Officials Strike Back Against Voter Fraud Accusations

PHILADELPHIA (CBS) — Continued attacks on the integrity of the election process prompted an unusual news conference today.

Elected officials from both parties, and non-partisan watch dogs, united to assure Philadelphians they can have confidence in their vote.

“The real threat to the integrity of elections in Philadelphia isn’t voter fraud.”

Al Schmidt is the minority, that is, the Republican representative on the city commission so he was chosen to address claims that the election could be stolen by cheating in Philadelphia.

“The real threat to the integrity of elections is irresponsible accusations that undermine confidence in the electoral process.”

Schmidt stresses he is not commenting on remarks by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, but it is Trump who has most vocally raised suspicions, including online tweets, this morning, calling fellow party members, including his running mate, “naive” to deny voter fraud.

Officials noted there are many ways to report perceived improprieties on Election Day, such as:

• 866-OUR-VOTE hotline (866-687-8683) for English
• 888-VE-Y-VOTA (888-839-8682) for Spanish
• 888-API-VOTE (888-273-8683) for a variety of Asian languages

Or the county board of elections: 215-686-3943


One Comment

  1. Jesse Peterson says:

    Lying libt ard bast ards

    1. Jesse Peterson says:

      Over at the Federalist website, a black American writer by the name of John Gibbs has an informative article on the voter ID problem and what could be done about it. It’s entitled Voter Fraud is Real. Here’s the Proof, by John Gibbs, The Federalist, October 13, 2016.

      It’s subtitled “Data suggests millions of voter registrations are fraudulent or invalid. That’s enough to tip an election, easily.”

      This week, liberals have been repeating their frequent claim that voter fraud doesn’t exist. A recent Salon article argues that “voter fraud just isn’t a problem in Pennsylvania,” despite evidence to the contrary. Another article argues that voter fraud is entirely in the imagination of those who use voter ID laws to deny minorities the right to vote.

      That’s the basic argument, that voter ID “disenfranchises” people. That’s a ridiculous argument, and Gibbs provides some examples of voter fraud.

      Yet as the election approaches, more and more cases of voter fraud are beginning to surface. In Colorado, multiple instances were found of dead people attempting to vote. Stunningly, “a woman named Sara Sosa who died in 2009 cast ballots in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.” In Virginia, it was found that nearly 20 voter applications were turned in under the names of dead people.

      In Texas, authorities are investigating criminals who are using the technique of “vote harvesting” to illegally procure votes for their candidates. “Harvesting” is the practice of illegally obtaining the signatures of valid voters in order to vote in their name without their consent for the candidate(s) the criminal supports.

      These are just some instances of voter fraud we know about. It would be silly to assume cases that have been discovered are the only cases of fraud. Indeed according to a Pew Research report from February 2012, one in eight voter registrations are “significantly inaccurate or no longer valid.” Since there are 146 million Americans registered to vote, this translates to a stunning 18 million invalid voter registrations on the books. Further, “More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters, and approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.” Numbers of this scale obviously provide ripe opportunity for fraud.

      There is evidence of real problems, and potentially of greater problems.

      Yet in spite of all this [the previous examples in Gibbs’ article], a report by the Brennan Center at New York University claims voter fraud is a myth. It argues that North Carolina, which passed comprehensive measures to prevent voter fraud, “failed to identify even a single individual who has ever been charged with committing in-person voter fraud in North Carolina.” However, this faulty reasoning does not point to the lack of in-person voter fraud, but rather to lack of enforcement mechanisms to identify and prosecute in-person voter fraud. The science of criminal justice tells us that many crimes go unreported, and the more “victimless” the crime, the more this happens. The fact is, a person attempting to commit voter fraud is very unlikely to be caught, which increases the incentive to commit the crime.

      Good point. As Gibbs points out later in the article

      …We have no reason to believe that the low number of prosecutions means only that exact amount of voter fraud is happening. Rather, it could mean a lack of enforcement is failing to reveal the bulk of the violations that are occurring. Thus, as with many types of crimes, especially victimless crimes, the real number of cases is likely significantly higher than the number reported.

      A “lack of enforcement”, that is, there’s not much effort to stop voter fraud, so they aren’t finding much.

  2. Hank Maglio says:

    they make it sound good,,,,they will do nothing , so they can help hillary get in ,,,,vote out all these career politicians,,,,all they do is raise taxes,,,,in phila,,,,gov…1.00 tax for a pack of cigarettes,,,they do nothing for the voter,,,,vote them out,,,,

  3. gwsjr425 says:

    if the media were merely balanced, the democrats would never hold another public office.

Comments are closed.

More From CBS Philly

Getaway Guide To Iconic Carousels
Getaway Summer Slopes

Watch & Listen LIVE