Election Reforms Reveal Vote Fraud | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's note: This post, by Susan Myrick, was originally published in the Issues section(s) of Civitas's online edition.

    A stunning report by the State Board of Elections has revealed clear voter fraud in the 2012 election – evidently in tens of thousands of instances.

    The North Carolina State Board of Elections reported Wednesday to the Joint Legislative Elections Oversight Committee on the effects of the state's new voter reforms. The most disturbing statistics came from comparing voter registration in North Carolina to those of selected states.

    The results were brought to light as a result of North Carolina's joining the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program, a consortium of 28 states. The SBOE had been directed by the new elections reform legislation (VIVA, Voter Information Verification Act) to join an interstate cross-checking program and to improve the accuracy of voter registration lists. The SBOE joined the program, and as a result it was determined that more than 35,000 North Carolina voters who voted in the 2012 General Election were identified as matching, by name and date of birth, a voter in another state who voted in the same election. This revelation deserves to be underlined: Tens of thousands of voters voted twice (in North Carolina and another state) in the 2012 General Election.

    Legislators on both sides of the aisle expressed alarm during the meeting, as you can see in this short clip from the meeting:

Rep. Bert Jones (R-Rockingham) said, "I believe these are staggering numbers." Rep. Tim Moore (R-Cleveland) suggested that the number of voters voting in two states in the same election was probably much higher, because the crosschecking didn't access voter rolls in every state. He told Kim Strach, SBOE Director, that this was probably just the "tip of the iceberg," and "I would submit to you, if you follow the basic math and trend these numbers are probably higher." Rep. Annie Mobley (D-Hertford) said, "These numbers are appalling to me."
    The preliminary findings indicate that:

   •  765 voters with an exact match of first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in N.C. and the other state in the 2012 general election.

   •  35,750* voters with the same first and last name and DOB were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in both states in the 2012 general election.

   •  155,692 voters with the same first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state – and the latest date of registration or voter activity did not take place within N.C.

    As Moore pointed out, given that only 28 states participate in the interstate crosscheck, it is reasonable to believe that the numbers for potential voter fraud would be much higher if all 50 states participated in the program. Populous states such as Florida, Texas, California and New York are among the 22 states that did not participate in the 2014 crosscheck.

    Moreover, Strach reported that, during an audit of death records from the Department of Health and Human Services, the Board discovered:

   •  50,000 new death records that had not previously been provided to the State Board of Elections.

   •  13,416 deceased voters on the voter rolls in October 2013.

   •  81 deceased voters that had voter activity after they died.

    There is no cost to participate in the crosscheck program. States must only sign a memorandum of understanding and assign two staff members to "participate in annual conference call and email, pull and transmit the data in January of every year, receive and process crosscheck results and work with local elections officials to respond for requests of addresses, signatures, etc." The findings raise the question of why North Carolina didn't join this program much earlier.

    In addition to voter fraud, these figures show massive irregularities with voter registration. Panel member Rep. Harry Warren (R-Rowan) commented on criticism of the VIVA legislation that "this was a solution looking for a problem." The report, Warren said, "does clearly – clearly – indicate there is a problem, and that VIVA addresses the problem."

    *The Kansas Secretary of State's Office told Civitas this number includes voter data from states that do not include the Social Security numbers.