Message From: Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans 70=THF/OU=THFDC/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=SPAKOSKY1-11 8/3/2017 1:27:26 PM Andrew J. Kossack [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov]; Mark Paoletta [mark.r.paoletta@ovp.eop.gov] Fwd: Critics Try to Smear Trump's Election-Integrity Commission Critics Try to Smear Trump's Election-Integrity Commission Calling us racists and 'voter-suppression superstars' is shameful and corrosive to civility. By Hans von Spakovsky andJ Christian Adams Aug. 2, 2017 5:26 p.m. ET It's one thing to attack a proposed policy. It's another thing to attack someone for simply asking a question. Yet that's exactly what President Trump's Advisory Commission on Election Integrity is facing from the New York Times,Washington Post, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and others. Since the president signed an executive order creating the commission in May,these organizations have attacked members ofthe commission personally, including the authors ofthis article. The reprehensible(and false) claim that we are engaged in voter suppression is a scare tactic, pure and simple. Ours is an advisory commission. It has no federal authority or power of any kind. It can't tell the states, local governments or even the executive branch ofthe federal government what to do in the administration of elections Further, the commission's request for publicly available information from the states is not some nefarious plot. This basic information about the voter registration process is necessary for the commission's work. Many states have already given or sold the same information to multiple private vendors. It's clear the frenzied critics never even read the president's executive order, which empowered the commission to "study the registration and voting process used in Federal elections" and to identify "vulnerabilities" that may imperil integrity and public confidence. What could be a worthier goal than examining the electoral system and formulating recommendations to improve it? What American wouldn't want to improve our election process? It's also clear the critics didn't bother to watch the commission's first meeting on July 19. There was near unanimity among the commission's bipartisan members. All agreed on the need to 17-2361-A-002164 review the voter-registration process itself, the types of voting equipment being used, and election cybersecurity. Some critics seem offended that voter fraud was mentioned during the meeting, as if it doesn't exist or we shouldn't be concerned about it. But as the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in 2008 when it upheld Indiana's voter ID law,fraud has a long history in U.S. elections. The Heritage Foundation maintains a database of almost 1,100 proven cases of election fraud. In many counties across the country, registered voters outnumber residents eligible to vote. Hundreds ofthousands of voters are registered in multiple states or remain on the voter rolls despite being deceased. These may be administrative errors, but what fair-minded citizen would suggest we ignore the problem? The commission seeks answers to other questions. Are people exploiting administrative loopholes to vote more than once? How many noncitizens are illegally voting because we lack a system for verifying registration information? Are states taking advantage of available local, state and federal databases to check the accuracy oftheir voter rolls? Have online voterregistration databases been hacked? If so, when and by whom? Why is turnout among overseas military voters so low? We don't know the answers to these and other questions, because there has been no systematic, comprehensive study of our election system. The critics apparently don't want that work to be done. They don't even want anyone asking questions. Instead, they smear the commission and its members in an effort to denigrate our work. Americans once engaged in spirited but civil debate on contentious issues. Calling members of our commission racists and "voter-suppression superstars" is shameful and corrosive to civility. Fortunately, the American people value truth. They know that the commission's work won't harm a single legitimate voter. "Truth enlightens man's intelligence and shapes his freedom," wrote Pope John Paul II in 1993. Clean elections protect freedom, while elections tainted by fraud or administrative errors disrupt the consent ofthe governed. Mr. von Spakovsky is a senior legalfellow at the Heritage Foundation. Mr. Adams is president and general counsel ofthe Public Interest LegalFoundation. Both are members ofthe president's Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. 17-2361-A-002165 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans [Hans.VonSpakovsky@heritage.org] 5/16/2017 9:28:54 PM Kris Kobach Fwd: fact-check related to voter registration Fyi Hans von Spakovsky Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and Senior Legal Fellow Institutefor Constitutional Government The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6207 heritage.org Begin forwarded message: From:"von Spakovsky, Hans" Date: May 16, 2017 at 2:22:15 PM EDT To:" Cc: "Bishop, Brad" Subject: FW:fact-check related to voter registration Amy, Your email was forwarded to me for a reply. See my responses below. By the way, the correct legal term according to the U.S. Supreme Court is "illegal alien." There is no such thing as an undocumented immigrant. Kris Kobach's response is correct. Almost no states have even tried to compare their voter registration lists with DHS records on illegal aliens and legal aliens. Those that have tried have run into huge bureaucratic roadblocks that were put up by the Obama administration that made the databases almost impossible to use. For example, it is my understanding that DHS told states that they could not access the SAVE system unless they already had an individual's alien number, which is the ID number assigned to legal aliens. See here: https://www.uscis.govisave/about-save/verificationprocesshttps://www.uscis.gov/save/about-save/verification-process. No state election official has that information. The whole point is to check the names and other matching information of registered voters to see if any of them are aliens who illegally registered. Those registered aren't going to provide their alien ID numbers. So this is an unnecessary obstacle put up by DHS. Also, my understanding is that the SAVE system does not have information on the illegal aliens that have been caught and detained by DHS,thus establishing a record with the agency. Those records also need to be looked at by state election officials; the SAVE system is not sufficient. Here is an article on this issue that you may want to read: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/01/25/john-fund-and-hans-von-spakovsky-why- trum ps-probe-voter-fraud-is-long-overdue.html. 17-2361-A-002167 And another one: http://dailysignal.com/2016/10/07/when-zombies-aliens-and-felons-steal-ourvotes/ They references several studies, reports, and surveys on noncitizen voting. By the way, neither of the studies you cite by Project 21 or the Brennan Center are valid sources. They did no extensive review of voter registration records across the U.S. to find noncitizens who are illegally registered to vote. They have no ability to do that because of the very problem we are discussing — we have an honor system of voter registration and no check is made of whether someone is really a citizen. So when noncitizens are found, it is usually purely by accident. If you don't think this happens, check out these three cases out of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals over aliens who registered to vote as soon as they got to the U.S. when they got their driver's licenses. The key point here to keep in mind is that they were not caught by election officials when they asserted they were citizens on the voter registration form because that information is not verified. They would never have been caught except they applied for a change of status with DHS: Elizabeth Dag Um Keathley v. Holder, 696 F.3d 644(7th Cir. 2012) Margarita del Pilar Fitzpatrick v. Sessions,847 F.3d 913(7th Cir. 2017) Anthony M. Kimani v. Holder, 695 F.3d 666(7th Cir. 2012). Heritage also has a new database that we have been filling with voter fraud convictions as we run across them — we are not even doing an extensive research effort to dig up cases. There are convictions scattered throughout the states of noncitizens illegally registering and voting. Iowa,for example has three cases in more than a dozen voter fraud cases. That database is here: http://thflegal.s3.amazonaws.com/VoterFraudCases.pdf If you have any other questions, let me know. From: Sherman, Amy [ Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 12:32 PM To: Heritagepress Subject: fact-check related to voter registration Hi: Do you have any experts on voter registration and undocumented immigrants? I am fact-checking a claim Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach made on Fox News about searching for noncitizen voters: "So, one thing that's never been done before that I eluded to earlier is the Department of Homeland Security has a database of all known aliens, green card holders, temporary visa holder in the United States. And that is never been bounced against the state's voter rolls to say well, hey, how many of these people with these names these date of birth so you can get an exact match. How many of them are registered to vote in state A or state B. We can do something like that again which would be very informative and I don't know what the results will yield but I know that for example in Kansas, we have seen a large number of 17-2361-A-002168 noncitizen register on voter rolls and that's one of the subjects were actually locked in battle of the ACLU in court right now." PolitiFact has previously written about the state of Florida and a handful of other states and a few counties in Arizona using DHS'SAVE database to verify citizenship status for voter registration purposes. According to USCIS website, the Department of Homeland Security has granted access to SAVE data to verify citizenship status for voter registration purposes for Colorado, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia and multiple Arizona counties. I am reaching out to some experts on undocumented immigrants and voter registration to ask these questions: Would you consider the use of SAVE by some states/counties as a way of using a DHS database to bounce it off state voter rolls? ls there some other DHS database that could be used for voter registration purposes other than SAVE? Florida election officials told me that they do not use SAVE for voter registration purposes. Any idea if other states on the list of approved states don't actually use it for voter registration purposes? Kobach didn't make a statement here about the number of undocumented immigrants who registered to vote or voted, however I may link to the most recent data about that. The most recent studies PolitiFact previously cited were News 21 in 2012 and then the Brennan Center in 2007. Have there been any more recent studies? Thanks - Amy Amy Sherman Miami Herald/PolitiFact.corn htt ://www. olitifact.corn/ Emily VanderBush Senior Aledia Specialist Brad Bishop Senior Media Associate, Institutefor Constitutional Government 17-2361-A-002169 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Kobach 6/27/2017 4:31:24 PM Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP Uo=Exchange Organization/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=8aba9b5542f6420a92cc812de2026bb8-Pab Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [/o=Exchange Organization/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=39ff6c312e514f0fac9dd16139907782-Ko] Fwd: Just Facts story link We need Agresti to present this analysis to the commission. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: David Boyer < Date: June 27, 2017 at 12:21:18 PM EDT To: Kris Kobach Subject: Just Facts story link Mr. Kobach, Here's the link to the story: http://www.washi ngtonti m es.coin/news/20 1 7/jun/1 9/noncitizen-illegal-vote-numb er-higher-thanesti m at/ Good talking with you. Dave Dave Boyer White House correspondent The Washington Times c) The information contained in this electronic transmission is intended for the exclusive use ofthe individuals to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential,the disclosure of which is prohibited by law. If the reader ofthis transmission is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying ofthis communication is strictly prohibited. In addition, any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail and any attachments is strictly forbidden. 17-2361-A-002170 Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP lAndrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] 9/8/2017 7:49:38 PM Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov] Fwd: Kobach Kris, FYI - Stefan is out ofthe office but says(below)he will reach out ASAP. Andrew J. Kossack Associate Counsel Office of the Vice President Email: Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov Cell: Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Passantino, Stefan C. EOP/WHO" Date: September 8,2017 at 3:47:51 PM EDT To: "Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP" Cc: "Gast, Scott F. EOP/WHO" Subject: Re: Kobach I can call in a bit. Stefan C. Passantino Deputy Counsel to the President Office ofthe White House Counsel On Sep 8, 2017, at 3:44 PM,Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP wrote: Short notice, but Ijust heard from Kobach and he said he's available for a bit if one or both of you want to connect. His cell is Andrew J. Kossack Associate Counsel Office of the Vice President Email: Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov Cell: Sent from my iPhone 17-2361-A-002171 Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Attachments: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP lAndrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] 6/28/2017 6:55:18 PM Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov1 Fwd: new version MERGED SoS Request - FINAL.docx; ATT00001.htm; SOS, US Attorney & Clerk Contacts.xlsx; ATT00002.htm Kris - Please see the attached version for review. Thanks Andrew J. Kossack Associate Counsel Office of the Vice President Email: Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp eop u,ov Cell: Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Schilb, Veronica J. EOP/OVP (Intern)" Date: June 28, 2017 at 2:53:08 PM EDT To: "Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP" Subject: RE: new version Original Message From: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 1:36 PM To: Schilb, Veronica J. EOP/OVP (Intern) Subject: new version Andrew J. Kossack Associate Counsel Office ofthe Vice President Cell: Email: Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov 17-2361-A-002172 [ EMBED Acrobat.Document.11 June 28,2017 [MERGEFIELD Title_l H ][ MERGEFIELD First Name][MERGEFIELD Last Name] [MERGEFIELD Position] [MERGEFIELD Address] [MERGEFIELD City],[ MERGEFIELD State Abv ][MERGEFIELD Zip ] [GREETINGLINE \f"<< BEFORE_ Dear >><< TITLE°_>><< _LASTO >> << AFTER >>" 1033 \e "Dear Sir or Madam,"] I serve as the Vice Chair for the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity ("Commission"), which was formed pursuant to Executive Order 13799 of May 11, 2017. The Commission is charged with studying the registration and voting processes used in federal elections and submitting a report to the President ofthe United States that identifies laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that enhance or undermine the American people's confidence in the integrity offederal elections processes. As the Commission begins it work, I invite you to contribute your views and recommendations throughout this process. In particular: 1. What changes, if any, to federal election laws would you recommend to enhance the integrity offederal elections? 2. How can the Commission support state and local election administrators with regard to information technology security and vulnerabilities? 3. What laws, policies, or other issues hinder your ability to ensure the integrity of elections you administer? 4. What evidence or information do you have regarding instances of voter fraud or registration fraud in your state? 5. What convictions for election-related crimes have occurred in your state since the November 2000 federal election? 6. What recommendations do you have for preventing voter intimidation or disenfranchisement? 7. What other issues do you believe the Commission should consider? In addition, in order for the Commission to fully analyze vulnerabilities and issues related to voter registration and voting, I am requesting that you provide to the Commission the publiclyavailable voter roll data for the[MERGEFIELD StateCommonwealth ] [MERGEFIELD State_Full ], including, if publicly available under the laws of your state, the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, voter history (elections voted in)from 2006 onward, active/inactive status, cancelled status, information regarding any felony convictions, information regarding voter registration in another state, information regarding military status, and overseas citizen information. You may submit your responses electronically to[ HYPERLINK "mailto:ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov"]or by utilizing the Safe Access File Exchange 17-2361-A-002173 ("SAFE"), which is a secure FTP site the federal government uses for transferring large data files. You can access the SAFE site at[ HYPERLINK "https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/Welcome.aspx" J. We would appreciate a response by July 14, 2017. Please be aware that any documents that are submitted to the full Commission will also be made available to the public. If you have any questions, please contact Commission staff at the same email address. On behalf of my fellow commissioners, I also want to acknowledge your important leadership role in administering the elections within your state and the importance of state-level authority in our federalist system. It is crucial for the Commission to consider your input as it collects data and identifies areas of opportunity to increase the integrity of our election systems. I look forward to hearing from you and working with you in the months ahead. Sincerely, ‘47 Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002174 State/Commonw ealth State of State of State of State of State of State of State of State of State of State - Full Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut DC Delaware Position Title 1 -H Title 2- S or LG First Name Secretary of State Lieutenant Governor Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of the District Secretary of State The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable Secretary Lieutenant Governor Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary John Byron Michele Mark Alex Wayne Denise Lauren Jeffrey Address Last Name Merrill Mellott Reagan Martin Padilla Williams Merrill Vaughn Bullock State of Florida Secretary of State The Honorable Secretary Ken Detzner State of State of State of State of State of State of State of Commonwealth of Slate of State of State of Commonwealth of State of State of State of State of State of State of State of State of State of Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Secretary of State Lieutenant Governor Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable Secretary Lieutenant Governor Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Brian Shan Lawerence Jesse Connie Paul Kris Kemp Tsutsui Denney White Lawson Pate Kobach PO Box 5616 550W.7th,Ste. 1700 1700W Washington,Ste. 1700 256 State Capitol 1500 11th Street 1700 Broadway,Suite 200 Capitol Office,PO Box 150470 1350 Penn. Ave.,NW - Suite 419 401 Federal Street RA.Gray Bldg.,500S. Bronough,Ste. 100 214 State Capitol Exec. Chambers,State Capitol PO Box 83720 213 State Capitol 200W. Washington St.. Room 201 Lucas Bldg., 1st Fl.,321 E. 12th St. 120 SW 10th Ave. City Montgomery Anchorage Phoenix Little Rock Sacramento Denver Hartford Washington Dover Tallahassee State Zip Phone Abv. AL 36103-5616 (334)242-7200 AK 99501 (907)269-7460 AZ 85007-2888 (602)542-4285 AR 72201 (501)682-1010 95814 (916)653-7244 CA CO 80290 (303)894-2200 CT 06115-0470 (860)509-6200 DC 20001 (202)727-6306 DE 19901 (302)739-4111 Email Ohn.menillPrsos.alabama.gos ligovernorOalaska.gos, sosadmirnilazsos.gov infoAsos.arkansas.gov sceretary.padilladsos.ca.gov secretary(arsos.state.co.us denise.menill@ctgov secretarygde.gov kathy.bradford@state.de.us (850)245-6000 secretaryofstate@dos.myflorida.com FL 32399 Atlanta Honolulu Boise Springfield Indianapolis Des Moines Topeka GA HI ID IL IN IA KS 30334 96813 83720-0080 62756 46204 50319 66612 Frankfort KY 40601 (502)564-3490 sos.secretary41)..gov Baton Rouge Augusta Annapolis LA ME MD 70804 04333 21401 (225)922-2880 adminro sos.b.gov (207)626-8400 