Voter Fraud – RI Future

October 28, 2016October 28, 2016

Voter says campaign surrogate changed her ballot

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

A voter filed a complaint with the Providence Board of Canvassers alleging her mail ballot was tampered with by supporters of Rep. John DeSimone, an incumbent legislator who lost in the Democratic primary for the District 5 House seat and is subsequently staging a write-in campaign.

Joanne St. Lawrence, who is 55 years old, disabled and does not drive, said three people came to her home on Phoebe Street to collect her mail ballot. She was expecting someone from the campaign of her preferred candidate, Marcia Ranglin-Vassell, who upset DeSimone in the primary. Instead, St. Lawrence says she was greeted by DeSimone supporters.

“They asked me if I had filled in for John DeSimone,” St. Lawrence told RI Future. “I said no. They said, ‘did you vote for Marcia?’ I said yes.”

That’s when one of them asked St. Lawrence for an eraser, she said. When erasing her ballot failed – St. Lawrence filled it out in pen – one of the people, “took it and wrote his name in. They had me sign it and they both signed it,” St. Lawrence said.

She said she knew something wasn’t right, but didn’t know how to stop the people from changing her ballot. “I wasn’t thinking clearly,” St. Lawrence said. “I just woke up.”

“I’m really concerned about this,” she told RI Future. “My vote is supposed to count.”

The Providence Board of Canvassers confirmed St. Lawrence filed a complaint with their office Wednesday. Kathy Placencia, the administrator of elections for the board, said she sent the complaint to the state Board of Elections. The state Board of Elections declined to comment. Bob Rapoza, the acting director, did not return several phone calls over several days.

St. Lawrence said she was told the Board of Elections would consider her complaint today. While the Board does meet today, no agenda lists her complaint specifically. An agenda says the Board will meet today at 2pm and “may” certify mail ballots. The agenda says, “Any individual seeking to represent a candidate or party during the mail certification process must submit written authorization from the represented party or candidate prior to appearing before the board, pursuant to Rhode Island General Laws Section l7-22-2″

UPDATE: Rapoza returned RI Future’s call shortly after this post was published. He said the complaint process will start at the Providence Board of Canvassers. He said his office did receive a copy of the complaint from the Board of Canvassers. “I have no comment on how this would work at this time,” Rapoza said.

On the advice of the Ranglin Vassell campaign, St. Lawrence said she plans to request a provisional ballot on election day. “If my [mail] ballot doesn’t show up, they have to take that,” St. Lawrence said. “So hopefully it doesn’t show up or hopefully they will see that it was changed.”

She said she is also considering filing criminal charges. The people who took her ballot signed it as witnesses, St. Lawrence said, but she does not know if they signed their actual names.

St. Lawrence said she is supporting Ranglin-Vassell because “she’s on the same level as a lot of people in the neighborhood. I don’t know who this John DeSimone is.”

September 17, 2012September 22, 2012

Tea Party Uses True the Vote Tactics to Stifle Votes

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

It turns out Anthony Gemma isn’t the only one using allegations of voter fraud to prop up his political agenda. Local tea party groups are doing so too, using both his tactics and his allegations, under the auspices of True the Vote.

“True the Vote’s plan is to scrutinize the validity of voter registration rolls and voters who appear at the polls,” according to an article in today’s New York Times. “Among those in their cross hairs: noncitizens who are registered to vote, those without proper identification, others who may be registered twice, and dead people.”

This all sounds well and good but read further into the story and you’ll find True the Vote is doing much more than just looking for voter fraud. Here’s what the Times reports about True the Votes efforts in the Wisconsin recall vote:

True the Vote began working in Wisconsin in 2011, the same year it received a $35,000 grant from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, which is based in Wisconsin and is a major backer of conservative causes, including Americans for Prosperity. The foundation’s president and chief executive, Michael Grebe, was Mr. Walker’s campaign chairman for his 2010 campaign and for the recall election, which he won.

