Methinks I'm rarely in agreement with the Providence Journal editorial page, but 'twould seem they make a valid point this time. 'Tain't that the Democrats need any additional help maintainin' their monoply in MA politics, so I really gotta wonder why they're doin' this, eh?

Invitation to vote fraud

01:00 AM EDT on Sunday, July 2, 2006

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino wants to increase voter turnout by instituting on-the-spot Election Day voter registration. Any citizen (or non-citizen) could then show up at the polls, register, and immediately cast a ballot.

Currently, voter registration in Massachusetts ends 20 days before an election, allowing time to verify voters' identities. Since the state's municipalities don't set the voting rules, changing the registration process in Boston would require a legislative act.

Nationally, there's a small movement toward same-day registration and voting. Six states that are largely rural (Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and Wyoming -- all generally honestly run) have the system. But the unanswerable objection to Mayor Menino's proposal is that in Massachusetts it would be an open invitation to electoral fraud, especially in cities, with their high population turnovers. Nothing beyond a driver's-license check would be available to keep political operatives from getting citizens and non-citizens out to vote "early and often," and there would be no way to discover fraud in time to do anything about it. In a state whose attorney general (Thomas Reilly) has refused to cooperate with federal officials on immigration issues, the idea of instant voting is a non-starter.

Widening participation in our democracy is a laudable goal. But inviting fraud does not enhance democracy, or people's confidence in it.

The 1993 National Voter Registration Act, "the motor-voter act," allowed simultaneous licensing to drive and registering to vote, and it resulted in numerous bogus names on the rolls (many inevitable "Mickey Mouses" and "Donald Ducks"). More of this, and worse, is what could be expected in Boston from same-day registration and voting.

NH has election-day registration, and it doesn't seem to have done them any harm.

Methinks the demographics are a bit different, kinda like what the editorial talked about. IMHO the demographics are so different that 'twould mean the difference between more eligible voters votin' and more voter fraud, eh?

With the stranglehold Democrats already have on MA politics why open this can of worms? Methinks the only time a Republican ever wins in MA is when the Democrats run such a stinker that the bulk of the voters can't even hold their nose long enough to vote for 'em.

Minnesota and Wisconsin have a some fairly large cities (Minneapolis/St. Paul and Milwaukee), and I don't hear similar complaints about them. Besides, I don't think urban people are necessarily less honest than rural people. Do you?

Cities just have more people. So you'll get more of every sort of folks, good and bad, rich and poor, and all of the spectrum between those extremes.

In the case of Boston and other east coast urban areas, yes! Methinks you'll find a much higher percentage of east coast urban dwellers have more undesirable traits. Might be I'm wrong, but poor school systems, more street crime, a kind of anything goes mentality and higher concentration of folks that can't be bothered to register to vote ahead of time and/or are more easily influenced to vote without botherin' to find out 'bout candidates and/or issues don't make for better, more responsive and responsible government, eh?

In the case of MN, wasn't same day registration one of the factors that resulted in the election of Governor Ventura? Is that what the good people of MA wanna see?

Maybe I'm outa the mainstream, but methinks folks that're really interested in conscientiously exercisin' their votin' rights can find the time to preregister to vote. Also methinks addin' more potential for fraud ain't really very progressive, or so 'twould seem here in Little Rhody where a review of the Providence voter rolls revealed almost 30% were ineligible 'cause they weren't American citizens, didn't really live here, were registered in multiple areas and the like.

Your statement that "you'll find a much higher percentage of east coast urban dwellers have more undesirable traits" is insulting to this east-coast urban dweller, as I'm sure it would be to several other east-coast residents here.

Could you have made some of your points in a nicer way? Am I, who has spent about 45 of my 53 years in "east coast urban areas" (if you count suburbs, which are definitely more urban than rural) in Massachusetts and Virginia more likely to be a person with undesirable traits? Shouldn't we look to all sorts of reasons for the problems of the schools and crime rather than simply looking at it in terms of "there must be a lot more of the undesirable type of person around there", while certainly not neglecting the fact that people with bad traits are a big part of the picture? Your "anything goes mentality" comment seems to be a rather unsupported and broad generalization. Do you know that there is a "higher concentration of folks that can't be bothered to register to vote ahead of time" in these urban areas, when you have these rural states that saw fit to enact same-day voter registration? Why did those states need to do that then if their citizens are so much less lazy than those of the urban areas? And how do you know that these urban voters "are more easily influenced to vote without botherin' to find out 'bout candidates and/or issues"? I'm not saying that there is no problem here, but I don't get the impression that this is something concentrated in the urban areas. I think it has to do with a citizenry more interested in the latest on Britney's love life as opposed to whether the NSA surveillance program was a dangerous erosion of our civil liberties or a necessary effort in the War on Terror. Or would you say that it is harder to find People magazine or the Globe in the small towns of Rhode Island than in Providence?



I'm not a fan of Jesse's, but isn't that sort of decision up to those who would vote in MN, MA, or anywhere else? That would seem to be democracy.



I think that we have to be worried about fraud too. But we need to worry about too few people getting on the rolls, as well as too many. When you hear about Katherine Harris purging all sorts of people from the voter rolls in Florida because they had the same name as a convicted felon, then I would say that we would want to call that abuse, and an injustice, if not fraud. As far as Providence goes, were those problems the result of fraud, or simply sloppiness, people moving, registering in their new precinct, and the bureaucrats neglecting to take them off the rolls in their old precinct? Maybe you could provide the link to that article, or post the text.

