The problem child of voter registration and compliance
In this must see video, Jovan Pulitzer discusses the issues with ERIC, the Electronic Registration Information Center, that many states use to help “clean” their rolls. Unfortunately many states never remove names despite the fact that 10% of people move annually. In addition, they share sensitive personal information with various non profit groups. If you are concerned about your privacy and the sanctity of your vote watch this video as well as the articles below from the Gateway Pundit.
Some of our team members will be speaking at the SC Election Excellence Forum on March 26th at the Yorktown at Patriot’s Point in Charleston from 1PM to 5 PM. There will be a social with hors d’oeuvres afterwards and special guest speaker Lara Logan.
The afternoon will feature election integrity discussion by Col. Phil Waldron, Jim Marchant, Mark Cook, Steve Hertzberg and locals Lauren Martel who is running for AG and Keith Blandford running for SC House District 1. We will also hear from cyber expert Burl Smith and Michael Reed publisher of the The Standard SC.
We are excited to discuss the efforts in our state and share with some of our friends in other states what is happening in their neck of the woods. Also we will cover our canvassing findings and include a 10-point action plan that you can implement to move our country in the right direction.
We hope to see you there!
Here is the agenda as it stands now.
1:00 – 1:10
(10 mins)
Opening Remarks
Introduction
Keith Blandford
Invocation
Kyle Kasten
Pledge of Allegiance
Keith Blandford
Star Bangled Banner
The Harris Sisters
1:10 – 3:05
(115 mins)
Session One
1:10 – 1:15
(05 mins)
Introduction
Keith Blandford
1:15 – 1:45
(30 mins)
Election Margin of Error
Laura Scharr/Cryste Carroll
1:45 – 2:15
(30 mins)
Electronic Voting Machines
Burl Smith
2:15 – 2:45
(30 mins)
Public Perception
Michael Reed, Standard SC
2:45 – 3:05
(20 mins)
SC Action Steps
Laura Scharr
3:05 – 3:55
(50 mins)
Session Two
3:05 – 3:10
(05 mins)
Introduction
Keith Blandford
3:10 – 3:15
(15 mins)
AG’s Role in Fair Elections
Lauren Martel, AG Candidate
3:15 – 3:40
(15 mins)
SOS Candidate (NV)
Jim Marchant (NV)
3:40 – 3:55
(15 mins)
Next Steps
Col. Phil Waldron
3:55 – 5:00
(65 mins)
Session Three
3:55 – 4:00
(05 mins)
Introduction
Keith Blandford
4:00 – 5:00
(60 mins)
Elections, A 20 Yr. Perspective
Steven Hertzberg
5:00 – 5:15
(15 mins)
Successful Strategies for Election Integrity Success
This is a guest blog by one of our team members Lucy Twinkle
“It’s the best we can do for an ‘election integrity’ bill during this session,” is the current mantra of SC Statehouse legislators.
But is it?
The SCGOP thinks so: “This strong bill would require all county election commissions to operate the same way, ensuring votes in Lancaster County are handled the same way as votes in Beaufort County, and prohibit drop boxes, expand the methods of required post-election audits…” Sounds good, but the SCGOP fails to mention the more far-reaching, even draconian, portions of the bill.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this bill is to CENTRALIZE AND INCREASE THE POWERS of the State Election Commission, whose members are appointed by the Governor, without holding the Commission accountable for its performance. This effort is occurring at a time, following the 2020 contentious election, when many experts are advocating DECENTRALIZING election powers, preferring to push control to the counties and precinct-level, closer to the people who vote. Plus, there is evidence that the SEC is not doing its job now, especially with respect to not cleaning up our dirty, bloated voter rolls. Current statute requires the SEC “to maintain a complete master file of all qualified electors by county and by precincts,” but there seems to be no mechanism for enforcement.
Do you remember the Credit Default Swaps that nearly tanked the economy during the 2008 financial meltdown, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression?
These “swaps” were forms of derivatives created by financial institutions to shelter bundles of subprime mortgages underneath the wrapping of triple-A-rated securities. What appeared to be a hot investment was really rotten at the core. Glorious on the outside, poop on the inside.
Think of H. 3444 as a REVERSE Credit Default Swap. Gold on the inside, poop on the outside.
