John Paul Stevens vs. Barack Obama On Voter Fraud

In ruling on the constitutionality of Indiana's voter ID law -- the toughest in the nation -- the Supreme Court had to deal with the claim that such laws demanded the strictest of scrutiny by courts, because they could disenfranchise voters. All nine Justices rejected that argument.

Even Justice Stephen Breyer, one of the three dissenters who would have overturned the Indiana law, wrote approvingly of the less severe ID laws of Georgia and Florida. The result is that state voter ID laws are now highly likely to pass constitutional muster.

But this case, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, also revealed a fundamental philosophical conflict between two perspectives rooted in the machine politics of Chicago. Justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the decision, grew up in Hyde Park, the city neighborhood where Sen. Barack Obama -- the most vociferous Congressional critic of such laws -- lives now. Both men have seen how the Daley machine has governed the city for so many years, with a mix of patronage, contract favoritism and, where necessary, voter fraud.

That fraud became nationally famous in 1960, when the late Mayor Richard J. Daley's extraordinary efforts swung Illinois into John F. Kennedy's column. In 1982, inspectors estimated as many as one in 10 ballots cast in Chicago during that year's race for governor to be fraudulent for various reasons, including votes by the dead.

Mr. Stevens witnessed all of this as a lawyer, special counsel to a commission rooting out corruption in state government, and as a judge. On the Supreme Court, this experience has made him very mindful of these abuses. In 1987, the high court vacated the conviction of a Chicago judge who'd used the mails to extort money. He wrote a stinging dissent, taking the rare step of reading it from the bench. The majority opinion, he noted, could rule out prosecutions of elected officials and their workers for using the mails to commit voter fraud.

Three years later, Justice Stevens ordered Cook County officials to stop printing ballots that excluded a slate of black candidates who were challenging the Daley machine. The full court later ordered the black candidates back on the ballot.

Barack Obama has approached Chicago politics differently. He came to the city as a community organizer in the 1980s and quickly developed a name for himself as a litigator in voting cases.

In 1995, then GOP Gov. Jim Edgar refused to implement the federal "Motor Voter" law. Allowing voters to register using only a postcard and blocking the state from culling voter rolls, he argued, could invite fraud. Mr. Obama sued on behalf of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, and won. Acorn later invited Mr. Obama to help train its staff; Mr. Obama would also sit on the board of the Woods Fund for Chicago, which frequently gave this group grants.

Acorn's efforts to register voters have been scandal-prone. St. Louis, Mo., officials found that in 2006 over 1,000 addresses listed on its registrations didn't exist. "We met twice with Acorn before their drive, but our requests completely fell by the wayside," said Democrat Matt Potter, the city's deputy elections director. Later, federal authorities indicted eight of the group's local workers. One of the eight pleaded guilty last month.

In Seattle, local officials invalidated 1,762 Acorn registrations. Felony charges were filed against seven of its workers, some of whom have criminal records. Prosecutors say Acorn's oversight of its workers was virtually nonexistent. To avoid prosecution, Acorn agreed to pay $25,000 in restitution.

Despite this record -- and polls that show clear majorities of blacks and Hispanics back voter ID laws -- Mr. Obama continues to back Acorn. They both joined briefs urging the Supreme Court to overturn Indiana's law.

Last year, he put on hold the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky for a seat on the Federal Election Commission. Mr. von Spakovsky, as a Justice Department official, had supported a Georgia photo ID law.

In a letter to the Senate Rules Committee, Mr. Obama wrote that "Mr. von Spakovsky's role in supporting the Department of Justice's quixotic efforts to attack voter fraud raises significant questions about his ability to interpret and apply the law in a fair manner." Of course, now an even stricter law than the one in Georgia has been upheld by the Supreme Court, removing Mr. Obama's chief objection.

The hold on the von Spakovsky nomination has left the Federal Election Commission with less than a quorum. As a result, the FEC can't open new cases, hold public meetings, issue advisory opinions or approve John McCain's receipt of public funding for the general election. Now Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claims that, even without the von Spakovsky hold, filling the FEC's vacancies will take "several months."