The accountability board concluded that about 900,000 signatures were valid and, in a memorandum reviewing True the Vote’s work, criticized its methods. For example: Mary Lee Smith signed her name Mary L. Smith and was deemed ineligible by the group.

Signatures deemed “out of state” included 13 from Milwaukee and three from Madison. The group’s software would not recognize abbreviations, so Wisconsin addresses like Stevens Point were flagged if “Pt.” was used on the petition. Signatures were struck for lack of a ZIP code.

It’s pretty clear True the Vote has political motivations outside of cleaning up voter rolls. According to the Times, “it grew out of a Tea Party group, King Street Patriots, that [was] founded in Texas. An examination shows that it has worked closely with a variety of well-financed organizations, many unabashed in their desire to defeat President Obama.”

So why should Rhode Islanders care?

Because the local incarnation of the Tea Party is using True the Vote methodology to scrutinize elections here too.

This from the Ocean State Tea Party in Action’s August newsletter:

Marina Peterson of East Bay Patriots, is heading up a project to clean up voter rolls. The work must be done within the next couple of weeks. The work can be done on your own time, in your own home with the use of a computer. Help identify potential voter problems – people registered at commercial properties or vacant lots, numerous people registered at one address, etc.

If you want to be part of a movement that helps protect the vote of the individual and stops the fraudulent casting of votes, then please sign up at http://www.truethevote.org/volunteer/. The cost to register is $25. Ocean State Tea Party in Action will reimburse you for this cost.

In fact, True the Vote is even trafficking in Gemma’s unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud lobbed at David Cicilline. In this post it links to a story from the American Spectator, but it’s really just a reprint from the local Tea Party group’s media ally the Ocean State Current, an arm of the conservative Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity.

Update: The East Bay Patriots say they are not a tea party group.

August 25, 2012August 26, 2012

Fraudsters Are Crying Fraud for Gemma

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Anthony Gemma isn’t wrong when he says voter fraud has occurred over the years in Rhode Island. In fact, some of the evidence he points to was actually perpetrated by people now acting as surrogates to his campaign.

First there is Maryelyn Alba-Acevedo. She is one of the Providence residents who gave a sworn statement to Gemma’s investigators about alleged voter fraud.

She should know, having committed voter fraud herself, according to a 2008 Providence Journal article. Alba-Acevedo was running for a state Senate seat against Juan Pichardo that year, and he made a complaint to the Board of Elections about her absentee ballots.

There’s no link to the article, and GoLocalProv also referenced the article on Friday in a piece similar to this one. Here’s an excerpt from the article (August, 26, 2008 by Daniel Barbarisi) from a copy provided by Alba-Acevedo in an email she sent to the Rhode Island Latino Political Action Committee email listserv at the time:

One candidate for state Senate, Maryelyn Alba-Acevedo, turned in more than 100 applications for mail ballots, including more than the allowed 50 witnessed by one notary. Thirty-six of her applications said the applicants could not vote for religious reasons, a rarely used exemption.

The Board of Canvassers turned to the state police for an investigation of Alba-Acevedo’s ballots, and after receiving a report back from the police, rejected her ballots Friday.

“We found that some of those applications are tainted, and that’s why they were not accepted by us,” Board of Canvassers Chairman and Secretary Laurence K. Flynn said.

According to the state police, many of Alba-Acevedo’s mail ballot applications came from a high rise, where she offered mail ballots to people who may not have known what they meant.

“The people who signed it were unsure what they were signing,” said state police Major Steven G. O’Donnell.

O’Donnell said that, having given their report to the Providence Board of Canvassers, the state police consider the matter closed, and Alba-Acevedo will not face any criminal prosecution.

A video recently leaked to the Journal indicates absentee ballots were purchased from high rises on Grand and Vineyard streets. Ironically, that is where Alba-Acevedo collected absentee ballots that were nullified by the Board of Elections as a result of the state police investigation. The video was secretly recorded by Gemma’s investigators. Gemma told the Journal he is not responsible for the leak.