THE GOLD: the bill outlaws ballot boxes. It also prohibits any county board of elections from accepting or using private funds to conduct elections. This would keep Mark Zuckerberg from pumping his money into SC elections.
THE POOP:
Eliminates Municipal Election Commissions and devolves all responsibilities to County Election Boards
Expands the powers of the SEC to oversee county boards of elections: it enables the SEC to create standardized processes with which that all county boards must comply
Extends compliance requirements of SEC: under the current statute, the SEC and county board of elections must work together to ensure that elections adhere to state and federal laws. This bill expands compliance to require the county election boards to comply with SEC policies, procedures or standardized processes, not just federal or state laws.
Requires that the SEC Executive Director “report all suspected violations of the state’s election laws” to the SC Attorney General and appropriate law enforcement agencies
Demands that the SEC and Attorney General notify the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House within 24 hours of any complaint that “challenges the validity of an election law, an election policy, or the manner in which an election is conducted”
Provides that the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate have an UNCONDITIONAL RIGHT to intervene in a state court proceeding that challenges the validity of an election law or even, the way an election was conducted.
Gives the Speaker of the House and Senate President the right to intervene in a FEDERAL court proceeding involving election law or the way an election was conducted and gives them standing; that they may file an amicus brief or provide evidence, even if they are a party to the suit
Requires that the SEC Executive Director shall establish methods of audits of election results, and it further defines different types of audits as “risk limiting audits, hand-count audits, and mandates through 3rd party vendors that specialize in election auditing, and ballot reconciliation, or any other method deemed appropriate by the Executive Director.” These audits must be conducted before an election can be certified by the Board of Canvassers.
(This provision is troubling. Risk-limiting audits are worthless. It’s like me telling you that I have $100 in my wallet, consisting of five twenty-dollar bills. You count and say, “yes, you have 5 twenties.” But, what I haven’t told you and what you haven’t determined, is that 2 of those twenties are counterfeit because you haven’t examined the actual bills. The same would be true for hand-counted audits. These audits can’t identify fraudulent ballots, just that the number of ballots equals the number of votes.
Plus, if we continue to have ES&S machines, you will need to find auditors that specialize in cyber audits, not election audits. This whole provision is intended to forestall forensic audits.)
Finally, there are some provisions to clarify voter registration requirements and what constitutes a “domicile.”
MOTIVATION: What is the motivation for this bill? Is it to create uniformity of our election processes across the state to ensure safer elections? Or is the intention political, potentially opening the door for partisan intrusion into our SC elections? BTW, who wrote this legislation? It was introduced by House Speaker Jay Lucas.
BOTTOM-LINE: H. 3444 appears to be a partisan power grab. And the effect of such legislation will be to concentrate the power of the state ruling party in SC elections. (And, it is not the only bill of its kind. Similar bills are being introduced in state legislatures across the country. This seems to be part of a coordinated national effort to change state election laws.)
H. 3444 opens the door to interference by the national parties – the RNC or the DNC, through 1) the consolidated power of the SEC; — controlling standardized election processes state-wide and determining the types of (meaningless) audits to be performed after elections; 2) the reduction of county election board self-determination through SEC oversight; 3) the elimination of the power of local precincts and municipal election boards, and 3) the ability of the Senate President and House Speaker (at the moment both Republican) to wield their influence and use their power to intervene in court cases involving elections. (Remember, the SEC members, and Chairman, are appointed by the Governor.)
This bill is a recipe for disaster.
WARNING TO THOSE WHO WROTE THIS BILL: It will come back to bite you. If you lose power in the state, you will have given the keys to your opponents.
So, in closing, is it really the best you can do in this session? Actually, passing this bill will make things worse in the state regarding election laws. Citizens of the state want fair and transparent elections, not controlled ones.
We are excited to announce that there will be an excellent forum on the issues of election integrity in our state on March 26th. There will be an exciting list of guest speakers from within the state as well as nationally recognized experts. Stay tuned for more information but put it on your calendar.
Is it really reducing the impact of absentee voting?
Bill 4919 has been lauded by the establishment as being a bill that puts more restrictions on absentee voting in SC, but my question is compared to what?
Prior to COVID, we didn’t have any in-person “absentee voting.” Due to COVID, the state allowed people to vote in person 40 days prior to the election as well as to mail in their ballots. Bill 4919 is now reducing the time period of in-person absentee balloting to 2 weeks which is 12 times the time period of in-person voting prior to COVID.
