In a Politico.com piece, John Fund described “out-of-state” registrants who reportedly cast ballots in Ohio as “fraudulent voters,” without noting that a Columbus Dispatch article Fund apparently cited in his piece quoted an Ohio prosecutor saying of the people: "[M]y take is that they haven't come here to deceive anyone. ... They were under the impression they were entitled to vote."
WSJ's Fund reported on “fraudulent voters” in Ohio, without noting prosecutor reportedly said those in question weren't “attempting to deceive anyone”
Written by Lily Yan
Published
In a November 2 Politico.com piece, Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund cited Columbus Dispatch reporting about an Ohio investigation into a group of “out-of-state registrants,” some of whom reportedly voted or requested absentee ballots, and all of whom reportedly shared a house. Fund wrote that "[t]he owner of the house the fraudulent voters stayed at is also under investigation." However, although Fund apparently referred to an October 18 Columbus Dispatch article in describing the investigation, Fund omitted comments made by the state prosecutor, reported in the same article, expressing his view that the people voting illegally believed they were entitled to vote and did not intend to break the law.
Fund wrote that Franklin County prosecutor Ron O'Brien “cracked down in the case of 13 out-of-state registrants who came to Ohio to register voters in Columbus for the group Vote From Home.” Fund later stated, “The Columbus Dispatch reported last month that 'none of them seems to have ties to Ohio' -- and apparently had no intention of staying there. One has even moved back to England, where he is a student. It is illegal in almost all states to vote somewhere that is not your permanent residence.” Fund continued, “The owner of the house the fraudulent voters stayed at is also under investigation. He has voted in Ohio even though he has lived and worked in New York for the past four years,” adding that "[m]any are concerned that other fraudulent votes could be cast in Ohio."
But Fund did not note that O'Brien also reportedly said the following: "[M]y take is that they haven't come here to deceive anyone," and, “They were under the impression they were entitled to vote. That's how they were reading the law.”
From the November 2 Politico.com article:
There are already documented examples of fraudulent registrations being converted into fraudulent votes in Ohio, where ACORN and other groups were active. Darrell Nash, an ACORN registration worker, submitted an illegal form for himself and then cast a paper ballot during the state's “early voting” period.
Franklin County prosecutor Ron O'Brien also cracked down in the case of 13 out-of-state registrants who came to Ohio to register voters in Columbus for the group Vote From Home. The group all lived out of the same rented 1,175-square-foot house in Ohio, registered to vote and then most of them either cast early voting ballots or submitted applications for absentee ballots before leaving the state. They have agreed to have all of their ballots canceled in exchange for the prosecutor's decision not to file charges.
The Columbus Dispatch reported last month that “none of them seems to have ties to Ohio” -- and apparently had no intention of staying there. One has even moved back to England, where he is a student. It is illegal in almost all states to vote somewhere that is not your permanent residence.
The owner of the house the fraudulent voters stayed at is also under investigation. He has voted in Ohio even though he has lived and worked in New York for the past four years.
Many are concerned that other fraudulent votes could be cast in Ohio.
From the October 18 Columbus Dispatch article:
About 200,000 newly registered Ohio voters have been flagged by the secretary of state because their names, addresses, driver's-license numbers, and/or Social Security numbers don't match other state or federal records.
Likely among them are the 12 people who have registered to vote since August using the address of the 1,175-square-foot Brownlee Avenue house.
Some of them already have voted. Others requested absentee ballots but have yet to return them to the Franklin County Board of Elections.
None of them, however, seems to have ties to Ohio - no close relatives, no public-records trail, no obvious intention to stay in the state past the election.
Most of them grew up on the East Coast, attended colleges there and registered to vote in their home counties. It is not illegal to be registered to vote in more than one state. But it is illegal to vote in more than one or to vote in a state that is not your permanent residence.
The owner of the house also is coming under scrutiny. He has voted in Ohio even though he has lived and worked in New York since 2004.
All 13 are under investigation by Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O'Brien. None has any apparent ties to ACORN, the Association of Community Activists for Reform Now, whose voter-registration activity has come under scrutiny in Ohio and other states.
“My take is that they haven't come here attempting to deceive anyone,” O'Brien said. “They were under the impression they were entitled to vote. That's how they were reading the law.”
He has talked to several of the people or their attorneys. He doesn't believe they set out to intentionally thwart the law, which requires voters to live in the state at least 30 days before the election.
Daniel Tokaji, assistant director of an elections law center at Ohio State University, said residency is not always cut and dried under Ohio law. The statute says: “A person shall not be considered to have gained a residence in any county of this state into which the person comes for temporary purposes only, without the intention of making such county the permanent place of abode. ... That place shall be considered the residence of a person in which the person's habitation is fixed and to which, whenever the person is absent, the person has the intention of returning.”
“My bottom line is for some of these cases, there's a gray area in the law as to whether someone's intention to remain is sufficient in circumstances where they've come here and it's not clear how long they plan to stay here,” Tokaji said.