After falsely claiming that he won the popular vote (he actually lost by 3 million votes) President Donald Trump created a Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity to prove the “truth” of his false claim.
The operations and staffing of the commission remain a mystery but its purpose is clear: the creation of mischief with the intent to disenfranchise voters. As part of its mandate, the commission recently wrote letters requesting personal information of all registered voters from each of the 50 states. These requests are not subpoenas issued by a judicial officer or a legislative body and have no force of law.
Public officials from at least 20 states have voiced their opposition and have refused to comply. Not New Hampshire.
The governor and secretary of state, with lap dog devotion, are rushing into the Trump voting trough carrying with them New Hampshire voting records and private information having no knowledge or understanding as to the consequences of production – what will happen with New Hampshire’s records and who will have access to the information. While surprised at their joint complicity, I should not have been. Bear in mind that Gov. Chris Sununu was an early proponent of the false claim that “busloads” of Massachusetts residents had fraudulently voted in our last election. And Secretary of State Bill Gardner, an appointee to the committee, has repeatedly had his efforts to disenfranchise New Hampshire voters rejected by our courts.
There are too many unanswered questions to rush pell-mell into production. Here are a number that are deserving of debate and being answered through public debate:
Is the request lawful and consistent with New Hampshire statutes?
Should the state Legislature be the authorized body to conduct the review of New Hampshire voting records?
What will happen to the information being provided? Initial reports from experts claim that the production will create a “hacker’s delight.”
How will voters’ privacy be protected?
Who will pay for the costs of production? New Hampshire? How much will it cost? Who will provide the labor and assure the accuracy of the production?
Who will pay the costs associated with a review of the documents? Mitch McConnell said the federal government will not pay a penny. Will outside money be used for this review?
Who will review the documents? How are these persons appointed and by whom? What are their qualifications?
If not every state participates, then is a national sampling tainted and the results inherently flawed? If the sampling is flawed, then why participate? (Bear in mind that this is an administration that has proudly rejected the science of global warming.)
How can the public be assured that the review will be nonpartisan?
These are simple questions that quickly come to mind; more serious questions would follow.
In the end, is the process results-oriented? Or is the process irreparably tainted by the cause of its birth?
Some guidance can be gained from an examination of the statements and litigation efforts of Kris Kobach, attorney general of Kansas and vice chairman of the commission. Kobach supports Trump’s claim that Trump “won” the popular vote. Last fall, Kobach gained Trump’s favor when he loyally stated, “I think the president-elect is absolutely correct when he says the number of illegal votes cast exceeds the popular vote margin between him and Hillary Clinton.”
As attorney general, Kobach was chastised by the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit for the wholesale disenfranchisement of thousands of people who registered to vote when they renewed their driver’s licenses under the National Voter Registration Act. In the same case, as reported in the New York Times, Kobach was fined by a federal magistrate for making “patently misleading representations to the court.” This record hardly gives me a warm sense of nonpartisanship.
It is sad that this is even an issue.
New Hampshire has a long, proud history of lawful and dynamic voter participation. There is no history of systemic fraud or abuse. I have personally been at voting polls in Keene, Dover and Manchester for more than 30 years witnessing the devoted efforts of our elected officials in the majestic process of assuring the right to vote.
This should be a nonpartisan issue. Until core questions can be answered, New Hampshire, like Mississippi and a host of other states, should follow the edict of Nancy Reagan: Just say no.
If currying Trump’s favor and carrying his toxic water is too enticing to the governor and secretary of state, then the Legislature should step in to put this flawed and fraudulent exercise to rest.
(Steven M. Gordon lives in Hopkinton.)