Student Government Constitution And Statutes 2011 - University Of: Fill & Download for Free

The Chinese are very aware of their government’s censorship because their government tells them “we censor stuff.”All countries censor their media but do so in two ways:Some tell their citizens, “We censor our media. Here are our rules.”Some don’t tell their citizens that they censor their media and don’t tell them the rules.Singapore and China are examples of #1 and the United States is an example of #2.Let’s look at China first:China’s Chief Censor is Wang Huning, Chairman of the Central Guidance Commission on Building a Spiritual Civilization. Every Chinese knows the constitutional source of his authority, “Once a policy has been widely discussed, voted on and legislated, discussion is suspended while everyone unites to implement it.” Wang helps keep public expectations in line with government capabilities by presenting his Central Steering Committee colleagues’ ideas to the Chinese people and the Chinese people’s concerns to his colleagues. Here are his rules:Anyone with more than five thousand social media followers must comply with mass media regulations: no infringing, fake accounts, libel, disclosing trade secrets or invading privacy; no sending porn to attract users; no torture, violence, killing of people or animals; no selling lethal weapons, gambling, phishing, scamming or spreading viruses; no organizing crime, counterfeiting, false advertising, empty promises or bullying; no lotteries, rumor-mongering, promoting superstitions; no content opposing the basic principles of the Constitution, national unity, sovereignty or territorial integrity; no divulging State secrets or endangering national security. As Ren Xianliang⁠[1] explains,The relationship between the government and Party to the media is different from that in western countries. In the West, these relationships are often adversarial debates with the media, with many pointed questions. This is not true in China, because the political system is quite different. The core value of the Chinese Communist Party is, ‘to serve the people with all your heart’ and it embodies the fundamental values of Marxism. The people are the masters of China and officials are their servants⁠2. This is said too often and many leaders don’t know what it means and do not put it into practice. They don’t take seriously the problem of creating an effective system for releasing news in order to satisfy as much as possible the people’s right to know.People have a constitutional right to know, to express themselves, to participate in management and decisions about public life and to exercise oversight of the state. The media supports the right to know, warn society, exercise oversight of the government, participate in the market economy and help reconcile various interests. The media are the ears of the Party and government and their microphone. A classic example of the news media in action was the Watergate affair. The lesson of Watergate is that failure to understand the media can be fatal to a government or a ruler. Lies cannot substitute for the truth and the truth cannot long be concealed.Deborah Fallows⁠[3] found that, of the eighty percent of Chinese who want media controlled, eighty-five percent want the government controlling it. Students consider say the censor is too strict, adults say he strikes the right balance and older folk criticize has laxness. No-one finds his censorship evil or repressive and some praise⁠[4] it for maintaining social harmony. Says Alice L. Miller⁠[5],Virtually every topic of conceivable interest to students of Chinese politics and policy now has specialist periodicals devoted to it. This diversity includes publications on previously sensitive topics like foreign affairs and military issues. Since the early 1980s, previously restricted specialist publications dealing with various aspects of international affairs–journals such as American Studies and Taiwan Studies–and new publications such as Chinese Diplomacy became openly available. In military affairs the Academy of Military Science’s premier journal, Chinese Military Science, became available for home delivery to Western students of the PLA. In the 1990s PRC media began routinely to carry opinion pieces by the growing community of foreign policy and national security specialists in China that frequently offered competing and clashing perspectives on various international issues, raising fundamental questions among Western analysts about what political authority to attach to them in Beijing’s policy process..The proliferation of websites hosted by news agencies such as Xinhua has given immediate access to streams of information and commentary far surpassing anything that was easily accessible by traditional means.The constitution protects critics, “Citizens have the right to criticize and make suggestions regarding any State organ or official, to make complaints or charges against relevant State organs and expose any State organ or functionary for violation of law or dereliction of duty.” Harvard’s Gary King⁠[6] says, “Contrary to much research and commentary, the purpose of the censorship program is not to suppress criticism of the State or the Communist Party. Indeed, despite widespread censorship of social critics, we find that when Chinese people write scathing criticisms of their government and its leaders the probability that their post will be censored does not increase. Instead, censored tweets were equally likely to be against the state, for the state, irrelevant, or factual reports about events. Negative, even vitriolic criticism of the state, its leaders and its policies are not more likely to be censored.” Maria Repnikova⁠[7] finds critical journalism alive and well:A popular depiction of Chinese media in the past decade has been that of a fearful, loyal agent of the ruthless party-state which exudes no tolerance towards its critics. Indoctrinated to channel official propaganda to the public, silenced by censorship and threatened by coercion, Chinese journalists function in one of the world's toughest places when it comes to media freedom.