Further restrictions were put on who could request an absentee ballot to be mailed in.
Here are the people allowed to vote absentee by mail:
Students and their spouses and dependents
Anyone serving in the Armed Forces and their spouses and dependents
Government employees and their spouses and dependents
Anyone 65 and older
Does this seem restrictive to you?
The only people I see eliminated are people who need to be at work when the polls are open.
They even allow people to vote absentee mail-in if they will be out of the county during the 2-week period and election day but who will be checking that? I could just say I was going to be out of town and request an absentee ballot. I assume that the same people who are keeping our voter rolls clean will not do the best job of verifying the absentee status of the mail-in voters.
My personal view is that these bills are trojan horses for expanded absentee voting which promulgates FRAUD. This is where the majority of the issues occur and it is something even President Jimmy Carter warned about.
Furthermore, Bill 3444 gives more power to the SEC in a centralized fashion when they are the ones who have been negligent in cleaning the rolls. That is not a good thing. Some of the other provisions in the bill are ok but that is how trojan horses work. They seem great on the outside but beware of the details. Look forward to our blog on that.
These bills are going to require many amendments if we the people are able to take back our vote.
The following blog is by Laurie Zapp, a constituent and registered voter in Bluffton, South Carolina. She has spent significant time researching the active registered deceased list in our state.
I have read some of the filed election bills that are currently up for consideration in the State House and Senate and would like to offer some concerns and recommendations based on my experience with leading canvass efforts in the state.
I was very excited to see a bill that was addressing an elector’s domicile. I feel that the bill is very clear in how it defines domicile as a person’s residence. It defines domicile as follows (from the text of the bill):
“A person’s residence is his domicile. ‘Domicile’ means a person’s fixed home where he has an intention of returning when he is absent. A person has only one domicile.”
What we discovered during our time canvassing is how the law is being interpreted not only by electors, but also by employees at various county boards of elections. For example, in Beaufort County, we discovered electors registered at rented spaces: such as a chiropractic office, mattress store, furniture store, and the Hilton Head Library. In Horry County, we found electors registered at Hungry Howies, a tailoring shop, a pub, Dominos Pizza, and Dunkin Donuts, to name a few. One man in Beaufort stated that the County Board of Elections gave him permission to use a rented space for his business as his registered voting address.
In section (D) 1-11 of the current law, and in S 898 of the proposed bill, I feel that loopholes remain. Unfortunately, we do not have county board of election employees or state employees who are diligently checking new voter registrations to confirm a new elector is providing an address that is consistent with a domicile. Amending the law to not fully address the bigger problem at hand will allow electors to continue to use commercial addresses as their domicile. It is recommended that we put in place procedures to ensure that a domicile is in fact a legitimate primary residence.
The first feature that I noticed about this bill is the responsibilities given to the South Carolina Election Commission. There is language in this bill giving roles and responsibilities to the SEC and using words such as “must do” or “shall.” What is missing is any accountability if the SEC Director fails to perform the duties of his job. Many voters are frustrated that the responsibility of our election system is under the authority of the South Carolina Election Commission, which is appointed by the Governor. We know that under their leadership, our voter logs are full of errors with electors who are deceased, electors who no longer live at the address they are registered at, and electors who are registered at addresses that are not a domicile. There needs to be new accountability measures to ensure compliance with the laws and regulations.
The second concern I have about this bill is part (C) under Section 3. This part of the bill gives the power of the South Carolina Election Commission (SEC) the authority to enter into agreements with organizations in an effort to maintain an accurate database of our registered voters. One such organization that gives the SEC permission to use is an organization called Election Registration Information Center ( ERIC).
I conducted extensive research into ERIC including their history, an examination of financial documents, and correspondence between employees of the SEC and ERIC, which I obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. My findings reveal serious concerns. There have also been recent articles in TheGateway Pundit that raised alarms – even resulting in Louisiana canceling their membership with ERIC.
Below I have provided you with a summary of the information, which led me and my group to realize that South Carolina needs to end its membership with ERIC.
History of ERIC
In 2012, ERIC was founded by three men; John Lindback, Jeff Jones, and David Becker. One must research each of these men to establish if ERIC is truly a nonpartisan organization. Each one of these men has connections to Democratic elected officials and to the Pew Charitable Funds. I will not go into depth on each of these men, but I will give a brief overview of some of the most partisan aspects I have found.
