Gessler Helps Debunk “Gypsy Voters” Mythology?

We've been talking for a few days now about allegations being made by conservatives regarding Colorado's voter registration process after the passage of House Bill 1303, the Voter Access and Modernized Elections Act–which will be in effect for the first time for the recall special elections in two Colorado Senate districts next month. Following some alarmist (and unfounded) comments from GOP Douglas County Clerk Jack Arrowsmith about the supposed possibility of voters being 'bused' into these districts to take advantage of a 'loophole' in the new law, the story spread rapidly through the conservative news ecosystem.

Actual voter fraud is extremely rare, of course, but the conservative coverage of this supposed 'loophole,' implying that it may be legal for voters to converge on these Senate districts from across the state, might actually lead to some number of Republican voters trying to fraudulently vote in these recall elections. We have tried our best to discourage that, but regret we may not have as large a conservative readership as the Daily Caller.

Yesterday, the Colorado Springs Independent's J. Adrian Stanley did a great job debunking the story:

While rare, fraud has always existed. Some people have attempted to register more than once using fake birthdays and Social Security numbers; others have voted more than once under one registration, perhaps by sending a mail ballot, then showing up later at a polling place.

[EL Paso County Clerk spokesman Ryan] Parsell says those types of cheaters are generally caught, and their names turned over to the local district attorney for investigation. But he worries that now, there's another way to game the system: A voter may drive in from an outside district, change his address on his registration form, and vote. Later, he says, a person can change his address back and say he intended to move, but never did…

This scenario has gotten attention on the Internet, where it's often derogatorily referred to as "gypsy voting."

…But there are a few reasons why this may turn out better than it sounds. First, according to an email from Gessler's office to Williams' office, [Pols emphasis] a person must have already moved into a district in order to vote in it.

"The 'intention' language is only relevant after the elector moved," it says.

Second, the same email confirms, clerks can and should refer any fishy behavior to the local DA's office. Ortiz, for instance, says he will track all last-minute change-of-address voters. If the address reverts in the coming months, he'll refer that voter to the DA…

And there's yet another reason why widespread fraud seems unlikely: A last-minute address change has actually long been possible. Ortiz notes that the process was previously called "emergency voting," and it wasn't popular.

The bottom line, as the Independent reports and we said days ago, is that all such misrepresentation is against the law, and anyone who actually votes using a fake residence is committing a felony. The biggest reason there is so much more discussion of vote fraud than there are actual cases is that the penalties are really very severe relative to the infraction–and that is by design. Individual, anecdotal cases of fraud consistently boil down to that one person's mistake or misguided decision, not coordinated plots to swing an election.

Again, unless a bunch of Republicans read this Daily Caller story and decide to attempt just that.

View the original article here