Flood-The-Bureaucrats Technique Works For Vote Fraud As Well As Amnesty
July 27, 2007, 04:04 PM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF
During the pause between June's two amnesty surges, I wrote a blog entry entitled "Why Not **One Million** Provisional 'Z' Visas In One Day?" My central notion was the following:

"[W]e should train ourselves to think like famously-devious immigration lawyers and organizations making up the ethnic invasion lobby (e.g. MALDEF, La Raza, and LULAC).

"The key thing is that the government would have only one business day to do a background check on an applicant for a provisional Z visa. If they can’t complete it within the requisite 24 hours, tough noogies, the applicant gets the provisional Z.

"So why wouldn’t MALDEF, ACLU, et al. simply arrange to hold off on submitting applications until, say, one million had accumulated (about twenty days at the Kris Kobach rate) and then dump the whole stack on the bureaucracy, along with the noisy reminder that 'You’d better turn these around by tomorrow'?"

I was proud that, as a linear-thinking physicist, I'd anticipated a way the nefarious operators of the left could game the system.

It turns out that the basic strategy has already been used in a different arena. The grievance group ACORN (which stands for "Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now") has been busy doing voter drives, including fraud-ridden ones as described by the Wall Street Journal in an editorial last fall ("The ACORN Indictments," November 3, 2006). From the editorial:

"During a Congressional hearing in Ohio in the aftermath of the 2004 election, officials from several counties in the state explained ACORN's practice of dumping thousands of registration forms in their lap on the submission deadline, even though the forms had been collected months earlier.

"'You have to wonder what's the point of that, if not to overwhelm the system and get phony registrations on the voter rolls,' says Thor Hearne of the American Center for Voting Rights, who also testified at the hearing. 'These were Democratic officials saying that they felt their election system in Ohio was under assault by these kinds of efforts to game the system.'"

The WSJ piece goes on to describe how ACORN also acts as closer after running the set-up just described:

"Given this history, it's not surprising that ACORN is so hostile to voter identification laws and other efforts to ensure fairness and accuracy at the polls. In Missouri last month, the state Supreme Court held that a photo ID requirement to vote was overly burdensome and a violation of the state constitution. ACORN was behind the original suit challenging the statute, and it has brought similar challenges in several other states, including Ohio."

Of course, ACORN would be merely a left pretender if they didn't support open borders. But they do.