John Lindback– He was the senior officer for Elections Initiatives at the Pew Charitable Trusts, and chief of staff for former Alaska Lieutenant Governor Fran Ulmer (D). He is also listed as a leader of an organization called Center For Secure and Modern Elections (CSME). Listed as one of the roles of CSME which is funded by left of center donors is to “engage in advocacy and lobbying for “automatic voter registration” (AVR) laws that would automatically register eligible individuals to vote when they acquire or renew a driver’s license, apply for social services, or otherwise interact with a state government agency.” Also important to note, CSME lobbied against legislation in Texas that was to reduce the occurrences of voter fraud.
Jeff Jones– Like John above, Jeff also has an interest in supporting Democrat candidates. According to the Federal Election Commission website, Jeff has donated to Democrat candidates like Harry Reid, Bernie Sanders, and Obama for America, to name a few. Jeff also worked with the Pew Charitable Trusts to modernize voter registration in the county. Today he is the CEO of a company called Senzing.
David Becker– Today David is the Executive Director and Founder of the Center for Election Innovation & Research (CEIR). Coincidentally, CEIR gave over a million dollars in grant money to South Carolina in 2020 to be used for election purposes. This is in addition to the over 5 million dollars that rolled into South Carolina via the Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL).
David worked at one time for the Department of Justice as a trial attorney and later in his career at the Pew Charitable Trusts as director of the elections program. Of the three men listed above, I am personally troubled by Mr. Becker’s ability to be nonpartisan the most due to the following article. https://legalnewsline.com/stories/555822683-mark-zuckerberg
The article above not only discusses how Becker talks about Republicans and the fact that there was a complaint filed against him but as the article goes on, the following quote is shared. “To be honest, I don’t use LinkedIn very much and haven’t updated my profile in years, and there’s probably a lot missing from it,” Becker told Legal Newline. “For instance, I also didn’t list the fact that since February my organization and I have a contract and work closely with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger,….”
Personally, if I lived in Georgia I would be interested in using the Freedom of Information Act to uncover the “contract and close work he and the Secretary of State” were conducting.
The three men mentioned above all had a part in developing the organization ERIC. Today, Lindberg and Becker are considered non-voting board members, and Jones is listed as being on the privacy and technology advisory board.
What is ERIC?
Eric’s mission per their website is “assisting states to improve the accuracy of America’s voter rolls and increase access to voter registration for all eligible citizens.” On the surface when one sees that an organization has the mission to improve the accuracy of the voter rolls, it sounds like a win! One must dig and look further to assess if what is stated in their mission is really being followed through with, and are their other agendas at play?
ERIC Requirements of Members
Once a member state signs on and agrees to be a member of ERIC, the first thing the state must do is register new voters. The state is sent a list that is referred to as EBU voters. EBU refers to eligible but unregistered voters. ERIC provides the member state with a list of the EBU voters. The state can then apply for a grant from Pew Charitable Trusts to help with the cost of mailing each EBU a postcard that is intended to encourage the EBU to register to vote. Part of the agreement with ERIC also states that the member state must continue to send postcards to EBU voters every two years and coincidentally it is in even number of years that they must do this.
In 2018, South Carolina became a member of ERIC. South Carolina took the grant money offered from the Pew in order to send out postcards to register new voters. South Carolina received $177,000.
As far as “improving the accuracy of America’s voter rolls”, the states that join and are members of ERIC also share their state’s data. The states are to share information such as the death of a voter or a voter that moves from one state to another. We also have concerns about our voter’s personal data being shared with an outside organization. (Most likely voters have no idea, and have not been informed, that South Carolina is sharing their personal data with a third-party organization.)
Partisanship with ERIC?
A few things to know about the Pew Charitable trusts; in 2020 Pew gave 99.5% of their money to Democrat candidates and not even 1% to Republican candidates, Pew gives funding to organizations like Planned Parenthood, and most recently in 2021 the Pew was instrumental in supporting police reform in the state of Washington.
Is ERIC Cleaning Voter Rolls or Strengthening the Democrat Vote?
