[House Hearing, 114 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE ACTIONS ON IMMI-
RATION AND THEIR IMPACT ON FEDERAL
AND STATE ELECTIONS
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
AND THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH CARE,
BENEFITS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 12, 2015
__________
Serial No. 114-5
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
http://www.house.gov/reform
____________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
93-973 PDF WASHINGTON : 2015
____________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah, Chairman
JOHN L. MICA, Florida ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland,
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio Ranking Minority Member
JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
JIM JORDAN, Ohio ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
TIM WALBERG, Michigan Columbia
JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee JIM COOPER, Tennessee
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania
CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
RON DeSANTIS, Florida TED LIEU, California
MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
KEN BUCK, Colorado STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
MARK WALKER, North Carolina MARK DeSAULNIER, California
ROD BLUM, Iowa BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
JODY B. HICE, Georgia PETER WELCH, Vermont
STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
WILL HURD, Texas
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama
Sean McLaughlin, Staff Director
Art Arthur, Staff Director, Subcommittee on National Security
Sang Yi, Professional Staff Member
Sharon Casey, Deputy Chief Clerk
David Rapallo, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on National Security
RON DeSANTIS Jr Florida, Chairman
JOHN L. MICA, Florida STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts,
JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR. Tennessee Ranking Member
JODY B. HICE, Georgia TED LIEU, California
STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma, Vice Chair ROBIN KELLY, Illinois
WILL HURD, Texas BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules
JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chairman
TIM WALBERG, Michigan, MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania,
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee Ranking Member
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming Columbia
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
RON DeSANTIS, Florida MARK DeSAULNIER, California
MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina, Vice BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
Chair JIM COOPER, Tennessee
MARK WALKER, North Carolina MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico
JODY B, HICE, Georgia Vacancy
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on February 12, 2015................................ 1
WITNESSES
The Hon. Jon Husted, Ohio Secretary of State
Written Statement............................................ 00
Oral Statement............................................... 00
The Hon. Kris Kobach, Kansas Secetary of State
Written Statement............................................ 00
Oral Statement............................................... 00
The Hon. Hans Von Spakovsky, Senior Legal Fellow, Edwin Meese III
Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, The Heritage Foundation
Written Statement............................................ 00
Oral Statement............................................... 00
The Hon. Matthew Dunlap, Maine Secretary of State
Written Statement............................................ 00
Oral Statement............................................... 00
APPENDIX
2015-02-12 Rep. Castro Statement................................. 00
2015-02-12 Rep. Fudge Statement.................................. 00
2015-01-27 Letter from OH Sec. of State Jon Husted to President
Obama.......................................................... 00
Kansas Voter Registration Form................................... 00
Ohio Voter Registration Form..................................... 00
Maine Voter Registration Form.................................... 00
2008-08-20 The Myth of Widespread Non-Citizen Voting............. 00
THE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE ACTIONS ON IMMIGRATION AND THEIR IMPACT ON
FEDERAL AND STATE ELECTIONS
----------
Thursday, February 12, 2015,
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on National Security, joint with the
Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and
Administrative Rules,
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Ron
DeSantis [chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security]
presiding.
Present from Subcommittee on National Security:
Representatives DeSantis, Hice, Duncan, Lynch, Kelly, and Lieu.
Present from Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and
Administrative Rules: Representatives Jordan, Carter, Hice,
Meadows, Walker, DeSantis, Walberg, Watson Coleman, Norton, and
DeSaulnier.
Also present: Representatives Chaffetz and Castro.
Mr. DeSantis. The subcommittee will come to order.
Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
We are a government of, by, and for the American people.
This means that the American people can, through their elected
representatives, set whatever policies, including immigration
policy, they see fit. The law can allow for unlimited
immigration, limited immigration, or even zero immigration. But
when the Government fails to enforce whatever laws happen to be
on the books, it undermines our ability to govern ourselves.
Likewise, when the President issued his executive edict
granting five million work permits and Social Security numbers
for individuals illegally present in our Country, which, by the
way, will also make these individuals eligible for taxpayer
finance welfare payments, he harmed the American people's
ability to govern themselves. After all, the American people
never voted for such a policy. Indeed, the stinging rebuke
delivered to the President's party in November, if anything,
provided evidence that the public rejected what the President
had long been threatening to do.
Under the President's policy, U.S. workers will face a
$3,000 hiring disadvantage due to the Affordable Care Act. The
American people had no say in enacting such a policy. Legal
immigrants will see the hefty application fees they must pay to
be diverted to administer the President's unconstitutional
program, which will make these legal immigrants wait longer.
The American people never approved such unfairness.
Taxpayers will be on the hook to pay, as Commissioner John
Koskinen said just yesterday, retroactive tax credit payments
to people who were working in our Country illegally for years.
The American taxpayer was never given a voice about this.
So the President's policy undermines our basic ability to
govern ourselves. And the reason we are having this hearing
today is to showcase an even more significant, perhaps,
ramification of what the President has done, a ramification
that could undermine the integrity of our elections.
Through the President's executive actions, millions of non-
citizens will be able to obtain valid Social Security numbers
and State driver's licenses. Under Federal law, any person with
a valid Social Security number or driver's license can register
to vote as long as he attests to his eligibility to do so.
Therefore, the President's executive actions dramatically
increase the risk that non-citizens may illegally register to
vote.
Now, the problem of non-citizens voting already exists.
Some experts have found that thousands of non-citizens may be
registered to vote in some States, and perhaps as many as tens
of thousands nationwide. A study that was released last year
found that some non-citizens do participate in U.S. elections
and that this participation has already had a meaningful effect
in election outcomes, including electoral college votes and
congressional elections.
The President's executive actions make this problem of non-
citizen voting worse without offering any solutions or
assistance to the States. Non-citizen voting undermines voter
confidence and damages the integrity of Federal elections. And
make no mistake, as an elected official, I don't want my vote
totals diminished because of a non-citizen to vote, but I also
don't want them to be enhanced, either. I want the actual voice
of the American people to carry the day.
Today we will hear from secretaries of State, officials
tasked with the responsibility of administering elections in
their States. They will testify how the President's executive
actions will affect their voter registration rolls and their
elections in their States. In fact, one of our witnesses today,
Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted, wrote to President Obama
about this very issue. He requested his Administration to
``work with us to minimize the impact on the integrity of our
elections and to ensure only eligible voters participate in
State and Federal elections.''
We will also hear from an expert on voter fraud and voting
rights laws issues to help us understand the consequences of
the President's executive actions.
Today's hearing is about upholding the integrity of our
elections and ensuring that every American's vote counts.
This is the first hearing that we have had on the
Subcommittee on National Security, but it is a joint hearing
with my friend, Jim Jordan. But I did want to recognize the
ranking member on our National Security Subcommittee, Stephen
Lynch, from the frozen tundra of Boston.
I am happy to work with you, Stephen, although I am
jealous. Coming from Boston, you guys four Super Bowls in the
last 15 years, three World Series. We don't get that much love
in Florida.
With that, I will recognize the ranking member for 5
minutes.
Mr. Lynch. Well, I appreciate the congratulations and the
condolences for the weather.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and I also want to thank
our panel of witnesses that have come forward to help the
committee with its work.
While I do share President Obama's frustration with the
inability of Congress to produce a balanced and sustainable
immigration policy, I do have some lingering concerns about the
precedence set by the President's executive actions on
immigration, especially when it comes to other major issues
that a future Congress may struggle to address. That is why I
continue to welcome the opportunity as a direct representative
of my constituents to consider and debate our Nation's
immigration policy on its merits.
Regrettably, the looming February 27 deadline to avoid a
shutdown of the entire Department of Homeland Security
demonstrates that some Members of Congress have chosen a more
drastic route in response to the President's executive action.
In particular, Republican leadership is attempting, I think, to
condition our Nation's continued anti-terrorism, border
enforcement, and cybersecurity funding on reversing the
President's immigration orders. And I am not sure, but to is a
partial Government shutdown and furloughing of approximately
30,000 dedicated Homeland Security employees an appropriate
response to the President's executive orders? I am not so sure
that it is.
Similarly, today's hearing now attempts to tie the debate
over the President's executive action to a different and
unrelated issue, I think, the misguided, at times, premise that
the President's immigration orders pose a threat of voter fraud
by non-citizens who will somehow hijack the election process
and thereby threaten our national security.
The rights of citizens in this Country to vote is one of
the most basic tenets of who we are as a people and is a
cornerstone of our democratic system that must be protected.
However, the threat we are here to discuss today is virtually
nonexistent if you look at the legal and electoral evidence.
Non-citizen voter fraud is not, in fact, an active or
present threat to our national security. None of the
President's executive actions on immigration launch voter fraud
into the realm of a clear and present danger or national
security concern.
The truth is the President's actions leave State and
Federal voting requirements untouched. I want to repeat that.
The President's actions leave State and Federal voting
requirements untouched. They do not change Federal elections
law and they leave State elections laws unaltered.
Nevertheless, it appears that we are here today to discuss
voter fraud, especially by non-citizens present in the Country.
I understand some of our witnesses have expressed concerns
to the contrary; however, it simply does not seem plausible
that immigrants who apply for deferred action will then choose
to ignore Federal and State laws prominently displayed on voter
registration forms and then fraudulently attest to being a U.S.
citizen just so they can illegally register to vote.
When you look at the penalties that would be on an
individual in that case, that might have received a deferred
status and is allowed to come to the Country, that they would
risk all of that to vote in an election where only 30 or 40
percent of our own citizens, without penalty, choose to vote in
those elections, it just strains the realm of credibility.
Further, this argument presumes that these people will then
fraudulently vote en masse in order to affect the outcomes of
elections in swing States, even though this means that under
the immigration law they will be deemed ineligible for
admission to the U.S. or other immigration benefits, the very
kinds of benefits these people are seeking in the first place.
To fraudulently vote, non-citizens would have to ignore
every real consequence of voter fraud, such as being deported
if discovered. And yet some of my colleagues claim that we
should be worried about a flood of these instances.
I looked at the numbers, thinking that perhaps despite all
the protections in place, this is a widespread problem. But
studies and investigations have shown that non-citizen voter
fraud makes up .00003 percent, the tiniest percentage of votes
cast in this Country.
Just to cite a few examples, only 17 instances of non-
citizen voter fraud, again, .0003 percent of the total votes
cast were found through Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted's
own investigation, and he is here to testify today, of the 2012
general elections.
Additionally, in a State legislative hearing on the issue
in Kansas last year, Secretary of State Kobach, again a guest
of us this morning, could only cite 20 non-citizen registrants
in the whole State. And out of the 20 non-citizens who were
registered, only 5 actually voted, so they are having the same
problem with non-citizens voting as we are with citizens
actually coming to vote.
So, again, I am disappointed that we are here today
spending our valuable time and resources on unfounded concerns,
because there are some real concerns out there. I realize that
the President's executive orders have spurred extremely
polarizing conversations in Congress, but as the ranking member
of the National Security Subcommittee, I hope I can work with
you, Mr. Chairman, to refocus on our efforts on some of the
very real issues that we face moving forward.
Again, I want to thank the panelists for taking the time
from their important responsibilities to testify today, and I
especially look forward to hearing more about what we are doing
to protect the rights of eligible voters in our States and
getting the 60 to 70 percent of voters who are legal citizens
of this Country but who don't choose to vote.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. DeSantis. The vote clock, it looks like we have about 4
minutes left on the vote tally. I wanted to get Mr. Jordan's
opening Statement, but I think it would be prudent just to
recess the hearing now. When we return, Mr. Jordan will give
his Statement, Ms. Norton will give hers, the witnesses will
give theirs, and then the members will be able to ask some
questions.