Also in the video, the Gemma operative can be heard saying about the absentee ballots, “Are these Wilbur’s people? Because Wilbur is supposed to help us too.”

Ostensibly, they are referring to Providence City Councilor Wilbur Jennings.

Jennings, like Alba-Acevedo stepped forward after Gemma’s Wednesday press conference to say that he too has knowledge about voter fraud in Providence.

Also like Alba-Acevedo, he has knowledge of it because he was accused of it in 2008 at the same time she was. In fact, he was implicated in the very same Providence Journal article. Here’s an excerpt:

[Alba-Acevedo’s] political ally, Wilbur W. Jennings Jr., who is running for state representative, turned in close to 50 [absentee ballots]. Of those, nearly three dozen listed the applicants as so disabled that they could not vote: including Jennings’ three sons and three sisters.

Alba-Acevedo’s and Jennings’ primary opponents, Rep. Thomas Slater and Sen. Juan Pichardo, both incumbents, say the disabilities and the religious exemptions are fake. They have hired a lawyer and are challenging the legitimacy of Alba-Acevedo’s and Jennings’ mail ballots.

Jennings, 64, the former director of Providence’s Department of Public Works and a seven-time candidate for state and city office, submitted mail ballot applications for his sons, Darrell, 31; Tremaine, 22, and Wilbur William, 23, who are all listed as living at Jennings’ home at 115 Sinclair Ave.

The applications each affirm that Jennings’ sons are “incapacitated to such an extent that it would be an undue hardship to vote at the polls because of illness, mental or physical disability, blindness or a serious impairment of mobility.”

Jennings said his opponents are playing politics and taking advantage of his family’s misfortunes.

Darrell, he said, may never work again due to liver problems. “He is on disability — he’s got liver problems. He’s sick, he’s very, very sick,” Jennings said. “He’s been in and out of hospitals.”

His second son, Tremaine, has also had it rough, and he stays at the house often, Jennings said.

“He’s in and out, he has problems. He comes here, he fights with his girlfriend sometimes, then he comes here.” Though he said that perhaps he had made an error in listing Tremaine as seriously disabled.

About his third son, Wilbur William, however, the elder Jennings said he definitely should not have listed him as disabled, and has withdrawn the application.

While Anthony Gemma, the self-proclaimed “smoking gun” evidence he presented on Wednesday and even a secret surveillance video made by his campaign operatives and given to the Projo has made no link of voter fraud to David Cicilline, those who have been either caught or accused of tampering with votes in the past are working with the Gemma campaign to help him traffic his to-date hollow accusations.

Correction: An earlier version of this story indicated Maryelyn Alba-Acevedo spoke after Gemma’s press event on Wednesday. She gave a sworn statement to Gemma’s investigators.

August 24, 2012

Don’t Believe the Voter Fraud Advocates

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Despite the fact that we have absolutely no evidence beyond Anthony Gemma’s highly biased word that his charges against David Cicilline are in fact true, Mr. Gemma has been willingly embraced by the voter fraud advocates, who have long been looking for any kind of proof, no matter how suspect, that what they’re talking about really exists. They had a field day with Gemmapalooza.

And in true fashion, the delirious Travis Rowley has already declared “I told you so.”

Mr. Gemma’s announcement could barely have been better crafted to appeal to this demographic, except for one flaw. A sitting liberal congressman with firm ties to the Democratic Party, the threat of violence, mass conspiracy, and the idea that Rhode Island government is so corrupt that it can’t even be trusted to run its own elections. It’s all so great to them. They hate this state already, here’s evidence of why. Even if they recognize the flaw in Mr. Gemma being the one making this announcement (or that he eventually buckled and fled under press pressure), they’re so blinded by their glee. “See, here’s why we need voter ID!”

