24th Jan 2013 at 11:23 | By Brian Sikma
Same Day Voter Registration System Used in Alleged Voter Fraud Cases
By: Brian Sikma
Two men suspected by prosecutors of committing voter fraud in the November 6, 2012 general election used Wisconsin’s same day voter registration provision to allegedly break the law. According to documents attached to a subpoena request filed by the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s office, Leonard K. Brown and Chad Vander Hyden each cast two ballots in the November general election last year. Prosecutors are currently gathering more information that could be used in a potential case against the two men.
Leonard K. Brown, according to election documents, voted early on November 2 in the Village of West Milwaukee. Four days later he registered to vote at a Milwaukee polling place and then, prosecutors’ believe, cast a second ballot.
When the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel broke the news of the investigation on Wednesday, it quoted Brown denying that he actually cast a second ballot. That could mean he walked into a likely busy polling place on election day and merely registered to cast a vote but never took a ballot. Prosecutors assert that the voter number jotted on Brown’s November 6 registration form means that he was assigned a ballot.
To prove his residency in registering on Election Day, Brown used a WE Energies bill.
Chad Vander Hyden, the second man under investigation, cast a ballot in West Allis on November 6, of last year and registered to vote and cast yet another ballot in Mukwonago on the same day.
Both men came to the attention of prosecutors after election officials noticed the discrepancies after the election. None of the mechanisms currently in place to protect elections as they are happening worked to prevent these two instances of alleged and suspected double voting.
Central to the ability of these individuals to double vote is Wisconsin’s same day voter registration system. Only nine states allow for same day voter registration in every election, and only two states allow for same day registration during presidential elections.
A proposal to expand voter registration opportunities in Wisconsin while ending same day registration was derided by left-wing groups who argued that the system has no flaws. A spokesperson for the liberal group One Wisconsin Now blasted Governor Scott Walker and legislators who expressed an interest in making Wisconsin’s election laws more like those of other states. The suggested reform was called a “scheme to disenfranchise Wisconsin voters.”
Scot Ross, the executive director of One Wisconsin Now who left his job in the state capitol under the cloud of an ethics scandal, authoritatively declared in late November “there is no good reason to eliminate same day registration in Wisconsin.”
Liberal activists have worked to place an advisory referendum, basically a non-binding political statement, in front of Milwaukee voters for the April non-partisan election affirming support for same day voter registration. The measure could help them gin up votes for liberal candidates at a time when voter turnout is normally quite low.
The cases of Brown and Vander Hyden show that Wisconsin’s same day registration system does not give election officials the tools they need to prevent some types of voter fraud from happening on election day. In this area, Wisconsin is decidedly lagging behind.
Documents and evidence here: MKEvoterfraudevidence
Related Articles | You may also like
Discussion | 8 Comments
Leave a Comment
Your reply will be added to the comment above (Below any other replies to this comment) -
John said
Jan 24, 2013 at 12:34 PM
Let’s see, two people may have voted twice, using same day registration. The same two people were caught through safe guards protecting our election system. And felony counts for both if convicted, a steep price to pay for two votes, unrelated. Were they voting Republican? No mention…curious.
Our system worked, but that wasn’t your pathetic point was it? No system is foolproof, voter ID does not stop voter fraud or election fraud in every instance.
Robert Earle said
Jan 24, 2013 at 1:17 PM
First, thanks for posting their actual registration forms, etc. Since I saw this story in the Journal/Sentinal yesterday, the first thing I wanted to see was the actual forms.
They show a confused and confusing picture.
Brown – As you article notes, Brown claims to have NOT voted in Milwaukee, but only registered, yet has registration form from 11/6 (which is VERY different version of a WI registration form than the ones I’m familiar with) shows a ‘voter number’ having been assigned, an indication that he was issued a ballot.
But on a busy election day, that would be an easy mistake for a poll worker to make – assuming that a registrant was going to go on to same-day vote, and assigning a number, only to then realize that he didn’t intend to same-day vote. One would hope that the poll worker would then cross out the assigned number on the registration form. But clearly that didn’t happen.
One further step to take would be to look through the voter roster for that ward to see if possibly voter number 420 was ‘re-assigned’ to a different voter. If there is a ‘voter #420′ in the regular roster, it would be an indication that the poll worker presumed Brown was going to same-day vote, assigned the number to him, then realized he wasn’t going to same-day vote, as he claims.
Unlikely, but possible, and it – I hope – will be checked by the investigators.
(Interestingly, Brown’s election day registration for April 5, 2011 does NOT have a same-day ballot voter number written on it. So is his story of registering at the polls but not voting what he did back then?)
Vander Hyden – His election day 11/6 registration form does NOT show a voter number having been assigned at the Mukwonago polling place. If he were making Brown’ claim of having registered but not voted, his registration form would back up that claim.
In both cases, there is another list of same-day registrants kept, where their name and address and assigned voter number would be listed; one page – or more, if you get a lot of them on a given day – with all the info on one line. So that poll workers can see ‘at a glance’ how many same-day registrants they have processed. It is also the form where the ‘voter signature’ for same-day registrants is to be collected (and weren’t in Racine in June – because collecting voter signatures was a new requirement, and poll workers didn’t realize that a signature beyond that on the actual registration form was required). In both cases, it would be interesting to know if their name appears on that list, and if so has the same (or any) voter number noted.
Robert Earle said
Jan 24, 2013 at 1:20 PM
…and yes, as John points out, the Walker ‘voter ID’ law would have done nothing to stop either of these cases (assuming they are indeed ‘cases’).
The ID shown under the on-hold law does NOT require that the address on the ID match the address where the voter is registered. It would be used to prove identity, NOT residence.
Robert Earle said
Jan 24, 2013 at 1:30 PM
BTW: any chance you guys could post a link to the entire subpoenae?
Bob said
Jan 25, 2013 at 8:40 AM
Neither of these cases will be prosecuted because a key piece of required proof is missing. Because neither had to show ID, there is no way way to prove it was actually those two individual who showed up and registered to vote. It could have easily been someone else just using their name.
Robert Earle said
Jan 25, 2013 at 9:50 AM
Investigators have signatures in voter list books and on registration forms. I’m certainly not a handwriting expert, but if the signatures match – and to me they look like they do – then establishing that it was the same person at both locations won’t be very hard at all. The harder part is determining if they actually voted at both locations.
But neither appears to have used a ‘different name’ etc.; that is, they didn’t seem to be trying to ‘fool’ anybody by giving a difference Driver License at the registration site than they had previously registered with., etc.
Steve Curley said
Jan 29, 2013 at 11:08 AM
VOTING FRAUD ‘DISENFRANCHISES’ EVERYONE
vanessaelizebeth said
Feb 19, 2013 at 6:57 AM
Voter fraud at the polls is an insignificant aspect of American elections.