So we stand in recess until the conclusion of this first
vote series.
[Recess.]
Mr. DeSantis. Before I recognize my colleague, Chairman
Jordan, I ask unanimous concern that our colleague from the
20th District of Texas, Congressman Joaquin Castro, be allowed
to fully participate in today's hearing. Without objection, so
ordered.
I now recognize Mr. Jim Jordan, chairman of the
Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules
for his opening Statement.
Mr. Jordan. I thank the chairman.
In the previous, Mr. Lynch, the ranking member, talked
about just 20 non-citizens on the voter rolls in Kansas, I
think was the example. If it's one, that is a problem. And the
issue today is there is potentially five million more potential
problems.
So let's remember what got us here. Twenty-two times the
President said he couldn't do what he turned around and did.
His actions violated the rule of law and the United States
Constitution. You don't have to take my word for it; we have
all kinds of law professors who say what he did was unlawful
and a violation of the Constitution. And not just any law
professors, all kinds of liberal law professors said that.
But the point is also it is not just the unconstitutional
action the President took last November; it is the unfairness
of that action. As the chairman pointed out in his opening
Statement, is it fair to seniors that non-citizens are going to
get Social Security benefits? Is it fair to taxpayers that non-
citizens are going to get tax refunds? Is it fair to legal
immigrants that non-citizens, illegals, are going to get moved
to the front of the line and slow down the legal immigrants
from getting the status they deserve? And is it fair that now
there is the potential for non-citizens to participate in our
elections?
Those are the issues and that is why we are having this
hearing, and that is why I want to welcome our panel. I
particularly want to welcome Jon Husted, our Secretary of
State, who has done an outstanding job in a State that is
always the center of the universe every 4 years in Presidential
elections, and just done a commendable job in his work running
the elections in our State.
Seven Democrats, Mr. Chairman, seven Democrats in the U.S.
Senate, if they would just do what they said should be done
last November. Last November, when the President did his
violation of the rule of law, violation of the Constitution,
executive amnesty order, seven Senate Democrats said it was
wrong. If they would just vote to allow our bill to come up for
debate. They can amend it, they can try to change it; that is
how the process works. They won't even let it come up. If seven
Democrats would just do what they said last year should be
done, we could get this Department of Homeland Security funded
and we could stop the unconstitutional action of the President.
And I again want to thank our panel for being here and
highlighting one of the real concerns that exist because of
what the President did.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman yields back.
The chair now recognizes Ms. Norton, Ranking Member of the
Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits, and Administrative
Rules, for her opening Statement.
Ms. Norton. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. Actually, I am here
for the ranking member. I am a member of the full committee and
a member of this subcommittee, but I want to express my
condolences to the chair of this committee, Matt Cartwright,
whose father passed and who, therefore, cannot be here today. I
know our thoughts and prayers are with Representative
Cartwright.
This hearing on immigration fraud by non-citizens would be
laughable if the subject were not so serious. Latino and other
people of color and other immigrants will not regard it as very
funny. They will be particularly insulted by this faux hearing
on a non-existent issue, and they will be joined by countless
of other Americans.
I quote from the testimony, which I will ask to be included
in the record, of the Ohio State NAACP. As they say in their
testimony, ``Voter fraud has not been perpetuated by
immigrants, nor have they been exacerbated by changes in
national immigration policies. Rather, we have spent 106 years
battling voting fraud, which was perpetuated primarily by
election officials who refused to register voters because of
what they look like or whose purges appear to be concentrated
among certain demographics.''
This hearing, coming as it does on the 50th anniversary of
the Voting Rights Act, when Republicans and Democrats are about
to go to Selma to commemorate that Act in March, comes close to
an insult, and this is particularly so when the Majority has
announced, indeed, announced early, that the House will not
even have a hearing on the Voting Rights Act.
I want to take a moment to thank Representative Jim
Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin, and Representative John
Lewis, Democrat of Georgia and a hero of the civil rights
movement, for their co-sponsorship of a bill to update the
Voting Rights Act of 1965, as instructed by the Supreme Court
of the United States.
It takes chutzpah, or disregard, or even disrespect, to
hold a hearing alleging fraud by Latino and other immigrants.
What have they received? Only the rudimentary right, the
temporary permission to remain in this Country to work,
unrelated entirely, of course, as the Majority knows, to the
right to vote. The data about fraud is manifestly and
overwhelmingly in the other direction. We should be glad that
there is something in this Country that you don't have to have
a hearing about.
It took minority Americans 150 years after the Civil War to
get the same right to vote that other Americans took for
granted and often don't even exercise. A couple of years ago
the Supreme Court did not nullify the Voting Rights Act, but
they did ask this Congress to update it. Instead, we see States
covered by the Act already passing laws designed to keep black
people and Hispanics from voting, manifestly so, and we see
Republicans in the rest of the Country spreading barriers,
including Ohio, where we have a witness today and one of the
States involved.
The President's executive order gives immigrants the right
to stay; immigrants who have been here for years; immigrants
who have been working hard and whose labor we have needed. Even
the bipartisan immigration reform bill passed by the Senate
last Congress would have postponed the right to vote for
immigrants for more than a decade.
The Republicans may want to go down in history as the party
who tried once again, 100 years later, to nullify the right to
vote. Well, I am here today to say they shall not succeed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentlelady's time has expired.
I will hold the record open for five legislative days for
any members who would like to submit a written Statement.
We will now recognize our first panel of witnesses. I am
pleased to welcome the Honorable Jon Husted, Secretary of State
for the State of Ohio; the Honorable Kris Kobach, Secretary of
State for the State of Kansas; The Honorable Hans von
Spakovsky, Senior Legal Fellow at the Edwin Meese Center for
Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation; and the
Honorable Matthew Dunlap, Secretary of State for the State of
Maine. Welcome all.
Pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be sworn in
before they testify, so please rise and raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are
about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
[Witnesses respond in the affirmative.]
Mr. DeSantis. All witnesses answered in the affirmative.
Thank you. Please be seated.
In order to allow time for discussion, please limit your
testimony to 5 minutes. Your entire written Statement will be
made a part of the record.
With that, Mr. Husted, you are up.
WITNESS STATEMENTS
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JON HUSTED
Mr. Husted. Thank you, Chairman DeSantis and Ranking Member
Lynch and the members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the
opportunity to be here today. My name is Jon Husted. I am the
Ohio Secretary of State, and in that capacity I serve as our
State's chief election official. I am here to proactively
address what I believe is an important issue facing my State
and the Nation regarding the integrity of our elections.
As the chief elections official in a key swing State, I
have tried to build an election system where it is easy to vote
and hard to cheat. We have done this by ensuring easy access to
the voting process and by working to ensure that only eligible
voters are on the voting rolls. I want to bring to your
attention my concern that the President's recent immigration
accountability executive actions will make it more difficult
for elections officials to determine if all voters meet the
primary standard for voting, which is U.S. citizenship.
I am not here to debate immigration policy or the
President's executive actions. However, I am here to
emphatically say that we cannot follow both the Federal law and
the executive action and ensure the integrity of the elections
process without further assistance from Congress or from the
Obama Administration. Let me briefly explain why.
For an estimated four to five million non-citizens, the
President's executive actions provide access to Social Security
numbers and driver's licenses. These are the same documents
that Federal law requires the States to recognize as valid
forms of identification for voter registration. Under Federal
law, anyone with a valid Social Security number or driver's
license number can register to vote provided they attest they
are a U.S. citizen. However, there is no way for us to validate
this citizenship Statement since, under the executive actions
previously, undocumented non-citizens will have access to the
same documents as U.S. citizens.
This issue becomes especially complicated in States like
Ohio, where millions of dollars are spent on third-party voter
registration drives where no election official would be present
to make clear the eligibility requirements for voting. By
signing the voter registration form and asserting citizenship
falsely or erroneously, non-citizens could face real legal
consequences. In Ohio, falsification is a fifth degree felony.
This could affect their ability to remain in the United States
and to become citizens.
Let me interject some perspective before I go further. It
is not my belief that four to five million non-citizens are
going to get on the voting rolls. Nor is it my belief that
third-party registration drive organizers are waiting to
exploit this loophole in law. While I am committed to ensuring
the security and the integrity of the elections in Ohio and
throughout the Country, it is important for us to recognize
that people can sometimes sign documents, in this case a voter
registration form, without fully comprehending the rules and
requirements.
Acknowledging that I do not expect this to be a systemic or
widespread problem, we also cannot ignore that there are real
electoral consequences. Presidential elections get most of the
attention, but every year there are thousands of State and
local elections in Ohio, and in the last 15 months alone 70
elections in our State were decided by one vote or tied.
Seventy elections were decided by one vote or tied. These were
mayoral elections, school and tax levies, bond issues, members
of city councils, township trustees, and school boards.
In light of these examples alone, we simply cannot overlook
policies that may allow ineligible voters to cast ballots. We
want to find the least intrusive solution to closing this
loophole without making it unnecessarily difficult to register
to vote.
While opinions may vary on the best solution for this
issue, one thing is clear: we cannot solve this Federal problem
solely at the State level alone.
In a letter to President Obama on January the 27th, I asked
that his Administration provide election officials with
realtime access to accurate searchable electronic data bases of
non-citizens who have valid Social Security numbers. This would
enable me and my counterparts in other States to prevent
illegal registrations and, more importantly, reassure the
public that steps have been taken to ensure only eligible
voters are participating in Federal, State, and local
elections.
In Ohio we are what we can to prevent non-citizen
registrations in voting. We electronically share data between
the State's Bureau of Motor Vehicles and our county boards of
elections which process voter registrations. This partnership
and the data provided allow my office to conduct a review of
Ohio's voter rolls to determine if, through the use of a
driver's license, non-citizens were registered to vote in Ohio.
Following the 2012 Presidential election, we found through
this information that 291 non-citizens were registered to vote
and 17 had actually cast ballots. Those 17 were referred for
further investigation and prosecution, and my office sent
letters to the other 274 to cancel their voter registrations.
However, without Federal assistance, we cannot perform the
same cross-match with registrations using Social Security
numbers. As a result, these executive actions could
significantly increase the potential pool of illegal
registrations in Ohio and around the Country.
It is also important to note that Federal law limits the
ways States can maintain their voter rolls, in some cases
prohibiting States from removing a voter from the rolls until
they have been inactive for two consecutive Federal general
elections. That means that when evidence suggests a person is a
non-citizen on the rolls, we cannot remove them immediately;
they have to remove themselves. This makes it especially
important that we prevent an ineligible voter from getting on
the rolls in the first place.
As I Stated earlier, my focus as the chief elections
official in Ohio is to make it easy to vote and hard to cheat.
The debate over voter fraud and voter suppression already
breeds significant hyperbole from across the political spectrum
that erodes public confidence. In this environment,
administering elections fairly and accurately becomes more
difficult when the path exists where millions more non-citizens
can register to vote in elections and elections officials have
no way to identify these individuals.
[Prepared Statement of Mr. Husted follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. DeSantis. Thank you, Mr. Husted. Your time has expired.
We are going to take your Statement, it will be entered in the
record, and you will have the ability to expand on some of that
with our questions.
The chair now recognizes Secretary Kobach for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE KRIS KOBACH
Mr. Kobach. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee. I come to you chiefly in my capacity as Kansas's
Secretary of State, but also in my private capacity I am the
lead attorney representing 10 ICE agents who sued the Secretary
of Homeland Security in the case of Crane vs. Napolitano, now
Crane vs. Johnson. The District Court in Texas ruled that the
President's first executive amnesty violates Federal law at 8
U.S.C. 1225(b)(2)(A) by ordering ICE agents to refrain from
placing into removal proceedings aliens who are required to be
placed into removal proceedings by Federal law.
