Just saw this article on voter fraud 'consent decree'.

"Just in time for this November’s mid-term elections!

Did you know that since 1982, the Republican Party had been legally prohibited from contesting elections due to suspected vote fraud, because of a legal agreement called the Consent Decree the GOP made with the Democrat Party?

Finally, 36 years later, a judge has ended the agreement, freeing the Republican Party to ensure electoral integrity by investigating and pursuing suspected vote fraud."

https://fellowshipoftheminds.c...raud-after-36-years/

How did I miss this the last 36 years, and what does it really mean?

Must not have worked.

See the election of President Bush (43). Contested all the way to the SCOTUS.

The case relates to “voter caging.” As example, in the 1980s, the Republicans “sent out letters to African-American neighborhoods. When tens of thousands of them were returned undeliverable, the party successfully challenged the voters and had them deleted from voting rolls.“ The letters were sent as first class, Non- forwardable mail. Having a letter returned was used to challenge the voter and purge the name from the voter roles.

One case:
“In Cleveland, Ohio. When 35,000 letters were returned as undeliverable, the party employed poll watchers to challenge the voters' right to vote. Civil liberties groups challenged the RNC in a case that went to the Supreme Court, but the RNC was not stopped from challenging the voters.”

The problem was:
“In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_caging

The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. The court denied the RNC's motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court's decision. A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
https://www.brennancenter.org/commentary

In areas with colleges, and a large number of out of state students, there has always been an issue with having more voters on the rolls then people that live there. This is “explained” as the students being registered to vote but living out of state. Could these students also be registered in their home state?

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:
Must not have worked.

See the election of President Bush (43). Contested all the way to the SCOTUS.

A quick read of the decree specifically prohibited the RNC from legally challenging an election on the basis of vote fraud.

Bush did not file a lawsuit based on suspected vote fraud in 2000. The lawsuit was to prevent the manual recount in Florida. They did not allege fraud in the complaint.
https://law.justia.com/cases/f...p2/120/1041/2499587/

Well one the 2nd time obama ran, the head of the democrat party in Cleveland(a woman) gave money and drugs for obama votes in Defiance county.
She was actually found guilty and sent to a mile prison term.

In some precincts in Ohio over 100% of the vote was counted in some strong obama precincts.

Though we had a Rep Gov.(Kasich), no votes were thrown out.