I cannot believe that states like NH and Minnesota are completely unworried about fraud. Maybe they have found ways to prevent same-day registration from being abused. But you will have the potential for abuse in the best system. We should not use that as a reason to make it more difficult for people to exercise their right to vote. In terms of people not doing what they should in order to vote, I worry about that less in terms of the individual failings of those people and more in terms that with less people voting cynicism (already so high) about the political system goes up. It should be easy for people (some who are extremely busy just to make ends meet and hold together crazy lives) to vote as is reasonably possible.

Sorry you feel insulted Rox, that weren't my intention. Just the same methinks if you and Arne can't see the difference between the realities of urban Boston, Springfield, Worcester, Brocton, Lawrence and Lowell and those in rural Pittsfield, Newburyport, Williamstown, Plymouth, Greenfield, Mansfield and the like then nothin' else I say will make any difference. If y'all in MA wanna see Mayor Mennino become the next James Michael Curley and become more powerful in the Commonwealth than the Governor and/or state government that's up to you. Since I left MA for the friendlier environment in Little Rhody in 1984 I can only express my opinions on the matter, but really ain't (and shouldn't) have a say in it, eh?

Think of"Boss" Tweed & Tammany Hall, Mayor James Michael Curley's Boston, Mayor Buddy Cianci's Providence, and the other corrupt (mostly Democrat) political machines in Baltimore, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Jersey City, Wilmington, Norfolk, Pittsburgh, Savannah, Miami and other eastern urban centers. Methinks there're other places too, Mayor Richard J. Daley's Chicago comes to mind, but IMHO the worst abuses and fraud in American history's been on the Atlantic coast. Post Civil War Republicans started it, Democrats made it an art form, tho now methinks the GOP's perfectin' it even more, eh? IMHO pretendin' 'tain't happenin' will do little to further progressive issues.

Are we again goin' from a "Golden Age" to a "Gilded Age" as described in Twain's 1873 book, "The Gilded Age: A Tale of Today"? Maybe 'tis time for another movement like the Mugwumps to reverse it, eh?

If y'all want the bosses in both major political parties limitin' your ability to vote for good candidates and fix what needs fixin' through more fraud and the like then keep your head in the sand and just pretend all's well. I apparently was under the mistaken impression that progressives wanted to make things better and make government & elected officials more responsive to constituents, not entrench people and organizations that really want to maintain the status quo.

And for Arne's info, the data on Providence voter rolls came from an examination maybe four years ago (after Cianci got convicted and sent to the federal pen) by folks tryin' to figure how he maintained power against all odds. Sorry, but links to stories that long ago ain't so easy to find. Not surprisin' methinks is that even after these problems were discovered so long ago corrective action to purge non citizens, dead people, duplicate registrations and other fraudulent entries is just now gettin' underway by the RI Secretary of State's office, eh?

East coast urban dwellers are Americans.

IMHO not all! For example, the illegal alien from the Dominican Republic who had no valid driver's license, car insurance or registration for his car when he ran a stop sign and broad sided my youngest's car in North Providence a few months back methinks most here, though maybe not all, would agree is not an American. He might've been registered to vote in Providence though.

If I respond to this there's gonna be flamin'. So I won't.

Flydangler, I think you missed my point. I think that you could have focused more on institutions, history, demographics, etc., without appearing to make overgeneralizations about different groups of people. Of course the problems in urban areas, and not just east coast urban areas, are different from those of other areas. I suspect that you don't have the MS-13 gang in your town, but it is not just in Northern Virginia, but in Los Angeles as well.

And I must say that implying that Menino wants to become the next James Michael Curley is like saying that Felipe Calderon must be stealing the Mexican election from the PRD candidate, Senior Lopez Obrador, because the the 1988 election was stolen from the PRD candidate in that election. You are right to worry about Boston because of their checkered history, but that doesn't mean that Menino's motives are suspect. Of course what he is proposing is a fair issue to debate.

I know that Cianci was a crook, but I also know that he was also pretty popular at one time. In the beginning he even had a reputation as being a reformer. Without defending him in the least, could he have maintained power simply by being popular? I'm glad that the Secretary of State is trying to clean things up, and I appreciate that it may be too difficult to dig up those sources, but my other questions concerning that particular issue would still stand.

And I do want to prevent the kind of fraud (or bureaucratic error, which it may be at least sometimes, but then it would still be a problem) that you are talking about. I just don't want "solutions" to that problem to be abused as a way to suppress the vote, which I think is a reasonable fear. I don't think that is what you want, but I do think that many (not all) of our Republican friends are aiming for just that.

Not every one in Northern Virginia is an American either, but most are. My wife was not an American until two years ago, which is when she registered to vote. And citizens cause accidents as well, while most foreigners are no worse drivers than anyone else (some drivers who appear to be foreigners to me seem to drive just a bit too carefully, and slow!)

There are plenty of illegals in rural areas also.

As far as comparing the affluent suburban communities for "desirable traits" I would say that the desirable traits that you mention should have nothing to do with someone's right to vote. I'll take the voter judgement of Lowell and Lawrence over Boxford and Topsfield any day of the week.