Slashdot Mirror
Indiana Is Purging Voters Using Software That's 99 Percent Inaccurate, Lawsuit Alleges (thedailybeast.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Daily Beast: More than 99 percent of voter fraud identified by a GOP-backed program is false, a study by Harvard, Yale, and Microsoft researchers found. Now Indiana is using the faulty program to de-register voters without warning. In July, Indiana rolled out a new law allowing county officials to purge voter registrations on the spot, based on information from a dubious database aimed at preventing voter fraud. That database, the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program, identifies people in different states who share the same name and birthdate. Crosscheck has long been criticized as using vague criteria that disproportionately target people of color. Now Indiana voters who share a name and birthdate with another American can have their registrations removed without warning -- a system ripe for abuse, a new lawsuit claims. Crosscheck's premise is simple. The program aims to crack down on people "double voting" in multiple states, by listing people who share a first name, last name, and birthdate.
Indiana has used Crosscheck for years. But until July, the state had a series of checks on the program. If Crosscheck found that an Indiana resident's name and birthdate matched that of a person in another state, Indiana law used to require officials to ask that person to confirm their address, or wait until that person went two general election cycles without voting, before the person's name was purged from Indiana voter rolls. Under the state's new law, officials can scrub a voter from the rolls immediately. That's a problem for Indiana residents, particularly people of color, a Friday lawsuit from Common Cause and the American Civil Liberties Union argues.
Indiana has used Crosscheck for years. But until July, the state had a series of checks on the program. If Crosscheck found that an Indiana resident's name and birthdate matched that of a person in another state, Indiana law used to require officials to ask that person to confirm their address, or wait until that person went two general election cycles without voting, before the person's name was purged from Indiana voter rolls. Under the state's new law, officials can scrub a voter from the rolls immediately. That's a problem for Indiana residents, particularly people of color, a Friday lawsuit from Common Cause and the American Civil Liberties Union argues.
More than 99 percent of voter fraud identified by a GOP-backed program is false
So then for the GOP it’s working 100% as designed. Sounds like a feature not a bug in their perspective.
This is why the US needs to make voting compulsory and a federal obligation.
If you're going to be all smug clever rightwinger, it helps if you can actually be clever and not thick as pigshit. Linking to an article which just talks about numerator and fails to mention denominator makes you seem like you wouldn't have graduated high school even with sympathetic teachers. Amazingly enough, what matters is not how many people share a name, but how many share a name in comparison to the sample size. There are rather more white males than hispanic females in the US population, so the 38k James Smiths account for 0.04% of the 120m or so white males in the US, while the 32k Maria Garcias on the list in the same article you chose to link to account for 0.18% of the 21m or so Hispanic females in the US -- ie Maria Garcia appears as a name 4.5 times more often among Hispanic women than does James Smith among white men.
The only soft bigotry of low expectations around here, mate, is that you don't consider yourself obliged to know some basic fucking maths, you numpty. Try reading a book on fractions one day as an alternative to masturbating over Tweets from Milo.
It's a gigantic deal if they didn't know they were unregistered and then they show up at the polls and are told "Sorry, registration closed six weeks ago." The story says that people are unregistered without being informed.
Because the Democrats won't provide one in Blue States (and in some states, it's not a part of the dataset to begin with, which to me, proves the Republican point that Democrats are into voter fraud).
I, on the other hand, consider evidence of fraudulent votes to be evidence of "voter fraud".
But I guess if you can't find any evidence of fraudulent votes then you need to take whatever kame argument is available to justify disenfranchising legal voters.
I stole this Sig
a) good for you
b) you're spreading bullshit
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
That's how populists get voted in: their simple worldview is easier to explain.
While you're still trying to explain all the subtleties about the jobs market, they just shouted "mexicans out means more new jobs!" and "climate change is fake news!". Now you have two stories to tell while they're already on number three to seven. That' race is hard to win.
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
You don't know you've been purged until you show up to vote. So you vote won't count but you may get a provisional ballot. But the very fact of asking for one makes people suspicious that you're one of the mythical hordes of people bused in to sway elections, so good luck getting counted that way. Then in the intervening two years, you accidentally get removed again...
Actual fraud is rare. This is solving a problem that does not exist.