I mention this because it is problematic for so many legal
reasons what this executive amnesty has done. But let's talk a
little bit about the voter fraud that we have observed
empirically in the State of Kansas.
At the outset, it is important to note that four States,
Kansas, Arizona, Georgia, and Alabama, require proof of
citizenship, documentary proof of citizenship when the person
registers. In the other 46 States they are exceedingly
vulnerable to what this executive amnesty has done, but even in
those four States, because of the recent decision of the
Election Assistance Commission, a board that is not supposed to
have any policymaking authority, people can use the Federal
form to circumvent our proof of citizenship requirement in
those four States.
I want to give you a few examples of aliens being
registered and voting illegally in the State of Kansas. The
most notorious case was in Seward County, in southwest Kansas,
in 1997. There was a county issue on the ballot whether or not
to prohibit a certain kind of hog farming operation. Across the
border, in Guymon, Oklahoma, there was a processing plant where
they hoped to render the hogs that were raised in Kansas.
Shortly before election day, according to the testimony of
the county clerk of Seward County, an envelope arrived with
about 50 registration cards from employees at the hog
processing plant in Oklahoma giving, in many cases, fictitious
addresses in Kansas and asking to be registered in Kansas. She
knew, based on her own personal knowledge of some of the
individuals and in subsequent observations, that many, if not,
most of these were not U.S. citizens, and also based on her
knowledge of the composition of the plant employee base. But
she was powerless at that time to do anything about it.
They were registered and on election day many van load
after many van load of employees at the Guymon plant in
Oklahoma came north and voted in Kansas to try to steal that
election. Fortunately, it was a very high election turnout; it
was a very contentious issue. Fifty-one percent turned out and
the illegal votes did not prevail and sway and overcome the
votes of the U.S. citizens.
I want to give you another example. In August 2010, across
the river from where I live, I am in Kansas City, Kansas, in
North Kansas City, Missouri, this one has been widely reported
in the press, August primary in a district for a State
representative seat between Rizzo and Royster. According to the
sworn testimony of poll workers, and I have attached one of
those to my written testimony, they observed approximately 50
Somali nationals who were brought in by a coach and the ballot
was translated for those individuals. They were instructed to
vote for Mr. Rizzo and in that case Mr. Rizzo won the election
by one vote. Successful use of aliens to steal an election.
Again, it occurs typically in smaller elections, not so
much in mass, nationwide elections.
I give you another example in my testimony of 20 aliens in
Kansas. Now, it was mentioned in some of the opening remarks
that, well, that 20 is not very much. Well, those 20 are the
ones where we know the exact name of the alien and we presented
those to Federal District Court in a separate litigation. We
know of many others, including the 50 in Seward County, but we
don't have the exact names.
And this illustrates a problem. Once the alien gets on the
voter rolls, there is no magical way you can say that must be
an alien or that must be an alien. You cannot identify them
once they are on, except for very limited ways, such as using
your driver's license data base to cross-match in those limited
cases where the driver's license indicates that it is an alien
and not a citizen. So this is an irreversible consequence. Once
these individuals get on the voter rolls, you are not going to
get them off except in very, very rare circumstances.
Now, I want to talk a little bit about how the President's
directive actually exacerbates the problem. In many States
these aliens will get a driver's license once they have an
employment authorization document. Some States, like Wisconsin,
State law requires it to be issued. In all of the 10 States of
the Ninth Circuit now, they will have to give these individuals
driver's licenses. That comes out of a decision that the Ninth
Circuit rendered last year. So that does change things.
Five point eight million illegal aliens who previously did
not have a driver's license now have the ability to get one,
and they certainly have the ability to get a Social Security
number, which will in turn allow them to register to vote. If
these aliens in Kansas, or in Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, even
our States where you have proof of citizenship, if they use the
Federal form, they can register to vote.
This is a problem. These consequences are irreversible. And
we are trying to fight this in the courts, but the courts are
taking a long time to hear these issues, even though they have,
to date, agreed with our position that it is illegal and it is
a problem. The consequences are not imaginary, the numbers are
real, and we need your help in dealing with it.
[Prepared Statement of Mr. Kobach follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes Mr. von Spakovsky for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HANS VON SPAKOVSKY
Mr. von Spakovsky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The U.S. already has a problem with non-citizens being able
to easily register and vote with little chance of detection or
even prosecution. There have been numerous such cases from
Florida to Virginia to Ohio to California. These ineligible
voters could make the difference in a close election. Let me
just give you a few examples.
In 2010, a Florida immigration judge issued an order in a
removal case for a Cuban citizen who entered Miami in 2004. She
voted in the November 2004 election. This was not detected by
local election officials; it only came to light because she
applied for a change in immigration status. She initially lied
about voting, but admitted it after DHS uncovered it in a check
of local voter registration records. If she had not tried to
change her immigration status, she could have easily continued
to vote illegally, without detection.
This is not an isolated case. In 2005, a GAO report said
that it found that 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called
for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a 2-year
period in just one United States district court were not U.S.
citizens. Now, that may not seem like many, but 3 percent of
registered voters would have been more than enough to provide
the winning margin in Florida in 2000.
In just one 3-year period, from 2002 to 2005, the U.S.
Justice Department prosecuted a dozen non-citizens for
registering and voting in Florida, including a non-citizen who
had been a candidate for the State legislature. These cases
were discovered accidentally, not through any systemic review
of election records.
The current Justice Department is not interested in
enforcing these laws. In 2011, when I was a member of the
Fairfax County electoral board in Virginia, we discovered 278
individuals who had registered to vote, despite Virginia DMV
records showing they were not U.S. citizens; 117 of them had
voted. We provided that information to the Justice Department;
no action was taken to investigate or prosecute these cases.
A voter registration card is an easily obtainable document
that an illegal alien can use for many different purposes.
Federal law requires employers to verify the identity of new
employees. The Federal I-9 Form provides a list of
documentation that can be used to establish identity, including
a voter registration card.
A Federal grand jury in 1984 found large numbers of aliens
registered in Chicago. The grand jury reported that aliens
``register to vote so they can obtain documents identifying
them as U.S. citizens and have used their voter cards to obtain
a myriad of benefits, from Social Security to jobs with the
Defense Department.''
Now, Federal immigration law requires DHS to ``respond to
any inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency
seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration
status of any individual. However, it is only since Florida
successfully sued DHS, in 2012, over its refusal to verify
citizenship data for election officials that the Government has
finally started working with State election officials and given
them limited access to the Systematic Alien Verification for
Entitlements, or SAVE, data base.
President Obama's executive action for as many as 5 million
aliens will greatly exacerbate this problem just given the
sheer numbers of new individuals who will be given quasi-legal
status to be present and working in the U.S. These aliens will
be given Social Security numbers and will obtain driver's
licenses. Thus, it will be easier for them to register to vote
illegally, since they will be able to meet the Help America
Vote Act's requirement that voter registration applicants
provide the last four digits of their Social Security number or
their current driver's license. As a result, it will be more
difficult for election officials to prevent or detect non-
citizens who intentionally or negligently affirm their
eligibility to vote and use these new ID documents.
What I would recommend is as follows:
First of all, all Social Security numbers issued to aliens
should have the letter N to designate non-citizen at the end of
the number so they can easily be identified as non-citizens.
DHS should work with the States to develop a more
accessible process or system to verify the citizenship of
registrants, especially those who get deferred action.
Congress should investigate why DOJ is not prosecuting
registration and voting by non-citizens, which are serious
criminal offenses.
They also should investigate whether DHS is granting
citizenship or deferred status to aliens who have illegally
registered or voted in past elections.
All Federal courts should be required to notify local
election officials when individuals are summonsed for jury duty
from voter registration rolls are excused because they are not
U.S. citizens.
And a voter registration card should not be acceptable as
ID on the Federal I-9 Form in States that have not implemented
proof of citizenship requirements.
Thanks.
[Prepared Statement of Mr. von Spakovsky follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes Secretary Dunlap for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MATTHEW DUNLAP
Mr. Dunlap. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, distinguished members
of the committee. My name is Matt Dunlap. I live in Old Town,
Maine, and I am Maine's Secretary of State, and I thank you for
the opportunity to sit with you today and talk a little bit
about the aspects of voter registration and some of the
supporting documents that we utilize to ensure the integrity of
that process.
I am also the chief motor vehicle official for the State of
Maine, so we issue about a million driver's licenses, and that
process has changed significantly over the last 10, 15 years,
and I will speak to that quite briefly.
I am quite pleased to tell you that in the State of Maine,
at least, registering to vote, along with every other aspect of
the elections process, is highly accessible to qualified
citizens and is quite secure. In order to register to vote, you
fill out the registration card, you have to present a photo
identification or non-photo government official documentation,
provide an official document that shows proof of your
residency; and we allow for election day registration, no-
excuse absentee balloting. We had strong systems in the
military and overseas voter empowerment act. We have a number
of provisions in the law that open the doors to voters to come
and participate in our process.
In the 10 years that I have been Secretary of State, we
have sent two cases of misuse of a ballot to the attorney
general for prosecution. Now, I think it is important for me to
note here, in the discussion that is centered today around the
prospect of voter fraud, that no amount of fraud is acceptable.
Nonetheless, it is extraordinarily rare, so what we talk
about in the context of voter access is the importance of
having integrity in the process, but also access. People need
to know that that system belongs to them and that they can
trust it. So the processes that we have in place, including a
series of sworn Statements that people take an oath to, works
quite well and is well policed by local elections officials.
The consequences for violating Maine election law are
fairly precipitous. In fact, under one of the very first
sections of Title 21-A in the Maine revised statutes, it says a
person is guilty of a crime if they knowingly violate a
provision of this title for which no penalty has already been
provided. So the message there is don't even think about it.
And for people who are non-immigrant aliens, the consequences
for attempting to register to vote or vote are even more
precipitous. After they serve a prison sentence, they are
deported and can no longer seek admission as a citizen to our
Country.
Now, assuming that they get that far, it is also important
to know that the documents that they have access to are heavily
described in law to prevent misuse of those documents,
including the driver's license. It used to be all you had to do
was pass the eye test, written test, and road test. But now you
also have to provide proof of citizenship or legal presence in
this Country. If you are eligible for a Social Security number,
you must provide it to us. And these things have done an awful
lot to make the credentials more secure, but also less
convenient to obtain for our citizens.
In terms of the work that we do on voter registration and
driver's license issuance, it is important for me to note, in
looking over the executive orders, that the executive orders
really change nothing in how we do our work. The protections in
our systems remain, they are uncompromised, and, at least in
the State of Maine, they work pretty well.
What I have experienced as the chief motor vehicle officer
in the State of Maine is that, actually, a lot of the new
requirements I just described, which run parallel to
requirements for compliance to the Real ID Act of 2005, do
create profound hardships for American citizens trying to
comply, and we spend a lot of time in our exceptions process
trying to make sure people can comply with the law.
As an administrator, you have to treat everybody the same.
It is easy to isolate people and call them potential terrorists
or illegal aliens using systems that the Federal Government has
very neatly exempted itself from participating in, but when you
have people who are born in Canada, who are American citizens,
trying to prove that they are Americans can be a troubling
process for them; and we spend a lot of time trying to help
American citizens comply with our laws.