…What goes unnoticed beneath the stark imagery of collision between the mighty state and the fearless, isolated critics however, is the web of complex negotiations taking place between some Chinese journalists and party officials. Specifically, whereas the majority of Chinese reporting still adheres to the propaganda model, in the past three decades an exceptional practice of what I term ‘critical journalism,’ including investigative, in-depth, editorial and human-interest coverage of contentious societal issues, has emerged in China amid the restrictive environment..what unites these journalists is their pursuit of social justice and their quest to push the envelope of permissible reporting.They exposed stories such as the 2002 AIDS epidemic in Henan province, the 2003 Sun Zhigang case of a migrant worker illegally detained and beaten to death in Guangzhou, the scandalous school demolitions in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, the 2008 milk-poisoning scandal, widespread environmental protests and food safety crises among other contentious issues. In most cases their stories raised a wide public outcry, as manifested in active discussions online, and in some cases they also produced a moderate policy shift...recently demonstrated in courageous investigative reporting of the major chemical explosion in Tianjin.Investigative journalist Cui Yongyuan⁠8 hosted a popular talk show, Tell It Like It Is, that garnered him 20 million Weibo followers. In 2013 he catalyzed national debate by voicing vehement opposition to the government’s plan to introduce genetically modified food. He exchanged heated, personal attacks with GM food supporters, greatly impacted how it is viewed, and helped defeat the legislation. His allegations about tax evasion by China’s highest-paid actress, Fan Bingbing, triggered a nationwide tax audit of the entire entertainment industry and forced it to disgorge two billion dollars in taxes and fines. He publicly accused Shanghai police of taking huge bribes during their investigation of the case and of ignoring death threats to himself and his daughter. When the police responded by saying they had been unable to reach him, Cui ridiculed them and turned his attention to the highest levels of the legal system.Surprisingly, even when Chinese journalists impinge on national security, the consequences are relatively mild. The government funded the monthly journal, China Through the Ages, for thirty years and a hundred thousand subscribers enjoyed its blunt criticisms of ‘the Party’s self-serving narrative about the Cultural Revolution,’ and its advocacy of constitutional, multi-party democracy and privatization of state assets. Beijing finally lost patience and cancelled its subsidy after the journal praised Zhao Ziyang, the Cabinet Minister who collaborated with the CIA during the Tiananmen demonstrations but, even then, the editor went down fighting, “This magazine will stop publication due to policy changes reflecting the establishment’s intolerance of reformers and liberals.” Imagine the US Government funding America Through the Ages for thirty years as it advocated one-party rule, workers’ ownership of the means of production and the abolition of competitive, multi-party elections.Now, let’s look at censorship in the United StatesThe New York Times’ reports of Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction and President Trump’s non-existent Russian connection seem scandalous to Chinese readers. Temple University Professor Deborah A. Cai⁠ [9] says, “Chinese reporting on the US appears to be relatively balanced overall. Extreme negative tones toward the US are rare and appear mostly during periods of overt Sino-US confrontation, such as the reconnaissance plane incident or, more recently, following America’s decisions to raise steel import tariffs or conduct unilateral actions in the Middle East.”Here are some random news clippings that illustrate American censorship in action:Politicians Can Break Our Content Rules, YouTube CEO Says PoliticoFacebook Confirms Its ‘Standards’ Don’t Apply To Politicians ars technicaThe US Department of Education has ordered Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to remake their joint Middle East studies program after concluding that they were offering students “a biased curriculum that, among other complaints, did not present enough “positive” imagery of Judaism and Christianity in the region.”In a series of damning emails exchanged with this writer, the predominant Internet-based encyclopedia Wikipedia admitted they subjectively censor material they deem to be controversial, in reference to the September 11, 2001 attacks, although their censoring is not limited to 9-11. Internet Encyclopedia Helps Brainwash Millions of MindsTwitter purges dozens of Cuban reporters just before president’s energy speechPublished time: 12 Sep, 2019 22:06. Last month, Twitter announced that it had suspended nearly 1,000 accounts it linked to a “state-backed information operation focused on the situation in Hong Kong,” accusing them of “sowing political discord” on the platform, though the social media giant offered no evidence to support the assertion. There was no similar statement regarding the bans of Cuban accounts.Facebook removed accounts with too many HK protesters violence videos but allowed Amnesty ad "describing HK peaceful protesters" appear on my Facebook pageRussia Insider on List of Censored Sites Leaked by Google Whistle-BlowerRon Paul's #2 and Fierce Foreign Policy Critic Dan McAdams Permanently Banned From Twitter Over Nothing at AllThe US military has issued a call for research proposals from technology partners for the development of an automated system capable of scanning the entire internet and locating and censoring content deemed as “false media assets” and “disinformation.” According to government documents, the requested solution would provide “innovative semantic technologies for analyzing media” that will help “identify, deter, and understand adversary disinformation campaigns.”MSNBC paid me millions to ‘keep quiet’ on Iraq: Jesse Ventura to RT’s Lee CampMedia silent on dismissal of DNC suit against Julian Assange.On December 2017 , my 5-years-old Youtube channel, Sayed Hasan, mainly translating speeches from Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, was completely removed by Youtube, along with its 10 000 subscribers, +6 millions views and +400 subtitled videos of anti-Zionist & anti-Imperialist content. I then denounced this censorship in detail in my article Kafka 2.0: How Youtube’s Political Censorship is Exercised. And just around New Year’s Eve 2019, the +6000 Subscribed Facebook Page Resistance News Unfiltered, along with all its similar content, got deleted without explanation.Slave Bible from the 1800s omitted key passages that could incite rebellion MPR NewsCNN commentator fired after giving pro-Palestinian speech at UN. #MediaPolitical commentator Marc Lamont Hill is quickly fired after promoting 'free Palestine'Twitter has suspended noted anti-war commentator, economist and former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Paul Craig Roberts.The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and Reporters Without Borders (RSF) spoke with over two dozen national and international journalists, who were subjected to or threatened with searches. They published a report