Look, I understand that majorities of Rhode Islanders agree with the voter ID law. I understand the impetus behind the idea. I’m even prepared to say that it’s not a terrible thing to have if you can distribute the necessary IDs to everyone who needs one so that no one loses their right as a citizen to vote. But unfortunately, the voter fraud advocates aren’t the kinds of people who care about that. They’re the kind of people who measure government success by how many people are prevented from using government services; whether it’s food stamps, unemployment insurance, voting, even walking in public parks if they’re callous enough.

But Mr. Gemma’s announcement doesn’t make their voter ID law any better, because of that nagging flaw. Because the voter fraud advocates forgot Mr. Gemma called on federal intervention into this election regardless of the voter ID law. Their law doesn’t appear to matter to Anthony Gemma, who never once mentioned it during Gemmapalooza. In fact, the kind of fraud he claimed to be heading off, mail ballot fraud (where actual cases of fraud are actually recorded) isn’t even addressed by the voter ID law.

Because it’s almost too hard to do. Because here’s a demographic reality in this state: it’s older and whiter than the country as a whole. It’s far easier to disenfranchise the poor, young, and non-white, because in Rhode Island the first isn’t particularly vocal when it comes to the kinds of things the Statehouse cares about, the second is pretty transient and apathetic, and the last are mostly contained to the cities and also overlap with the first two categories. It’s much harder to disenfranchise the elderly population, who use mail ballots.

There would be political hell to pay if you focused on mail ballots. All it would take would be your opponent going “I don’t think we should disenfranchise our elders, who did so much for this great nation.” Look at you, big man, telling Granny she can’t vote when she’s voted all her life. Furthermore, elderly folks tend to vote more conservative than the poor, young, and/or non-white; and since voter ID is a notion advanced by conservative politicians… Well, you’re not stupid, you see the political calculus.

Which is why these voter fraud advocates aren’t worth anything. Because they’re too cowardly to focus on actual problems, so they focus on the conspiratorial ones that serve their interests.

The other great problem is that we’ve conflated “ineligible voters” with “voter fraud”. So this Valley Breeze story mentions seven people who are incorrectly registered. None of the people appear to have committed fraud with the intent of impersonating a voter or voting in the wrong place. Rather some of them appear to have completely misunderstood the mailing address/registration address difference (and that’s fair, it’s taken me a while to understand why there are even two addresses). The others likely didn’t know any better.

Properly educating voters would do far more to make elections fairer than any one law. But that would require government work, and if there’s one thing conservatives hate, it’s government reaching out to help people instead giving them the cold shoulder and a kick out the door.

Finally, I do believe the current straits we find ourselves in do reflect poorly on Rhode Island’s government. Rhode Island needs to do everything it can to project the idea of a clean and fair government. The 2013 session better include independent ethics and redistricting commissions, more open government laws, fewer to no closed-door meetings, speedy votes, and anything else that could possibly bolster the reputation of this state as a place for fair play. Because if these allegations of corruption are allowed to fester and nothing is done, people are going to get more and more fed up, and they’re going to completely lose faith.

And if people don’t believe in a government, then that government doesn’t count for shit.

August 23, 2012August 24, 2012

An Independent Take on Gemmapalooza

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

First, I’ll admit that I didn’t watch the press conference yesterday. I have seen plenty of the media aftermath though. The impression I get is that candidate Gemma’s accusations of voter fraud are being swept under the rug, and the whole affair is being framed as a media stunt. Even if it was only designed as a way to garner attention for a flagging campaign, it was a success.

However, I think there might be a little more substance to the unsubstantiated allegations than we want to admit. I’ll take a few moments from my own campaign to pile a little more conjecture on top of the pile of Gemmapalooza. After all, it’s not altogether unrelated.

As much as it was about public relations, I believe that Gemma’s campaign was intending to hasten the speed of the state’s investigation of the voter fraud charges. Investigators are likely to put more emphasis on the case with the added pressure of both the media and Doherty’s campaign. Raising the issue now also lays the groundwork for a legal challenge to the primary results if they turn out to be close.

