BACKTALK---Denyse Selesnick recently authored in CityWatch an article entitled, “Fake News: My Very Own Focus Group.” In that article, she alleges that the statistics regarding the registration overages in the California voter rolls exposed by Election Integrity Project California are “fake news.” As she proceeds to explain herself, it becomes clear wherein her error lies.
Denyse ignorantly presumes that voters on the Inactive List are irrelevant, and that only voters listed as “Active” can vote. Therefore, she continues, inactive registrants should not be counted in the formula comparing the number of registered voters to the number of eligible people in the state. This is incorrect. To vote, people on the Inactive List need only show up to a polling place and state their name and address. The poll worker will find them on the Inactive List, immediately reactivate them and hand them a ballot. From that point on, they remain active until a subsequent period of four years of inactivity again qualifies them for inactive status.
Inactive voters may also achieve reactivation by calling the County Elections Office and by giving name and birthdate, request a mail ballot, or by signing a petition.
Given the honor system that characterizes the entirety of California’s electoral system, wherein ID is not required at any level, and realizing that virtually anyone can obtain a copy of the voter rolls, it is no leap to conclude that any unscrupulous person would have no trouble whatsoever voting in another voter’s, or ten or twenty voters’ names with complete impunity. Add to the mix the enormous list of inactive registrants, many of whom are deceased or residing elsewhere and unlikely to lodge a complaint, and the pool of votes at the ready for stealing is practically bottomless and almost irresistible.
Not only is it legitimate to include the inactive registrants in the count of names eligible to vote, it is deceptive and misleading not to do so, as Mr. Padilla and Ms. Selesnick have done. It should be clear that a timely and careful management of the voter rolls, and constant vigilance for error are vital to protect the integrity of the vote. Since proper calculation of the statistics shows that our state and county officials appear to be lax in their responsibilities in that regard, it is essential that the public call them to task in following the voter roll maintenance mandate of Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act.
Ms. Selesnick is the one who, by not doing proper research, is propagating FALSE NEWS. Judicial Watch and the Election Integrity Project California are on the right side of the law in this matter, and are the only ones looking out for the rights of the people.
(Ruth Weiss, Vice President of the Election Integrity Project CA Inc. www.electionintegrityproject.) Prepped for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.BLOG COMMENTS POWERED BY DISQUS