on the “wide powers” claimed by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents. Around 1 million people cross U.S. borders every day. Less than 1 percent have their electronic devices searched. Nevertheless, electronic device searches went from 8,500 in 2015 to more than 30,000 in 2017. CBP contends it must operate with a “border exception” when it comes to needing a warrant to search the electronic devices of individuals. It searches devices for threats to “national security,” which includes “classified information.” That directly threatens journalists and their confidential sources. According to the report from CPJ and RSF, from 2006 to June 2018, 37 journalists were “stopped collectively for secondary screenings more than 110 times.” At least four journalists were questioned while leaving the country. Nearly all of the 20 journalists, who said their devices were searched, had their devices taken out of sight. “I treat the U.S. as almost a hostile state,” the reporter said. “You do or say what you have to to maintain that privilege because the financial cost of not being able to access the U.S. is huge.”According to Canadian journalist Ed Ou, who was denied entry to the United States, border agents in 2016 asked him why he was interested in covering the protests against the Dakota Access pipeline at Standing Rock. One agent apparently said “covering a protest is not a valid reason to come into the country,” and agents were concerned about how he wanted to report on indigenous groups in America. Journalists Face Greater Risk Of Warrantless Electronic Searches At BorderIn North Carolina, farm level data is classified information,” said Heather Overton, referring me to the 1979 confidentiality state statute § 106-24.1. which states, “All information published by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services pursuant to this Part shall be classified so as to prevent the identification of information received from individual farm operators.” Confidentiality laws are so unyielding, even when an Alabama and Texas ranch produced cows with the always fatal mad cow disease their identities were kept secret and they were allowed to resume operations in 30 days. If anyone questions whether agriculture departments serve the public and consumers or meat producers that’s the answer.If you regularly visit bookmarked mainstream sites such as BBC , Independent , Guardian , Ebay , Amazon etc. those sites will be showcased as “frequently visited” by OSX in your bookmarks index. If , however you regularly visit bookmarked sites such as Sputnik , RT , OffGuardian, Craig Murray , Southfront , Jonathon Cook etc. these sites will NEVER be showcased by OSX no matter how many times you visit these sites per day. Visit them each 25 times a day and they will NOT get highlighted as “frequently visited” by OSX .Google and YouTube Suppress Controversial 9/11 Truth?Search Engine Manipulation. Google and YouTube Suppress Controversial 9/11 Truth? By Elizabeth Woodward via Global research, Oct 2013Punishment for breaking America’s unpublished censorship rules is draconian:The US Government has issued a million national security letters (administrative subpoenas with gag orders that enjoin recipients from ever divulging they’ve even received them).The President controls all information through EO 10995 & 12472.The President can order the execution of American citizens just for preaching religion. In 2011 he separately executed an American Muslim preacher Anwar al Awlaki, his sixteen-year-old son, and his eight-year-old daughter, all without trial._____________________________________________________________________1 The Art of Guiding Public Opinion—How Leading Cadres Handle the Media. By Ren Xianliang, Vice Chairman of the China Journalists’ Association. David Cowhig's Translation Blog.2 The People are supreme, the state is secondary, and the Ruler is least important. Only those who please the people can rule. Mencius. Mengzi (372–289 BC), 孟軻, was born near modern Zoucheng, Shandong Province, just south of Qufu, Confucius's birthplace. An itinerant teacher and sage, he was the principal interpreter of Confucianism.3 Most Chinese Say They Approve of Government Internet Control, by Deborah Fallows, Pew Internet & American Life Project. March 27, 2008.4 A Confucian Look at Internet Censorship in China. Yubo Kou, Bryan Semaan, Bonnie Nardi. September 20175 Alice L. Miller. Analysing the Chinese Leadership in an Era of Sex, Money and Power. China Leadership Monitor, Issue 57 (Fall 2018).6 “Reverse-Engineering Chinese Censorship”. Gary KingThursday, September 12, 20137 Media Politics in China: Improvising Power under Authoritarianism by Maria Repnikova, C.U.P., July 15, 2017.8 MEET CUI YONGYUAN, CHAT SHOW HOST: CHINA’S UNLIKELIEST WHISTLE-BLOWER (JUST ASK FAN BINGBING). SCMP Jan 26, 20199 Deborah A. Cai, Perspectives Toward the United States in Selected Newspapers of the People’s Republic of China. University of Maryland Institute for Global Chinese Affairs and the Department of Communications, May 2002, pp. 6–7.

In my point of view M.P Jain Indian Constitutional Law is the best book for law Student how ever you can buy DD Basu and VN Sukla's constitutional law books.M P Jain Indian Constitutional Law by M P Jain Revised by Justice Jasti Chelameswar and Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu , Lexis NexisAbout the Author-M Plain Indian Constitutional Law is an authoritative, evergreen classic on Indian constitutional law. This book, presently in its eighth edition, is a thematic presentation of the complex and multi-dimensional subject of Constitutional law in a lucid, comprehensive and systematic manner. The book contains in-depth insights that will benefit students, research scholars, lawyers, judges, legal academics, policy makers and interested citizens who look for the latest in constitutional jurisprudence.Price 970/-V.N. Shukla’s Constitution of India has proved itself, over twelve editions, to be the most authoritative and respected academic book on the Indian Constitution. Its outstanding reputation has established it in the foremost rank of classical legal textbook. This 13th edition has been thoroughly revised and updated by Prof. (Dr) Mahendra Pal Singh taking into account the developments since the publication of the previous edition. The current edition includes a detailed analysis of the latest Constitutional Amendments and landmark Supreme Court decisions such as Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Assn. v. Union of India; Madras Bar Assn. v. Union of India;Shreya Singhal v. Union of India; Common Cause v. Union of India; Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India; Jindal Stainless Ltd. v. State of Haryana; Union of India v. Harish