National Lawyers Council

Mission Statement

The Democratic National Committee's National Lawyers Council (NLC) is a nationwide coalition of Democratic volunteer lawyers and law students committed to promoting and protecting a strong democracy through advancing an accessible, open and fair election process. It is our mission to ensure that every eligible citizen is allowed to vote and know that his or her vote is counted. The NLC works closely with the Party at the national, state and local levels to promote voting rights and to identify and combat problems that undermine those rights. While the NLC coordinates with the Party on other issues, its foremost objective is to organize early in every state and territory to carry out the Democratic Party's commitment to this goal.

Work

The NLC has begun preparations for the 2010 midterm elections.For the 2008 presidential cycle, the national leadership of the NLC worked to recognize ways to facilitate the voting process, identifying potentially problematic methods of election administration, developing best practices for voter protection, and creating voter education materials. In-state leadership formed relationships with local election officials, working to prevent potential problems, and recruiting county-lead lawyers to manage poll watching operations during the early vote period and on Election Day. State leadership also worked with the state party to conduct legal research, produce training materials, and determine if litigation is necessary. As part of NLC's ongoing analysis of election laws and administration, working groups studied specific issues that can arise directly before, on or after Election Day. Additionally, to ensure that the votes of historically disenfranchised populations are protected, the national leadership formed Voter Protection Task Forces to study demographic-specific election administration issues and create tailored voter education materials.

“This is wrong, and it is illegal.”

December 3, 2009 

On Tuesday a federal court rejected an attempt by the Republican National Committee to nullify a consent decree that has been in place since 1982 to provide for minority voter protection. The consent decree bars the RNC from using “ballot security” measures that target minority and under-represented communities for voter intimidation and voter suppression. It was put in place following a lawsuit filed by the DNC against the RNC, and was extended by the courts in 1987 to cover the nation.

Last November the RNC went to court to challenge the decree, arguing that the party’s so-called “ballot security” programs are essential to preventing voter fraud. In rejecting these arguments, the court found that there is “no indication” that voter registration fraud threatens the integrity of elections, noting that the RNC was “unable to point to a single instance in which an individual actually voted using … a fictitious identity.”

Instead, the court called the RNC’s “ballot security” measures —including compiling lists to challenge minority voters at the polls— “politically-motivated” and found that they “result in the disenfranchisement of many individuals whose eligibility is not in question.”

In a joint statement released following the judge’s decision, DNC Chair Tim Kaine and Vice Chair Donna Brazile said:

“For years, Republicans have engaged in deplorable practices that intimidate voters and make it more difficult for them to cast their ballot. This is wrong, and it is illegal. As the court made clear, these types of actions stand in the way of Americans’ fundamental rights under the Constitution of the United States.

...These are not the ideals that our country was founded on, and they should not be tolerated. We applaud yesterday’s decision and recommit ourselves to fighting to ensure that the right to vote is fully protected.”

DNC Hails Decision to Keep in Place Consent Decree Barring Republicans From Voter Intimidation

December 2, 2009

DNC Chairman Tim Kaine and DNC Vice Chair for Voter Registration and Participation Donna Brazile issued the following statement on yesterday’s ruling by the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey keeping in place a consent decree barring the Republican National Committee from voter intimidation and asserting that Republicans still have an incentive to engage in such illegal practices. Late last year the RNC asked that the consent decree, which it agreed to in 1982, be nullified, going so far as to argue that because the President and U.S. Attorney General are African American, there is no longer any reason for Republicans to be subject to limits on efforts to engage in “ballot security measures.”

“Yesterday's ruling is a victory for all Americans who believe that every eligible citizen should have the right to vote and have their vote counted. It also represents a resounding repudiation of the Republican Party's trumped up claims of voter fraud. Our great nation was founded on the principles of equality and freedom, and our founders envisioned the right to vote as central to our ideals. Yet for years, Republicans have engaged in deplorable practices that intimidate voters and make it more difficult for them to cast their ballot.

“This is wrong, and it is illegal. As the court made clear, these types of actions stand in the way of Americans’ fundamental rights under the Constitution of the United States. Republicans would be better served trying to engage minority and under-represented voters rather than trying to intimidate them. Yet there is overwhelming evidence that these types of practices still occur, that Republicans have engaged in them in recent elections and that without a consent decree barring such actions Republicans will continue to have an incentive to engage in them. That Republicans, who attempted to use foreclosure lists in the 2008 election to deny people the right to vote in Michigan, even asked the court to nullify this decree, shows just how eager they are to continue engaging in practices to suppress the rightful votes of thousands of American citizens.

