Wisconsin “Movers” Didn’t Move

[ZiprHead]

Court Hears Lawsuit to Purge Voters Based on List that is “Wrong and Racist”

Today, the Wisconsin Supreme Court may choose our President. That is, justices will hear arguments in a lawsuit that would force the state to remove 129,000 from the voter rolls on grounds they’d moved from their registration addresses.

But a report by the nation’s top experts in address verification, including the official licensee of the US Postal Service, says that at least 39,722 “movers” did not move.

Worse, the hit list is not only disastrously wrong, it is suspiciously over-weighted with African-Americans.

Given Trump’s 2016 Wisconsin victory margin of less than 23,000, this racially poisonous purge of voters could decide the state, and so the nation.

On Monday, Black Voters Matter Fund issued my foundation’s report, Wisconsin “Movers” Purge List Errors with a link to SaveMyVote2020.org where we list every single voter wrongly facing erasure of their voting rights.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

For the record, Trump won Wisconsin by less than 20,000 votes in a ‘depressed’ turnout where Trump somehow managed to win with fewer votes than Romney got in 2012 when he lost to Obama.

 

[skepticalbip]

I don't know anything about the Wisconsin case but there should be an attempt to keep voter rolls accurate or we will have the mandate of actual voting citizens diminished. Even by the judge's decision, there would be least 89,000 voters on their rolls that should be purged. I wouldn't necessarily trust the USPS as an arbiter of who lives at an address - I have lived in this house for over eight years and I still get mail for the previous resident (who is dead) and some woman that either lived with him for a while or lived here before him. Apparently the USPS assumes that someone lives in a residence until they submit a change of address form to them. Then there is an old case several years ago in a neighboring county where there were more people voting than the population... Fortunately, this extreme level of voting fraud attracted federal agents' attention.

 

[Valjean]

This sort of voter suppression happens every election, using a variety of strategies, usually perpetrated by the Republicans, who know they'd be unlikely to win if everyone voted.

 

[crazyfingers]

I don't know anything about the Wisconsin case but there should be an attempt to keep voter rolls accurate or we will have the mandate of actual voting citizens diminished. Even by the judge's decision, there would be least 89,000 voters on their rolls that should be purged. I wouldn't necessarily trust the USPS as an arbiter of who lives at an address - I have lived in this house for over eight years and I still get mail for the previous resident (who is dead) and some woman that either lived with him for a while or lived here before him. Apparently the USPS assumes that someone lives in a residence until they submit a change of address form to them. Then there is an old case several years ago in a neighboring county where there were more people voting than the population... Fortunately, this extreme level of voting fraud attracted federal agents' attention.

I don't know anything about Winsconsin's system either but I have moved my mom to different assisted living facilities in the last year and whenever I put in a change of address at the post office the state sends my mom a voter registration form for hew new town. It would be better if they just registered her but the form is easy enough to sign and send in.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't know anything about the Wisconsin case but there should be an attempt to keep voter rolls accurate or we will have the mandate of actual voting citizens diminished. Even by the judge's decision, there would be least 89,000 voters on their rolls that should be purged. I wouldn't necessarily trust the USPS as an arbiter of who lives at an address - I have lived in this house for over eight years and I still get mail for the previous resident (who is dead) and some woman that either lived with him for a while or lived here before him. Apparently the USPS assumes that someone lives in a residence until they submit a change of address form to them. Then there is an old case several years ago in a neighboring county where there were more people voting than the population... Fortunately, this extreme level of voting fraud attracted federal agents' attention.