sos.officeiimainc.gov (410)974-5521 dhndsos_soeitmaryland.gov (404)656-2881 (808)586-0255 (208)334-2300 (217)782-2201 (317)232-6536 (515)281-6230 (785)296-4564 soscontactOsos.ga.gor kgov@hawaii.gov Idennerritsosidaho.gor jesscwhitekilsos.net sovirsosin.gov soectsos.iowa.gov sovirsos.ks.gov Kentucky Secretary of State The Honorable Secretary Alison Lundergan-Grimes 700 Capitol Ave.,Suite 152 Louisiana Maine Maryland The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable Secretary Secretary Secretary Tom Matt John Schedler Dunlap Wobensinith The Honorable Secretary William Galvin State House,24 Beacon St., Rm.337 Boston MA 02133-1099 (617)727-9180 cisAsee.state.ma.us Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey Secretary of Stale Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of the Commonwealth Secretary of State Secretary of Slate Secretary of State Secretary of Slate Secrets!). of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Lieutenant Governor The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The I lonorable The Honorable Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretar) Lieutenant Go% entor Johnson Simon Hosemann Ashcroft Stapleton Gale Ccgavske Gardner Guadagno 430 West Allegan St., 4th FL 100 Rev. Dr. MLK Jr. Blvd. 125 S. Congress St. 600 West Main. PO Box 1767 PO Box 202801 PO Box 94608-4608 101 N.Carson Street, Suite 3 State House. Rm 204 PO Box 001 Lansing St. Paul Jackson Jefferson City Helena Lincoln Carson City Concord Trenton MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH NJ 48918 55155-1299 39201 65101 59620-2801 685094863 89701 03301 08625 (517)373-2510 (651)201-1324 (601)359-1350 (573)751-4936 (406)444-2034 (402)471-2554 (775)684-5708 (603)271-3242 (609)292-6000 secretarysnichigan.gov secretary.,.statelitstate.mn.us delben.hosemanreftsos.ms.gov info4sos.mo.gos. sosibritgov, sos.info(knebraska.gos. sosexec(i_4os.nv.gov kladtkOsos.staterth.us Itgovemorii nj.gol, State of New Mexico Secretary of State The Honorable Secretary Ruth Steve Delbert Jay Corey John Barbara Bill Kim Nlaie gg Toulouse Oli‘er 325 Don Gaspar,Suite 300 Santa Fe NM 87501 (505)827-3600 trish.wintera state.us nm Secretary 12231 (518)486-9846 infoados.n .go, Massachusetts PO Box 94125 148 State House Station 16 Francis Sweet State of New York Secretary of State The Honorable Rossanna Rosado Commerce Plaza.99 Washington A,enue Albany State of State of State of North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State The I karorabk! Secretary The Honorable Secretary lire)ionorabk: Secretary blame AI,in Jon Nlaishall Jaeger I lusted PO Box 29622 600 E. Boulevard Ave.. Dept. 108 180 E. Broad St., 16th Fl. State of Oklahoma Secretary of State The Honorable Secretary Dm,: Lopez State of Commons,ealth of State of State of State of State of State of Oregon Secretary of State The Honorable Secretary Dennis Richardson NY Raleigh Bismarck Columbus NC ND OH 27626-0622 (919)807-2005 emarshal/ASOSIIC corn 58505-0500 (701)328-2900 aiaegerftd.goN 43215 (614)466-2655 ihnskxl@ohioseeretaryofstate.gov 2300N Lincoln Blvd..Ste. 101 Oklahoma City OK (405)521-3912 webmaster(Osos.ok.gov 136 State Capitol Salem OR 97310-0722 (503)986-1523 oregon.sosrdstate.or.us 73105 ST-PRESS a pages Penns% ',atria Secretar) of State The Honorable Secretary Pedro Cortex 302 North Office Building Harrisburg PA 17120-3025 (717)787-6458 Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State Secretary of State The Honorable The Honorable The lionorabl; The Honorabl.: .able The I tom. Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Nellie Mark Shantel Ire Rolando Gorbea Hammond Krebs Hargett Pablos 82 Snrith St , Rut 217 1205 Pendleton Street, Suite 525 500 East Capitol Ave..#204 State Capitol,First Floor 1100 Congress Ave. Providence Columbia Pierre Nashville Austin RI SC SD TN DC 02903 29201 57501 37243-0305 78701 (401)222-2357 (803)734-2170 (605) 773-3537 (615)741-2819 (512)463-5770 iimgoibea a sos ri.gov rdaggerhartir.sos.sc.gov shanteLkrebs*state.sd.us ire.hargett@tn.gov secretaryAsos.stateix.us Texas State of Utah Lieutenant Governor The honorable Lieutenant Governor Spencer Cox PO Box 142325 Salt Lake City UT 84114 (801)538-1041 spencernox o utaligor State of Commonwealth of State of Vermont The I lonorabk Secretary Jim Condos 128 State Street Montpelier VT 05633 (802)828-2148 iim.condos:a sec.state.vt.us The Honorable Secretary Kelly Thomasson PO Box 2454 Richmond VA 23218 (804)786-2441 Washington Secretary of State Secretaly of the Commonwealth Secretary of State The Honorable Secretary Kim Wyman PO Box 40220 Olympia WA State of West Virginia Secretary of State The Honorable Secretary Andrew Warner 1900 Kanawha Blvd.. Bldg. I. Suite- 157K Charleston WV State of Stale of Territory of Wisconsin Wyoming American Samoa Secretary of State Secretary of State Lieutenant Governor The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable Secretary Secretary Lieutenant Governor Douglas Ed Lemanu Peleti La Follette Murray Mange PO Box 7848 2020 Carey Ave.. Ste. 600& 700 A.P. Luigi Executive Office Building WI WY AS Virginia Madison Cheyenne Pago Pago 98503-0220 (360)902-4151 25305 (301)558-6000 kell)ihomasson agovernorAirginia.gov kim.wymarvie sos.wa.gov wvsos@wvsos.com 53707-7848 (608)266-8888 douglafolletto(rilsos.state.wi.us 82002 (307)777-7378 soeofstatOwyo.gov 96799 (684)633-4116 ligovernoriijgo.as.gov 17-2361-A-002176 Territor) of Commonwealth of Virgin Islands Guam Lieutenant Got enter The Honorable Lieutenant Gm color Ra) Tenorio PO Box 2950 Puerto Rico ofthe United States Secretary of State Lieutenant Governor The Honorable The Honorable Secretor). Lieutenant Gm eviler Luis Osbert Rivera Mann Potter PO Box 9023271 1131 King &MCI,Suite 101 Hagatna Guam San Juan St. Croix PR USVI 96932 00902 00820 (671)475-9380 set, .ICC a guam go) (787)722-2121 (340)774-2991 secretatio(d.cstado.pr.gov pctra.phipps'Algo.vigor 17-2361-A-002177 District United States Attorney Alabama. Middle Alabama, Northern Alabama. Southern Alaska Arizona Arkansas. Eastern Arkansas, Western Califomia, Central California. Eastern CalifomM, Northern California, Southern Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida, Middle Florida, Northern Florida. Southern Georgia, Middle A. Clark Morris Robert O. Posey Steven E. Butler Bryan Schroder Elizabeth A. Strange Patrick C. Harris Kenneth Elscr Sandra Brown Phillip A. Talbert Brian Stretch Alana Robinson Robert C. Troyer Deirdre Daly David C. Weiss Charming D. Phillips William S. Muldrow Christopher P. Canova Benjamin G. Greenberg G.F."Pete Peterman, III Middle Last Name Title First Name Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. The Honorable Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. A. Clark Robert Steven Bran Elizabeth Patrick Kenneth Sandra Phillip Brian Alan Robert Deirdre David Channing William Christopher Benjamin Pete Morris Posey Butler Schroder Strange Harris Elscr Brown Talbert Stretch Robinson Troyer Daly Weiss Phillips Muldrow Canova Greenberg Petennan Suffix III Address 131 Clayton Street 1801 4th Avenue North 63 South Rosa! Strivt. Suite 600 222 West 7th A\ ell tIC, Room 253, #9 Two Renaissance Square,40 N. Central Avenue. Suite 1200 P.O. Box 1229 414 Parker Asenue 312 North Spring Street, Suite 1200 501 I Street. Suite 10-100 Heritage Bank Building, 150 Almaden Blvd. Suite 900 880 Front Street, Room 6293 1225 17th Street, Suite 700 450 Main Street, Room 328 Nemours Building. 