Serfin' USA

Do you wish to spend the rest of your life supporting swarms of non-citizens streaming across our borders and voting for you to give them more of your earnings? If not, it would be a good idea to pay more attention to wiping out America’s rampant vote fraud, clearly a Democrat plan to secure a permanent majority of rent seekers.

As we near the midterm elections, the Democrats seem to be in trouble: the hated ObamaCare premiums are rising, the War on Women seems to be drawing blanks as the voters Rick Ballard dubs “the Lackwitz sisters” suddenly appreciate they are more at risk from terrorism and our weak responses to it, and Ebola and enterovirus spread by gormless government policies than they are by Republicans not wanting to buy them birth-control pills. The notion that this patriarchy rhetoric is simply mal-archy grows. Rick has analyzed the latest surveys and says the reports are hiding a major shift in female sentiment.

Women have moved in the GOP's direction since September. In last month's AP-GfK poll, 47 percent of female likely voters said they favored a Democratic-controlled Congress while 40 percent wanted the Republicans to capture control. In the new poll, the two parties are about even among women, 44 percent prefer the Republicans, 42 percent the Democrats.

The movement from 47D to 44R or 40 R to 44R or 47D to 42D among 51% of likely voters (lets just use 10 per cent shift for simplicity) is somewhat more than a "move" in the GOP direction. "Surge" and "leap" are more apt descriptors concerning the demographic split which used to provide the thin margin of victory for the Progressive Fascists outside of the bluest of Blue Hells.

At last look, it appears that crony capitalism and graft affected even DHS’ misappropriation of funds intended to deal with Ebola, though news of this is likely to be buried in the press, too.

As for the other plank in the Democrat playbook – racism -- that, too, is dying as the Brown case, like the Martin case before it, crumbles under the weight of credible evidence. The Department of Justice and the press are racing as fast as they can to deflate the controversy and rancor they themselves generated with their “narrative” that was obviously false even as they were peddling it. (I mean really -- who in his right mind treats the testimony of Brown’s partner in crime as equivalent to that of the police officer who had an impeccable record and substantial bruises to sustain his view of events?) The capper this week was that Brown’s mother beat up his grandmother and cousin for trying to capitalize on his death by selling T shirts and other paraphernalia.

The Democrats still have that ace up their sleeves though -- election fraud. Despite what Democrat consultant Donna Brazile called a “big ass lie”, there is more than sufficient evidence of voter fraud and has been for years. This week even the Washington Post was forced to acknowledge that the growing numbers of illegal aliens voting in our elections (by a huge margin for Democrats) is big enough to affect the results and may have done so the last time around.

The Post published a well-researched article by Jesse Richman and David Earnest, Associate Professors which examined data contained in the Cooperative Congressional Election Study  and the results were startling.

More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

Estimated Voter Turnout by Non-Citizens




Self reported and/or verified

38 (11.3%)

13 (3.5%)

Self reported and verified

5 (1.5%)


Adjusted estimate

21 (6.4%)

8 (2.2%)

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.

This problem is likely to grow as the number of aliens admitted to the U.S. by the DREAM Act , the open borders policies of the administration and the threatened new amnesty order by Obama  flood the country with non-citizens, a large percentage of whom need assistance and will vote for whoever promises to provide it out of the public till. Using the Motor Voter Act in particular, they will often be encouraged to register even though they are ineligible to vote. And by design or inadvertence many of them do vote.

Non-citizens voting in U.S. elections is not, of course, the only means of evading election laws. The Heritage Foundation calculates of the 24 million voter registrations “nearly 1 in 8 are inaccurate, out of date or duplicates”; 2.8 million people are registered in 2 or more states and 1.8 million registered voters are dead.

Our lawless Attorney General has not enforced federal law requiring states to clean up their voter rolls. I anticipate the Republicans will gain control of both houses and must make it a priority that Holder’s successor does this job.

Voters must volunteer to observe polling places and fight for state laws cleaning up this mess.

Of course, that may not be enough. By design, mail ballot systems, early voting and failure to pass or be able to enforce voter I.D. laws, make the job of assuring free elections almost impossible. I recall that when, as a propaganda ploy, the Democrats invited UN observers in to the 2008 elections and it backfired on them.

“It's an incredible system," said Nuri K. Elabbar, who traveled to the United States along with election officials from more than 60 countries to observe today's presidential elections as part of a program run by the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES). Your humble Cable guy visited polling places with some of the international officials this morning. Most of them agreed that in their countries, such an open voting system simply would not work.