The problem is that a voter who remains in the rolls has little impact, we purge only to keep from sending out mailings. Removing someone who shouldn't be, however, has a much higher cost. Shall we throw 20,000 innocents in jail because they look like 89,000 guilty people? (And note that finding 20,000 that are wrongful doesn't mean all the rest are right, either. It says the error rate is far too high, the list should be circular-filed.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't know anything about the Wisconsin case but there should be an attempt to keep voter rolls accurate or we will have the mandate of actual voting citizens diminished. Even by the judge's decision, there would be least 89,000 voters on their rolls that should be purged. I wouldn't necessarily trust the USPS as an arbiter of who lives at an address - I have lived in this house for over eight years and I still get mail for the previous resident (who is dead) and some woman that either lived with him for a while or lived here before him. Apparently the USPS assumes that someone lives in a residence until they submit a change of address form to them. Then there is an old case several years ago in a neighboring county where there were more people voting than the population... Fortunately, this extreme level of voting fraud attracted federal agents' attention.

I don't know anything about Winsconsin's system either but I have moved my mom to different assisted living facilities in the last year and whenever I put in a change of address at the post office the state sends my mom a voter registration form for hew new town. It would be better if they just registered her but the form is easy enough to sign and send in.

They certainly shouldn't simply move her registration. The address you receive mail at is not necessarily the address you live at. Long, long ago my parents filed a change of address to an address we had never lived at and would not be living at--the address of my uncle who would be dealing with the mail while we were away. Should our voter registrations have been moved there? Nope. I'm not sure exactly what the voting situation would have been, though--moot anyway as it wasn't an election year.

Or consider thru-hikers. Many who are single put their stuff in storage and are technically homeless for the duration of their hikes. They'll forward mail to family members but that doesn't mean they're living there. I believe in a situation like that you vote in the precinct you were in before giving up a fixed abode. (Our case was different as we were not in the US at all.)

Less of an issue I filed a change of address on my mother to a house I was absolutely certain she would never live in. It wouldn't have mattered if the voter registration moved as dead people don't vote anyway.

 

[skepticalbip]

I don't know anything about the Wisconsin case but there should be an attempt to keep voter rolls accurate or we will have the mandate of actual voting citizens diminished. Even by the judge's decision, there would be least 89,000 voters on their rolls that should be purged. I wouldn't necessarily trust the USPS as an arbiter of who lives at an address - I have lived in this house for over eight years and I still get mail for the previous resident (who is dead) and some woman that either lived with him for a while or lived here before him. Apparently the USPS assumes that someone lives in a residence until they submit a change of address form to them. Then there is an old case several years ago in a neighboring county where there were more people voting than the population... Fortunately, this extreme level of voting fraud attracted federal agents' attention.

The problem is that a voter who remains in the rolls has little impact, we purge only to keep from sending out mailings. Removing someone who shouldn't be, however, has a much higher cost. Shall we throw 20,000 innocents in jail because they look like 89,000 guilty people? (And note that finding 20,000 that are wrongful doesn't mean all the rest are right, either. It says the error rate is far too high, the list should be circular-filed.)

Voter rolls are purged because there are crooked people who can and have used the registration of dead people (or people that moved) and "stuffed" the ballot box. This was the case in the neighboring county I mentioned above where there were more votes than population. The Feds jailed a few of the county officials for voting fraud but the fraud had been going on in several election before the county officials got too brazen making their fraud so obvious. There is serious election problems when those in the grave yard can elect politicians.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't know anything about the Wisconsin case but there should be an attempt to keep voter rolls accurate or we will have the mandate of actual voting citizens diminished. Even by the judge's decision, there would be least 89,000 voters on their rolls that should be purged. I wouldn't necessarily trust the USPS as an arbiter of who lives at an address - I have lived in this house for over eight years and I still get mail for the previous resident (who is dead) and some woman that either lived with him for a while or lived here before him. Apparently the USPS assumes that someone lives in a residence until they submit a change of address form to them. Then there is an old case several years ago in a neighboring county where there were more people voting than the population... Fortunately, this extreme level of voting fraud attracted federal agents' attention.

The problem is that a voter who remains in the rolls has little impact, we purge only to keep from sending out mailings. Removing someone who shouldn't be, however, has a much higher cost. Shall we throw 20,000 innocents in jail because they look like 89,000 guilty people? (And note that finding 20,000 that are wrongful doesn't mean all the rest are right, either. It says the error rate is far too high, the list should be circular-filed.)