We should all be concerned about whether there is and has been tampering with Rhode Island’s elections. To me, the most probable and meaningful fraud would be the deceased voter scenario. There are many proven occurrences of the dead rising to cast votes (for Kennedy in Chicago famously), and to my knowledge there has never been a serious investigation to see if it’s happening in Rhode Island.

With a long entrenched and dominant Democratic machine in the State, Rhode Island would be fertile ground for such fraud. Former AG James O’Neil thinks so evidently, and I’m not sure he would risk tarnishing his reputation without good reason. If it is discovered that we have a lot of zombie voters, I don’t think that the crime will be pinned to Representative Cicilline. It is more likely to fall on the state Democratic Party.

All in all, I’d say that Gemma’s antics are going to once again hurt the Democrats’ chances of hanging onto the District 1 seat. The silver lining will hopefully be that we have a more honest election.

ps- As I read it, the horrendous Voter ID law we have would do little to stop the occurrence of the dead voting, as I expect they would mostly be mail-in ballots. The law does not specify that anything more than the mail-in ballot application needs to be submitted to the board of canvassers to vote. Am I reading the law wrong?

August 22, 2012August 22, 2012

Unsubstantiated Allegations

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

gemma allegations — Anthony Gemma on his way to announce … unsubstantiated allegations. (Photo by Bob Plain)

After all that hype, there was nothing particularly game-changing about Anthony Gemma’s announcement that he found some people willing to accuse his political opponent of voter fraud. There wasn’t even anything substantiated.

I would imagine most candidates could dig up similar accusations regardless of whom their opposition is. The difference is most know not to stake their entire candidacy on unsubstantiated allegations. Gemma, though, seemingly doesn’t even realize he’s doing that! Either that or he doesn’t mind blatantly lying the the people’s faces.

“I’ll close my remarks today by answering before it’s asked what I suspect will be your first question,” he said according to a transcript of his remarks. “In my opinion, have I presented today smoking gun evidence that David Cicilline has committed criminal acts relating to voter fraud? My answer, based upon the results to date of the ongoing TPS investigation is a resound yes.”

His smoking gun? He presented what he called “sworn testimony” from five individuals. By sworn testimony what he meant was something someone told a lawyer. I’m pretty certain in most people’s minds telling a lawyer something, even under oath, is a far cry from a smoking gun.

Gemma said he has known about the allegations since 2010, but was unable to come up with a coherent reason for why he waited two years to disclose them. Keep in mind, the primary between he and Cicilline is 20 days away.

Gemma also said this wasn’t about his campaign but was about protecting the process. But again, he was unable to come up with a coherent reason why he didn’t respect the wishes of law enforcement and wait until the investigation played out – as he admitted they asked him to do. Again, remember, 20 days until the primary.

And despite defying authorities, he had the nerve to say, “I am obliged by conscience to protect the integrity of ongoing criminal investigations being conducted and/or contemplated by federal and state law enforcement authorities.”

What? He didn’t respect the integrity of anything! Not any potential criminal investigation and certainly not the electoral process. Did you pick up on the word “contemplated” in that statement. Not even Gemma will confirm that an investigation is ongoing.

Even his fellow Democrats – though there is hardly any more evidence that Gemma is a Democrat than there is that he has uncovered any real evidence of actual voter fraud – are imploring him to give up the gamesmanship.

“In short, Mr. Gemma’s approach to this matter has been highly irresponsible,” said Edwin Pacheco, head of the state Democrats. “This race is too important. I am calling on Mr. Gemma to return to the issues and put the theatrics aside. In his own words, he has stated that law enforcement authorities have asked him not to discuss this matter. Instead, for his own political gain, Mr. Gemma is attempting to tear down Congressman Cicilline by linking him to these accusations. A link he was unable to make. As an attorney, Mr. Gemma should know it is highly irresponsible to cast unsubstantiated accusations without providing supporting documentation. The voters of Rhode Island deserve more than campaign antics, they deserve solutions to the real problems they are facing every day.”