“These are not the ideals that our country was founded on, and they should not be tolerated. We applaud yesterday’s decision and recommit ourselves to fighting to ensure that the right to vote is fully protected. And we encourage Republicans to work with us to reform our electoral system to remove any impediments to voting and to ensure our voting rights laws are enforced consistent with the law.”

Growing trend towards same day registration

November 6, 2009

The trend towards same day registration continues to grow this week, with the Council of the District of Columbia passing a voter registration reform bill, easing the processes by which people may register and vote in the District. The Omnibus Election Reform Act establishes same day registration, allowing people to register and vote on Election Day and directs the D.C. Board of Elections to study the feasibility of automatic voter registration. These provisions and others--including primary voting for 17-year-olds who will be 18 by the time of the general election and extended hours at polling locations--are expected to boost voter participation rates in the District, which are below the national average. In the 2008 presidential election, D.C. ranked among the 15 states with the lowest voting rates.

Senator Russ Feingold and Representative Keith Ellison Reintroduce the Same Day Registration Act

October 29, 2009 U.S. Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and U.S. Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) are reintroducing legislation that will make it easier to register to vote by permitting eligible voters to register the same day that they vote in all federal elections. By expanding the opportunities to register to vote, the Same Day Registration Act (S1986 and HR 3957) would help increase voter turnout. In the 2008 presidential election, the five states with the highest voter turnout were Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin--all of which allow voters to register the same day they vote. Discussing the legislation, Senator Feingold stated “[w]e should take action to get more people involved in the political process and same day registration is a proven way to do it.” Please join the Democratic National Committee in urging legislators to adopt measures that simplify and expand the voter registration process, so that all eligible voters have the opportunity for meaningful participation in the political process.

U.S. Department of Justice again rejects two Georgia election administration procedures on ground that they violate the Voting Rights Act

October 16, 2009

The U.S. Department of Justice has again rejected the two Georgia election administration procedures enacted in 2007 purportedly to verify the identities and citizenship of voters. In a letter sent to Georgia Deputy Attorney General Dennis Dunn earlier this week, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas Perez wrote that he remains “unable to conclude that the State of Georgia has carried its burden of showing that the original voter registration verification program has neither a discriminatory purpose nor a discriminatory effect.” Mr. Perez provided a list of additional information Georgia would need to provide for the Justice Department to consider the state’s changes to the system. Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel has said she will discuss the state’s options with state Attorney General Thurbert Baker and Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue. Please join the Democratic National Committee in continuing to support the Voting Rights Act and advancing the voting rights of all eligible persons.

8/12/09 -- Update –The State of Georgia is appealing the Department of Justice’s rejection of two Georgia voter verification procedures under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Secretary of State Karen Handel said in a statement that she does not “believe there is anything discriminatory in verifying voter information and citizenship.” The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of several voting rights groups that brought suit against Secretary Handel in October 2008, denounced the appeal, expressing its disappointment that she has sought to defend “a flawed, unreliable database system that creates barriers to voting.” DOJ has 60 days to respond to the appeal.

The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has rejected two Georgia election administration procedures enacted in 2007 purportedly to verify the identities and citizenship of voters. DOJ found that the state had failed to prove that the procedures would not have a retrogressive effect on minority voters. Georgia is one of nine states with a history of discrimination, which are required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to submit all new voting procedures to DOJ or a federal court for “preclearance” prior to implementation. Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel, a Republican, did not submit the two procedures for federal review until after a coalition of voting rights groups, representing a naturalized citizen in Georgia, filed suit.

The rejected procedures used state and federal databases to verify the identities and citizenship of voter registration applicants and, in some cases, to verify the citizenship of existing registered voters. One of the procedures flagged persons as non-citizens based upon conflicting records from the Georgia voter registration database and the state’s Department of Driver Services (DDS), and required these persons to submit additional proof of their citizenship before voting. Under the second procedure -- a “no match, no vote” program -- the Secretary of State’s office would reject the voter registrations of persons who provided personal information that did not match records from the Social Security Administration or DDS databases. The Help America Vote Act of 2002, which Congress enacted to improve election administration, does not require voters to supply proof of citizenship, and instances of non-citizens voting are rare to non-existent. When such an aberration has occurred, it typically resulted from a mistake or confusion about eligibility.