All of this may be smart politics, but it is far removed from Mr. Obama's call for transcending the partisan divide. Then again, Mr. Obama's relationship to reform has always been tenuous. Jay Stewart, the executive director of the Chicago Better Government Association, notes that, while Mr. Obama supported ethics reforms as a state senator, he has "been noticeably silent on the issue of corruption here in his home state, including at this point, mostly Democratic."

So we have the irony of two liberal icons in sharp disagreement over yesterday's Supreme Court decision. Justice Stevens, the real reformer, believes voter ID laws are justified to prevent fraud. Barack Obama, the faux reformer, hauls out discredited rhetoric that they disenfranchise voters.

Acorn's national political arm has endorsed Mr. Obama. And its "nonpartisan" voter registration affiliate has announced plans to register hundreds of thousands of voters before the November election. An election in which Mr. Obama may be the Democratic candidate.

Comments

[aceholiday]

hey guy where's the voter fraud in georgia?

[pmorlan]

John Fund is such a squirrel. Stevens a liberal icon? The fact that Stevens is not a radical conservative like Scalia, Thomas, Roberts & Alito doesn't make him a liberal. PLEASE! I wish we had a liberal justice on the Court because we haven't had one for years.

[BubbaC33]

Nothing in your posting speaks to the point of this blog. Stevens favors voter reform and honest voter registration while Obama defends illegal and unethical voter registration. Stevens political ideology is not the issue. BUt what you have done is so typical of Obama supporters. Change the subject, avoid the issue, ignore the truth in a posting in order to attack a point, not the point.

[MrWinky]

The problem with the article and our point is that you act as if it is a quick fix one way or the other. Stevens sides on the side of preventing voter fraud, but I would assume he is also against disenfranchisement. Same with Obama, he has come down on the side of enfranchisement, but feels that the IN law maybe done in a less restrictive way. That doesn't mean he supports voter fraud. That would be like saying that because you are for Hillary, you are a racist. You can be for one without being against the other.

[jadez]

this writer doesnt have a clue to what he pretends to write about.
these laws are not about voter fraud.
they are a further attepmt to block people from voting.
part of the republicans strategy for years.

if you want to know who these laws will affect do some investigation.
but heres a clue.
they will NOT prevent white people from voting.

do you homework pal.

[aliceblue]

According to his bio above, Mr. Fund gets
his paycheck from Mr. Murdoch.

What I found interesting is the timing of
the decision, a week before two big primaries,
one of them with a large black vote.

Voters can get provisional ballots but it requires
an affidavit with a fee of $13 which for lower income
people black or white, is PUNITIVE.

Oh. That's right. This whole endeavor is to keep
an entire class of voters away from the polls.

[pagopago]

well, there you have it another underling from the DARK side. LOL!

[kae]

Thank you now I get it - it's RUPERT!

How about that last paragraph! Acorn hired people who didn't do their jobs. No story here, not Barak's fault - on a board that gives money does not mean hires & sits in on employee performance evaluations - Barak Obama supports this groups mission, they want to help all americans vote. This writer is trying to suggest that Barak Obama is involved in a scheme to register voters (poor minorities) and oooooh he's involved with a group that wants to vote for him! The reality of this Propaganda is that probably every poor minority lining up to vote is against BushCo and corporate media - I feel it has become just too transparent lately, why is there no such thing as libel & slander laws in politics - it's being used against us, it's working and even when it doesn't they just tell us otherwise. This is why Rupert Murdock should not be allowed to buy or consolidate one more f-ing thing.

[kindofblue]

Indiana had not one case of voter fraud. When they were challenged to produce even one case, they couldn't.

Do you know the term "election fraud"? This is what the Supreme Court validated in 2000. Where were you then? One of the participants, right?

[BubbaC33]

If a community was free of the crime of murder would that be a good argument against making it illegal? No, it would not. So the idea of being pro-active on voter fraud is not a bad idea. It is important, of course, to make certain no law can be used to suppress the vote, but making certain only legal voters are casting votes is a good idea.
Rather than attacking Fund and his ideology why not refute the points he has made concerning Obama and his support for voter registration that is open to fraud? For once I'd appreciate reading a posting from an Obama supporter that explains and justifies his position rather than an attack posting, which is much more typical.