In short, the only way Gemmapalooza will change the game is that he probably lost whatever shred of credibility he has left.

All this isn’t to say that nothing will come of Gemma’s broad accusations, and I very much look forward to following all the fallout from today’s events. But nothing that happened today would indicate it will be tied to David Cicilline, and everything indicates that Gemma is a rogue actor and loose cannon who should never be elected to so much as a neighborhood association, never mind Congress.

January 19, 2012May 31, 2016

Rep. Lima to Introduce Voter ID Repeal Legislation

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Watch for Rep. Charlene Lima to introduce legislation today to repeal the Voter ID bill that passed last session and was signed by Governor Chafee. She has been circulating the legislation in the House and has about 15 co-sponsors. It will likely be coming today in tandem with her press statement which was not completed yesterday.

While I’m a big fan of clean elections, I do not support Voter ID because it doesn’t actually fix any of the problems that its advocates seemingly imagine are rampant. Clearly, Voter ID will prevent the impersonation of another individual at a polling station. I will not be able to cast a ballot in South Providence this year claiming to be Sen. Harold Metts, and that is a good thing. But in a state that went to such great lengths to restore the vote of the formerly incarcerated, it is unfortunate that Rhode Island enacted this legislation to correct a problem that doesn’t actually exist in any meaningful way. The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law puts it like this:

Such photo ID laws are effective only in preventing individuals from impersonating other voters at the polls — an occurrence more rare than getting struck by lightning.

Voter ID merely takes a snapshot in time (quite literally) of individual voters and freezes it. Once the IDs are issued, there is no follow up to determine residence in future elections. Voter ID doesn’t prevent people from moving from one district to another and vote in the former district, or double voting, which are what I image fraudulent voting to be. However, the marginal benefit of voting in one district over another is exactly one vote, out of hundred, thousands, or tens of thousands (depending on the election), which is exactly why it so rarely happens. When was the last time an election was decided by a single vote? What Voter ID also ignores is election fraud, which is much more significant an issue, but does not involve voters at all. To quote Scott MacKay on this point:

In recent memory, Rhode Island political chicanery has not involved imposter voters. From Almeida to Zambarano, Cianci to Celona, Martineau to Maselli, it’s been the politicians, not the voters, who have been guilty of corruption.

Here are some clear examples of what Voter ID doesn’t do:

Case 1: I am a college student living in Providence and register to vote upon arrival. After my first year I move out of the dorms into another district, but continue to vote in my original district using my Student ID. Voter ID does not prevent this.
Case 2: I am a business owner living in Smithfield, but operating a business in Johnston. I use the utility bill for my business, addressed to me, as proof of my residence. I vote in Johnston, rather than Smithfield. Voter ID does not prevent this.
Case 3: I use a piece of mail delivered to my house, but addressed to the previous resident, as proof of my residence. I register to vote using this different name and vote twice using two different identities. Voter ID does not prevent this.
Case 4: Provisional ballots, which are valid once the signature on the ballot is verified as matching the signature on the original voter registration form, will be used for everyone who did not bring an ID to the polling booth. I forge my address on the voter registration form, never bring an ID to vote, and cast provisional ballots at every election in a district where I do not reside. Voter ID does not prevent this.
Case 5: There is another person named Brian Hull who lives in the same neighborhood in Providence (he was also born in the same year I was). He never registered to vote, but votes at our local precinct, before I do. My name gets crossed off as having voted when I did not actually vote. When I appear at the polling place, I am unable to vote because the other Brian Hull already voted. Voter ID does not prevent this.
Case 6: There are about 1,400 registered voters on Block Island, a community which has a voting age population of just 825? Voter ID does not prevent this.