Secretary of State Handel had asserted that the procedures were necessary to ensure the integrity of the electoral process. But DOJ found that Georgia had incorrectly identified thousands of eligible voters as non-citizens and that those flagged for additional scrutiny were overwhelmingly African-American, Latino, or Asian-American. DOJ concluded that minority voters were improperly subjected to higher burdens on their right to register and vote, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Voting rights advocates are applauding DOJ’s continued affirmation of the Act and its rejection of Georgia’s discriminatory voter verification practices.

6/1/09 -- The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has rejected two Georgia election administration procedures enacted in 2007 purportedly to verify the identities and citizenship of voters. DOJ found that the state had failed to prove that the procedures would not have a retrogressive effect on minority voters. Georgia is one of nine states with a history of discrimination, which are required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to submit all new voting procedures to DOJ or a federal court for “preclearance” prior to implementation. Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel, a Republican, did not submit the two procedures for federal review until after a coalition of voting rights groups, representing a naturalized citizen in Georgia, filed suit.

The rejected procedures used state and federal databases to verify the identities and citizenship of voter registration applicants and, in some cases, to verify the citizenship of existing registered voters. One of the procedures flagged persons as non-citizens based upon conflicting records from the Georgia voter registration database and the state’s Department of Driver Services (DDS), and required these persons to submit additional proof of their citizenship before voting. Under the second procedure -- a “no match, no vote” program -- the Secretary of State’s office would reject the voter registrations of persons who provided personal information that did not match records from the Social Security Administration or DDS databases. The Help America Vote Act of 2002, which Congress enacted to improve election administration, does not require voters to supply proof of citizenship, and instances of non-citizens voting are rare to non-existent. When such an aberration has occurred, it typically resulted from a mistake or confusion about eligibility.

Secretary of State Handel had asserted that the procedures were necessary to ensure the integrity of the electoral process. But DOJ found that Georgia had incorrectly identified thousands of eligible voters as non-citizens and that those flagged for additional scrutiny were overwhelmingly African-American, Latino, or Asian-American. DOJ concluded that minority voters were improperly subjected to higher burdens on their right to register and vote, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Voting rights advocates are applauding DOJ’s continued affirmation of the Act and its rejection of Georgia’s discriminatory voter verification practices.

Indiana court declares that voter ID law violates state constitution, Secretary of State seeks state supreme court review

October 16, 2009

The Indiana Secretary of State has asked the state supreme court to review a decision of the court of appeals striking down Indiana’s voter identification law. The court of appeals held last month that the law violates equal protection under the state constitution because it imposes disproportionate burdens upon a specific class of voters. Specifically, the law requires in-person voters, but not mail-in voters or residents of some nursing homes, to produce photo ID as a condition to voting. Some scholars have described the law as the most restrictive in the country.

The Indiana legislature passed the voter ID law in 2005. Challenged in federal court in 2007, the law was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in April 2008. In its 6-to-3 ruling, the Court held that the state had a “valid interest” in improving election administration procedures and deterring fraud. Challenged again, this time in state court, the law was struck down by a unanimous three-judge panel of the court of appeals, which found that the law violates the Indiana constitution’s guarantee of equal protection.

States are increasingly imposing restrictive laws as a prerequisite to voting. Although the majority of Americans have photo ID, these laws disproportionately exclude from voting many senior citizens, low-income voters, students, and people with disabilities who do not. Advocates of voter ID laws assert that they are necessary to combat in-person voter fraud, although there is no evidence that any such fraud is an actual problem. Please join the Democratic National Committee in continuing to support an open and accessible election process. We will continue to monitor developments in this case and others.

Senate Rules Committee to Look at Potential Impact of Sale of Diebold Voting Machine Business to Largest Competitor

October 9, 2009

U.S. Senator Charles Schumer, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, announced today that the Committee staff will begin a formal review of Diebold’s proposed sale of its voting machine subsidiary, Premier, to its largest competitor, Election Systems & Software (ES&S). Senator Schumer announced he will seek input from state and local election officials on the sale’s implications for elections administration, and that the staff’s findings will be compiled in a public report.

On September 14, Senator Schumer asked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the proposed merger for possible anti-trust violations. The following day, Hart Inter Civic Inc., a Texas-based voting-machine company, filed suit to try to stop the sale on anti-trust grounds. ES&S machines counted approximately 50% of all ballots cast in the last four major U.S. elections, and the merger would result in the company acquiring an approximately 70% share of the voting machine market.

Voting rights advocates also have expressed concern over the proposed sale, asserting that it threatens to undermine the reliability and integrity of elections. On September 28, Voter Action, an advocacy organization, filed a complaint with the Department of Justice, challenging the merger on anti-trust grounds and arguing that it has the “potential for disturbing U.S. election processes and results.” Senator Schumer said in today’s announcement that it is “in the public interest to maintain a range of choices in voting systems. If one company has a stranglehold over the market for voting machines, it runs the risk of jeopardizing the integrity of our elections.”