Voter rolls are purged because there are crooked people who can and have used the registration of dead people (or people that moved) and "stuffed" the ballot box. This was the case in the neighboring county I mentioned above where there were more votes than population. The Feds jailed a few of the county officials for voting fraud but the fraud had been going on in several election before the county officials got too brazen making their fraud so obvious. There is serious election problems when those in the grave yard can elect politicians.

If the officials are corrupt things like purging the rolls won't help you. If they're not in on it it's pretty hard to pull this off effectively.

 

[ZiprHead]

So no one wants to comment on Republicans trying to remove people, almost all African Americans and students, without even bothering to check whether they really moved or not.

 

[skepticalbip]

Voter rolls are purged because there are crooked people who can and have used the registration of dead people (or people that moved) and "stuffed" the ballot box. This was the case in the neighboring county I mentioned above where there were more votes than population. The Feds jailed a few of the county officials for voting fraud but the fraud had been going on in several election before the county officials got too brazen making their fraud so obvious. There is serious election problems when those in the grave yard can elect politicians.

If the officials are corrupt things like purging the rolls won't help you. If they're not in on it it's pretty hard to pull this off effectively.

It is a given that there are some corrupt politicians in office. Trying to keep the voter rolls up to date is an attempt to keep such people from being re-elected. The election commissions don't have a lot of tools to weed out the corrupt politicians. It is easy for election commissions to check that there are not more votes counted than the number of voters on the roll but if there are a lot more names on the rolls than qualified voters, because of deaths or people moving then ballot box stuffing is difficult to detect.

Example: Assume there are 20,000 qualified voters in a precinct;
. If there are 20,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted makes fraud obvious.
. If there are 25,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted would not be suspicious.

The corrupt politicians in the neighboring county were not caught earlier because the voter rolls kept growing because they were never purged. It was only after the number of names on the rolls exceeded the population that their fraud became obvious and attracted federal agents. The corrupt politicians knew not to have the fraudulent votes exceed the voter rolls but dumb enough to forget to check population numbers.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Voter rolls are purged because there are crooked people who can and have used the registration of dead people (or people that moved) and "stuffed" the ballot box. This was the case in the neighboring county I mentioned above where there were more votes than population. The Feds jailed a few of the county officials for voting fraud but the fraud had been going on in several election before the county officials got too brazen making their fraud so obvious. There is serious election problems when those in the grave yard can elect politicians.

If the officials are corrupt things like purging the rolls won't help you. If they're not in on it it's pretty hard to pull this off effectively.

It is a given that there are some corrupt politicians in office. Trying to keep the voter rolls up to date is an attempt to keep such people from being re-elected. The election commissions don't have a lot of tools to weed out the corrupt politicians. It is easy for election commissions to check that there are not more votes counted than the number of voters on the roll but if there are a lot more names on the rolls than qualified voters, because of deaths or people moving then ballot box stuffing is difficult to detect.

Example: Assume there are 20,000 qualified voters in a precinct;
. If there are 20,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted makes fraud obvious.
. If there are 25,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted would not be suspicious.

The corrupt politicians in the neighboring county were not caught earlier because the voter rolls kept growing because they were never purged. It was only after the number of names on the rolls exceeded the population that their fraud became obvious and attracted federal agents. The corrupt politicians knew not to have the fraudulent votes exceed the voter rolls but dumb enough to forget to check population numbers.

What does this have to do with removing people from the voter rolls if they haven't moved from the address they currently lived in when they registered?

 

[skepticalbip]

It is a given that there are some corrupt politicians in office. Trying to keep the voter rolls up to date is an attempt to keep such people from being re-elected. The election commissions don't have a lot of tools to weed out the corrupt politicians. It is easy for election commissions to check that there are not more votes counted than the number of voters on the roll but if there are a lot more names on the rolls than qualified voters, because of deaths or people moving then ballot box stuffing is difficult to detect.