Chandra Singh Rawat; Nabam Rebia & Bamang Felix v. Dy. Speaker, Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, etc. This book has been an ideal study and reference companion for students and practitioners alike and is frequently cited in the courts. The Supreme Court of India cited the 11th Edition in Indian Medical Association v. Union of India [(2011) 7 SCC 179], the 10th Edition in Rameshwar Prasad (VI) v. Union of India [(2006) 2 SCC 1] and the 7th Edition in Umaji Keshao Meshram v. Radhikabai [1986 Supp SCC 401] while the Constitutional Court of South Africa cited the 9th Edition in Nalandazeli Fose v. The Ministry of Safety and Security [Case CCT 44/96]. This edition also comes with a companion web resource EBC ExplorerTM (www.ebcexplorer.com).This book will be immensely valuable for law students, professors, judges, practitioners, government officials, NGOs and anyone interested in learning about the principles underlying Indian Constitution.Price 437/-D D Basu Introduction to the Constitution of India is a pioneering work, catering to the needs of anyone who wants to study the origin and development of the Constitution of India. It meets the requirements of universities for the LL.B., LL.M., B.A. and M.A. (Political Science) courses as well as competitive examinations held by the Union and State Public Service Commissions. Recent amendments to the Constitution up to the 102nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 2018 and notable judgements of the Supreme Court and High Courts have been incorporated.Key Features:• The book offers a systematic exposition of the Constitutional document arranged under logical chapters and headings.• It traces the constitutional history of India since the Government of India Act, 1935; analyses the provisions of the present Constitution; and explains the interrelation between its diverse contents.• Gives an account of the working of each of the provisions of the Constitution during its first decade, with reference to statutes and decisions wherever necessary, together with a critical estimate of its trends• Analytical table of contents, marginal notes, index, and reference tables further aid understanding• Serves as an introductory study on the Constitution for general readers, politicians journalists, statesmen and administrative authorities, as well as students and Public Service Commission and other competitive examinations aspirants

Original question:What is the goal of Trump's voter fraud task force?The presidential election integrity commission was established by executive order in May to investigate Trump’s claims of rampant voter fraud. As this item starts to occupy more and more headlines - I find it all very confusing, what is the goal and are they going about it the right way?The main goals, based on the past and present behavior and actions of Trump, seem to be:Voter intimidation.Voter suppression & voter restriction.Disenfranchising Voters.To ice his bruised ego (he lost the popular vote).Examples that back up the above goals I listed:Intimidation:Trump asked his base to be “election observers”: [1]Go down to certain areas and watch and study and make sure other people don’t come in and vote five times……The only way they can beat it in my opinion, and I mean this 100 percent, is if in certain sections of the state they cheat, okay? So I hope you people can sort of not just vote on the 8th — go around and look and watch other polling places and make sure that it’s 100 percent fine.Trump’s campaign website also added a “sign up” page for “election observers”:Appeal to motive in the below tweet:Numerous states are refusing to give information to the very distinguished VOTER FRAUD PANEL. What are they trying to hide?— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 1, 2017Voter Suppression & Restriction: [2]Voter purges:The letter doesn’t ask whether states are complying with the parts of the law that expand opportunities to register. Instead it focuses on the sections related to maintaining the lists. That’s a prelude to voter purging.Usually the Justice Department would ask only a single state for data if it had evidence the state wasn’t complying with Motor-Voter. But a blanket request to every state covered under that law is virtually unprecedented...These parallel efforts show us exactly how the Trump administration will undertake its enormous voter suppression campaign: through voter purges. The voter rolls are the key. Registration is one of the main gateways to political participation. It is the difference between a small base of voters pursuing a narrow agenda and an electorate that looks like America.Will affect minority voters disproportionately:Here’s how the government will use voters’ data. It will create a national database to try to find things like double-voters. But the commission won’t be able to tell two people with the same name and birthday apart. Such errors will hit communities of color the hardest. Census data shows that minorities are overrepresented in 85 of the 100 most common last names.Purging voters is part of a larger malicious pattern that states have employed across the country. Georgia and Ohio are being sued for carrying out early versions of what we can expect from the Trump administration.Disenfranchising Voters: [3]The Voter Commission’s data request resulted in some people withdrawing their voter registration:Three thousand, three hundred and ninety-four Coloradans have withdrawn their voter registrations as of July 13, following the Trump administration’s request for voter data as part of the Commission on Election Integrity. An additional 182 citizens in the state have filed as confidential voters.Several other states have reported a similar uptick in citizens moving to keep their information out of the federal government’s hands.Bruised Ego:Trump cannot accept that he lost the popular vote:In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016Quick look at “voter fraud” claims: [4]The 1960 presidential election:…reports of deceased and other unregistered voters in largely African American districts in Illinois or cases of malfeasance throughout Texas were believed to have rigged John F. Kennedy’s victory over Richard Nixon.Former Attorney General John Ashcroft:Formed the “Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative” under George W. Bush’s presidencyDespite his coordination of the U.S. attorney offices with local election officials, only 24 people were convicted of improper or illegal voting and 14 non-citizens were found to be illegally voting in federal elections between 2002 and 2005.Claims of Voter Fraud in New Jersey:There were reports in 2004 that 4,755 deceased voters cast ballots in New Jersey. After careful comparison between voter rolls and