The Democratic National Committee supports a system of elections administration that is accessible, open, and fair. We will continue to monitor this issue, and others affecting the administration of elections.

South Dakota Department of Public Safety Driver’s Licensing Stations to Remain Open, Citing Possibility of Voting Rights Act Litigation

September 30, 2009

South Dakota’s Department of Public Safety will continue to operate driver’s licensing stations in two counties with high American Indian populations, citing the possibility of a challenge under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Section 5 requires certain states and political subdivisions with a history of discrimination to preclear—or, submit for federal review—any changes to voting procedures. Residents of the two counties complained that the closures would require them to drive significant distances to get the driver’s license or photo ID card that are necessary to vote in South Dakota, and they asserted that the closures would have a disparate impact on Native American voters who are less likely than non-Native residents of the counties to have access to cars and money for gas. One of the stations is in Todd County, a jurisdiction subject to the preclearance requirement. The second station is in Charles Mix County, which is not subject to the preclearance requirement but has been involved in Voting Rights Act litigation in the past.

A recent report by the ACLU found that Native American voters in South Dakota and elsewhere continue to face significant obstacles to voting, including electoral systems that dilute Native voting strength; burdensome voter ID requirements; lack of language assistance at the polls; and discriminatory voter registration procedures. In 2004, during the South Dakota primary, poll workers illegally turned away Native American voters who did not have the necessary identification, although voters could vote even without ID by signing an affidavit. And in 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit found that the city of Martin, South Dakota violated the Voting Rights Act by drawing districts that dilute the strength of the Native vote.

The problems facing Native American voters demonstrate that ongoing, strong enforcement of the Voting Rights Act is necessary to protect the voting rights of persons across the country. Please join the Democratic National Committee in continuing to support the Voting Rights Act, and a voting process that is open and accessible to all eligible voters.

Federal court upholds Massachusetts law in face of challenge under Voting Rights Act

August 6, 2009

Today, in the case of Simmons v. Galvin, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Massachusetts law against a challenge under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The law prohibits persons with felony convictions from voting while they are incarcerated. In 2000, the Massachusetts legislature enacted the law to prohibit presently incarcerated felons from voting in all state elections, following passage of a state constitutional amendment that, standing alone, would prohibit incarcerated felons from voting in only some elections. The plaintiffs, incarcerated felons, argued that because the percentage of persons incarcerated with felony convictions in Massachusetts who are African-American or Latino is higher than the percentage of those groups in the state population at large, the law abridges the right to vote on account of race in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

The two-judge majority of the Court of Appeals rejected the arguments of the plaintiffs, finding that the “language, history, and context” of the Voting Rights Act make clear that Congress did not intend for Section 2 to prohibit states from passing laws that prohibit currently incarcerated felons from voting. The dissenting judge found that the plain meaning of Section 2 supported the plaintiffs’ challenge, and that the law had a “disproportionately adverse effect” on African-American and Latino prisoners, who are over-represented in the criminal justice system.

Felony disenfranchisement laws bar more than 5 million American citizens from voting, and nationwide, 13 percent of African American men, seven times the national average, are unable to vote because of the laws. The Democratic National Committee will continue to monitor developments in this case, and others involving the Voting Rights Act.

Al Franken sworn in as Minnesota’s second U.S. senator, following 8-month recount process

July 7, 2009

After an eight-month recount process,  Al Franken was sworn in today, joining Senator Amy Klobuchar (D) as Minnesota’s second U.S. senator and filling a seat left vacant for eight months. He is the 60th member of the Senate Democratic Caucus. In signing the certificate of election that concluded his state’s 2008 U.S. Senate race, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie credited Minnesota’s exclusive use of paper ballots with making a smooth recount process possible. Please join the Democratic National Committee in urging lawmakers to adopt regulations that mandate the transparent administration of elections, including accurate and reliable post-election audits and recounts.

6/30/09 -- The Minnesota Supreme Court verified the results of the manual recount in the disputed race for U.S. Senate in that state, confirming Democratic candidate Al Franken as the winner of that contest. Franken’s election night victory was by a margin low enough to trigger a mandatory recount. The manual tabulation of nearly three million, all-paper ballots cast in Minnesota confirmed his win. Norm Coleman, a Republican incumbent seeking a second Senate term, went to court to challenge those results, claiming that thousands of absentee ballots had been illegally excluded. The lower court found Franken had won the election by 312 votes, and Coleman appealed this decision to the state supreme court under the due process and equal protection clauses of the federal Constitution.

The Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the findings of the trial court and rejected Coleman’s constitutional challenges to the exclusion of certain absentee ballots. The court wrote that election officials in different jurisdictions treating similar absentee ballots differently did not, on its own, support Coleman’s claim that the election officials had denied Minnesota voters equal protection under the law. The supreme court then rejected Coleman’s argument that the trial court violated equal protection by applying statutory requirements for the acceptance of absentee ballots instead of adhering to the practices of local jurisdictions. Absent evidence of an intent to discriminate against individuals or classes, the supreme court wrote, neither the election officials nor the trial court could be said to have violated the equal protection clause. The high court also rejected the claim that the trial court violated due process by applying what Coleman asserted was a new and more stringent standard for determining what types of absentee ballots may be counted. In fact, the court held, the lower court had applied precisely the statutorily mandated standard, and had not worked a post-election change to the election rules in violation of Coleman’s due process rights.

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Decision on Voting Rights Act, Leaving Non-Discrimination Requirement Intact

June 22, 2009

In a victory for voting rights groups, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder, leaving in place the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and avoiding a constitutional challenge to what is widely considered this country’s most successful piece of civil rights legislation. Under Section 5 of the Act, certain states and local governments with a history of discrimination must “peculiar” with the Department of Justice or with a federal court any changes to their election laws or procedures. The purpose of Section 5 is to prevent states from enacting policies or legislation that negatively affect the voting rights of ethnic, racial, or language minorities. A jurisdiction covered by the Act may seek an exemption from the preclearance requirement by demonstrating that it has satisfied the Act’s “bailout” criteria, including that it has not discriminated against minority voters for a 10-year period, has taken affirmative steps to increase minority participation in the electoral process, and has sought to eliminate the harassment and intimidation of persons seeking to register and vote. In the case, the Supreme Court held eight-to-one that the municipal utility district, a small political subunit that was created in 1987 and did not have a history of explicit discrimination, could seek a “bailout.” The Court declined to decide, as some observers hoped it would, whether Section 5 is no longer constitutional because it fails to account for political conditions that have changed since it was first enacted.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called the case “perhaps the most important of the term,” and pro-enfranchisement groups applauded the Court for deciding the case purely on the bailout question. However, Chief Justice John Roberts, wrote for the majority that Section 5 “raise[s] serious constitutional questions”, and hinted that Section 5 may be susceptible to future challenges.

The Voting Rights Act is credited with significantly increasing voter registration among African Americans and Latinos and with providing a framework for challenging discriminatory election systems that dilute minority voting strength. Donna Brazile, Vice Chair of Voter Registration & Participation at the Democratic National Committee, has described the right to vote, which is protected by the Act, as “the lifeblood of our democracy.” Please join the Democratic National Committee in continuing to support the Voting Rights Act, and a voting process that is open and accessible to all eligible voters.

John McCain and Republican Party Must End Hypocrisy on Voter Registration Fraud and Sever Ties with Tainted GOP Operatives Immediately

October 21, 2008

On a conference call today, the National and California State Democratic Parties called on the Republican Party to end their hypocrisy on voter registration fraud and sever all ties with long-time GOP Operative Mark Jacoby. Jacoby is the owner of Young Political Majors (YPM) who was arrested in California last weekend on two counts of voter registration fraud and two counts of perjury. Jacoby faced allegations of voter fraud in 2004 when he worked for Arno Political Consultants. YPM is currently under contract with the California State Republican Party to register voters. John McCain's California Co-Chair is also a leading supporter of the CA Republican State Party's voter registration efforts. Just yesterday, campaign finance reports revealed that the MCCain-Palin campaign and the RNC have paid Nathan Sproul, a Republican operative who has faced numerous charges of unethical and potentially illegal activity surrounding voter registration.

"We've made it clear that we don't and won't tolerate voter registration fraud," said DNC Communications Director Karen Finney. "But this exposes the absolute hypocrisy of John McCain and the Republican Party and their same-old Washington tactics. Over the past few weeks we've heard John McCain denounce voter fraud on the campaign trail while the RNC hurls false attacks, so the question is: where is the outrage now?"