Example: Assume there are 20,000 qualified voters in a precinct;
. If there are 20,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted makes fraud obvious.
. If there are 25,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted would not be suspicious.

The corrupt politicians in the neighboring county were not caught earlier because the voter rolls kept growing because they were never purged. It was only after the number of names on the rolls exceeded the population that their fraud became obvious and attracted federal agents. The corrupt politicians knew not to have the fraudulent votes exceed the voter rolls but dumb enough to forget to check population numbers.

What does this have to do with removing people from the voter rolls if they haven't moved from the address they currently lived in when they registered?

Nothing. People who have not moved should not be purged. It was an explanation to Loren, who suggested purging the voter rolls wasn't necessary, as to why it is necessary. The neighboring county to mine didn't purge their voter rolls for decades and ended up with more names on the rolls than the county's population and the most corrupt political office holders in the state.

As I first posted, I don't know anything about this particular case. All I have seen is the article in the OP that was the position of an activist group. How accurate it is, I don't have any idea. They claim that some of those on the list haven't moved and, obviously, there is another side that claims to have evidence that they did move (or maybe died). The court will see both claims and their evidence.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is a given that there are some corrupt politicians in office. Trying to keep the voter rolls up to date is an attempt to keep such people from being re-elected. The election commissions don't have a lot of tools to weed out the corrupt politicians. It is easy for election commissions to check that there are not more votes counted than the number of voters on the roll but if there are a lot more names on the rolls than qualified voters, because of deaths or people moving then ballot box stuffing is difficult to detect.

Example: Assume there are 20,000 qualified voters in a precinct;
. If there are 20,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted makes fraud obvious.
. If there are 25,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted would not be suspicious.

The corrupt politicians in the neighboring county were not caught earlier because the voter rolls kept growing because they were never purged. It was only after the number of names on the rolls exceeded the population that their fraud became obvious and attracted federal agents. The corrupt politicians knew not to have the fraudulent votes exceed the voter rolls but dumb enough to forget to check population numbers.

What does this have to do with removing people from the voter rolls if they haven't moved from the address they currently lived in when they registered?

Nothing. People who have not moved should not be purged.

Okay dokes.

It was an explanation to Loren, who suggested purging the voter rolls wasn't necessary, as to why it is necessary. The neighboring county to mine didn't purge their voter rolls for decades and ended up with more names on the rolls than the county's population and the most corrupt political office holders in the state.

Well, my Dad died in March and he is already scrubbed. Sure, we need scrubbing, but the trouble is, there is a lot of unnecessary scrubbing.

As I first posted, I don't know anything about this particular case.

Pretty much people that registered to vote are being taken off of the rolls for arbitrary reasons, usually they haven't vote in X elections and didn't respond to postcard. Ohio does this as well. And like with tuna netting, dolphins get caught too. And legitimate voters are removed from the rolls and then some people find out they can't vote. And this typically affects urban areas more than rural areas.

All I have seen is the article in the OP that was the position of an activist group. How accurate it is,

It is common. Wisconsin isn't the first state and lots of red states push these methods. To fix this problem, they could send out mailers to everyone, and inform them of their voting registration status, a couple months before registration deadlines, and after the purges. But red states don't want to fix something they feel they benefit from.

Now how much this affects elections is unknown, to the best of my knowledge. I don't recall reading about tens of thousands of people that were kept from voting because of these restrictions. Yes, one person is too many and that is why we need a failsafe, but this hasn't seemed to be a problem for statewide voting.

 

[Worldtraveller]

It is a given that there are some corrupt politicians in office. Trying to keep the voter rolls up to date is an attempt to keep such people from being re-elected. The election commissions don't have a lot of tools to weed out the corrupt politicians. It is easy for election commissions to check that there are not more votes counted than the number of voters on the roll but if there are a lot more names on the rolls than qualified voters, because of deaths or people moving then ballot box stuffing is difficult to detect.

Example: Assume there are 20,000 qualified voters in a precinct;
. If there are 20,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted makes fraud obvious.
. If there are 25,000 names on the rolls then 23,000 votes counted would not be suspicious.

