ups

What can brown do for you?

Via Allen B. West

If there is one thing I learned in the 2012 election cycle, it was about voter fraud. My conservative warrior associate, Katherine Engelbrecht, and her organization, True the Vote, took up the mantle against the St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections, Gertrude Walker, who admitted to sending “questionable” results to the Florida Secretary of State. It was somewhat disheartening that the Florida Secretary of State and Attorney General sat back, watched the news reports, and did nothing.

With that background, I’d like to share a story written by Gregg Prentice: “Voter Fraud? If they’re not catching the easy stuff, what else are they missing?”

Prentice asks, are some of Florida’s Supervisors of Elections skirting the law? Supervisors are tasked with maintaining an accurate voter roll. One of the requirements of the Supervisors is to ensure voters provide a legal residence address. Yet a December 2013 analysis shows more than 3,000 voter registrations statewide listing their residence address at a UPS store, potentially illegally.

Florida Law is clear and, with minor exception, requires that voter registrations listing other than an address of legal residence should not be accepted, because they are “ineligible” (F.S. 98.045 (1)(h)). In fact, it’s actually a felony to willfully submit any false voter registration information (F.S.104.011(2)). Accordingly, if these “ineligible” registrations are found to exist, Florida statutes also provide for their prompt correction or removal (F.S. 98.075(6) & (7)).

So there you go. It’s a felony for this to have happened, but how can it be that a citizen watchdog had to uncover this Florida voter fraud while the people paid with our taxpayer dollars have not a clue? Is it not a mandated responsibility of the Florida State Supervisors of Elections to maintain these voter address rolls? I’d say so.

A review of the state-mandated voter registration list reveals that of the 3,000 UPS store registrations:

– 1,200 match addresses already known as commercial that were ignored
– 500 match addresses erroneously marked as residential
– 1,100 have no match at all.

Keep reading

529 Shares