We have never had an experience as described by my
colleagues, with undocumented aliens trying to throw our
elections. My experience is they don't come here to vote and
they don't come here to drive; they come here to find a better
life; and the changes in immigration law which make it very
difficult for them to pursue that is occupied entirely by the
Federal Government. That field is yours, and yours alone. It is
our job to try to help citizens comply with the law.
I will try to answer any questions at the pleasure of the
chair that come from this committee, sir.
[Prepared Statement of Mr. Dunlap follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. DeSantis. Thank you, Secretary Dunlap.
The chair now recognizes himself for 5 minutes.
If you look at the President's executive order, I think, as
has been pointed out by some of my Democratic colleagues, it
doesn't say anything about voting; it talks about the work
permits and the Social Security numbers, kind of the positive
benefits that will result from this exercise of ``prosecutorial
discretion.'' But it doesn't say anything about voting.
So, Secretary Kobach, what would your response be when
people say the President didn't even address voting. How could
this possibly be an issue?
Mr. Kobach. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is perhaps an
unintended consequence of what the President has done through
these executive actions, because you are now giving
approximately 5.8 million people, once they get their deferred
action, a Social Security number and they, in turn, can get
that driver's license.
I want to point something out. Of the aliens that we have
specifically identified in Kansas on the voter rolls, the ones
that were presented to the Federal District Court,
approximately half of those aliens registered at the DMV; and
this was before we had our proof of citizenship requirement in
place. So when you get that driver's license, at all too many
DMVs across the Country, the clerk who has been handing out
licenses all day long and has done several hundred within just
the morning alone, will oftentimes, out of rote habit, say, and
would you like to register to vote at the end of the process.
So aliens are often given the opportunity to register to
vote by someone they see as a government agent. And they
sometimes use that as an excuse when they eventually are found,
and sometimes in cases in the previous administration, when
people were deported for falsely asserting U.S. citizenship,
which is a felony under Federal law, they would sometimes say,
but I thought I could register to vote because this lady who
works for the government asked me if I would like to register
to vote.
So quite often the government agent on behalf of the county
unwittingly invites the alien to register; the alien
unwittingly assumes that he is able to register. So in many
cases it is going to be completely accidental, but it will
happen. It is a guaranty that it will happen, because when they
go to the DMV they will almost certainly be asked that
question.
Mr. DeSantis. Mr. Husted, you wrote a letter to the
President after he issued these executive actions, this was
late January 2015, and you wanted the Federal Government, I
think, to cooperate with the State so that you could ensure the
integrity of the elections. Have you received a response from
the Administration about that letter?
Mr. Husted. Mr. Chairman, I have not.
Mr. DeSantis. And what would you like the Administration to
do and how will that help you do your job to ensure elections
with integrity?
Mr. Husted. What we have asked them for are anybody who is
receiving a Social Security number who is a non-citizen, we
would like to have the name, the date of birth, and the last
four digits of their Social Security number. That would allow
us to match it against our Statewide voter data base to
determine whether anyone who is a non-citizen is on our voter
rolls, and then we would go through the process of trying to
remove them.
But that is simply what we are asking for. We believe that
it is something that should be easily doable for the Federal
Government. And that would include people who are here under
present tools that allow you to be in America legally and those
who would come under the President's new administrative action.
Mr. DeSantis. And do you concur with that, Mr. Kobach,
would that be helpful?
Mr. Kobach. That would be helpful. I do think it would also
be helpful for the Congress to clarify that the Election
Assistance Commission is a service agency, not a policymaking
agency, and that it should not have the authority, which it has
illegally exercised, at least according to the district court,
but that case is still pending, its authority to tell States,
no, we don't think you need proof of citizenship, which is
essentially what that agency did. In fact, I shouldn't say
that, it wasn't the Commission, it was a temporary executive
director of the Commission that rendered that opinion. So that
would also be helpful.
Mr. DeSantis. Mr. von Spakovsky, you are somebody who is
very knowledgeable; you write a lot on voting issues. Are you
familiar with this Richmond Chattha, and Earnest study that
came out in 2014 about non-citizens voting in the 2008
election?
Mr. von Spakovsky. I am familiar with it.
Mr. DeSantis. I think, as I read that, it was their
contention that, and I think as people have pointed out, you
are talking about some of the big national elections. There may
not be enough people who are non-citizens to make a huge
difference, but in 2008 it was these authors' contention that
there were enough non-citizens that voted in North Carolina to
shift those electoral votes one way, and that the 2008 Senate
race in Minnesota, the margin of victory was lower than the
number of non-citizens who voted. Is that an accurate
reStatement of what they concluded?
Mr. von Spakovsky. It is. Now, I should mention that there
has been some debate over the validity of that, but they based
that assessment on something called the Comprehensive
congressional Survey, which was a survey of literally tens of
thousands of voters in the 2008 and 2010 election. Look, you
can debate that. The authors of the study actually posted a
long article in The Washington Post in which they answered some
of the claims of critics, but that shows that we do have a
potential problem; and the actual prosecutions that have
occurred shows it is a real problem.
Mr. DeSantis. Secretary Dunlap, in Maine, if somebody gets
a work permit based on the President's executive action, will
that, ipso facto, entitle them to get a driver's license in
Maine?
Mr. Dunlap. Not necessarily, Mr. Chairman. There would be
other required documents as well. We do require proof of
residency. The Social Security number is not, we don't utilize
that as proof of citizenship simply because you do not need to
be an American citizen to obtain a Social Security number. It
causes a fair amount of discomfort with people. For example,
when we tell them we don't accept military ID cards as proof of
citizenship for the same reason.
So a work permit on its face would not be sufficient for us
to issue a driver's license; there would be other required
documents, including proof of identity, which might be a
passport, it might be a birth certificate. Lacking those
documents, we would probably have to go into a lengthy
exceptions process.
If I may give you a very brief example using an American
citizen, last year we were confronted with the difficulty of
somebody trying to obtain a renewal of their driver's license,
and we could not process that request because they could not
prove citizenship. As it happened, the individual is of
Vietnamese birth, had been adopted by an American serviceman
during the Vietnam War, and the hospital where he was born was
destroyed by missile fire 2 weeks after his birth and all the
records were lost. After a fair amount of research and working
with some of our partners in the Federal Government, I was able
to inquire after the constituent if they had a copy of his
adopted father's obituary, and it was found because he had been
listed as a survivor, that was sufficient to satisfy our
regulations.
So it takes a fair amount of detective work to ascertain
proof of identity.
Mr. DeSantis. But Maine, though, you would think it would
be unacceptable if a work permit comes in, nothing else; no
rubber stamped driver's license in Maine, correct?
Mr. Dunlap. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeSantis. OK.
I will recognize the ranking member here in a second, but I
just would like to respond to one contention that was made
about the fact that there are penalties for people who vote
illegally in the Country, and that if somebody obtained work
authorization, that could actually lead them to be removed from
the Country and sent back to their home country.
The problem with that is I don't think that any of those
penalties have any bite whatsoever anymore, because we know,
for example, by DHS's own admission, they released, in 2013
alone, 36,000 people who were illegally in our Country and had
been convicted of criminal offenses, in some cases very serious
offenses like homicide and rape and aggravated assault and drug
trafficking. And of those 36,000 in 2013, guess what we now
know? One thousand of them have already been convicted of new
crimes. So you literally have a situation in which these folks
were in the criminal justice system, being convicted.
Supposedly we say that would be a penalty that people would be
sent back to their home country. And yet they are released into
society by DHS and now other people have been victimized
already, less than 2 years later.
So I appreciate the fact that there are penalties. I just
don't think that those penalties have very much teeth, given
the way this system has been administered in the last couple
years.
My time has expired and the chair will now recognize the
ranking member of the National Security Subcommittee, Mr.
Lynch, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Lynch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My thanks again to the panel.
Secretary Husted, I was trying to read your reports from
the Ohio Statewide election survey. Is it correct that you
actually referred 135 cases of voter fraud in 2012? Are those
numbers right?
Mr. Husted. Off the top of my head, I believe that sounds
about right.
Mr. Lynch. That was 135 cases out of 5.63 million voters in
Ohio. I did the math and it comes out to about .00002 percent.
Secretary Dunlap, you had a chance to review your
predecessor's request of review of Maine's election practices
as it was considering adopting new voter ID laws. You agreed
with the recommendations to continue early voting and hold off
on the proposed requirements for voter identification.
Secretary Dunlap, how many instances of voter fraud has Maine
uncovered, if any?
Mr. Dunlap. We had two cases of misuse of an absentee
ballot, for alleged double voting, Congressman.
Mr. Lynch. That is illegal in Maine?
Mr. Dunlap. It is, sir.
Mr. Lynch. OK. There are some parts of my district I think
this is going on, so I just had to question that.
Mr. Dunlap. And I would point out that that is over the
course of 4 years.
Mr. Lynch. The old slogan for James Michael Curley was vote
early, vote Curley, vote often. So I am correct in saying that
you would generally describe voter fraud as very rare?
Mr. Dunlap. Extremely rare.
Mr. Lynch. Would you say the incidence of voter fraud by
non-citizens is even smaller?
Mr. Dunlap. I have no evidence of it in the State of Maine,
Congressman.
Mr. Lynch. I just want to go over this again. The
proposition here is that these folks who have received deferred
action status, and whether you agree with that or not, that is
beside the point. I actually think, and I think the President
agreed, that the best result would have had us coming up with a
comprehensive immigration policy that would address everyone. I
think even the Administration said this is imperfect. This was
done, in some sense, out of frustration because we couldn't get
comprehensive immigration reform done.
So now we have this deferred action executive action, and
that leaves us with this situation where certain individuals
are going to be allowed to stay in the Country. But if they
vote, the penalty is that they would be deported. That is the
penalty. And I am not sure equating people who rape and maim
and rob is the same group that you are talking about going in
and actually voting in an election. I don't think you can
equate those.
But does it make sense that someone that has been given a
chance, at least through deferred action, would go and
jeopardize their status here in order to be .0002 percent of a
Statewide election? What is your sense of this, Mr. Dunlap?
Mr. Dunlap. It doesn't make sense to me, and in many ways,
Congressman, the executive order brings this around full circle
to an earlier time in motor vehicle administration when many
motor vehicle administrators really wanted to provide
credentials to people who came here for work purposes, legally
or illegally, for the simple premise that, if they are in your
system, you know who they are and you know where they are. And
for the purposes of highway safety, we all want to make sure
that everyone who is operating on the roads that are shared by
our families are in fact qualified to operate those vehicles.
The reality is if you make it difficult for them to obtain
those credentials, they are going to drive anyway, they are
just not going to have a license.
What we find is that if people have the opportunity to
comply with the law, they will. If it is impossible for them to
comply with the law, then they are already at variance with it.
So it only makes logical sense that if people have the
opportunity to succeed in America, that they will seize upon
that opportunity and not throw it into jeopardy. At least that
is what history shows us.
Mr. Lynch. Well, thank you, Mr. Secretary. I have 8 seconds
left and I am just about done here.
All I can say is I am honored to be the ranking Democrat on
a National Security Subcommittee, and I am sure, during this
next couple of years, we are going to have a real opportunity
to deal with national security issues. This, however, does not
strike me as being one.
Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. DeSantis. The chair now recognizes Mr. Jordan, chairman
of the Benefits Subcommittee, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Jordan. I thank the chairman.
Secretary Husted, you had some numbers in your testimony. I
want to go through them. The first number is 291, 291 people
who were non-citizens who were on the registration rolls in
Ohio, is that right?
Mr. Husted. That is correct.
Mr. Jordan. How did you derive that number?