[kae]

Being pro-active on voter fraud is one thing but you need to make sure that the "law cannot be used to suppress the vote" (your words). Not everyone has a photo ID, you can say that it is their own fault but I would say it should not void them of their right to vote. Who wouldn't have an ID in this day and age? Maybe elderly and poor people. If this law included some kind of voter ID that was issued when you register so that ALL can vote, that's good - BUT unless it was free it would still prevent people from voting and that is the intent here - I'm afraid we can't afford programs like these. BushCo has maxed us out. Preventing voter fraud is very important. I just want to make sure it doesn't smell like BushCo.

[greejambri]

Where is the PROOF of wide-spread "voter fraud?" What a smokescreen!!! What this ruling WILL ensure is WIDESPREAD VOTER DISENFRANCHISEMENT. Mr. Fund is very disingenuous, and has a history of anti-Obama posts.

[Alexei Stakhanov]

Fund's bogus charge against Obama on so-called "voting fraud" is misleading on its face. It says that Omaba represented certain parties, successfully, against the State of Illinois when it refused to implement the Federal law on registration and voting. That should be lauded by all as an ANTI fraud action. That Acorn is on of the parties and that Obama agrees with Acorn's objectives and that certain Acorn volunteers in states other than Illinois may have been overly zealous to the degree of illegality has nothing to do with [a] Illinois elections corruption, or [b] Obama's (wrongly) inferred approval of those (few) alleged illegal actions.

The real outrage is that with its recent decision the Court has firmly established the anti-constitutional view taking away the RIGHT to vote - it has made the right to vote a privilege, not a right. A right is something you have and can exercise UNLESS THE STATE PROVES THAT YOU HAVE FORFEITED THAT RIGHT. I have a right to free speech and the government cannot insist that I show a document as a condition for exercising that right.

That's why Karl Rove went nuts over voter registration drives. Unless he could develop the impression that they were somehow 'dangerous' to the public - as, for example, in propagating fraud - no court would intervene in the abridgment of Acorn's right to register voters. Doing that proved much harder than causing the declaration of a few bogus yellow alerts on the eve of an election..­.

[ajax2]

Voter suppression is much more likely than voter fraud in the U.S. Fund like most conservatives is against everyone voting, democracy. He is for putting obstacles in the way of as many people as possible. I'm sure he would love to have only property owners eligible to vote, and could write that argument.

Both Karl Rove and Justice Rehnquist have taken part in voter suppression campaigns, democracy is a threat to right wing rule. As for Justice Stephens I don't know if Fund's titles of liberal and reformer ring true. He probably was not appointed as a liberal. Fund also says, "polls that show clear majorities of blacks and Hispanics back voter ID laws". I don't know what this means or if it's true.

Fund has an agenda here, to have as few people vote as possible.

[jadez]

of course he does and if you ever saw this smug guy on tv it is obvious.

look the firing of the AGs was ALL about voter surpression and FAKE prosecution of innocent people for voter fraud. run out of the white house by rove who should be in jail.but expect no justice because this is america.

[PaulC37943]

I'm not an attorney, but it seems to me that there are valid issues on both sides. Having grown up in the Chicago area, I can see how voter fraud is a legitimate concern. But so is repressing the votes of minorities and the elderly. Having said that, I believe that if the law is going to error, it should error on the side of voter access.

[Lon]

In Stevens decision he surveys the evidence for voter fraud of the type covered in the bill and cites exactly one case of one individual who was caught engaging in this kind of fraud in the last 100 years. The idea of disenfranchising primarily poor, elderly, and minority voters based on that evidence seems comical. Fund may be right as to where Stevens developed his warped sense of what the problem is. But the lack of evidence that Stevens could provide in supporting his own case shows how ludicrous this ruling is.

[t9chi]

Ok, here's the plan

The media, The Clintons and The Republicans will continue to pound on him(Obama) from all angles.

The Super delegates will then endorse Clinton.

Then the DNC will expect him to campaign for Billary to keep the Blacks from fleeing.

The Dems will tell him to gracefully get out of the Race because he has too much baggage.

The Cherry on the top maybe that Edwards may endorse her as well.

[aplegrand]

Do you think Black people are stupid enough to fall for these games? Black folks will not support Hilary Clinton if she steals the nomination, period.

[KMan1]

Nah, because they know the Clinton baggage is even more disastrous.