"One month ago I called on state and local law enforcement authority to investigate a report that voter fraud being committed by a firm hired by the Republican Party of California called the Young Political Majors," said CA Democratic State Party Chairman Art Torres. Most importantly, what did the McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee know about this voter fraud ahead of time? These are the same "repeat offenders" we've had collecting signatures for the Republican party… in 2004, 2006, and 2007. The California Republican Party and the National Republican party need to immediately terminate its relationship with YPM or any other firm that is committing voter fraud."

"The Republican National Committee, the Republicans, the McCain campaign have been hammering away for weeks with the same old Washington politics, said DNC Legal Counsel Joe Sandler. "In fact, none of the charges that they've been talking about have actually panned out. In Montana they were forced to withdraw challenges, baseless challenges to 6,000 new voters. On a call yesterday, the RNC's communications director was forced to admit that he was unable to come up with a single example, of actual voter fraud. And today, on another McCain campaign press conference call, Florida Governor Charlie Crist, said he did not believe that voter fraud would be an issue, a problem of any kind in the state of Florida this year. It's the height of hypocrisy for the Republicans to harp on this theme."

The following are the facts on the McCain campaign and RNC's connection to Questionable GOP Operatives:

MCCAIN CAMPAIGN STEERED $175,000 TO COMPANY NOTORIOUS FOR SUPPRESSING THE VOTE:

McCain's Campaign Directed $175,000 To Lincoln Strategy, Whose Managing Partner Nathan Sproul Has Been Investigated On Multiple Occasions For Suppressing Democratic Voter Turnout. "John McCain's campaign has directed $175,000 to the firm of a Republican operative accused of massive voter registration fraud in several states. According to campaign finance records, a joint committee of the McCain-Palin campaign, the RNC and the the California Republican Party, made a $175,000 payment to the group Lincoln Strategy in June for purposes of 'registering voters.' The managing partner of that firm is Nathan Sproul, a renowned GOP operative who has been investigated on multiple occasions for suppressing Democratic voter turnout, throwing away registration forms and even spearheading efforts to get Ralph Nader on ballots to hinder the Democratic ticket. … That Sproul would come under the employment umbrella of the McCain campaign -- the Republican National Committee has also separately paid Lincoln Strategy at least $37,000 for voter registration efforts this cycle -- is not terribly surprising. Sproul, who has donated nearly $30,000 to McCain's campaign, has been in the good graces of GOP officials for the past decade despite charges of ethical and potentially legal wrongdoing." [Huffington Post, 10/20/08]

Lincoln Strategy Is Paid By California Republican Party/V8 Committee That Is Funded By McCain Victory California. Lincoln Strategy is paid by the California Republican Party/V8 committee that has been funded by McCain Victory California. McCain Victory California is a joint fundraising committee of the RNC, the McCain campaign and the CA GOP. [FEC]

MARK JACOBY ARRESTED ON "SUSPICION OF COMMITTING VOTER REGISTRATION FRAUD:"

Young Political Majors Owner Mark Anthony Jacoby Arrested On "Suspicion Of Committing Voter Registration Fraud." "Mark Anthony Jacoby, who owns the firm known as Young Political Majors (YPM), was arrested after allegedly registering himself to vote, once in 2006 and again in 2007, at an address where did not live. An investigation by the Secretary of State's Election Fraud Investigation Unit revealed that Jacoby twice registered to vote at the address of a childhood home in Los Angeles although he no longer lived there. The Secretary of State's fraud unit and the Ontario Police Department arrested Jacoby near an Ontario hotel just before midnight Saturday […] On October 3, the Public Integrity Unit of the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office charged Jacoby with four felonies: two counts of voter registration fraud and two counts of perjury. A warrant was issued for his arrest and bail was set at $50,000." [California Secretary of State Press Release, 10/19/08]

Jacoby Was Charged With Two Counts Of Voter Registration Fraud And Two Counts Of Perjury. "Jacoby was charged with four felonies: two counts of voter registration fraud and two counts of perjury." [AP, 10/20/08]

In 2004, Jacoby's YPM Worked For Arno Political Consultants, Which Itself Was Paid By The RNC. Young Political Majors LLC, or YPM, is a company registered by Mark Jacoby at a Town 'N Country residence...Jacoby could not be reached for comment. His company worked for a company called JSM Inc., which in turn worked for Arno Political Consultants, a Sacramento, Calif., firm that qualified 300 ballot initiatives in 20 states. The firm's largely conservative clients include the Bush/Quayle campaign, the National Rifle Association and RJ Reynolds. The company has also worked for Florida's class size amendment. The Republican National Committee hired Arno for a voter registration drive, said Mindy Tucker Fletcher, a senior adviser to the Florida GOP. Campaign finance reports show the RNC paid Arno $450,000 in one reporting period in September... Owner Bill Arno said the firm was registering voters in Florida, Ohio, Oregon and Nevada for the RNC. He declined to say what he was paid for the Florida effort, except to say he earned a monthly flat rate. [St. Petersburg Times, 10/23/04]