1007 Orange Street. Suite 700 Judiciary Center Building,555 Fourth Street, NW 400 North Tampa Street, Suite 3200 Ill North Adams Street, 4th Floor U.S. Courthouse 99 N.E. 4th Street Post Office Box 1702 City Montgomery Birmingham Mobile Anchorage Phoenix Little Rock Fort Smidi Los Angeles Sacramento San Jose San Diego Denver Hartford Wilmington Washington Tampa Tallahassee Miami Macon State ffip Phone AL AL AL AK AZ AR AR CA CA CA CA CO CT DE DC FL FL FL GA 36104 (334)223-7280 35203 (205)244-2001 36602 (251)441-5845 99513 (907)271-5071 85004-4408 (602)514-7500 72203-1229 (501)340-2600 72901 (479)783-5125 90012 (213)894-2400 93814 (916)554-2700 95113 (408)535-5061 92121-8893 (619)557-5610 80202 (303)454-0100 06103 (860)947-1101 19801 (302)573-6277 20530 (202)252-7566 33602 (813)274-6000 32301 (850)942-8430 33132 (305)961-9001 31202-1702 (478)752-3511 GA 30303-3309 (404)581-6000 Georgia. Northern John Horn Mr. John Horn Richard B. Russell Federal Building. 75 Spring Street, S.W.,Suite 600 Atlanta Georgia, Southern Guam & Northern Mariana Islands Hawaii Idaho Illinois. Central Illinois, Northern Illinois, Southern Indiana, Northern Indiana. Southern Iowa. Northern Iowa. Southern Kansas Kentucky. Eastern Kentucky, Western Louisiana, Eastern Louisiana. Middle Louisiana, Western Maine Maryland James D. Durham Shawn N. Anderson Elliot R. Enoki Rafael M.Gonzalez, Jr. Patrick D. Hansen Joel R. Levin Donald S. Boyce, Jr. Clifford D. Johnson Joshua Minkler Sean Berry Kevin E. VanderSehel Thomas E. Beall Carlton S. Shier IV John E. Kuhn,Jr. Duane A. Evans Corey R. Amundson Alexander C. Van Hook Richard W. Murphy Stephen Schenning Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. James Shawn Elliot Rafael Patrick Joel Donald Clifford Joshua Sean Kevin Thomas Carlton John Duane Corey Alexander Richard Stephen Durham Anderson Enoki Gonzalez Hansen Levin Boyce Johnson Mithder Berry VanderSchel Beall Shier Kuhn Evans Amundson Van Hook Murphy Sehenning Massachusetts William D. Weinreb Mr. William Weinreb Savannah liagatna Honolulu Boise Springfield Chicago Fairview Heights Hammond Indianapolis Cedar Rapids Des Moines Kansas City Lexington Louisville New Orleans Baton Rouge Shreveport Portland Baltimore Boston MA 02210 (617)748-3100 Michipn, Eastern Michigan. Western Minnesota Mississippi, Northern Mississippi, Southern Missouri. Eastern Daniel L. Lemisch Andrew B. Burge Gregory G. Brooker Robert Norman Harold Brittain Carrie Costantin Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr Mr. Ms. Daniel Andrew Gregory Robert Harold Carrie Lemisch Birge Brooker Noman Brittain Costantin 22 Barnard Street, Suite 300 Sircna Plaza. 108 Heman Cortez, Suite 500 300 Ala Moana Blvd.,#6-100 Washington Group IV,800 Park Blvd., Suite 600 318 S. Sixth Street 219 S. Dearborn St.. 5th Floor 9 Executive Dr 5400 Federal Plaza, Suite 1500 10 W Market St, Suite 2100 1 1 1 7th Ave,SE. Box ri 1 U.S. Courthouse Annex. Ill) East Court A‘enue,Suite 8 286 500 State Avenue,Suite 360 260 W. Vine Street, Ste. 300 717 West Broadway 650 Poydras Street. Suite 1600 Russel B. Long Federal Courthouse,777 Florida Street. Suite 208 300 Fannin Street, Suite 3201 100 Middle Street, East Tower,6th Floor 36 S. Charles Street, 4th Floor John Joseph Moakley United States Federal Courthouse, 1 Courthouse Way.Suite 9200 211W. Fort Street. Suite 2001 330 Ionia Avenue. NW.,Suite 501 300 S 4th Street, Suite 600 Ethridge Building,900 Jefferson Ave. 501 East Court Street, Suite 4.430 Thomas Ea,gleton U.S. Courthouse. I 1 1 S. 10th Street. 20th Floor Detroit Grtind Rapids Minneapolis Oxford Jackson St. Louis MI MI MN MS MS MO 48226 49503 55415 38655 39201 63102 (313)226-9100 (616)456-2404 (612)664-5600 (662)234-3351 (601)965-4480 (314)539-2200 Missouri, Western Thomas Larson Mr. Thomas Larson Charles Evans Whittaker Courthouse. 400 East 9th Street, Room 5510 Kansas City MO 64106 (816)426-3122 Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York, Eastern New York, Northern LeifJohnson Robert C. Stuart Steven W. Myhre John J. Farley William E. Fitzpatrick James D. Tierney Bridget Rohde Richard S. Hartunian Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. The Honorable Leif Robert Steven John William James Bridget Richard Johnson Stuart Myhre Farley Fitzpatrick Tierney Rohde Hartunian 2601 Second Ave. N., Ste. 3200 1620 Dodge St., Suite 1400 501 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 1100 53 Pleasant Street. 4th Floor 970 Broad Street, 7th Floor P.O. Box 607 271 Cadman Plaza East James Foley Bldg., 445 Broadway, Room 218 Billings Omaha Las Vegas Concord Newark Albuquerque Brooklyn Albany MT 59101 (406)657-6101 NE 68102 (402)661-3700 89101 (702)388-6336 NV 03301 (603)225-1552 NH 07102 (973)645-2700 NJ 87102 (505)346-7274 NM NY 11201 (718)254-7000 NY 12207-2924 (518)431-0247 Jr. Jr. IV Jr. 31401 (912)652-4422 GA GU 96910 (671)472-7332 96850 (808)541-2850 HI 83712 (208)334-1211 ID 62701 (217)492-4450 IL IL 60604 (312)353-5300 62208 (618)628-3700 IL 46320 (219)937-5500 IN 46204 (317)226-6333 IN IA 52401 (319)363-6333 IA 50309-2053 (515)473-9300 KS 66101 (913)551-6730 KY 40507-1612 (859)233-2661 KY 40202 (502)582-5911 70130 (504)680-3000 LA LA 70801 (225)389-0443 LA 71101-3068 (318)676-3600 ME 04101 (207)780-3257 21201 (410)209-4800 MD 17-2361-A-002178 New York, Southern New York, Western North Carolina. Eastern North Carolina, Middle North Carolina, Western North Dakota Ohio, Northern Ohio,Southern Oklahonta, Eastern Oklahoma, Northern Oklahoma, Western Oregon Pennsylvania, Eastern Pennsylvania, Middle Pennsylvania, Western Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee. Eastern Tennessee. Middle Tennessee, Western Texas. Eastern Texas. Northern Texas. Southern Texas. Western Utah Vermont Virgin Islands Virginia. Eastern Virginia. Western Washington, Eastern Washington, Western West Virginia, Northern West Virginia. Southern Wisconsin, Eastern Wisconsin, Western Wyoming Joon Kim Mines P. Kennedy John Stuart Bruce Sandra J. Hairston Jill Westmoreland Rose Christopher C. Myers David A. Sierleja Benjamin C. Glassman Doug A. Hom Loretta F. Radford Mark A.Yancey Billy J. Williams Louis D.Lappen Bruce D. Brandler Soo C.Song Rosa E. Rodriguez-Velez Stephen G. Dambruth Beth Drake Randy Seiler Nancy S. Harr John L. Smith Lawrence J. Laurenzi Brit Featherston John R. Parker Abran Martinez Richard Durbin John W.Huber Eugenia A.P. Cowles Joycelyn Hewlett Dana Boente Rick A. Mountcastle Joseph Harrington Annette L. I laves Betsy S. Jividen Carol A. Casto Greg Haanstad Jeffrey M. Anderson John Robert Green Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Mr. Ms. Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. The Honorable Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Kim Joon Kennedy James John Bruce Hairston Sandra Westmoreland Rose Jill Christopher Myers Sierleja David Benjamin Glassman Horn Doug Radford Loretta Mad( Yancey Williams Billy Lappen Louis Brandler Bruce Song Soo Rodriguez-Velez Rosa Stephen Dambruch Drake Beth Seiler Randy Nancy Harr John Smith Laurenzi Lawrence Brit Featherston Parker John Martinez Abran Durbin Richard Huber John Cowles Eugenia Joycelyn Ilewlett Boente Dana Mounteastle Rick Harrington Joseph Hayes Annette Jividen Betsy Carol Castro Haanstad Greg Anderson Jeffrey Green John Robert One St. Andrew's Plaza 138 Delaware Ave. 310 New Bern Avenue, Federal Building, Suite 800 101 South Edgeworth Street, 4th Floor 227 West Trade Street. Suite 1650 655 First Ave. North, Suite 250 801 West Superior Avenue, Suite 400 303 Marconi Boulevard, Suite 200 520 Denison 110 West 7th Street, Suite 300 210 West Park Avenue, Suite 400 1000 SW Third Ave Suite 600 615 Chestnut Street, Suite 1250 P.O. Box 11754 U.S. Post Office a Courthouse, 700 Grant Street, Suite 4000 Torre Chardon,Suite 1201,350 Carlos Chardon Street Fleet Center. 50 Kennedy Plaza, 8th Floor Wells Fargo Building. 1441 Main Street, Suite 500 P.O. Box 2638 800 Market Street. Suite 211 110 Ninth Avenue South, Suite A96I 167 North Main Street, Suite 800 350 Magnolia Avenue,Suite 150 1100 Commerce Street, Third Floor 1000 Louisiana Street. Ste 2300 60 I NV.Loop 410. Suite 600 I 1 1 South Main Street. Suite 1800 P.O. Box 570 5500 Veterans Drive. Room 260 2100 Jamieson Ave P.O. Box 1709 P.O. Box 1494 700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220 1125 Chapline Street 300 Virginia Street, Suite 4000 530 Federal Building,517 East Wisconsin Avenue 222 West Washington Ave, Suite 700 P.0. Box 668 New York Buffalo Raleigh Greensboro Charlotte Fargo Cleveland Columbus Muskogee Tulsa Oklahoma City Portland Philadelphia Harrisburg Pittsburg San Juan Providence Columbia Sioux Falls Knoxville Nashville Memphis Beaumont Dallas Houston San Antonio Salt Lake City Burlington St. Thomas Alexandria Roanoke Spokane Seattle Wheeling Charleston Milwaukee Madison Cheyenne NY NY NC NC NC ND OH OH OK OK OK OR PA PA PA PR RI SC SD TN TN TN TX DC TX TX LT VT VI VA VA WA WA WV WV WI WI WY 10007 (212)637-2200 14202 (716)843-5700 27601-1461 (919)856-4530 27401 (336)333-5351 28202 (704)344-6222 581024932 (701)297-7400 44113-1852 (216)622-3600 43215 (614)469-5715 74401 (918)684-5100 74119 (918)382-2700 73102 (405)553-8700 97204 (503)727-1000 19106 (215)861-8200 17108-1754 (717)221-4482 13219 (412)644-3500 00918 (787)766-5656 02903 (401)709-5000 29201 (803)929-3000 57101-2638 (605)330-4400 37902 (865)545-4167 37203 (615)736-3151 38103 (901)544-4231 77701-2237 (409)839-2538 75242-1699 (214)659-8600 77002 (713)567-9000 78216 (210)384-7100 84111-2176 (801)524-5682 05402-0570 (802)951-6725 00802-6424 (340)774-5757 22314 (703)299-3700 24008 (540)857-2250 99210-1494 (509)353-2767 98101-1271 (206)353-7970 26003 (304)234-0100 25301 (304)345-2200 53202 (414)297-1700 53703 (608)264-5158 82003-0668 (307)772-2124 17-2361-A-002179 Dastrict Middle DiStriCt of Alabama Northam District of Alabama Southern District of Alabama District of Alaska District of Arizona Eastern District of Arkansas Western District of Arkansas Central District of California Eastern District ofCalifornia Northem Disaict of California Southern District of California District of Colorado District of Connecticut District ofDetonate District ofColumbia Middle District of Florida Northern District of Florida Southern District of Florida Middle Disuict of Ge•orgia Northern District of Georgia Southern District of Georgia for the Northern Mariana Islands District ofGuam District of Hassan District of Idaho Central District of Illinois Northern District of Illinois Southern District of Illinois Northern District of Indiana Southern District of Indiana Northern District ofIona Southern District ofIona District of Kansas Eastern District of Kentucky Western District of Kentucky Eastern District of Louisiana Middle District of Lorisiana Western District of Louisiana District of Maine DISIOCI of Maryland District of Massachusetts Eastern District of Michigan Western District of Michigan District of Minnesota Northern District of Mississippi Southern Dial/lid of Mississippi Eastern District of Missouri Western District of Missouri District of Montana District ofNebraska District of Nevada District of New Hampshire District of New Jersey District ofNew Mexico Eastern District of New York Northern District of New York Southern District of New York Western District of New York Eastern District ofNorth Carolina Middle District of North Carolina Western District or North Carolina District ofNoah Dakota Northern District of Ohio Southern District of Ohio Eastern District of Oklahorm Northern District of Oklahoma Western District of Oklahoma District ofOregon Eastern District of Pemsylvama Middle District of Pennsylvania Western District of Pennsylvania District ofPuerto Rico District ofRhode Island District ofSouth Carolina District ofSouth Dakota Eastern District ofTemessee Middle District ofTemessee Western District of Tennessee Eastern District ofTexas Northern District of Texas Southern District ofTexas Western District of Texas Distnct or Utah DiSIliCI of Vennont ofthe Virgin Islands Eastern District of Virginia Western District of Virpinia Eastern District of Vs'ashingion Western Disuict of Washington Nonhem District of West Virelnia Southern District of West Virginia Eastern District of Wisconsin Western Dishict of Wisconsin District of Wvo • • Ms. Ms. Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Ms. First Name Debra Sharon Charles Lesley Brian James Doug Kiry MIASMIC Susan Mr. Ms. Mr. Ms. Ms. Ms. Jeffrey Robin John Angela Elizabeth Jessica Coined Tabora Cerino Caesar Warren Lyublanovits Mr. Mr. Mr. The Honorable Ms. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. David James Scott Heather Mame Sue Stephen Kenneth Thomas Justine Robert Laura Robert John Timodw Robert Vanessa William Michael TOIW Cluista Felicia Robert David Thomas Bum Flatten Poll Kennedy Quinata Beide Kenyon Wells Bruton Flanagan Trgovich Briggs Phelps Courier O'Brien Cart Armstrong }Nevins McComell Moore Berry Camon Farrell Weaver Dorwin Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. Ms. David Mika Oregon' Paige Tvler 1Denise Crests Johnston Linhams Wymore-Wvm Gilman Lucks Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Ms. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Lynch IDaniel Walsh IWilliam Daman Matthew Palmer Douglas Baerman Lawrence Krajick Rube Loewenguth Mart Moore Peter Brubaker John Frank Joins Ansley Robert Opacich Sandy Nagel Richard Keeney Patrick McCant Mark Carmelite Reeder Shim Moran Mary Berkman Kate Welsh Peter Barth Robert Rios de Moran Frances Tyer-Witek Hanorah Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Ms. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Joseph Debra Keith Thomas David , Karen Dm id Jearnette •,r.r Mark I Jerre, IGlenda Fernando Julia Sent William Dean Cheryl Teresa Stephen Peter Stephan Tide Middle Last Name Suffix Hackett Harris Diard Allen ICarth McCormack Young Gray Motherly Soong Haas Poplin Throcianorton Gould OToole Mitchell Bradley I Clack Jones I Eaton I Lake Galindo I Dudle.y IMcAvoy McCool Rile, Deppner 1 Ones 0ppeneer Barns Jr. Position Clerk ofCourt Cleric ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoed Clerk &Tom Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk &Tom Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCool Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoed Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCorn Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoed Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCart Clerk ofCourt Court Executive Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoun Clerk ofCoun Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoon Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCOM Clerk ofCoed Clerk ofCom Clerk ofCoed Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoed Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoed Clerk orcow Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoed Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoun Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCoun Clerk ofCourt Clerk offoun Clerk ofCourt Clerk orCorat Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCour Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCourt Clerk ofCote Clerk ofCourt Clerk orCoun Clerk ofCoed Clerk ofCourt Clerk oftourt Cleit ofConn Address One Church Street 1729 5th Avenue North 113 Saint Joseph St. 222 West 7th Avenue. Room 229 Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 130.401 West Washington Street SPC 1 600 W Capitol Ave. Rm A 149 30 South 6th Sucet, Room 1038 350 W 1st Stmet Siete 4311 5011 Street Room 4-200 450 Golden Gate Avenue 333 West Broadsmy,Suite 420 901 19th Street 450 Main Street 844 North King St Unit 18 333 Cantiartion Avenue N.W. 801 North Florida Avenue Ill N Adams St. Ste. 322 400 North Miami Avenue 475 Mulbeny Street 2211 United States Courthouse,75 Ted Turner Drive,SW PO Box 8286 P.O. Box 500687 520 W Soiedad Ave FL4 300 Ala Moana Blvd C-338 550W. Fort Street Suite 400 151 U.S. Courthouse.600 E Monroe Street 219 South Dearborn Street 301 West blain Street 5400 Federal Plam 46 East Ohio Street 1 1 1 Seventh Avenue SE Box 12 123 East Walnut Street soo State Avenue. Suite 259 101 Barr Street 601W. Broadnay 500 Poydras Street. Room C151 Russel B. Long Federal Courthouse,777 Florida Street Slits 139 300 Fannin Street. Suite 1167 156 Federal Siren 101 West Lombard Street I Courthouse Way 231 W. Lafayette Blvd.. Room 564 399 Federal Bldg. 110 Michigan St NW 300 S 4th Street. Suite 202 Federal Building Room 369.911 Jackson Avenue East 501 E Court St • Suite 2.500 Thomas Eagleton U.S. Courthouse. 1 1 1 South 10th Street. State 3.300 Charles Evans Whinaker Courthouse. 400 E 9th Street 2601 2nd Avenue North I 1 I South I itth Plea.Suite 1152 333 Las Vegas Blvd. South 55 Pleasant Street. Room 110 50 Walnut Street 333 Lorms Blvd NW 225 Cadman Plaza East James T. Foley Courthouse,Suite 509.445 Broadway Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S. Courthouse.500 Pearl Street 2 Niagara Square 1PO Box 25670 324W. Market Street 401 West Trade Street Room 210 U.S. District Court. PO Box 1193 Carl B. Stokes U.S. COU0 House.801 West Superior Avenue Joseph P. Kirwan' U.S. Courthouse, Room 121.83 Marconi Boulevard PO Box 607 333 W. 4th Street Room 411 200 NW 4th Street woo S.W. Third Ave. 601 Market Street 228 Walnut Street 700 Grant Siren Federico Degetau Federal Building. Room 150. 150 Carlos Cluudern Street Federal Building and Counhouse,One Exchange Terrace 901 Richland Street Rm 128 United States Courthouse.400 So. Phillips Avenue 800 Market Meet. Suite 130 801 Broadway 167 N Main St #242 300 Willow Street. Suite 104 1100 Convnerce Street Room 1452 P.O. Box 61010 655K Cesar E Chavez Blvd.. Room G65 351 S. West Towle. Rm 1.100 11 Elmwood Avenue. Room 506 5500 Veterans Drive. Rm 310 401 Courthouse Square 180 W Main &Ie.& Roan 104 PO Box 2164 700 Stewart Street Suite 2310 1125 Chapline Street. P.O. Box 471 300 Virginia Street East. Suite 2400 517 E Wisconsin Ave. Em 362 120 N. Hemv St. Btu 320 2120 Capitol Avenue. Roan 2131 (iv State Zip Montgomery Birmingham Mobile Anchorage PhOeltiX Little Rock Fon Snails Los Angeles Sacnunento San Francisco San Diego Denver Hanford Wilmington Washington Tampa Tallahassee Miani Macon Atlanta Savannah Saipan Minns Honolulu Boise Springfield Chicago Benton Hammond Indianapolis Cedar Rapids Des Moines Karnes CM' Lexington Louisville New Orleans Baton Rouge Shrevepon Portland Baltimore Boston Detroit Grand Rapids Minneapolis Oxford Jackson St Louis Kansas City Billings Omaha Las Vegas Concord Nenark Albuquerque Brooklyn Albany New York BulTalo Raleipli Greensboro Charlotte Bismarck Clevelaml Columbus Muskogee Tulsa Oklahoma City Portland Philadelphia Hanisburg Pittsburg San Juan Providence Columbia Sioux Falls ICnonille Nashville Memplis Beaumont Dallas Houston San Antonio Salt Lake City Burlington St Thomas Alexandria Abingdon Spokane Seattle Wheeling Charleston Milnaukee Madison Cheyenne AL AL AL AK AZ AR AR CA CA CA CA CO CT DE DC FL FL FL GA GA GA MP GU HI ID IL IL IL IN IN IA IA KS KY KY LA LA LA ME MD MA MI MI MN MS MS MO MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NY NY NY NC NC NC ND OH OH OK OK OK OR PA PA PA PR RI SC SD TN TN TN TX TX TX TX UT VI' VI VA VA WA WA WV WV WI WI WY 36104 35203 36602 99513 85003-2118 72201 72901 90012 95814 94102-3489 92101 80294-3589 06103 19801 20001 33602 32301 33128 31202 36303-3309 31412 96950 96910 96850 83724 62701 60604 62812 46320 46204 52401 50309 66101 40507 40202 70130 70801 71101 04101 21201 02210 48226 49503 55415 38655 39201 63102 64106 59101 68102 89101 03301 07101 87102 11201 12207 10007 14202 27611 27401-2544 28202 58502-1193 44113 43215 74402 74103 73102 97204 19106 17101 15219 00918 02903 29201 57104 37902 37203 38103 77701 75242 77208 78206 84101 05401 00802 22314 24210 99210 98101 26003 25301 53202 53703 82001 17-2361-A-002180 District California, Southern Florida, Southern Minnesota Nevada South Carolina Title FirstMiddle Last Name Suffix Name Position Clerk of Court Clerk of Court Clerk of Court Clerk of Court Clerk of Court Address 333 West Broadway, Suite 420 400 North Miami Avenue 300 S 4th Street, Suite 202 333 Las Vegas Blvd. South 901 Richland Street City San Diego Miami Minneapolis Las Vegas Columbia State Zip CA FL MN NV SC 92101 33128 55415 89101 29201 17-2361-A-002181 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP IMark.R.Paoletta@oyp.eop.gov] 6/30/2017 1:38:33 AM Hans.VonSpakoysky@heritage.org; Kris Kobach Fwd: President Donald J. Trump Announces Key Additions to his Administration Mark Paoletta Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734 (work) Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: White House Press Office Date: June 29, 2017 at 9:31:32 PM EDT To: Subject: President Donald J. Trump Announces Key Additions to