death records, there were no official accounts of voter fraud.Claims of voter fraud in New York:In New York in both 2002 and 2004, 2,600 deceased voters allegedly voted, only to be removed from the register after an investigation revealed clerical errors and not malfeasance.Paranoia over “voter fraud” leads to voter suppression.North Carolina:Supreme Court rejected an appeal to reinstate North Carolina’s stringent voter identification laws that were found to discriminate against African Americans “with almost surgical precision.”Within days following this ruling, the court also found that two of North Carolina’s congressional redistricting maps resulted from unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. The decision—even supported by the more conservative Justice Clarence Thomas—found that African Americans were unfairly packed in two concentrated black districts, thereby minimizing their political influence in major elections.Wisconsin:Wisconsin’s efforts mirrored those in North Carolina where advocates purported that nearly 300,000 people lacked the proper ID to participate in the 2016 presidential election, even after parts of the state’s law were deemed unconstitutional upon appeal.Florida:In Florida, 1.5 million people were disenfranchised by a law that disqualifies ex-felons from voting, resulting in one in every four African American residents unable to vote in 2016.The 10 members in Trump’s “Commission on Election Integrity”:The above chart is based on information from a Washington Post article. [5]Mike Pence said that the “Commission on Election Integrity” will: [6]…Initiate a full evaluation of voting rolls in the country and the overall integrity of our voting system in the wake of this past election.Closer look into Kris Kobach:On November 9th, 2016, Kobach emailed a Trump transition team member about amending the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA): [7] [8]Kobach wants to amend the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Passed in 1993, the NVRA aims to increase voter registration: Its provisions include requiring that motor vehicle and public assistance agencies provide voter registration opportunities, and allows for registration by mail.“Interstate Crosscheck System”: [9]The “Interstate Crosscheck System” is faulty at stopping voter fraud and is conducted by Kansas election authorities:States participating in the program, known as the Interstate Crosscheck System, send their voter registration files to Kansas…Each participating state receives back a list of their voter registrations that match the first name, last name and date of birth of a voter in another state. Crosscheck provides some guidelines for purging voter registrations from the rolls.The “Interstate Crosscheck Program” is inherently flawed:In theory, the program is supposed to detect possible cases of people voting in multiple locations. But academics and states that use the program have found that its results are overrun with false positives, creating a high risk of disenfranchising legal voters…For every one illegitimate vote, “Interstate Crosscheck Program” would eliminate 200 legitimate votes:A statistical analysis of the program published earlier this year by researchers at Stanford, Harvard, University of Pennsylvania and Microsoft, for instance, found that Crosscheck “would eliminate about 200 registrations used to cast legitimate votes for every one registration used to cast a double vote.”Why the “Interstate Crosscheck Program” gets it so wrong:Factors for “matches” - birthdays and names:Crosscheck bases its “matches” primarily on just two factors: people's first and last names and their birth date. But in a country of 139 million voters, you're guaranteed to have tens of thousands of individuals who share both names and birthdays.For instance, in a 2007 paper, elections experts Michael McDonald and Justin Levitt examined voter files from New Jersey's 2014 elections. In those elections, the most common names — William Smith, Maria Rodriguez, etc. — showed up hundreds of times, reflecting their prevalence in the general population.Shared birthdays are even more common — statistically speaking if you have a group of just 23 people, there's a greater than 50 percent chance that at least two of them will share the same birthday.At 180 people, according to McDonald and Levitt, there's a 50 percent chance that two of them will share the same birth date — month, day and year.So if you have 282 William Smiths, as in New Jersey's voter rolls in 2004, you'd expect four of them to share the exact same birthday. Those four William Smiths would be flagged as potentially fraudulent voters by Kobach's Crosscheck system.Disorganized Voter files:…Voter files are notoriously messy and often incomplete. Among the 3.6 million New Jersey voters McDonnell and Levitt analyzed, for instance, nearly 1 million were missing a birth date completely. Ten thousand were listed with a birth date of Jan. 1, 1753, and another 20,000 listed as Jan. 1, 1800 — likely placeholder values that were never updated.Multiply those figures up to the national level, and you can see how a system that naively matches names and birth dates is going to return a lot of noise — and very, very little in the way of people actually trying to game the voting system.There's no question that incomplete voter data is a problem. But comparing incomplete data sets against each other isn't likely to solve that problem.Data on someone registering and voting in two states:Boiling it all down, out of the 240,000 paired registrations that Crosscheck sent to Iowa, there were only six cases where it appeared that the same person registered and voted in two different states.In other words, well over 99 percent of the 'matches' sent to Iowa were unlikely to have anything to do with even attempted voter fraud.Incidentally, that's in line with Kobach's prosecution record on Crosscheck cases: a grand total of nine successful convictions so far, “mostly older Republican males,” according to local media reports.Crosscheck’s “User Guide”:…Crosscheck's user guide recommends purging older voter registrations when the name and partial Social Security number match the name and SSN of a more recent registration.…Harvard, Stanford, University of Pennsylvania and Microsoft team estimate that following this guideline would result in 200 deletions of legitimate voter registrations for each real-world case of double voting it prevented.Kobach loves the “Interstate Crosscheck Program” and wants to take it to a national level - that’s concerning:Kobach's championing of Crosscheck is one reason many voting rights advocates are concerned that President Trump's voter fraud commission may be a vehicle for recommending mass voter purges……In his opening remarks before the election commission he said the Crosscheck program “illustrates how a successful multi-state effort can be in enhancing the integrity of our elections and in keeping our voter rolls accurate. I'm confident that this commission will be equally successful on the national level.”