The corrupt politicians in the neighboring county were not caught earlier because the voter rolls kept growing because they were never purged. It was only after the number of names on the rolls exceeded the population that their fraud became obvious and attracted federal agents. The corrupt politicians knew not to have the fraudulent votes exceed the voter rolls but dumb enough to forget to check population numbers.

What does this have to do with removing people from the voter rolls if they haven't moved from the address they currently lived in when they registered?

Nothing. People who have not moved should not be purged. It was an explanation to Loren, who suggested purging the voter rolls wasn't necessary, as to why it is necessary. The neighboring county to mine didn't purge their voter rolls for decades and ended up with more names on the rolls than the county's population and the most corrupt political office holders in the state.

As I first posted, I don't know anything about this particular case. All I have seen is the article in the OP that was the position of an activist group. How accurate it is, I don't have any idea. They claim that some of those on the list haven't moved and, obviously, there is another side that claims to have evidence that they did move (or maybe died). The court will see both claims and their evidence.

If you have more names on the voter rolls than population, that's one thing. However, obviously all those other people aren't voting in that county, are they?

A relatively simple (but somewhat infrastructure intensive to set up) solution is for all states to share their database. When someone registers, it is checked against the database. If it matches with a different, previous address, that person gets a postcard/email asking if that was their previous address. Anyone caught lying would have to be fined to keep people from trying to fuck with other people, but other than that a simple system.

 

[laughing dog]

I find the WI case rather interesting. First, unless any registered voter moved out of state, the address is irrelevant for voting for statewide and federal offices. So, unless this group has evidence of specific voters either being dead or having moved out of state, I don't see how they have any standing.

Second, addresses do matter for local elections. But I would think that it should be up to the locality (or local citizens) to have standing for asking for that type of purge.

It is not an accident that this is a conservative group. WI conservatives have been active in the past 4 years in trying to make it more difficult for certain groups (blacks, the poor, and students) to vote.

 

[skepticalbip]

Nothing. People who have not moved should not be purged. It was an explanation to Loren, who suggested purging the voter rolls wasn't necessary, as to why it is necessary. The neighboring county to mine didn't purge their voter rolls for decades and ended up with more names on the rolls than the county's population and the most corrupt political office holders in the state.

As I first posted, I don't know anything about this particular case. All I have seen is the article in the OP that was the position of an activist group. How accurate it is, I don't have any idea. They claim that some of those on the list haven't moved and, obviously, there is another side that claims to have evidence that they did move (or maybe died). The court will see both claims and their evidence.

If you have more names on the voter rolls than population, that's one thing. However, obviously all those other people aren't voting in that county, are they?

Those people weren't voting but the corrupt politicians used the number of names on the voter roll to decide how many extra ballots they could stuff into the ballot box to re-elect themselves and co-conspirators.

A relatively simple (but somewhat infrastructure intensive to set up) solution is for all states to share their database. When someone registers, it is checked against the database. If it matches with a different, previous address, that person gets a postcard/email asking if that was their previous address. Anyone caught lying would have to be fined to keep people from trying to fuck with other people, but other than that a simple system.

There are several ways to establish a voting system that is fair. The problem is that it is politicians that do it. Some are more concerned with how they can game the system to benefit themselves and/or their party... and this is in both major parties. Some want to be able to stuff the ballot box and some prefer to limit likely opposition party participation. And then some like both.

 

[marc]

Now how much this affects elections is unknown, to the best of my knowledge. I don't recall reading about tens of thousands of people that were kept from voting because of these restrictions.

????

In 2000, Florida's Secretary of State Katherine Harris purged thousands from the state's voter rolls. Some reports the next few years stated she had sent the list of names back the the company that compiled them because she wanted more on the list. Some did try to bring the matter up into investigation in the Senate, but Gore discouraged it, the reason being the senate was 50/50 split at the time, which meant Gore would get the tie breaking vote on it, which would lead to an even bigger uproar and court battles than was already going on.