Mr. Husted. When you apply for a driver's license in Ohio
as a non-citizen, you have to indicate that at the time you
receive your license. We went back, searched that data, then
went and looked at the Statewide voter roll after the election,
found the matches of 291 people, and then waited an entire
year, because this is self-reported data, and then waited an
entire year to see if these individuals also self-reported
themselves as non-citizens a year later. So it is their
information; they are the ones that provided it.
Mr. Jordan. And a year and a half way to get to that
number.
Mr. Husted. That is the only way we could get to it.
Mr. Jordan. In your professional judgment, is that a low
estimate or could the number be significantly higher?
Mr. Husted. It could be higher. That is just what we can
find out at this point.
Mr. Jordan. OK. Then another number you had in your
testimony was 70 elections. These are the number of elections
decided by one vote?
Mr. Husted. That is correct.
Mr. Jordan. And that was in what timeframe?
Mr. Husted. That is in the past 15 months.
Mr. Jordan. In the past 15 months. So that .00002 percent
that the gentleman from Massachusetts was talking about, that
is a small number, but that small number could have changed 70
elections in Ohio in the last 15 months, is that right?
Mr. Husted. Yes. We have had 70 elections that were decided
by one vote or a tie.
Mr. Jordan. So you have 291 on the voter registration
rolls; that is a low estimate. You had 70 elections in the last
15 months decided by one vote. And now the President just said
five million more non-citizens can get access to the very
documents that allow people to register to vote. Is that
accurate?
Mr. Husted. That is correct.
Mr. Jordan. So the problem is potentially much bigger,
right?
Mr. Husted. Correct.
Mr. Jordan. Now, in your testimony you also talked about
voter registration drives as maybe the biggest concern that you
have as the head election official in your State. Can you walk
me through that?
Mr. Husted. Yes. In Ohio, as you are well aware, there are
a lot of third-party voter registration drives. Their goal is
to register as many people as they can. A lot of times those
individuals don't take the care that somebody at the DMV might
be at explaining the rules for doing this, and a lot of times
folks who--of that 291, some of them didn't even know that they
weren't allowed to be registered to vote.
Mr. Jordan. So the point is that compounds everything I
just went through, potentially.
Mr. Husted. Correct.
Mr. Jordan. Right. So we have 70 elections in Ohio decided
by one vote in the last 15 months. Now, think about it. If some
of that was done by non-citizens illegally participating in the
election process, what does that say to citizens?
What does that say to a senior citizen, when this non-
citizen is already getting Social Security benefits? What does
that say to a taxpayer when this non-citizen is already getting
tax refunds? What does it say to legal immigrants who came here
and did it the right way and are citizens, what does it say to
them that now the position they took may have been defeated
because a non-citizen potentially in 70 different races in the
last 15 months decided the outcome of an election? That is what
we are concerned about, right?
Mr. Husted. It says we are letting them down and we need to
fix it.
Mr. Jordan. Exactly. And that is why you are here and that
is why you wrote the letter to the President of the United
States, right?
Mr. Husted. That is correct.
Mr. Jordan. Now, in November, when the President decided he
was going to go down this path and create this mess we just
walked through, did he contact you, John Husted, Secretary of
State for the State of Ohio?
Mr. Husted. No.
Mr. Jordan. Now, think about this. Every political pundit
in the world knows Ohio is always a central State in every
Presidential election; important State, seventh largest State,
a lot of people there. And the President of the United States
didn't contact the guy who has been running elections in the
State that is always the center of the university in a
Presidential race, didn't contact you and ask, hey, is there
going to be concerns or problems if we do this?
Mr. Husted. He did not, no.
Mr. Jordan. Now, you are in town, you and Mr. Kobach and
Mr. Dunlap are in town with the Secretary of State Association,
right? You have a conference and you are listening to speakers
and all the things you guys do. Do you know, Mr. Husted, if the
President contacted the Secretary of States Association before
he issued this order in November of last year?
Mr. Husted. I am not aware of any contact.
Mr. Jordan. Mr. Kobach?
Mr. Kobach. I am not aware.
Mr. Jordan. Mr. Dunlap?
Mr. Dunlap. The President does not require my permission to
issue an executive order.
Mr. Jordan. I didn't ask that. I said did he contact you?
Mr. Dunlap. He did not, sir.
Mr. Jordan. So the head of election officials, the
association that represents and conducts elections, the
President didn't even talk to you guys when he did this, and
now is potentially allowing five million people to get access
to the documents so they can register to vote, and he didn't
even have the decency to call you guys?
Mr. Husted. We did not get contacted, and I would say why I
wrote the letter is that I want to comply with the Federal law.
Mr. Jordan. Exactly, which brings me to my last question,
Mr. Chairman.
We have Secretary Husted, who is offering a solution. In
fact, he wrote the Ohio delegation and he wrote the White House
and said, hey, here is all we have. I am not even going to
comment. I think what he did is unconstitutional; most law
scholars do. Even liberal ones think what he did is
unconstitutional.
But you are not even commenting on that, you are just
saying we want to fix it so at least our elections can only be
decided by people who are actually citizens. You have offered a
solution. Have you heard from the White House about your
solution, Mr. Husted?
Mr. Husted. We have not. And it is particularly important
when you are the Secretary of State from Ohio because we will
get sued for not complying with the Federal law.
Mr. Jordan. Exactly. Exactly. This is unbelievable. The
White House didn't talk to the people who run elections before
they did the order, and now we have a secretary of State in one
of the most important States in every election, every
Presidential election, offers a solution and the White House
doesn't even have the decency. They weren't contacted on the
front-end, but they should at least have the decency, when they
offer a solution to fix the problem the White House created,
the decency to talk to them and say, all right, let's work on
it.
I yield back.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman yields back.
The chair now recognizes Ms. Norton for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I hear what passes
for evidence, I can only say it is no wonder that the last two
Congresses have gone down in history as the least productive in
American history.
I want to say for the record that the Social Security card
that these immigrants get says valid for work only with DHS
authority. These are immigrants who, for years, have been
living in fear because they are undocumented. They live in such
fear that they don't even report crime. Now we are made to
believe that they will go to the polls and throw elections,
even the much vaunted election in Ohio.
Mr. Dunlap, let me thank you for apparently being able to
secure the vote without denying the vote.
In Kansas, Mr. Kobach, you have implemented so-called proof
of citizen voting requirements. I do want to note that it
delayed voting registration applications for 22,000 people, at
least as of last four. That is 16 percent. Most of those were
probably just as full citizens as you and I are.
But let me turn to Ohio while I still have some time. Mr.
Husted, you have been particularly determined. In 2012, you
initially denied the expansion of early voting hours in urban
Democratic-leading counties covering Cleveland, Columbus,
Akron, and Toledo. But at the same time, the record will show,
there were early voting hours in heavily Republican counties
like Warren and Butler. They were expanded to include nights
and weekends.
The record shows there were such loud complaints about this
patent, unadulterated unfairness that you limited early voting
across the State to weekdays only. Is that not true?
Mr. Husted. Ranking Member Norton, that is not true. What
is true in Ohio is that we have nearly a month to vote, 24
hours----
Ms. Norton. Wait a minute. I didn't ask you what happens in
Ohio. Did you not deny the expansion of early voting?
Mr. Husted. I did not.
Ms. Norton. In Cleveland, Columbus, Akron, and Toledo?
Mr. Husted. And the answer to your question is I did not.
Ms. Norton. What did you do?
Mr. Husted. I set uniform hours for the State of Ohio so
that every voter would have equal access. The local----
Ms. Norton. And you are denying that at the same time----
Mr. Husted. I am denying.
Ms. Norton [continuing]. The early voting hours were set in
Republican-leading districts. You are denying that on the face
of the record.
Mr. Husted. I had nothing to do with it. Those were local
election officials that did that.
Ms. Norton. So you had nothing to do with that. Well, then,
Mr. Husted, while my time is up, sir, before my time is up,
isn't it true that these voting restrictions were overturned by
a Federal district court and that you did not immediately
comply with the full restoration of those voting rights?
Mr. Husted. That is not true, ma'am. We have complied with
the Federal court ruling. We were also granted a stay.
Ms. Norton. I said you did not immediately comply.
Mr. Husted. We immediately complied.
Ms. Norton. Well, you appealed to the Supreme Court.
Mr. Husted. Ma'am, that is how the justice system works.
Ms. Norton. And they refused to hear your case.
Mr. Husted. And they did hear my case.
Ms. Norton. And what did they decide?
Mr. Husted. They gave us a stay, and it is still in Federal
court.
Ms. Norton. So you believe you have every chance of
prevailing in this case, a case with the facts I have just
enumerated, with the differences?
Mr. Husted. Ma'am, we vote for twice as long as the
District of Columbia does, and everybody votes by the same
rules.
Ms. Norton. I doubt that you vote for longer than the
District of Columbia. I doubt that very seriously and I
challenge you to send to this committee evidence of that. But
if you do, let me make sure that I inform elected officials so
that they would at least be as good as Ohio is.
Mr. Husted, a recent study by two of your prominent State
universities, Case Western Reserve and Cleveland State
University, found that in 2008 African-American voters made up
56.4 percent of all weekend voters in Cayuga County, even
though adult African-Americans made up only 28 percent of the
population there. Can you understand, therefore, why there has
been such an outcry in Ohio when two prominent research
universities in your State found that cutting early voting on
Sundays and weekend evenings could disproportionately affect
African-Americans? I mean, shouldn't that concern you in a
State like Ohio?
Mr. DeSantis. Her time has expired, but I will let you
answer that, then I will recognize Mr. Walberg.
Mr. Husted. Ma'am, I understand that, and I would invite
you to Ohio to see what we do. I enforce the Ohio law, I don't
make the Ohio law. But when granted the opportunity to
establish hours, I have granted 2 weekends of early voting on
the Sunday and Saturday before the elections; and that is how
the Presidential election will be run in Ohio under a directive
that I have issued so long as the courts allow so.
Mr. DeSantis. The chair now recognizes Mr. Walberg for 5
minutes.
Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the panel
for being here. And though this cuts into some of my
questioning time, I think it is important that I express real
concern, and even offense, at some of the Statements that are
being made. I hope it comes from emotion, and not from the
heart of hearts, that any party is attempting to quash and take
away the rights that are given to all citizens of this Country,
all legal citizens of this Country, regardless of color, race,
creed, origin, gender. That is not happening with any of my
support, and I know my colleagues as well.
I also say that that is offensive to those legal and
documented aliens who serve in my communities well in providing
services on farms, in hospitality, in construction, in IT, and
all sorts of things that are extremely important to us, and yet
they are doing it legally.
I say it as a proud father-in-law of a Rwandan who is here
on an appropriate legal visa in the United States right now
that expires in April, and he, with my daughter, will be going
back to their home in Uganda. I say it as well based upon the
fact that this hearing is important not so much even for the
issues of voting, but the issue of constitutionality and the
strength of our Constitution, a Constitution that a legal
constitutional scholar, our President, Stated 22 times he did
not have the power to do this executive order, and then he did
it. This is a constitutional crisis that we are dealing with
and this is one of the issues that has resulted from that
constitutional crisis.
So I make that Statement. I believe it is important for us
to make sure that is on the record as well, that we want to see
this Country move forward legally, and all citizens, all legals
that are here are treated justly and fairly.
Mr. von Spakovsky, how big do you think this problem is?
Mr. von Spakovsky. Well, it is really hard for us to know
because there is no systematic verification of citizenship
status across the Country; we can only get a rough idea of it.
Mr. Walberg. There is no way to quantify it?