On June 30, 2021, I testified at the House Legislative Oversight Committee on the number of active registered voters I and volunteers had discovered that remained on our active voter logs. At this point, South Carolina had been a member of ERIC for 3 years. One statistic that was given in testimony by the SEC was that the SEC had received 54,455 names of individuals that were deceased. 45,000 of those 54,455 deceased were provided to the SEC from DHEC, 6,600 of those names came from other sources, and only 2,600 names were from ERIC. We also discovered that there are modules set up that ERIC has to offer, and the SEC has yet to implement them. One of the fundamental requirements to vote is to be a citizen of the United States. Unfortunately, ERIC states that if a state knows that someone is not a citizen, the state is not allowed to document this or share this information electronically. Are they encouraging non citizens to vote?
Recent Reporting By The Gateway Pundit
Last month,The Gateway Pundit published a 3 part series on ERIC. Please see the links below for shocking information about ERIC. If you feel as strongly as I do that we must end our agreement with ERIC and follow in the footsteps of Louisiana (who terminated their agreement with ERIC), I hope you will amend this bill and also request our Governor to terminate our membership with ERIC.
In response to our canvassing efforts Seth Keshel, former military intelligence officer, describes how the data correlates with his analysis. Here is a link to his video.
Results of South Carolina Citizen-Led Canvass of 2020 November General Election Reveal Election Irregularities and Thousands of Errors In Voter Rolls
Columbia, S.C. – February 5, 2022 – SC Safe Elections Group, a non-partisan volunteer group comprised of approximately 75 citizens from across eight South Carolina counties presented findings of its canvass of South Carolina voter rolls and the 2020 General Election today. Presenters shared results that revealed widespread inaccuracies with voter rolls and potential ineligible votes.
“Our canvassing efforts have shown that much work needs to be done by our local and state election officials to clean up our voter rolls and to enforce existing laws, said Laura Scharr, leader of the South Carolina voter integrity effort. “Our state lawmakers also need to enact new legislation now that ensures greater accuracy and confidence in our elections. Every illegitimate vote cancels out one of our voices. It is essential that we not have any errors in our voter rolls and that only legal votes are counted.”
Highlights of the audit included the following:
• Approximately 21% of voters on the voter rolls appear to be ineligible or to have voted outside of the regulated guidelines.
• Over 4,300 registered voters on the rolls across eight counties were either deceased or had moved prior to the 2020 November election.
• We found 1,369 citizens were registered to vote (and many of which voted) at commercial addresses such as grocery stores, USPS locations, non-residential university addresses where the voters were not students, and vacation RV parks.
“For citizens to trust our elections, it’s imperative that state and local officials and representatives work together to clean up the voter rolls, fix broken systems, and ensure that our election laws are followed,” said S.C. State Representative Vic Dabney, District 52. “I applaud the efforts of all these citizens involved with the canvass who took months of their time to research our voter rolls. Clearly, we have election integrity issues that must be addressed.”
“If our elections are not trustworthy, we lose any confidence in our system, said Josiah Magnuson, S.C. State Representative for District 38. “This is not a partisan issue but one that is foundational to our Republic as a whole. I am so thankful for those who through dogged persistence are bringing to light possible attacks on our state’s election process and showing us what must be done to ensure those candidates the people legally vote for are those who get elected. I look forward to pushing for immediate legislation that will renew the security and accuracy of our elections.”
S.C. State Representative Robert J. “RJ” May, III of District 88 added, “Free and fair elections are the bedrock of our Republic. We must have confidence that our votes count and that only qualified citizens are casting ballots. As your state representative, my stance on election integrity is simple: No cheating! I’m attending this conference to learn, but more importantly, to stand with the people I represent who demand action from the General Assembly.”
Other issues addressed at the presentation included: 1) concerns with the voter machines, 2) the state’s use of the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), and 3) voter roll and statistical election race anomalies. Canvass volunteer leaders from each county presented their findings; in addition, Jeff O’Donnell, a software and database expert, spoke about voter roll anomalies, and Phil Evans, a data analyst and engineer, spoke about election race anomalies. A summary report of the findings of the audit can be found at: https://scsafeelections.org. A video recording of the presentation can also be found at this website.
Laura and Representative Vic Dabney from Kershaw County were interviewed by Citizen Journalist Richard Potcner about why reform of the election process is so important. And we talk about the reveal of our statewide canvassing efforts.