The most often noted difference between American elections among the visitors was that in most U.S. states, voters need no identification. Voters can also vote by mail, sometimes online, and there's often no way to know if one person has voted several times under different names, unlike in some Arab countries, where voters ink their fingers when casting their ballots.

The international visitors also noted that there's no police at U.S. polling stations. In foreign countries, police at polling places are viewed as signs of security; in the United States they are sometimes seen as intimidating.

This week the indefatigable James O’Keefe shows us how the vote thieves in Colorado do it in a state which relies on mail balloting:




Richman and Earnest do not believe voter I.D. laws are a barrier to voting by non-citizens:

We also find that one of the favorite policies advocated by conservatives to prevent voter fraud appears strikingly ineffective. Nearly three quarters of the non-citizens who indicated they were asked to provide photo identification at the polls claimed to have subsequently voted.

Patterico takes issue with this conclusion and I think he has made an excellent point:

I can’t leave this post without noting this by Richman and Earnest:

We also find that one of the favorite policies advocated by conservatives to prevent voter fraud appears strikingly ineffective. Nearly three quarters of the non-citizens who indicated they were asked to provide photo identification at the polls claimed to have subsequently voted.

Really? That’s “strikingly ineffective”? (Well, yeah, it could be a lot better. But read on.)

The converse of that is that more than a quarter of the people who were asked for voter ID did not vote. We’re not told how many of the 1.4 million who voted illegally in the 2008 election were asked for IDs, but if voter ID laws were in effect in all 50 states, rather than only about 15 states, we might see over 25% of 1.4 million illegal votes prevented in a presidential election. That’s over 350,000 illegal votes that could potentially be prevented by voter ID laws.

Now: I’m perfectly happy to consider other means for preventing illegal voting. But voter ID laws work, and this study helps prove it.

This is hugely important, folks. Bookmark this post, right now. The next time people try to tell you there is no such thing as voter fraud, I want you to take this link and shove it right down their throats.

P.P.S. The authors do say: “Finally, extrapolation to specific state-level or district-level election outcomes is fraught with substantial uncertainty.” We can’t know for sure whether the extrapolation I present here is overstated, understated, or completely accurate. But one thing we can say: despite the false claims by the left, there is definitely massive voter fraud occurring in every federal election.

In states where the voting seems to be close, Republicans should start publicizing now the penalties for illegal voting. And in future by new federal law those penalties should be made much stiffer. Stolen votes are stolen from all legitimate voters and undermine our respect for democratic governance.

I also agree with Heritage’s procedural recommendations to secure votes:

 PHOTOGRAPHIC, GOVERNMENT-ISSUED IDENTIFICATION TO VOTE -- Photo IDs should be required for both in-person voting and absentee balloting. With absentee ballots, voters should be required to provide either a photocopy of the ID when they mail in the absentee ballot or the identification number of their state-issued driver’s license or photo ID card. For the small percentage of individuals who do not already have an ID, states should issue free ID cards for voting.


TO VOTE -- Anyone registering to vote should be required to provide proof of U.S. citizenship such as a birth certificate, naturalization papers, or other documents including those that the federal government requires all employers to check before hiring a new employee.

JURY FORMS AND DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY DATABASES -- All state and federal courts should be required to notify local election officials when individuals summoned for jury duty from voter registration rolls are excused because they are not U.S. citizens. All state voter registration databases should run frequent comparisons with noncitizen databases maintained by the Department of Homeland Security to detect individuals who have registered to vote but who are not citizens.

INTERSTATE VOTER REGISTRATION CROSSCHECK PROGRAM -- The State of Kansas initiated a program to compare state voter registration rolls to detect individuals who are registered in more than one state and may have voted unlawfully in the same election in different states. All states should participate in this program to increase the accuracy of voter registration information and detect possible fraud.

ACCURACY CHECKS OF VOTER REGISTRATION INFORMATION -- All states should verify the accuracy of their voter registration information by comparing it with other information databases such as Department of Motor Vehicle driver’s license and Social Security Administration records, as well as tax and other county and state records.

Indeed, these suggestions ought to be incorporated into an amended version of the Motor Voter Act and the new Congress should make this one of their priorities. If they don’t we are condemned to serfdom and we might as well move to Caracas or Havana.

If you experience technical problems, please write to