Minnesota Majority’s report on fraudulent votes cast by ineligible felons in Minnesota’s 2008 General Election may be just the tip of the iceberg.
A total of 39 cases of double-voting are currently under investigation in which it appears that an individual voted in both Minnesota and Wisconsin during in 2008. Two Wisconsin men have thus far been charged with voting twice – once in their hometown of Menomonie and once again in Minnesota. Voting more than once in an election is a felony.
The prosecutions came about as a result of a Wisconsin law enforcement investigation that’s been underway for months. Minnesota authorities appear to be cooperating with Wisconsin officials in these cases, but no investigation of this type has been undertaken within Minnesota, despite repeated calls for such an investigation by Minnesota Majority over the past two years.
The standard response from most Minnesota officials has been that there is no voter fraud in Minnesota and therefore no need to conduct an investigation. But the skeletons are now beginning to spill out of the closets. If there are cases of double voting between Wisconsin and Minnesota, what about other neighboring states?
Following the 2008 election, over 30,000 postcards mailed to newly registered Minnesota voters were returned as undeliverable. These “Postal Verification Cards” (or PVCs) are often the only verification used to confirm the identity and residence of newly registered voters and only after a voter’s ballot has been cast and counted.
Some of the returned PVCs are due to people moving right after the election (election mail is non-forwardable). But what about the others? Clearly some were the result of Wisconsin residents illegally voting in Minnesota. How many other cases of fraudulent voter registrations do we have in Minnesota? If government officials refuse to investigate, we will never know the answer to this question.
Some forms of voter fraud are detectable by simply cross-checking government databases. For example, double voting, even across state lines, can be detected if state governments share data and compare records.
In-state, it’s even easier. Fraudsters impersonating a deceased voter can be detected using death certificate databases. Ineligible felon voters can be detected by comparing court records to the voter rolls. Non-citizen voters could be identified by comparing voter rolls to driver’s license records.
But what about other forms of voter fraud, where there is no list to compare? Minnesota’s election law allows for election day registration and no photo ID is required. Anyone could create multiple identities and vote in several different precincts on Election Day.
Since there’s no database of people who don’t exist, there’s no way to detect these types of fraudulent voters. The only validation mechanism is the PVC card, which could only be used to potentially prevent a fictitious identity from voting in the next election (keep in mind a fraudster could simply concoct a new identity).
Even if the logical fallacy of proving someone does not exist were accomplished, there would still be no way to identify the specific individual who was behind the fraudulent vote. If the record says Fred Flintstone voted and his PVC card is returned undeliverable, there is no connection to that name and the real identity of the fraudster. Thus Minnesota law allows for dishonest persons to commit the perfect crime and never be caught.
Minnesota Majority’s investigation into election irregularities has resulted in a ground swell of voters calling for the requirement of a photo ID to vote. Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie claims that there has never been a person convicted of voter impersonation in Minnesota.
No one has been checking for detectable forms of voter fraud, let alone undetectable varieties. Convicting someone of this type of crime would require the perpetrator to voluntarily step forward and admit to the crime, because without photo ID, it is completely undetectable.
Still, despite the fact that we have found evidence of every detectable variety of voter fraud, our election officials are asking us to believe that the easiest, most undetectable and un-prosecutable variety of voter fraud doesn’t exist in a system that seems to invite it.
Not good enough. Two years after the 2008 election, the fallout from voter fraud continues to ring up the count of fraudulent votes. We will likely never know with certainty the full extent of fraud in that occurred in the 2008 election and without additional verification measures such as photo ID, Minnesotans will have to continue to wonder about the accuracy and integrity of future elections.
Jeff Davis is president of Minnesota Majority.