JACOBY'S COMPANY ACCUSED OF VOTER FRAUD IN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY:

San Bernardino County Democrats Charged That Young Political Majors Used Petition Drivers Throughout The County To Register Residents As Republicans Without Their Knowledge. "The San Bernardino County District Attorney's office is still collecting information regarding claims that a political group has fraudulently registered Democrats as Republicans to pad the voter rolls, officials said. 'To say it's under investigation is a bit of an overstatement,' said John Goritz, deputy district attorney for the public integrity unit. 'We're still receiving documents and evaluating it as it comes in.' Local Democrats have charged that a political firm, Young Political Majors, has used petition drives throughout the county to register residents as Republicans without their knowledge. The allegations arose when a substantial amount of registered Republicans were submitted to the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters over a period of just two weeks. The group's owner and operator, Arizona-based Mark Jacoby, has denied any wrongdoing." [Daily Press, 9/28/08]

YPM HAS A HISTORY OF VOTER FRAUD ACCUSATION IN CALIFORNIA, FLORIDA, ARIZONA AND MASSACHUSETTS:

Young Political Major Has A History Of Fraud Complaints Nationwide And Have Been Accused Of Voter Fraud In Massachusetts, Florida And Arizona. "A company hired by the Republican Party denies it used deceptive practices to register 70,000 new Republican voters in the United States this year. Young Political Majors, has a history of fraud complaints nationwide, most recently in California where some new Republicans allege they were tricked into changing their registration, the Los Angeles Times reported Saturday. The Times said it randomly interviewed 46 of the hundreds of California voters the firm recently registered and 37 of them -- 80 percent -- said they thought they were signing petitions for tougher state law enforcement penalties, not changing political parties, the Times reported. Voters in Massachusetts, Florida and Arizona have made similar accusations against Young Political Majors, which is paid $7 to $12 for each GOP registration it secures, the Times reported." [UPI, 10/18/08]

YPM A SUBCONTRACTOR TO THE CA GOP:

Young Political Majors Is A Subcontractor Of The CA Republican Party. "The San Bernardino County Democratic Party pressed its case Wednesday that the recent surge in Republican registration in the county is fraudulent. Democratic officials gathered in front of the county registrar of voters office and accused a company that specializes in gathering signatures of duping voters into switching their party affiliation. 'I am appalled at the deceptive and probably illegal tactics used by these crews operating in our communities,' said Carol Robb, chairwoman of the San Bernardino County Democratic Central Committee. But California Republicans say Democrats are just dusting off old tactics to attack the GOP in advance of a planned celebration next month marking the county becoming predominantly Democrat. 'They were going to have a party, and now they are upset they are having to put their cake on hold,' said Hector Barajas, a California Republican Party spokesman. The county issued 7,000 voter-registration forms to Young Political Majors, Registrar of Voters Kari Verjil said Wednesday. She has turned over information to the district attorney and secretary of state. Young Political Majors is a subcontractor to the California Republican Party, Barajas said. California Grassroots Mobilization is the vendor, he said." [Press Enterprise, 9/18/08]

Young Political Majors Asked People To Sign A Phony Petition To Increase Prison Time For Sex Offenders Of Outside Of Wal-Marts And Chaffey College, According To Democrats. "Democrats are demanding an investigation into a recent surge of Republican registrants in San Bernardino County, claiming voter registration fraud belies the numbers. Members of the San Bernardino County Democratic Party are holding a news conference today to discuss their claims and urge authorities to take action. Mark Kirk, an executive committee member of the county's Republican Party, denied his party was involved in any illegal or unethical action. 'Their claims have more to do with their disappointment in the registration numbers than anything,' he said Tuesday. 'It still wouldn't make a difference. We'd still be a red county.' The county has long been dominated by Republicans. In 2002, they outnumbered registered Democrats by 60,000. That gap narrowed to 30,000 in 2006. By May, it was down to 5,000. As of Tuesday, county Registrar Kari Verjil said there were 303,531 registered Democrats and 307,132 registered Republicans. … Verjil, who turned the complaint and supporting documentation over to the California Secretary of State's Office and the district attorney's Public Integrity Unit, said she is doubtful voter registration fraud has been occurring because she hasn't received calls from upset voters. Most of the alleged voter-registration fraud occurred when members of Young Political Majors asked people to sign a phony petition to increase prison time for sex offenders outside of Wal-Marts and Chaffey College, according to the Democratic Party. Voters were either asked to sign as a Republican after being promised it wouldn't change their political party or were asked to sign in two places, one of which was a Republican registration form, Robb said." [San Bernardino County Sun, 9/16/08]