…If the system is primarily a vehicle for false positives, why bother using it at all?…the naming of Kobach to President Trump's voter fraud commission ensures that Crosscheck will continue to have a role in the spotlight this year. And if the Republican Party has its way, Crosscheck will expand — the 2016 GOP party platform called for “every state to join the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program to keep voter rolls accurate and to prevent people from voting in more than one state in the same election.”Kris Kobach sent a letter to all 50 states (June 28th, 2016), requesting information on voters: [10]This letter asked for: [11]The information requested includes the names, addresses, birthdates, political party (if recorded), last four digits of the voter's Social Security Number and which elections the voter has participated in since 2006, for every registered voter in the country.It would seem that Kobach desires to use “Interstate Crosscheck System” on all the information sent in regarding the information he requested.The ACLU said this about the request from Kobach:As a part of Donald Trump’s Election Integrity Commission, Kris Kobach sent letters across the country, asking state representatives for details on every registered voter in the country. This is an unprecedented government request for information on American voters, including names, addresses, birthdates, political affiliation, last four digits of Social Security numbers, and voting history.Here is a chart from the ACLU regarding where each state stands on these requests:After Kobach’s letter, there are currently seven federal lawsuits that have been filed in July (2017) against Trump’s “Commission on Election Integrity”: [12]The NAACP Legal Defense Fund filed a lawsuit on July 18th, 2017. The lawsuit alleged that the “Commission on Election Integrity”: [13]“was formed with the intent to discriminate against voters of color in violation of the Constitution…to reaffirm President Trump’s false allegations of millions of ‘illegal’ votesto provide a basis for actions that will target African-American and Latino voters…rather than objectively analyze an issue of national significance.”It went on further, saying:“Statements by President Trump, his spokespersons and surrogates…as well as the work of the Commission as described by its co-chairs, are grounded on the false premise that Black and Latino voters are more likely to perpetrate voter fraud…”The suit points to the below evidence:Trump’s repeated lies that “millions of illegals” voted in the electionPence repeating Trump’s claim/defending it [14]Kobach repeating Trump’s claim: [15]“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 at this point.”Hans von Spakovsky’s ties to the “Public Interest Legal Foundation”The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed a lawsuit against the Commission on July 3, 2017, alleging that: [16]“the Commission’s demand for detailed voter histories also violates millions of Americans’ constitutional right to privacy.”The “Commission on Election Integrity” asked states to stop sending voter information until this lawsuit was resolved [17]The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit on July 10th, 2017, alleging that the Commission was not following proper transparency laws: [18]The lawsuit charges the commission with failing to comply with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which is designed to ensure public accountability of all advisory committees.The ACLU said that the Commission was not making any of the topics discussed available to the publicThree days later, the White House had a page added to its website which contained some documents regarding the meetings [19]The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law filed a lawsuit similar to the ACLU’s on July 10th, 2017, citing the Commission’s failure to comply with transparency laws [20]The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law also filed a Hatch Act Complaint against Kobach, saying that he improperly used his role on the Commission to promote his upcoming run for Governor in Kansas [21]The Florida ACLU filed a lawsuit on July 10th, 2017 (separate from the other ACLU lawsuit) against the Commission, alleging that the collection efforts were: [22]“…an unjustified invasion of privacy not authorized under the Constitution and laws of the United States or the individual states.”Public Citizen filed a lawsuit on July 10, 2017, similar to the lawsuit from ACLU Florida, alleging that the Commission: [23]“collection and dissemination of [voter] information violates the Privacy Act, which prohibits the collection, use, maintenance or distribution of any ‘record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.’ ”Public Citizen is requesting a temporary restraining order on the Commission’s request regarding voter informationCommon Cause also filed a lawsuit regarding Privacy Act violations on July 14, 2017, against the Commission: [24]“Common Cause asks the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to order the commission, [the Department of Homeland Security], and [the Social Security Administration] to stop seeking and using the voter history and party affiliation of voters, and return any such data it has already obtained from any state.”How Kobach’s request could be unconstitutional: [25]Kobach’s goal seems to be collecting personal information on people to put in a national voter file [26]The files would collect information not limited to:NameAddressPolitical party affiliationVoting HistorySome states include even more information: [27]Date of birthTelephone numbersEmail addressesInformation about minors (some states “pre-register” minors so that they can automatically vote when they turn 18)“Publicly Available” is not a cut and dry definition: [28]In some states, voter files are widely accessible, but not to everyoneSome states restrict “why” one can have access to voter filesFor example, Texas prohibits access to voter information used for commercial profitsVoter information is sometimes limited to: [29]Political partiesCandidatesNonprofitsAny state that have these types of restrictions are automatically breaking their own laws by sending information to back to KobachNo one knows what the Commission’s security protocols will be (or if they even have any)Asking for this information via email is suspectMakes it appear that the Commission has no security protocolsAnd/or doesn’t care about