suggesting voter fraud is something that needs to be addressed. The _facts_ are it is such an insignificant issue as to be virtually a non-issue. By all means the checks that are in place should (largely) remain but they seem more than sufficient as is without throwing yet more money and more roadblocks to voting. As has been cited numerous times in this thread voter roll purging, often in _[violation](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/us/politics/09voting.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all)_ of the law, disenfranchises huge swaths of voters who, far more often than not, tend to be left leaning. Your voter fraud problem in comparison? [95 total cases with 70 convictions in Federal elections from 2002-2005](http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud_graphic.html) (article that graphic came from [here](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?ei=5088&en=277feccfa099c7d0&ex=1334030400&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1197490509-kQxLoEru+cH9aetsLB6CnA)). Just how much better can you reasonably hope it to be? ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/488 "2008-10-15T17:04:54Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > The case you cite is about a poll tax for not voting. And it is based on the Missouri Constitution. And it was not appealed to the Supreme Court, so it did not have the opportunity to overrule it. > > The also see doesn’t mention any legal arguments against mandatory voting, much less mandatory registration. > > I think you’d have a pretty tough time arguing that mandatory registration is unconstitutional. Your best bets would be that there is some First Amendment right to express your disapproval by not registering, or some substantive due process right about not being in a national database. But I think both arguments are probably losers. That’s an interesting theory you’ve got there a poll tax for not voting is not about mandatory voting? Where I come from if you are punished for not doing something that means doing it is mandatory. As for its not being appealed we have a term for that, settled law. Furthermore, it is conservatives who fight tooth and nail to keep the riff raff from voting and bemoaning things like the motor voter law. Conservatives are the most up in arms against mandatory registration. If you briefly glance at the make up of the current supreme court I think you will find that the likelyhood of them permitting it is slightly greater than them overturning Bush v Gore. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/489 "2008-10-15T17:08:20Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > That’s an interesting theory you’ve got there a poll tax for not voting is not about mandatory voting? Where I come from if you are punished for not doing something that means doing it is mandatory. Where did I say it wasn’t about mandatory voting? The case clearly was. The “also see” cite was not. > [@askeptic](#): > > As for its not being appealed we have a term for that, settled law. I was responding to your argument that SCOTUS has never overruled it. They couldn’t have. And one state supreme court decision from the 19th century doesn’t mean the law is settled. It is binding on the lower courts of that state, for now. That is not what is generally meant by “settled law,” and certainly not what is meant by “settled law” in the context of the entire nation. Not that it matters because that case is about voting, not registration. > [@askeptic](#): > > Furthermore, it is conservatives who fight tooth and nail to keep the riff raff from voting and bemoaning things like the motor voter law. Conservatives are the most up in arms against mandatory registration. If you briefly glance at the make up of the current supreme court I think you will find that the likelyhood of them permitting it is slightly greater than them overturning Bush v Gore. So to return to my original question, what would be their constitutional basis? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/490 "2008-10-15T17:13:48Z")
Here’s a [debate](http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/15/acorn) (sort of) between ACORN’s chief organizer and a Pub attorney specializing in elections law. ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/491 "2008-10-15T17:28:38Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Your voter fraud problem in comparison? [95 total cases with 70 convictions in Federal elections from 2002-2005](http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud_graphic.html) (article that graphic came from [here](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?ei=5088&en=277feccfa099c7d0&ex=1334030400&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1197490509-kQxLoEru+cH9aetsLB6CnA)). > > Just how much better can you reasonably hope it to be? > [@](#): > > Voter fraud is actually less likely to occur than lightning striking a person, according to data compiled by New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice. As Lorraine Minnite, a Columbia University professor, observed in the Project Vote report, The Politics of Voter Fraud, “The claim that voter fraud threatens the integrity of American elections is itself a fraud.” In October 2002, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft launched an intensive "Ballot Access and Voting Integrity that required all U.S. attorney offices to coordinate with local officials in combating voter fraud. Yet even after the Justice Department declared the war against voter fraud a “high priority,” only 24 people were convicted of illegal voting in federal elections between 2002 and 2005 – and nobody was even charged by Justice with impersonating another voter. (The Justice Department declined to answer questions about more recent fraud prosecutions.) And despite the anti-immigrant frenzy fueling photo-ID laws, only 14 noncitizens were convicted of illegally voting in federal elections from 2002 through 2005 – mostly because of their ignorance of election law. [http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein\_archive?month=10&year=2008&base\_name=the\_voter\_fraud\_fraud](http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=10&year=2008&base_name=the_voter_fraud_fraud) ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/492 "2008-10-15T18:01:06Z")
