Horrors! Between a draft version of a report and the final version, editorial changes were made that reflect the truth on the subject matter -- and The New York Times smells a scandal.

A federal panel responsible for conducting election research played down the findings of experts who concluded last year that there was little voter fraud around the nation, according to a review of the original report obtained by The New York Times.

Instead, the panel, the Election Assistance Commission, issued a report that said the pervasiveness of fraud was open to debate.

The revised version echoes complaints made by Republican politicians, who have long suggested that voter fraud is widespread and justifies the voter identification laws that have been passed in at least two dozen states.

Democrats say the threat is overstated and have opposed voter identification laws, which they say disenfranchise the poor, members of minority groups and the elderly, who are less likely to have photo IDs and are more likely to be Democrats.

Though the original report said that among experts “there is widespread but not unanimous agreement that there is little polling place fraud,” the final version of the report released to the public concluded in its executive summary that “there is a great deal of debate on the pervasiveness of fraud.”

The topic of voter fraud, usually defined as people misrepresenting themselves at the polls or improperly attempting to register voters, remains a lively division between the two parties. It has played a significant role in the current Congressional investigation into the Bush administrationÂ’s firing of eight United States attorneys, several of whom, documents now indicate, were dismissed for being insufficiently aggressive in pursuing voter fraud cases.

The problem, of course, is that there is a great deal of debate over the pervasiveness of such fraud -- especially given a number of recent prosecutions for election fraud and certain irregularities in predominantly DemocratICK communities regarding the number of votes cast and the security of ballots. Part of the problem comes down to one of definition, and part of it relates to the question of how one defines "pervasive" -- and whether one considers voter fraud that impacts election results to be a serious problem worth even looking at.

One interesting change is this one.

The original report said most experts believe that “false registration forms have not resulted in polling place fraud,” but the final report cites “registration drives by nongovernmental groups as a source of fraud.”

Well let's consider that for just a minute. It may well be argued that fake registrations coming from such registration drives are caught by election officials, but the fact that groups such as ACORN have a long track record of submitting fake registrations is of concern -- and is an example of attempted election fraud.

Oh, and by the way, let's consider a little comment by one of the Democrats on the commission.

Gracia Hillman, the Democratic commissioner who voted in favor of releasing the final report, said she did not believe that the editing of the report was politically motivated or overly extensive.

“As a federal agency, our responsibility is to ensure that the research we produce is fully verified,” Ms. Hillman said. “Some of the points made in the draft report made by the consultants went beyond what we felt comfortable with.”

Which raises a question -- is the report the responsibility of the commission, or the consultants? And if the answer is "the consultants", why do we have the commission in the first place?

No scandal here -- but I'm willing to bet that we will continue to see efforts to create one by partisan Democrats interested in making one more attack on the Bush Administration.

Posted by: Greg at 10:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 637 words, total size 4 kb.