securityNo one knows exactly what the Commission will do with the infoWhat laws could this data request be breaking? Here are some of them: [30]The Privacy Act:We’ve long had privacy and security concerns about government recordkeeping in this country. Back in 1974, Congress passed the Privacy Act, regulating how federal government entities keep records. There are a number of substantive requirements for a body like the Kobach commission. Those actually include specific limits on data that Kobach has asked for, like voting history and party affiliation.The Paperwork Reduction Law:The Paperwork Reduction Act, a law with a longstanding pedigree (if an uninspiring name), governs agencies that want to issue potentially burdensome information requests. The statute covers requests that are mandatory or voluntary, aimed at individuals or organizations. The guiding idea behind the PRA is simple: before the federal government enlists individuals, companies, organizations, or state governments into potentially burdensome fact-finding, it should have a good justification and a well thought out plan.Procedural requirements found within the PRA:PRA requires federal agencies to satisfy procedural requirements designed to ensure a deliberative approach informed by the people who will feel the effects of federal action. Much of it is basic stuff. Before sending out an information request to more than ten people, a federal agency must articulate a justification for doing so. It must weigh any potential benefits to the government against the burdens that its requests will impose on recipients. It must have a plan for conducting the request and managing the information it receives. Perhaps most importantly, it must engage the public through two rounds of detailed public notification, coupled with opportunities for the public to weigh in. Only then may the agency seek final approval from the White House’s budget office, which oversees compliance with the PRA, to go forward.The election commission didn’t do any of those things. It simply ignored the statute’s requirements. In other words, its request to every Secretary of State in the country violated federal law.…In other words, the Commission’s failure to adhere to the PRA isn’t a matter of mere technical non-compliance; it flouted a legal framework whose provisions would have offered a safeguard against a misguided, and potentially quite harmful, national fishing expedition for voter data.…For state officials on the fence about whether to provide the data, the PRA should weigh significantly in their decisions. The Kobach letter was, after all, an unlawful request. State officials should pause long and hard before turning over such sensitive data – data that is foundational to the democratic process…And on top of all of that, the letter from Kobach also creates a major target for hackers: [31]Digital security experts say the commission’s request would centralize and lay bare a valuable cache of information that cyber criminals could use for identity theft scams — or that foreign spies could leverage for disinformation schemes.Quick facts on voter fraud:Justin Levitt, Loyola Law School professor, found: [32]2000 - 2014 = 35 cases of voter impersonation out of ~800 million ballots that were cast in primary, municipal, special, and other elections.News21 journalism looked into voter impersonation as well as people voting twice, vote buying, absentee fraud, etc from 2000 - 2012. [33]For voter impersonation: 10For other alleged fraud cases: 2,068~50% of those votes ended with acquittals or charges being droppedThe State Board of Elections in North Carolina found: [34]1 case of voter fraud out of 4.8 million votes in the 2016 General ElectionThere were 500 ineligible votesAlmost all of those 500 were people voting who genuinely thought they couldIn 2007, the NYT found that there were: [35]86 convictions of voter fraud from 2002–2007Quick background on voter ID laws (hint, its voter suppression): [36]Voter ID laws disproportionately affect minorities:These laws have a disproportionate effect on minorities, which is exactly what you would expect given that members of racial and ethnic minorities are less apt to have valid photo ID.States that do have strict voter ID laws tend to vote more conservative:Because minority voters tend to be Democrats, strict voter ID laws tilt the primary electorate dramatically.All else equal, when strict ID laws are instituted, the turnout gap between Republicans and Democrats in primary contests more than doubles from 4.3 points to 9.8 points.Likewise, the turnout gap between conservative and liberal voters more than doubles from 7.7 to 20.4 points.States that pass strict Voter ID laws tend to have GOP legislatures:By instituting strict voter ID laws, states can alter the electorate and shift outcomes toward those on the right:Where these laws are enacted, the influence of Democrats and liberals wanes and the power of Republicans grows.Strict ID laws are passed almost exclusively by Republican legislatures.Quick look at what States have Voter ID laws: [37]Some states seem energized by Trump’s voter fraud conspiracies, many pushing for more Voter ID laws in 2017:At least 99 bills to restrict access to the polls have been introduced (or have been carried over from previous sessions) in 31 states this year; that's already more than double the number last year, according to data compiled by the Brennan Center.Voter ID — requiring voters to prove who they are with identifying documents — is the most common requirement, but changes to the voter registration process, such as asking people to prove their U.S. citizenship, are a close second.Why obtaining a government issued ID tends to be more challenging for minority demographics, collectively as well as some of the reasons that these laws are discriminatory: [38]Cost:Obtaining ID Costs Money.Even if ID is offered for free, voters must incur numerous costs (such as paying for birth certificates) to apply for a government-issued ID.Underlying documents required to obtain ID cost money, a significant expense for lower-income Americans. The combined cost of document fees, travel expenses and waiting time are estimated to range from $75 to $175.Travel:The travel required is often a major burden on people with disabilities, the elderly, or those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation.In Texas, some people in rural areas must travel approximately 170 miles to reach the nearest ID office.Voter ID laws are discriminatory:Minority voters disproportionately lack ID.Nationally, up to 25% of African-American citizens of voting age lack government-issued photo ID, compared to only 8% of whites.Some Voter ID laws exclude forms of ID in a discriminatory way:Texas:allows concealed