 

[southernhybrid]

So no one wants to comment on Republicans trying to remove people, almost all African Americans and students, without even bothering to check whether they really moved or not.

I will comment on Georgia's nefarious purges of the voter rolls, which primarily impact minority voters.

https://www.thv11.com/article/news/politics/elections/aclu-report-on-georgia-voting-rolls-released/85-4d68a598-e4e4-4e26-8fd8-43788ea2133e

A newly-released report said that it found that more than 198,000 voters were wrongly removed from Georgia voter rolls late last year because the state believed, incorrectly, that they no longer had valid addresses.
The ACLU of Georgia released the results of that report, conducted by the Palast Investigative Fund, titled Georgia Voter Roll Purge Errors, on Sept. 1.

Georgia Republicans have a history of suppressing the vote, especially in areas where it's assumed that Black people and/or students live. In other words, those who usually vote for the Democratic Party.

Palast has been looking into the state's various voter purges since 2013.
“It’s real simple, Georgians shouldn’t be removed from the voter rolls on the basis of false information," he told 11Alive Wednesday.
According to the Georgia Secretary of State's office, the state compares its voter rolls with the National Change of Address registry every two years and sends confirmation mailersm, to ensure that Georgia voters who have moved are registered to vote in the correct precinct and county.

Inactive voters can still vote (and thereby change their status to “active”) according to the Secretary of State's office, but if they do not vote or have any other contact with their county elections office for two general cycles (4 years), their registration will be canceled, and they must re-register in order to continue to vote.
"This verification is part of the regular list maintenance of voter rolls required by federal and state law," the Secretary of State's office said previously.
A registered voter becomes vulnerable to being dropped from voter rolls if that voter files a change of address request with the U.S. Postal Service, official election mail is returned undeliverable, or the person fails to vote in the previous, two general elections, or has had no contact with elections officials for five years prior to that. They can also be removed by not responding within 30 days to an address confirmation letter mailed by the county voter registrar.
Palast said independent experts have concluded that "a card returned as undeliverable," or a card not returned, "does not, in and of itself, indicate that a voter has permanently moved residence."
"Many cards were returned because they were missing apartment addresses. Again, this is no indication the voter has made a registration-canceling move," the report pointed out. "This is the main source of the state’s extreme error rate."

Andrea Young with the ACLU of Georgia said the state is not equipped to verify addresses accurately based on its current system.
“The process being used by the State of Georgia is both more expensive and less accurate than an industry-standard for list maintenance," she said. "The effect of their actions is that hundreds of thousands of Georgia citizens who were duly registered to vote may show up on election day and find that their names are not on the rolls."

There are numerous other sources that discuss Georgia's attempts at voter suppression. It appears as if Wisconsin Republicans are also learning this trick. Republicans know that if most people voted, they would win very few elections. It's very disturbing what has happened to our country. Voter fraud is extremely rare and there has never been enough examples of voter fraud to show that it changed the outcome of an election. But, Republicans want people to believe that voter fraud is the problem when the truth is that voter suppression is a much large problem.

 

[Derec]

I find the WI case rather interesting. First, unless any registered voter moved out of state, the address is irrelevant for voting for statewide and federal offices. So, unless this group has evidence of specific voters either being dead or having moved out of state, I don't see how they have any standing.

General elections usually have a slate of non-statewide elected officials. There is no separate election for state legislature, county commission, school board, city council and mayor, etc. They are on the same ballot as president , governor or senator. And even your congressional district may be affected by an instate move, and that's a federal office. What are you babbling about? Of course your address is relevant!

Second, addresses do matter for local elections. But I would think that it should be up to the locality (or local citizens) to have standing for asking for that type of purge.

It depends on the state law how that is handled.

It is not an accident that this is a conservative group. WI conservatives have been active in the past 4 years in trying to make it more difficult for certain groups (blacks, the poor, and students) to vote.

That may be the case. Doesn't change the fact that when you move, you should update your voter registration.