The Serebrov-Wang Vote Fraud Report Draft–What It Really Said
Bonnie Goldstein in Slate on May 15 complains about revisions of a study on election fraud. She selectively quotes from the draft to make it seem as if it said that election fraud wasn’t a problem. Fortunately, she posts the original draft, which says the opposite– that the people they interviewed think there is widespread fraud (mostly absentee voting, vote buying, and illegal registrations) and slack Justice Department investigation.
First, here’s what her story says, in part:
When allegations surfaced of voter fraud or voter suppression in key states in the 2004 presidential election, the federal Election Assistance Commission ordered a study to “determine the quantity and quality of vote fraud and voter intimidation on a national scale.”
Two consultants, one Republican (Job Serebrov) and one Democrat (Tova Wang), were hired to draw up a preliminary overview based on interviews, news stories, applicable case law, government reports, position papers from advocacy groups, and academic studies. In their “predecisional” draft (excerpted below and on the following four pages) Serebrov and Wang reported that “the only interviewee who believe[d] that polling place fraud is widespread” was Jason Torchinsky
She is correct that the draft says that polling place fraud is unimportant. That’s not where the fraud is. And we wouldn’t expect it there. Why pay people to vote twice at the polling place when you can pay them to give you their absentee ballot to mail in? In fact, why pay people at all, when you can invent nonexistent people and mail in ballots for them?
Here are excerpts from pages 4and 5 of the document:
There is virtually universal agreement that absentee ballot fraud is the biggest problem, with vote buying and registration fraud coming in after that. The vote buying often comes in the form of payment for absentee ballots, although not always. Some absentee ballot fraud is part of an organized effort; some is by individuals, who sometimes are not even aware that what they are doing is illegal. Voter registration fraud seems to take the form of people signing up with false names. Registration fraud seems to be most common where people doing the registration were paid by the signature.
There is widespread but not unanimous agreement that there is little polling place fraud, or at least much less than is claimed, including voter impersonation, “dead” voters, noncitizen voting and felon voters. … Jason Torchinsky from the American Center for Voting Rights is the only interviewee who believes that polling place fraud is widespread and among the most significant problems in the system….
Many interviewed support stronger criminal laws and increased enforcement of existing laws with respect to both fraud and intimidation. Advocates from across the spectrum expressed frustration with the failure of the Department of Justice to pursue complaints.
So there we have it– those interviewed thought that there was widespread election fraud, and that U.S. Attorneys weren’t interested enough in going after it. That’s consistent with all the news stories about election fraud in New Mexico, Washington State, and elsewhere.