weapons permits for voting, but does not accept student ID cards.North Carolina:Until its voter ID law was struck down, North Carolina prohibited public assistance IDs and state employee ID cards, which are disproportionately held by Black voters.Wisconsin:Until recently, Wisconsin permitted active duty military ID cards, but prohibited Veterans Affairs ID cards for voting.Enforcement of Voter ID laws shows a trend of discriminatory behavior:A Caltech/MIT study found that minority voters are more frequently questioned about ID than are white voters.Voter ID laws reduces the turnout of minority voters:Several studies, including a 2014 GAO study, have found that photo ID laws have a particularly depressive effect on turnout among racial minorities and other vulnerable groups, worsening the participation gap between voters of color and whites.The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a right wing group that is funded by corporations like Exxon Mobile and the Koch brothers, is the culprit behind most of the voter ID laws: [39]Lawmakers proposed 62 photo ID bills in 37 states in the 2011 and 2012 sessions, with multiple bills introduced in some states.Ten states have passed strict photo ID laws since 2008, though several may not be in effect in November because of legal challenges.…More than half of the 62 bills were sponsored by members or conference attendees of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a Washington, D.C.-based, tax-exempt organization.At ALEC’s annual conferences, legislators, nonprofits and corporations work together without direct public input to develop bills that promote smaller government…The group’s Public Safety and Elections Task Force at the 2009 Atlanta meeting approved the “Voter ID Act,” a photo ID bill modeled on Indiana and Georgia laws.…Arkansas state Rep. Dan Greenberg, Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce and Indiana state Rep. Bill Ruppel (three Republicans now out of office) led drafting and discussion of the Voter ID Act.Critics of photo voter ID laws…say voters without a driver’s license or the means (a birth certificate or Social Security card) to obtain free ID cards at a state motor vehicles office could be disenfranchised.They claim that ALEC pushed for photo ID laws because poor Americans without ID are likely to vote against conservative interestsThe White House asked for feedback on the “Election Integrity Commission” on the White House website, which didn’t go so well. For example: [40]There was a lot of swearing:People called out Kobach and Pence specifically:Others questioned the integrity of the Commission:There were comparisons to Big Brother:Others demanded that the commissioners explain themselves:And my personal favorite:So, in conclusion, Trump’s “Commission on Election Integrity” is a waste of taxpayer money. The goal of the Commission is to create a “solution” that is looking for problems that don’t exist as well as creating problems.Are they going about it the right way? No.The premise of this Commission is based on lies.How the Commission is going about collecting the information based on a false premise is wrong.The data the Commission is wanting is likely a violation of privacy laws.Footnotes[1] Trump Asks Supporters to Prevent ‘Rigged’ Election by Becoming ‘Observers’[2] Opinion | The Voter Purges Are Coming[3] Some voters unregistering after Trump administration's data requests[4] Trump’s election integrity commission needs to redress voter suppression, not fraud[5] Analysis | Here are the first 10 members of Trump’s voting commission[6] Trump's election commission meets as critics condemn president's 'biggest lie'[7] Kris Kobach Email [8] This Trump administration official wants to make it more difficult to vote[9] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/20/this-anti-voter-fraud-program-gets-it-wrong-over-99-of-the-time-the-gop-wants-to-take-it-nationwide/?utm_term=.b08bbbc38661[10] https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3881818/SOS-Letter.pdf[11] Election Integrity Commission - State Responses[12] Trump’s voter commission is now facing at least 7 federal lawsuits[13] http://www.naacpldf.org/files/about-us/EIC%20Complaint.pdf[14] Watch Mike Pence try to defend Trump’s false claim that ‘millions’ voted illegally[15] Kris Kobach agrees with Donald Trump that ‘millions’ voted illegally but offers no evidence[16] EPIC v. Presidential Election Commission[17] https://epic.org/privacy/litigation/voter/epic-v-commission/EPIC-v-Commission-government-filing-on-DOD-database.pdf[18] American Civil Liberties Union v. Donald Trump[19] Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity[20] Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Files Lawsuit To Halt Commission Hearing for Failure to Comply With Federal Law | Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law[21] Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Files Hatch Act Complaint Against Kris Kobach | Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law[22] https://www.aclufl.org/2017/07/10/coalition-of-voting-rights-leaders-and-florida-voters-sue-presidential-commission-over-request-for-voter-information/[23] https://www.citizen.org/media/press-releases/public-citizen-sues-trump-administration-prevent-government’s-collection-voter[24] http://www.commoncause.org/press/press-releases/PenceKobachLawsuit.html?referrer=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/18/trumps-voter-fraud-commission-is-now-facing-at-least-7-federal-lawsuits/?utm_term=.696f889ac706?referrer=http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/18/trumps-voter-commission-facing-several-federal-lawsuits/[25] All Your Voter Data Are Belong To Us | Take Care[26] http://www.ncsl.org/Documents/Elections/The_Canvass_February_2016_66.pdf[27] Full List Facts and Info - Voter List Information[28] States - Voter List Information[29] ELECTION CODE CHAPTER 18. PROCEDURES FOR IDENTIFYING REGISTERED VOTERS[30] President Trump’s Election Commission Has Already Violated Federal Law | Take Care[31] Trump voter-fraud panel’s data request a gold mine for hackers, experts warn[32] Voter Turnout Data - United States Elections Project[33] A News21 2012 National Project[34] https://s3.amazonaws.com/dl.ncsbe.gov/sboe/Post-Election%20Audit%20Report_2016%20General%20Election/Post-Election_Audit_Report.pdf[35] In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud[36] Analysis | Do voter identification laws suppress minority voting? Yes. We did the research.[37] States push new voter requirements, fueled by Trump[38] Oppose Voter ID Legislation - Fact Sheet[39] Oppose Voter ID Legislation - Fact Sheet[40] https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/docs/comments-received-june-29-through-july-11-2017.pdf