To its credit, the Secretary of State’s office understands the legitimate concerns voters have regarding the use of photo IDs to cast a ballots and it began issuing free Voter ID cards earlier this month, albeit during working hours of 8:30-4:30, Monday through Friday (I suppose if you are lucky enough to have a job, good luck getting a Voter ID if you need one). For the period of time between January 3rd (when the Secretary of State first began issuing IDs) and close of business on January 18th, a total of 17 IDs were created and will be mailed out soon. To increase the issuance rate, Mollis’ office will be going to Senior Centers and community groups to provide Voter IDs (you just have to contact the Secretary of State’s office to arrange this). While this will be helpful, it does not actually address the problems likely to be caused by implementation of Voter ID: transient, homeless, elderly, and other population groups that already suffer from underrepresentation will be denied the right to cast a non-provisional ballot when they go to vote for lack of the proper Voter ID.

Here is the press release from Rep. Lima:

Representative Lima announced today that she plans to introduce legislation that will repeal the ill-advised and unneeded Voter ID legislation signed into law last year.

Calling it nothing more than “Jim Crow” disguised as election reform, Representative Lima said that the only reason that the Voter ID bill passed was complacency. No-one believed Rhode Island founded by Roger Williams with a history as a sanctuary for individual rights, free thinkers and religious tolerance since the 17^th century would pass such a backward leaning and anti-democratic piece of legislation whose only purpose is to rob our senior citizens, our economically disadvantaged and our growing minority population of their equality at the voting booth under the guise of make- believe voting fraud. The proponents of voting equality were caught off guard and the bill passed.

In 1841 Thomas Dorr led a People’s Convention in RI to give suffrage to many landless and voteless working citizens. Rhode Island voters overwhelmingly supported the voting reforms and on May 19, 1842 in Providence Thomas Dorr and his militia led an unsuccessful attack against the opponents of voting reform and then fled to Chepachet where they hoped to reconvene the People’s Convention. Later Dorr was imprisoned and spent several years in prison before being pardoned in 1845.

However because of the Dorr War and the People’s Convention the Rhode Island Legislature passed some of the most meaningful voting reforms ever seen in November of 1842.

By contrast in 2011 the Rhode Island Legislature took a giant and shameful leap backward in voting equality that surely caused Roger Williams and Thomas Dorr to turn over in their graves by the passage of the Voter ID law of 2011.

Twenty States in 2011 considered legislation that would have required voter ID and to the astonishment of the nation Rhode Island with its Democratic-controlled legislature and proud history of believing in the principles of the freedom and individual rights was the ONLY state with a Democratic controlled legislature to have passed a voter ID law.

Representative Lima said that the Voter ID law is anti-democratic and robs the elderly, the low income, the minorities and our of age students of their constitutional right against impediments that make their voting right more difficult to exercise.

Additionally the voter ID law will cost the State between $1.6 and $4.9 million dollars to implement properly and effectively, according to a recent study released by the Democratic National Committee and referenced in the Projo on July 6, 2011.

Representaticve Lima said, “the main reason for this law can be summed up in two words, “voter fraud”. The only thing fraudulent about voting in Rhode Island is the proponents of Voter ID claims that voter fraud is rampant in Rhode Island. Voter fraud in Rhode Island is nothing more than a manufactured crisis to justify the passing of the voting rights killing ID law. The only thing rampant in Rhode Island is the new migration of the Jim Crows.

It is with some degree of hope that I see so many groups and elected officials rushing to voice their opposition to the voter ID law. Over twenty Representatives have co-sponsored my bill so far.

Also voicing opposition are groups such as the ACLU, NAACP, Univocal Legislative Minority, Progresso Latino, RI coalition of the homeless, the Providence Youth Student movement, COMMON CAUSE, Direct Action for Rights and Equality and the RI Disability Law Project. Our full Congressional delegation has also voiced their opposition to the Voter ID law. With their support for the passage of my legislation and the repeal of Rhode Island’s voting equality bashing ID law I think we can undo the damage done to Rhode Island’s reputation as a protector of individual rights and freedoms. I will be looking for their full and public support because we must work together is we are to effectuate real change to this bad law. I look forward to their help and support.

I will be sending this release to all the groups above as well as to our full delegation in Washington seeking their public input.