Mr. von Spakovsky. No. But that is why, for example, I
cited the GAO report, where they found that 3 percent of people
called for Federal jury duty, and those come from voter
registration lists, so 3 percent of 30,000 were excused from
jury duty under oath because they were not U.S. citizens. That
gives you a flavor of it.
I would remind this committee that in 1996 this committee
issued a report investigating an election contest in
California, one congressional race won by less than 1,000
votes, and in that one congressional race, after comparing INS
records with voting records, this committee found that there
were 624 non-citizens, clear evidence, who had voted illegally
in that congressional race, and another 192 where there was
circumstantial evidence that they were not U.S. citizens. Now,
the race wasn't overturned, but this is just one investigation
20 years ago that found hundreds of non-citizens who had voted
in a congressional race in California.
Mr. Walberg. And it is likely to increase in its problem
exponentially?
Mr. von Spakovsky. I believe so because now individuals who
are here illegally are going to be legally obtaining Social
Security numbers and driver's licenses, which are key documents
in order to get registered to vote, according to the law that
Congress itself passed in 2007, the Help America Vote Act.
Mr. Walberg. In your opinion, how do we prevent or stop
non-citizen voter registration or voter fraud? Does Congress
need to change the law?
Mr. von Spakovsky. Yes. I think what Secretary Husted has
said about getting access to the DHS data base on everyone
given deferred action, for example, so they have their name,
the last four digits of a Social Security number, and a birth
date so they can start verifying that. That is the first step.
The other thing you should do is require all Federal courts to
notify State election officials when someone is called for jury
duty and they are excused because they are not a U.S. citizen.
They are not doing that right now. That is just a basic step.
Mr. Walberg. So are there existing laws that could be
enforced that aren't right now that would assist in this
problem?
Mr. von Spakovsky. Yes. I would tell you I spoke to a
former election official just this week, and he said that while
DHS has finally started complying with the Federal law that
requires them to verify citizenship information when they get
inquiries from State election officials, that they put up all
kinds of burdensome red tape to make it difficult. The current
system is slow and cumbersome, and he highly recommended that
DHS work with State election officials to set up a better,
quicker system.
Mr. Walberg. Thank you.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair notes the presence of the committee chairman, Mr.
Chaffetz. Would you like to be recognized?
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from California for
5 minutes.
Mr. Lieu. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Husted, for the record, I believe that Congresswoman
Norton was talking about a 2012 case and you were giving
answers to a 2014 case. That is sort of my understanding of her
interchange.
But my questions are for Mr. Dunlap. I have heard a lot of
hypotheticals today. I am sure anything can happen. It is
certainly possible that that .002 percent change could 1 day
affect the State of Ohio, that could 1 day affect a
Presidential election. Anything is possible. But I just note
that in the last election two-thirds of Americans did not vote.
That number dwarfs by orders of magnitude .002 percent, and my
view is that in our republic, in our democracy, we are better
served by having as many eligible voters vote as possible.
Everyone's time is limited and constrained. I think that our
democracy is better if the 50 secretaries of State focused
their time on increasing voter turnout for eligible voters,
that makes our Country stronger, than focusing on .002 percent
hypotheticals.
So let's talk about what the actual laws are right now in
America.
Mr. Dunlap, can you just walk through again the
requirements that an individual must meet to be eligible to
vote in your State of Maine?
Mr. Dunlap. In order to be eligible to vote, sir, they have
to be a domiciled resident of the State, they must demonstrate
citizenship, they have to give proof of identity, and
affirmative proof of where they live.
Mr. Lieu. And what are the consequences if someone, under
Maine law, engages in voter fraud?
Mr. Dunlap. The penalties range from elevated misdemeanors
to Class C felonies, which are punishable by up to 5 years in
prison and $5,000 in fine, and then being remitted to Federal
authorities for further penalties and expulsion from the
Country, sir.
Mr. Lieu. And has the President's executive order changed
the law on voter fraud in any way whatsoever?
Mr. Dunlap. No, sir. We still maintain the same due
diligence that we did before.
Mr. Lieu. Has the President's executive order conferred any
new right to vote for non-citizens in Maine?
Mr. Dunlap. It has not affected the right to vote for
anyone other than naturalized or born United States citizens,
sir.
Mr. Lieu. And it is still illegal for non-citizens to
affirm that they are citizens in order to vote in Maine.
Mr. Dunlap. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Lieu. As a representative of California, I would like
to, at this time, read an excerpt from a Statement prepared for
this hearing by California Common Cause, a national non-
partisan advocacy organization founded in 1970 to enable
citizens to make their voices heard in a political process.
California Common Cause writes: ``Ensuring that every eligible
citizen has the opportunity to cast a vote free from
discrimination and obstacles is fundamental to a democracy that
aims for and professes representation of all. As Stated below,
we see no threat to election processes at either the State or
Federal level resulting from the President's orders.''
I ask unanimous consent to enter this Statement into the
congressional record, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeSantis. Without objection, it will be so entered.
Mr. Lieu. And with that I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman yields back the balance of his
time.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
Hice, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Hice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think it has been clearly established here so far that I
don't think there is anyone in the room that would not
acknowledge that there at least have been instances, as you
have brought up, in the thousands, perhaps, in fact, certainly
over the course of time. We have examples from North Carolina
and Minnesota extensively so. We all know that there have been
problems of voter fraud. We also know that Federal law
authorizes the Department of Justice to prosecute non-citizens
for both registering and voting. This is a criminal offense
and, as has just been mentioned, can result in removal from the
Country.
My first question to each of you, do you know, to the best
of your knowledge, of any example where the Department of
Justice has in fact brought charges against anyone or deported
them?
Mr. Husted. I do not, sir.
Mr. Kobach. I know of examples in the prior Administration.
I cannot think of anyone of an alien voting in this
Administration where charges have been brought against that
alien for voting.
Mr. von Spakovsky. I have to agree with Secretary Kobach. I
know of instances, during the prior Administration, where
individuals were not only prosecuted by the Justice Department,
but this was considered in their citizenship applications. But
as I pointed out, I am not aware of that being done in this
Administration, and I know from personal knowledge that of the
almost 300 individuals that Fairfax County sent over to the
Justice Department notifying them that these were not U.S.
citizens, that they had registered and that almost half of them
had voted. That fell into a black hole at the Justice
Department.
They did nothing to investigate or prosecute those cases,
and I don't believe that any of those non-citizens had any of
the penalties brought up against them that could have allowed
their removal from the Country. In fact, I cite in my written
testimony a letter published by a county election official in
Tennessee that she got from a non-citizen. He had gotten this
from DHS and it was a letter--this person was applying for
citizenship and this was a letter telling him that he needed to
be sure that he was taken off the local voter registration
list.
So they clearly weren't going to punish him or in any way
delay his citizenship; they just told them, well, to go forward
with your citizenship application, you need to be sure you are
off the list.
Mr. Hice. OK, thank you.
Mr. Dunlap?
Mr. Dunlap. I do not know of any such action in my State,
sir, but I also Stated earlier that we have never had a
complaint of such action, either, so it makes sense.
Mr. Hice. OK. All right, so what we have here, evidently,
is that at least within this Administration we have no examples
that we have any knowledge of where the law in this regard has
been upheld by the Justice Department. So we have, evidently, a
Justice Department unwilling to abide by the law, which, of
course, is what we are seeing across the board even in so many
instances right now; and if the rule of law is not going to be
upheld, it is of very little value at all to any of us.
Now, it has also been brought up that the motor voter law,
as it is known, where individuals are given the opportunity to
register to vote when they get their driver's license, is
posing a significant problem, as you have mentioned; and from
what we hear from multiple DMVs across the Country, they don't
believe it is their responsibility to find out whether or not
these individuals are citizens of the United States or not.
Would you agree with that?
Mr. Kobach. I would say that those States that are fully
complying with the Real ID Act of 2005, they are least trying
to ascertain whether or not the person is a citizen who is a
U.S. citizen or is an alien here lawfully present. But it is at
the later stage of the process where they ask that final
question, and would you like to register to vote. Even in fully
compliant Real ID States they are not going back and checking,
hey, wait a minute, I have to check your citizenship.
Mr. Hice. But at some point someone has to be responsible;
it is either the State or the Federal Government. Real quickly,
almost a yes or no answer, is the DHS trustworthy? Do States
believe that they can trust the DHS to give this information?
Mr. Kobach. We have asked DHS for a lot of information and
it has not been forthcoming from DHS. And the one program they
do make available, SAVE, which was created in the 1990's for
State governments to use, they make that virtually impossible
to use; they say, well, we won't let you check those names
unless you can give us an independent number associated with
that alien. Virtually impossible for the State to do.
Mr. Hice. We have an enormous problem here, obviously, and
it is only getting bigger. The President's actions to grant de
facto amnesty to five million is just exasperating an already
existing problem, and I and Congress should look for solutions
to prevent non-citizens from diluting the ballots of citizens
in this Country.
Thank you.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes Ms. Kelly for 5 minutes.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would first like to ask
for unanimous consent to enter a Statement into the record by
our colleague, Congresswoman Marcia L. Fudge, who represents
the 11th District of Ohio.
Mr. DeSantis. Without objection.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you.
Ms. Kelly. I would like to focus a bit on the occurrence
specifically of non-citizen voter fraud.
Secretary Husted, your office released a report on voter
fraud in May 2013, including a review by 88 county boards of
election in Ohio. According to that report, over five million
total votes were cast in Ohio in that election. According to a
letter you sent to the Ohio Attorney General, Mike DeWine, on
December 18, 2013, how many instances of non-citizen voter
fraud did you refer for the investigation?
Mr. Husted. We referred 291 cases on the non-citizen aspect
of the issues. Those are two separate reports, so that you
know; there was the voter fraud report, which did not include
our non-citizen research because we had to wait for a calendar
year after the election to double-check our work on that to
make sure we didn't include anybody that shouldn't have been on
the list. But on the non-citizen piece, there were 291 non-
citizens that were referred to the attorney general's office.
Ms. Kelly. And what happened with those cases?
Mr. Husted. Those were investigated. Some of them were
referred to local prosecutors. Seventeen of the people in those
individual cases had voted; some of them have been prosecuted;
there were plea agreements in other cases. But what we did with
those who didn't vote, we simply sent them a letter and asked
them to remove themselves from the voter rolls, because we do
not have the authority under the law to remove them, so we
asked them to remove themselves.
And then after waiting a few months, if they didn't comply,
we sent them a second letter. And if they didn't respond to the
second letter, then we turned them over to the attorney
general's office for further action. Some of them removed
themselves; some of them have, in some cases they didn't know
they were on the voter rolls; in some cases they didn't know
that they weren't allowed to be on the voter rolls; and in some
cases we have never been able to track the individual down.
Ms. Kelly. So you wouldn't say people maliciously were
trying to do something wrong if they didn't even know or some
of the things you just said.
Mr. Husted. I think it is across the board. Some people
were on there that knew they shouldn't be; some people were on
there that didn't know that they shouldn't be.
Ms. Kelly. OK. So 17 cases of non-citizen voter fraud, so
that, as I think one of my colleagues said, represents 0.0003
percent of the over five million total voters in Ohio.
I would like to say I believe it is a misallocation of
time, money, and committee resources to combat a voting problem
that is practically non-existent. This is especially true when
many States are taking steps to make voting more difficult for
eligible Americans by curtailing early voting hours and other
barriers. We need to combat that problem. And I believe this is
especially important to make this point now, as this is the
fiftieth anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, and it is
utterly ridiculous in 2015 that American citizens are still
fighting for the right to vote.