CA GOP Spokesman: Young Political Majors Is A Subcontractor Of The CA Republican Party; California Grassroots Mobilization Is The Vendor. "The San Bernardino County Democratic Party pressed its case Wednesday that the recent surge in Republican registration in the county is fraudulent. Democratic officials gathered in front of the county registrar of voters office and accused a company that specializes in gathering signatures of duping voters into switching their party affiliation. 'I am appalled at the deceptive and probably illegal tactics used by these crews operating in our communities,' said Carol Robb, chairwoman of the San Bernardino County Democratic Central Committee. But California Republicans say Democrats are just dusting off old tactics to attack the GOP in advance of a planned celebration next month marking the county becoming predominantly Democrat. 'They were going to have a party, and now they are upset they are having to put their cake on hold,' said Hector Barajas, a California Republican Party spokesman. The county issued 7,000 voter-registration forms to Young Political Majors, Registrar of Voters Kari Verjil said Wednesday. She has turned over information to the district attorney and secretary of state. Young Political Majors is a subcontractor to the California Republican Party, Barajas said. California Grassroots Mobilization is the vendor, he said." [Press Enterprise, 9/18/08]

YPM Is Paid $7 To $12 For Each Registration It Secures And Claims To Have Registered 70,000 Voters For The CA GOP. "The firm, which a Republican Party spokesman said is paid $7 to $12 for each registration it secures, has denied any wrongdoing and says it has never been charged with a crime. The 70,000 voters YPM has registered for the Republican Party this year will help combat the public perception that it is struggling amid Democratic gains nationally, give a boost to fundraising efforts and bolster member support for party leaders, political strategists from both parties say. Those who were formerly Democrats may stop receiving phone calls and literature from that party, perhaps affecting its get-out-the-vote efforts. They also will be given only a Republican ballot in the next primary election if they do not switch their registration back before then. Some also report having their registration status changed to absentee without their permission; if they show up at the polls without a ballot they may be unable to vote. The Times randomly interviewed 46 of the hundreds of voters whose election records show they were recently re-registered as Republicans by YPM, and 37 of them -- more than 80% -- said that they were misled into making the change or that it was done without their knowledge." [Los Angeles Times, 10/18/08]

MCCAIN CAMPAIGN CO-CHAIR MAJOR SUPPORTER OF CA GOP VOTER REGISTRATION EFFORTS:

Steve Poizner, The McCain Campaign's California State Co-Chair, Is Supporting The CA Fund That Is Paying Young Political Majors. "U.S. Senator John McCain's presidential campaign today announced that Steve Poizner, California Insurance Commissioner, has endorsed John McCain for president. Commissioner Poizner will serve as a State Co-Chair for the McCain campaign in California." According to the Ventura County Star, California "[s]ignature gatherers are paid from a fund partially supported by Republican gubernatorial hopeful Steve Poizner, a Silicon Valley multimillionaire who has offered Young Political Majors $5 per new GOP voter." [States News Service, 2/9/08; Ventura County Star, 10/20/08]

California GOP Chair Ron Nehring Praised Poizner For "Commitment To Building The California Republican Party." "Steve Poizner continues to demonstrate his strong commitment to the Republican Party in California. Steve led the effort to defeat Proposition 93 and protect voter-approved term limits, and has recognized the importance of party building efforts. Moreover, he has backed it up with direct support for our volunteers in the field," said California Republican Party Chairman Ron Nehring. "Our partnership in expanding Republican voter registration is the latest example of Commissioner Poizner's commitment to building the California Republican Party." [California Republican Party Press Release, 8/30/08]

Poizner Announced Plan With California GOP To Increase Bounty For Voter Registrations. "The California GOP and Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, the second-highest elected Republican in the state, today announced the reauthorization and expansion of the Poizner-underwritten bounty registration grant. (The original grant provided by Poizner, providing an additional $3 per verified registration, will be extended beyond the August 31 program date through the October 20 registration deadline. The CRP's existing bounty payment will also be augmented by an additional $2 from Commissioner Poizner, bringing the total available bounty to $8 per verified registration for volunteer organizations and county Republican committees. [California Republican Party Press Release, 8/30/08]