Bricker lets see some of that outrage… > **[Firedoglake - Firedoglake weblog » Lindsay Beyerstein](http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/752)** > [@](#): > > Nearly a quarter of John McCain’s “Clean Election and Voter Fraud Committee,” chaired by Warren Rudman and John Danforth, have been involved in GOP voter suppression efforts or unfounded partisan claims of voter fraud. Of the 21 members of the committee, five have been engaging in these shady efforts. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/493 "2008-10-15T19:07:23Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > Furthermore, it is conservatives who fight tooth and nail to keep the riff raff from voting and bemoaning things like the motor voter law. Conservatives are the most up in arms against mandatory registration. Except that in this very thread I expressed approval for the idea. Didn’t I? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/494 "2008-10-15T19:13:19Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > Bricker lets see some of that outrage… > [Firedoglake - Firedoglake weblog » Lindsay Beyerstein](http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/752) I’m not seeing where in that link anything is proven, or even alleged with specificity. For example: > [@](#): > > Just last week Davis admitted to engaging in subtle voter suppression techniques. But what’s described by Davis’s “admission” is not voter suppression at all: > [@attributed to Davis](#): > > I think it’s fair to say, yeah, I think it’s fair to say we’re not going to spend any money educating them on what they need to do but that’s what you do in these kinds of elections… I’m just saying in terms of vulnerability of our congressional candidates, you’ve got to look at these high African American voter urban style districts and recognize that it’s not business as usual as a candidate, that you’re going to deal with an electorate that is significantly different from what you see in off years. And I just think that’s the fact. Um… what? That’s “voter suppression?” No. So I’ll be glad to give you the outrage when you show me something to get outraged about. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2008, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/495 "2008-10-15T20:11:22Z")
Can someone explain to me what the hell he’s even saying? He’s not making any sense, at least from my perspective. ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/496 "2008-10-16T00:29:54Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That falls into the category of “too damn bad.” Not trusting the court system is not an “impediment” to voting. It’s a choice. So. Keeping the Sabbath holy is a choice, but it would be obviously wrong to require Saturday voting. At some point, you have to stop bending over backwards to accommodate people’s irrationality , but there really needs to be some effort made to keep polling places from appearing to be a convenient place for the authorities to check in on anyone who’s had some run-in with the law. I don’t have any good way to draw a decent balance, though it seems the Census Bureau has good practices in place to get accurate data while maintaining its secrecy. That might be a good place to look for ideas. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/497 "2008-10-16T15:26:06Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That falls into the category of “too damn bad.” Not trusting the court system is not an “impediment” to voting. It’s a choice. It falls in the category that there are people with your attitude in the system. You reinforce their beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/498 "2008-10-16T15:36:32Z")
> [@waterj2](#): > > So. Keeping the Sabbath holy is a choice, but it would be obviously wrong to require Saturday voting. At some point, you have to stop bending over backwards to accommodate people’s irrationality , but there really needs to be some effort made to keep polling places from appearing to be a convenient place for the authorities to check in on anyone who’s had some run-in with the law. I don’t have any good way to draw a decent balance, though it seems the Census Bureau has good practices in place to get accurate data while maintaining its secrecy. That might be a good place to look for ideas. Agreed. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/499 "2008-10-16T17:25:39Z")
Meanwhile, [McCain’s “Clean Election and Voter Fraud Committee” is packed with Pub operatives with a history of voter suppression.](http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/752) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2008, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984/500 "2008-10-16T18:17:07Z")
[ACORN’s response to McCain’s comments in last nights debate.](http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=31565) > [@](#): > > In a conference call with reporters this morning, they’ve accused McCain – whose recent ad also suggests ACORN has a role in the widespread home mortgage crisis – of an ‘‘outlandish’’ attempt to “hoodwink the American public” in order to distract from what they say is his “desperate” presidential campaign. > > They argued that with regard to their voter registration efforts of more than a million new voters – many of them first-time, and poor – “we should be applauded and, quite frankly, proud of our achievements.” > > And Maude Hurd, the organization’s national president, said in a statement issued today slammed McCain for being “for ACORN before he was against it.” > > “We appreciate that Sen. McCain’s effort to stir up the Republican base by attacking a community organization working to increase public participation in our democratic process,” Hurd said in her statement. “Unfortunately, the Sen. McCain we saw (in the debate) is very different than the Sen. McCain who stood shoulder to shoulder with ACORN at a Feb. 20, 2006 immigration reform event.” > > That’s where McCain delivered a speech lavishing praise at an ACORN-sponsored rally, telling the crowd chanting “Si Se Puede” that they were part of “what makes America special.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984.md?page=24) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/acorn-submits-fraudulent-voter-registrations-en-masse/466984.md?page=26)