[KHAAANNN]

t9chi is correct except for the last sentence; Here is the last part......­.
Hillary gets the nomination and picks Wesley Clark as her VP candidate.
Blacks and Progressives desert the Democratic party in droves and don't vote in the election.
McCain picks Jeb Bush as his VP candidate.
Despite this, Clinton/Clark leads in the polls by 10% after Labor Day.
A poison gas "terrorist" attack occurs in late September in a northeastern town, probably Philadelphia, or Boston, but no one claims responsibility.
Bush blames Iran anyway and launches a sustained non-Nuclear air attack on them.
Independents, frightened by the gas attack vote Republican in large numbers.
McCain wins 65% to 35%. Claims biggest mandate in 30 years. Republicans ride his coattails into control of both houses of Congress.
McCain chooses Joe Lieberman as Secretary of State, stacks cabinet with lobbyists.
Second terrorist attack (this one real) on a southern city, probably Miami.
McCain's first act as President; Nuclear attack on Iran after Israeli intelligence blames Iran for the Miami attack (unproven though.)
McCain's second act as President; Suddenly dies of a stroke.
Jeb Bush becomes President and promptly picks Mitt Romney as VP, then declares Martial Law. Congress suspends the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights because "We are at War".
Seig Heil.

[BubbaC33]

I have no idea where you live, but I'd be willing to bet a number of good mental health care professionals practice near you. Maybe you should try finding one with an opening in their schedule and you can get the help you seem to need.

[ShootFirstInc]

This article is misleading and dangerous in its cavalier condescension to those voters who do not have photo ID. While such a personal article may be commonplace nowadays, a photo ID is not something that many poor people have. They can't spend the $35 or $50, and they take the bus. Up to 25% of African Americans do NOT have photo IDs.

Photo ID requirements set into motion a slew of confusing restrictions, as to whether or not your current address is valid, or if it's the right type of photo ID, letting untrained pollworkers make decisions that lead to voters given a provisional ballot, which will very likely not even be counted.

The problems he cites about ACORN pertain to registration fraud, not voter fraud -- volunteers could get $2 a signature or so, and some began adding fake names for a few bucks. None of these fake persons could vote or try to vote. But the GOP has used the specter of Daley's Chicago Machine for years to scare voters into laws which suppress Democratic constituents.

The 2008 election has already been stolen, by the Supreme Court again. Watch the voter ID laws flourish in Republican state legislatures, in states with no history of "voter fraud." It is legalized voter suppression, and it is a far more effective game than getting out your own base to vote.

see these issues explored and exposed at www.freeforall.tv

Premiering July 4th

[babylonandon]

The Indiana votor ID was offered for free as a part of implementing the law.

There are some parts of this country where this is situation is no joke and has changed election outcomes.

There were over 7,000 PROVEABLE cases of votor fraud in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in 2004 that are still working thru the court system. Dead people voted. Thousands of people that lived in public parks, parking lots, industrial facilities, and addresses that plain did not exist had voters

Absentee ballots were found in stacks where the the same person filled out hundreds of ballots and signed them with different names (usually the dead, folks who are comatose on life support, bed-ridden dementia patients, and quite a few infants). Ohhh...and the person running the Milwaukee Election Commision had just been released from jail for committing election fraud in 2000 (she got busted for providing cigarettes to street people in exchange for voting for Democratic candidates).

[Lon]

So if the problem is verification of absentee ballots as you success, what is the point of this law placing limits on people who vote in person? Your evidence suggests that trying to address voter fraud in this way is highly misguided.

[SamThornton]

Mr. Fund is not being honest about the so-called ACORN voter fraud. In fact, the alleged fraud was itself a fraud pushed by Karl Rove as part of his program to suppress voter registration through the US Attorney's offices in the states where the goofy charges were brought.

In fact, ACORN had "been vindicated of the various bogus charges, as virtually all of the frivolous lawsuits and investigations the GOP liars made so much noise about had simply collapsed by then," according to ProjectVote.org's coverage. http://tinyurl.com/5apkntt)

Allegations of ACORN voter fraud is a frequently echoed canard published on right-wing websites by the likes of Mr. Fund. I'm surprised the Huffington Post has seen fit to allow Mr. Fund, a well-known darling of the extreme right, to publish these false charges.

[liveandlearn]

thank you for sorting out the facts. the article didn't seem to add up, and you explain why.