I yield back.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentlelady yields back.
The chair now recognizes Mr. Carter for 5 minutes.
Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Gentlemen, thank you for being here. Appreciate you for
being here very much.
Full disclosure: I am from Georgia, and in Georgia we are
only one of four States that has a voter ID law. In further
full disclosure, I am proud of the fact that I was a member of
the Georgia State legislature when we passed that bill, and I
voted in favor of it and even co-sponsored it. So full
disclosure there.
I want to ask each of you, if you will, do you think it is
one of our greatest rights here in America, the right to vote?
Do you value that, as I do, as one of your greatest rights as a
citizen?
Mr. Husted. I certainly do.
Mr. Carter. Thank you.
Mr. Kobach. Absolutely. And I would add that every time an
alien votes, even if it doesn't succeed in stealing the
election, it effectively cancels out the vote of a U.S. citizen
and effectively disenfranchises that U.S. citizen.
Mr. von Spakovsky. And I have to agree wholeheartedly with
that.
Mr. Dunlap. I would certainly say, sir, that the right to
vote is the preeminent of all of our rights.
Mr. Carter. Thank you all.
Let me ask you. At least three of the four of you are
secretaries of State. Do you consider it your responsibility in
the office that you hold to make certain that only American
citizens vote in our elections?
Mr. Husted. Yes, sir, I do, and I am here to try to find a
solution to that problem, because as the Ohio Secretary of
State, we cannot comply with the Federal law if we don't have
access to the name, the date of birth, and the last four digits
of the Social Security number. And we will see litigation where
the courts will settle this issue rather than the Congress or
the Administration, and I ask of you to give us what we need so
that we can comply with the Federal law.
Mr. Carter. Thank you.
Mr. Kobach. Absolutely it is our responsibility do that,
and I would note, partially in response to what Mr. Lynch said
in his opening remarks, the fact that you attest to your U.S.
citizenship on a voter registration card is not enough; it is
clearly not enough from the many hundreds of cases,
collectively, who have shown where people have signed the voter
registration card, have checked the box, yes, I am a U.S.
citizen. In many cases they probably didn't even know what they
were checking because we subsequently learned that many of
these aliens on our rolls don't read English or know English
particularly well. So they may have been manipulated into
signing that card.
But the bottom line is simply checking a box is not enough.
That is why we in Kansas, and likewise in Georgia, moved to a
proof of citizenship system. More States need to move in that
direction and we need the Federal Government, especially the
EAC, to get out of our way so that we can ensure that our voter
rolls are clean.
Mr. Carter. Thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Dunlap?
Mr. Dunlap. I do believe that it is part of our prime
directive to make sure that our systems do have integrity, but
also that people can access them as well, and that is a very
delicate balance that we maintain through our State legislature
as we craft election law.
Mr. Carter. Mr. Husted, you have made it clear that Ohio
takes this very seriously and you have a number of checks and
balances to make sure that it is a truly American citizen who
gets to vote.
Mr. Kobach, I am very aware you have the same laws as the
State of Georgia with voter ID.
Mr. Dunlap, I am just a little bit concerned. I still don't
understand the checks and balances that exist in Maine to make
sure, the system there, that only Americans are voting.
Mr. Dunlap. Well, if you are speaking in reference to a
voter ID statute, that was proposed the last legislature and it
was converted under the Republican administration that preceded
me into a resolve that created a study committee that examined
that issue. In the State of Maine, that study committee
actually recommended that we not pursue photo ID to access a
ballot because of the hardship that would cause on legal
citizens from being able to access their ballots to participate
in their election.
Mr. Carter. OK, so you don't have voter ID, but what proof
do you require, then?
Mr. Dunlap. Well, in order to register to vote, as I
mentioned before, you do have to present photo ID, a government
issued identification, and also an official document that shows
that you live in the precinct in which you are registering. In
order to obtain that driver's license, if you will, under Maine
law, and I didn't get an opportunity to answer Mr. Hice when he
asked the same question, but we are required under Maine law to
determine citizenship. So if you follow that line, then we do
have that check and balance, along with the subscribed oath
that you take when you register to vote that everything you
State in there is, in fact, true.
Mr. Carter. I understand. Is a Social Security card enough?
Mr. Dunlap. No, sir.
Mr. Carter. So it takes more than that.
Mr. Dunlap. Absolutely.
Mr. Carter. Much has been made here today about the fact of
this .002 percent, and I get that, I understand that. But I
think all of you agree that even that should be zero, not .002
percent.
Mr. Dunlap, one last question. How many elections in the
past few years have been decided in the State of Maine by .002
percent or less?
Mr. Dunlap. When people say, sir, that they don't think
their vote counts, I invite them to come to a recount where we
see many races decided by one vote.
Mr. Carter. So that .002 percent could have made a
difference.
Mr. Dunlap. Our races can be small, so it may exist outside
that statistical figure, sir.
Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair asks unanimous consent that Mr. Husted's letter
be entered into the record. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. DeSantis. The chair now recognizes Mrs. Watson Coleman
for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all,
I would like to ask unanimous consent to enter certain forms
into the record, and those forms are the voter registration
forms for Kansas, Ohio, and Maine. I think each of these
documents clearly asks whether the submitter is a U.S. citizen.
Kansas, for example, has a clear Statement saying, Warning: If
you submit a false voter registration application, you may be
convicted and sentenced to up to 17 months in prison. So I ask
unanimous consent to enter this form into the record because it
seems clear to me that non-citizens who receive a driver's
license are fully apprised of the consequences of lying about
citizenship on their applications.
Mr. DeSantis. Without objection.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Mr. Kobach, I have a question for you.
You mentioned something relating to a hog election in Kansas,
and that you had problems with people from, I believe it was,
Oklahoma? Were those people from Oklahoma non-citizens of
Kansas or non-citizens of the United States of America?
Mr. Kobach. They were non-citizens of the United States of
America based on the county clerk of Seward County. Most of the
employees at the hog processing plant in Oklahoma were non-
citizens, both legal and illegal, it is believed. But some of
the Seward County personnel recognized some of those applicants
as being non-citizens based on personal knowledge and then
based on the general perspective----
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Non-citizens of what?
Mr. Kobach. Of the United States.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. OK. How do they know that?
Mr. Kobach. As I just mentioned, there was some personal
knowledge involving specific individuals, and then the county
clerk also made a general assessment based on the fact that
most of the employees at the plant were non-citizens.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you.
Mr. Dunlap, how does the Maine mail-in registration form
clarify voting eligibility requirements?
Mr. Dunlap. Well, under State and Federal law, we do allow
people to mail in their voter registrations. They do have to
include a photocopy of their ID, as well as copies of those
official documents I mentioned earlier; and they have to
provide us with either the last four digits of their Social
Security number or their driver's license as part of that mail-
in registration.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So, to your knowledge, has there been
a significant reporting of individuals not understanding this,
these requirements?
Mr. Dunlap. I have not gotten any reports of people not
understanding the requirements. The work that is done,
especially under the National Voter Registration Act, in our
motor vehicle offices around the State of Maine, that work does
include ascertaining, as I mentioned, citizenship and
explaining the meaning of the documentation to those that are
applying. And when people do mail in their voter registration
forms, if they are incomplete, they are rejected and referred
back to the registrars of voters, who then followup with the
voter to make sure the documentation is complete.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So when third parties go out and do
voter registration, how are you sure that they are getting
people who are eligible to register to vote to actually
register? Are they asked to accompany those forms with the
information that you would ask of an individual?
Mr. Dunlap. We handle those one card at a time, so each one
is treated separately and each one is examined for every field
to make sure the fields are complete and that the documentation
that is required is, in fact, provided.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Do you think that the laws on the
books as of right now are really adequate to ensure that there
is an understanding and a compliance for voting?
Mr. Dunlap. I do. I do. And we have had, as I say, a number
of hotly contested recounts over this last election cycle, and
as those recounts were concluded and as the election itself was
certified and tabulated, I have had no question about the
integrity of our election systems in the State of Maine.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Has there been anything identified in
the Presidential executive actions that are loosely related to
this issue, if at all, and I certainly don't think that they
are, that somehow enhances the opportunity of voter fraud by
non-citizens?
Mr. Dunlap. It has not impacted our ability to enforce
Maine election law.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Does your office have a sense that our
participation of eligible voters voting or not voting has
become sort of diminished in our elections and that we should
be doing something to encourage those who can vote to vote?
Mr. Dunlap. Not in the State of Maine. This last election
cycle, I am proud to say that Maine led the Nation in turnout,
with 60.9 percent of voter-age eligible voters utilizing the
processes that we provide them.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Well, I certainly wish we could take
that as a standard and try to apply it and exceed it.
I certainly think that what we have been experiencing these
last elections would suggest very strongly that we need to be
concentrating on efforts to get eligible people to vote, and
that the few instances and the expectations or the projections
of a possibility of a problem does not necessitate the kinds of
resources and application of time, resource, or money that we
are devoting to this today. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentlelady's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina,
Mr. Walker, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Walker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
commend you guys for the duration here and hanging in there.
But I think even more I am impressed with these young ladies
who have sit on this front row the entire time. I don't know
who their parents are, but maybe we need to have you back on a
committee on parenting or something. So, yes, excellent job
there. Well behaved.
I want to start off by addressing something absolutely
crucial to the understanding and the purpose of this hearing. I
have heard a few comments today saying this is frivolous, why
are we here, but let's be clear. The exact purpose that we are
here today, and that is because of President Obama's executive
overreach. Whatever the President could not pass through
Congress in his first 6 years is now getting force-fed to all
Americans. He has created chaos at the Federal, National, and
at the State level by expanding the executive powers at whim.
That is one of the reasons that you guys are here today.
Strong Statement, but I believe his disrespect of the
presidency, that is, the President, the legislative process,
and the States as independent sovereign bodies. Most of all, he
has cheated Americans out of their constitutional prerogative
to be heard by their elected representatives.
I do have a question. It seems like today that we have
tried to make a case in some instances that only a little bit
of illegal activity is OK. I don't understand that, so my
question is what percentage of voter fraud is OK. I know that
is rhetorical, but I would love to hear just a quick response
on how you feel about that for the record.
Mr. Husted. Mr. Walker, no amount of voter fraud is OK,
particularly for a Secretary of State who is in charge of
overseeing elections. And I have heard the topic come up about
voter turnout. I think voter turnouts improve when people
believe that their elections are run with integrity. And this
is part of helping to build confidence in the entire system of
elections, and that is, in part, along with the legal
responsibilities I have, as to why I am here today.
Mr. Walker. Well, thanks for taking pride in that, Mr.
Husted.
Mr. Kobach?
Mr. Kobach. I agree with Secretary Husted. Absolutely no
voter fraud is OK. And even if the instances are relatively
small in a particular election, like we saw in the 2010
election in North Kansas City, Missouri, it can steal an
election. There are so many close elections. So it is a red
herring to keep reciting a very small percentage. If we didn't
have that close elections in America, then that would be a
legitimate argument. But we do.
Mr. Walker. Thank you.
Mr. von Spakovsky. Congressman, the whole reason the U.S.
Supreme Court upheld the voter ID as constitutional in 2008 was
because it said not only does this Country have a history of
voter fraud, but could make the difference in close elections.
It is a completely invalid comparison to take the number of
prosecutions in cases and compare it to, for example, the total
number of votes cast in a particular State because of that very
issue, it can make a difference in close elections.
