Clarence Mingo is a black delegate to the Republican National Convention. Yesterday, he participated on a panel that formally adopted support for Voter ID laws in the Republican Party platform. Here’s what Mr. Mingo had to say:
“I think it is very important and critical that this language not be used for strategic political purposes,” Mingo, an African-American, said. “Our efforts in this regard must be sincere, and that’s to prevent voter fraud. Any other message or any other suggestion that the party or this platform is attempting to suppress votes for political gain I don’t think will help our cause much, and that’s certainly not the intent of this body.
“But I do think it’s terrifically important that we demonstrate sincerity in this regard in that we highlight the fact that this is about voter fraud and not political gain,” Mingo added.
I present the following for Mr. Mingo’s consideration:
A new nationwide analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases since 2000 shows that while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal, and in-person voter impersonation on Election Day, which prompted 37 state legislatures to enact or consider tough voter ID laws, is virtually non-existent.
In an exhaustive public records search, reporters from the investigative reporting project “News21” sent thousands of requests to elections officers in all 50 states, asking for every case of fraudulent activity including registration fraud, absentee ballot fraud, vote buying, false election counts, campaign fraud, casting an ineligible vote, voting twice, voter impersonation fraud and intimidation.
Analysis of the resulting comprehensive News21 election fraud database turned up 10 cases of voter impersonation. With 146 million registered voters in the United States during that time, those 10 cases represent one out of about every 15 million prospective voters.
With ten cases of confirmed in-person voter impersonation over a ten year period, that’s two cases nationwide per election cycle. By contrast, under the new Pennsylvania Voter ID law, there are 758,000 Pennsylvanians and 186,830 Philadelphia residents (18% of the population) who do not have the requisite identification to vote.
Now, Mr. Mingo is concerned that the Voter ID laws not be perceived as designed to provide some kind of political advantage. He wants to have free and fair elections, not to change the outcome through chicanery. Taking Mr Mingo at his word, I hope he would agree that a vote wrongly denied is just as much of a distortion of the political will as a vote wrongly cast. A law that disenfranchises 186,830 Philadelphians is just as bad as a computer virus that adds 186,830 make-believe votes to the overall tally. The Voter ID laws won’t actually disenfranchise that many voters because people can take steps to obtain identification between now and the election, but the laws will surely cost more than two people their right to vote.
To knowingly take tens of thousands of people’s votes away just to try to prevent a one in fifteen million chance of in-person voter impersonation cannot be justified. And, given the demographic profile of the people who lack identification, it cannot be seriously argued that the laws don’t give the Republicans a political advantage. Mr. Mingo must be able to see this. His first clue is that only Republican-controlled legislatures are passing these laws.
Voter ID laws may make a lot of intuitive sense, but they are really just latter-day Jim Crow laws passed to change the outcome of this November’s election. It’s cheating under the pretense of preventing cheating. It’s dishonest and dishonorable, and it’s an affront to the people who fought during the Civil Rights Era to win the vote for African-Americans.
Mr. Mingo should be ashamed to have anything to do with these laws. He should not want to win this way.
I’m pretty sure any sense of shame he may have had was bought and paid for long ago.
there’s always hope.
I don’t know — the guy sounds really dim. He doesn’t think it will help the Republican cause much if the GOP announces that it is attempting to suppress votes for political gain? Really? No shit? Lucky somebody figured that out.
I think he’s just a poor schmuck in way over his head in a party that despises him.
Extremism in the defense of extremism is no vice.
But it might be stupid.
BooMan,
he’s a slave catching coon who wants to be able to go to the family BBQ.
I have news for him, it won’t work. he’ll still get the side eye and get cussed up and down for his nonsense.
They think there were hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes cast — by illegal aliens or by each poor black person voting a thousand times, or something — which your lousy statistics don’t show but their laws will prevent.
The only proof they need is that that Kenyan was “elected”. Real Americans couldn’t possibly have voted for HIM, so it was all Acorn’s fault. And they think all of those hundreds of thousands of fraudulent unAmerican voters will vote for him AGAIN this time unless their laws can stop them.
Where I live, you go to the polling place, sign a sheet, they look you up in their book and compare sigs, which judges from both parties can inspect. Then you get a ballot. If there’s some mixup (which has never happened to me, it helps to have your voter registration card, which is mailed by the Election Board periodically, but it’s not necessary. Then you get your ballot. Period.
How the ID laws make “a lot of intuitive sense” is beyond my comprehension. If I wanted to vote twice or more, I’d have to go over to another precinct prepped with a list of dead former voters, forge a signature, and pass the judges’ muster. Each time risking that the person I’m impersonating already voted, or somebody knows the dead guy is dead. So I’m risking going to the federal pen every time I try it. And for what? Love of the party? A few bucks? How many times is that gonna happen in one election? And who is going to bother rewarding me for trying it, when they can steal votes wholesale (as in Waukesha County) at the counting end, which has nothing to do with voter identity?
The stats bolster the case, but they’re not needed to know the “vote fraud by voters” claims are total, subversive crap. That PA judge who let the law stand is the one who needs some criminal fraud investigating.