I keep going back to Fairfax County, the 117 individuals we
found who were not U.S. citizens who had voted in past
elections. Virginia has millions of registered voters. Yet, in
the past few years we have had attorney generals in other cases
decided by less than 500 votes in one case, less than 1,000
votes in another case. And that was only one county where we
found over 100 non-citizens who had voted in prior elections.
The key thing is any kind of fraud like that cheats
American citizens from the value of their vote.
Mr. Walker. Thank you.
Mr. Dunlap?
Mr. Dunlap. No violation of law can be excused or
dismissed. In the context of this discussion here today about
the impact of the President's executive order and our ability
to conduct free, fair, and transparent elections, and some of
the solutions that have been offered, I am a little bit
bewildered by it all simply because, as I have Stated
repeatedly here today, the executive order has not impacted my
ability to enforce Maine election law or Maine motor vehicle
law.
I would point out that I flew here in a plane; I did not
build an airport and start an airline. So the real solution to
the problems that are perceived here is immigration reform, not
trying to build new data bases and find ways to screen out
ineligible voters.
Mr. Walker. Thank you, Mr. Dunlap.
One last question. I have about 45 seconds left, so just a
quick answer. What percentage of voter fraud goes undetected?
Is there any way to have a number on that? How would we know
that?
Mr. Dunlap. I can say with great assertion that our 503
municipal clerks and registrars do an extraordinary job making
sure that this system is executed to its fullest and that every
T is crossed and I is dotted.
Mr. von Spakovsky. And I have to say that, as the 7th
Circuit pointed out when it upheld Indiana's voter ID law, you
can't detect that kind of fraud when you don't have the tools
in place to detect it.
Mr. Walker. Thank you. That is my point.
Yes, go ahead, Mr. Kobach.
Mr. Kobach. Prior to our adoption of laws with proof of
citizenship and photo ID, the vast majority of voter fraud went
undetected. And one other point. The numbers we have given you,
291 cases in Ohio, I mentioned in my testimony approximately
200 cases in Arizona, 20 cases in Kansas over a 3-year period;
those are just driver's license data base checks. That is only
the small subset of aliens who happened to have applied for a
driver's license. The rest of the alien population you cannot
detect on the voter roll using that method.
Mr. Walker. So the point being this: the numbers that we
have heard thrown out, .02 percent here, really is a number
that shouldn't even be taken into consideration because of what
we can't detect that is voter fraud.
Mr. Husted, I will let you close, then I will yield back.
Mr. Husted. I would just reiterate that I can't answer the
question without access to the last four digits of the Social
Security number, the name, and the date of birth, because there
is no way for us to make that determination without access to
that information.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman's time has expired.
The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr.
Duncan, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Duncan. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I had other meetings, and I apologize if I get into
something that you have already covered, but I read in our
briefing paper that it says non-citizen voting is a criminal
offense under 18 U.S. Code Section 611, and a removable offense
in INA Section 212, various subsets. But then it is very seldom
prosecuted, seemingly, because there are not high-profile
people involved in it, and too many prosecutors don't seem to
want to prosecute things unless they are going to get some good
publicity about it.
Our briefing paper also says the California Secretary of
State reported in 1998 that 2,000 to 3,000 of the individuals
summoned for jury duty in Orange County each month claimed an
exemption from jury service because they were not U.S.
citizens. But these individuals were summoned from the voter
registration list. It seems to me that if that kind of thing is
happening in that one county, this is a much bigger problem
than perhaps some people have said here today.
Mr. von Spakovsky, I know you wrote a book about this, I
think, at one point. Now, in one of our briefing things it says
that voter fraud could be dramatically reduced if Federal,
State, and local governments simply share the information they
already obtain regarding citizenship status. Do you agree with
that? And what would be the No. 1 thing that you think we could
do that is not being done now, or should be done that is not
being done now?
Mr. von Spakovsky. Require DHS to put in an easily checked
system that allows the Secretaries of State, such as the
gentlemen here today, to run data comparisons between their
State voter registration lists and DHS records, similar to
what, frankly, the State of Kansas is already now doing with a
number of other States, where they are doing data comparisons
to find people who have registered in multiple States.
Mr. Duncan. Well, it just seems a shame to me that this is
a violation of Federal criminal law, and a lot of people just
slough it off as if it is really not anything too bad, so we
are not going to do anything about it.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman yields back.
We are happy to welcome Mr. Castro from Texas, who is not
on the committee, but asked to be waived on, and I will now
recognize you for 5 minutes.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman DeSantis, and thank you for
the courtesy of allowing me to be here. This is an issue that I
take great interest in. I served in the Texas legislature when
the legislature passed the Texas voter ID law. It was around
the same time that redistricting plan was passed in Texas,
which a Federal court found intentionally discriminated against
minorities in Texas, African-Americans and Hispanics. So I
apologize, like all of us who have been running around, I may
have a few questions over which you have already tread.
But let me ask each of you very quickly what was the
participation rate in each of your States for the 2014 mid-term
elections? Just a number real quick, or ballpark.
Mr. Husted. Thirty-nine percent.
Mr. Kobach. Our participation rate was 51 percent. And I
would note that that increased from 50 percent in our previous
non-Presidential election----
Mr. Castro. OK. No, no, that is fine.
Mr. Kobach. And we put photo ID in place is my point. And
the number went up.
Mr. Castro. Sure. I don't mean to make an argument of it; I
just need a number.
Mr. Kobach. Just thought you might want to know.
Mr. Castro. Fifty-one percent?
Sir, what was yours?
Mr. Dunlap. It was 60.9 percent of voter age eligible.
Mr. Castro. OK, so somewhere between 39 and 60? And which
of your States has voter ID laws in effect now?
Mr. Kobach. In Kansas we have photo ID and proof of
citizenship.
Mr. Castro. OK.
Mr. Husted. In Ohio we use the Federal standard.
Mr. Castro. So did you pass a State voter ID law or not?
Mr. Husted. We have an ID law, but not a strict photo ID
law, so you could use bank Statements and another type of
document.
Mr. Castro. Certainly, Mr. Dunlap, would you agree that
when there is photo ID passed or voter ID passed there are some
legitimate voters who are not going to be able to vote because
they don't have the ID with them?
Mr. Dunlap. That is precisely why the Maine legislature
rejected that very piece of legislation and why the study
committee said that it would be a disenfranchising force. We do
require photo ID to register to vote, but not to access an
actual ballot at the polls.
Mr. Castro. And do you know of any estimates about the
percentage of people that might be denied their legitimate
right to vote because of these laws?
Mr. Dunlap. It would probably be fairly significant. It
could run 5 to 10 percent.
Mr. Castro. OK. So let me ask any of you this: Do you think
that the argument here is that the President's executive action
may cause undocumented folks to vote? Do you think these folks
are more patriotic than, in Kansas, 61 percent of your Kansans?
I guess what I mean to say is you really think that these folks
are so patriotic and so wanting to go vote that they want so
much to go vote more than 61 percent of the Kansans who didn't
want to go vote?
Mr. Kobach. Let me tell you a story about a specific
individual.
Mr. Castro. No, please answer my question. If you are going
to, yes or no?
Mr. Kobach. It is directly in answer to your question.
These individuals may vote for some of the same reasons that
you are suggesting. A woman in Wichita, an alien, voted----
Mr. Castro. Do you think--I need to reclaim my time.
Mr. Kobach. She voted multiple times. She was a green card
holder with an application for U.S. citizenship----
Mr. Castro. Mr. Chairman, I asked a direct question for
which the witness won't give me a direct answer.
Mr. Kobach. I am trying to answer your question. The answer
is she wanted her U.S. citizenship application and she said,
when asked, she voted as a green card holder because she
thought it would increase the changes of her becoming and
accepted as a U.S. citizenship. So it was an error.
Mr. Castro. But, Mr. Kobach, you believe that----
Mr. Kobach. So many are motivated to vote.
Mr. Castro [continuing]. There are so many undocumented
folks there who just want to vote so much in Kansas that this
is going to be a problem?
Mr. Kobach. Some, like her, are in error, and they think
voting will help them. Others are manipulated, like those in
Seward County, Kansas, in my written testimony, but evidently
you haven't looked at it.
Mr. Castro. OK, so you feel there are so more patriotic
than 61 percent of your Kansas out there, that they are just
dying to go vote. OK.
Mr. Kobach. I doubt that the participation rate would
exceed 61 percent.
Mr. Castro. Now, let me ask you this.
Mr. Dunlap, do you think that there are more people who are
going to be legitimately disenfranchised, Americans, legitimate
voters who have the right to vote, disenfranchised by laws
passed in Kansas and other places, or are there going to be
more undocumented folks who actually turn out and vote? Which
number do you think would be higher?
Mr. Dunlap. Those denied access to the process, sir.
Mr. Castro. Yet, these were laws that were very graciously
passed in places like Kansas and Tennessee, which the
Government Accounting Office has said cost the vote for a lot
of people. I know you have disputed that report, but the GAO
has said that it was solid and credible.
Mr. Kobach. The GAO report was before the 2014 election. We
now have empirical evidence that the voter participation went
up after we put photo ID in.
Mr. Castro. So you think that putting roadblocks in front
of people is OK, right, even though legitimate voters,
everybody agrees that are going to be some legitimate voters
who aren't going to be able to vote. Even you agree with that,
right?
Mr. Kobach. No, I don't agree with that.
Mr. Castro. Not a single legitimate voter is going----
Mr. Kobach. Not a single one. We have been unable to find a
single person----
Mr. Castro. Wow. That is a remarkable answer, that you
won't even admit a single person is not going to be able to
vote.
Mr. Kobach. Every person can get a free non-photo ID----
Mr. Castro. So there are going to be more legitimate
people, right, who can vote, there are going to be more
legitimate people that can vote because of the laws that you
all passed versus these undocumented folks that you are worried
about today.
Mr. Kobach. Not a single U.S. citizen or other legitimate
voter, I assume you are talking about someone who didn't bring
their driver's license with them.
Mr. Castro. No.
Mr. Kobach. Not a single legitimate voter has been denied
the right to vote in Kansas, and we have many cases----
Mr. Castro. Mr. Kobach, you are being unreasonable.
Mr. DeSantis. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Jordan. Mr. Chairman, could I just do one quick
question for Mr. Kobach?
Mr. DeSantis. The chair recognizes the gentleman.
Mr. Jordan. I just want to be clear. It was tough for us to
hear exactly what you said. So in the 2010 non-Presidential
election you had a percentage of Kansas that showed up and
voted. Between 2010 and 2014 you implemented a photo ID
requirement. And if I heard you, I think you said in 2014 the
percent of Kansas who showed up to vote went up, is that
accurate?
Mr. Kobach. That is accurate. The percentage went up and
the raw number of voters who voted in 2014 set an all-time
State record, and that, again, was after we implemented a photo
ID requirement.
Mr. Jordan. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeSantis. The ranking member, the chair recognizes.
Mr. Lynch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a report here
entitled, Truth in Immigration: The Myth of Widespread Non-
Citizen Voting, by the Maldef Legal Defense and Education Fund,
that I would ask to have submitted to the record.
Mr. DeSantis. Without objection, it will be so entered.
Mr. DeSantis. Well, let me thank the witnesses for your
time and providing your input. I think part of the issue that
we are seeing emanating from what the President did is we are
really in unchartered law. I mean, this is kind of a law-free
zone. The work permits that are issued are not contemplated by
the statute; the different benefits have never been passed by
Congress. So this is going to trickle down to how that new
status that has been created by executive fiat is going to
interact with State laws, and I think it is going to be
confusing and I think that the President was wrong to do what
he did, and I don't think that that is how the system is
supposed to operate.
But I do appreciate all of you for coming here today.
This hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:28 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]