his Administration Reply-To: THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 29,2017 President Donald J. Trump Announces Intent to Appoint Personnel to Key Administration Posts President Donald J. Trump today announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key positions in his Administration: Darlene Hutchinson of Alabama to be Director of the Office of Victims of Crime,Department of Justice. Ms. Hutchinson has been a crime victims' advocate more than 20 years, working extensively on legislation and public policy, teaching at police academies, and accompanying victims of all types to court and parole hearings. Ms. Hutchinson's volunteerism includes 10 years with rape crisis centers in Montgomery, Alabama, and Collin County, Texas, as well as seven years as president of a victims'support and advocacy group. Simultaneously, Ms. Hutchinson worked 25 years in publishing,including eight years as the editor of law enforcement publications in Alabama, Washington, D.C.,and Texas. Plus,she served nearly 6 years as the Communications and Media Director for the Dallas Bar Association. She has received many awards for her dedication to empowering survivors and protecting their rights, while enhancing public safety. Ms. Hutchinson has played a key role in the development of Alabama's innovative victim notification system, as well as the passage and ratification of a Victims' Constitutional Amendment in Alabama. A native of St. Petersburg, Florida, Ms. Hutchinson holds a bachelor's degree in Journalism from Troy State University. Hans A. Von Spakovsky of Virginia to be a Member of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. 17-2361-A-002183 President Donald J. Trump Announces Nomination of Personnel to Key Administration Posts President Donald J. Trump today announced his nomination of the following individuals to key positions in his Administration: Matthew P. Donovan of Virginia to be Under Secretary of the Air Force. Mr. Donovan most recently served as majority policy director for the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, where his responsibilities included advising the chairman of the Committee on broad policy matters related to national security, defense strategy and policy, organization,force structure, modernization, readiness, and regional issues. Mr. Donovan was previously a professional staff member for the committee, where he advised the chairs of the AirLand and Seapower subcommittees on policy and oversight relating to Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. He served 31 years in the Air Force, retiring as a colonel,including tours as commander of the U.S. Air Force Officer Training School and an F-15C fighter squadron. Mr. Donovan is a recipient of the Defense Superior Service Medal,the Legion of Merit, and the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, among other military awards and decorations. He is also a Distinguished Graduate of the U.S. Air Force Air Command and Staff College and U.S. Air Force Undergraduate Pilot Training. Mr. Donovan is a graduate of Regis University, Webster University,the U.S. Air Force School of Advanced Airpower Studies, and the U.S. Army School of Advanced Military Studies. Eric S. Dreiband of Maryland to be an Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division Division, Department of Justice. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas to be United States Permanent Representative on the Council of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,with the rank and status of Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary. Kay Bailey Hutchison has been senior counsel since 2013 at Bracewell, LLP,in Dallas, Texas. During her 20 years a U.S. Senator,she served as a member of the Armed Services Committee and chairman of the Military Construction Subcommittee of Appropriations, where she gained extensive international experience and a deep understanding of NATO. She also served in the Texas state government as an elected State Representative and later State Treasurer. Ms. Hutchison has served as vice chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. She earned a J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law and a B.A.from the University of Texas. ### Unsubscribe The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW • Washington DC 20500 • 202-456-1111 17-2361-A-002184 Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Attachments: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP lAndrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] 9/12/2017 1:11:47 AM Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.govj Fwd: presentations and member submissions Member Submission Summaries.docx; ATT00001.htm Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Specht, Alyssa M.EOP/OVP (Intern)" Date: September 8,2017 at 6:09:27 PM EDT To: "Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP" Subject: RE: presentations and member submissions Hi Andrew, Please find attached a summary of all the documents you shared with me. I put them in order of the Agenda. Those that are not on the agenda are under "Additional submissions." Thanks Alyssa 17-2361-A-002185 Panel One Dr. Andrew Smith • Turnout and Voter Trust(Powerpoint presentation) o Low turnout due to either high costs,low expected benefits, or both o Factors correlated with turnout: • Demographics: age, education, income • Barriers • Civic Education • Campaign Factors: competition, interest, economy, war, etc. o Trust in Elections • 83% of voters were confident in the 2016 election results, in 2003 it was 85% • Voters are less confident is electronic voting then paper ballots,69% in the 2016 election. Kimball Brace • The Election Process: from a Data o Basic Election Administration Facts • Elections ran by small jurisdictions and small staff • States report registration status differently o Election Process from a Data Prospective o Registration Data • Voter registration deadline varies for each state o Turnout Data • In 2012 and in 2016,the Presidential contest was not the highest vote generator in all counties. More for US Senate, Governor, and US House. • In the 2012 General Election participation results greater than reported due to data missing from California, Mississippi, New Mexico,and Vermont. 1.4 million participated, but did not cast a ballot for President. • In the 2016 General Election data was missing from Arkansas and Texas. 2.4 million participation, but did not cast a ballot for President. Dr. John Lott • Evidence of Voter Fraud and the Impact that Regulations to Reduce Fraud have on Voter Participation Rates. October 10, 2007 o Results support the evidence that regulations that prevent voter fraud can actually increase the voter participation rate. o It is too soon to see whether voting regulations harm minorities, the elderly, or the poor; and, whether the mandatory photo ID law impacts US elections as a whole. o Non-photo ID regulations have not had a negative impact on elections o Campaign finance regulation general reduce voter turnout • Powerpoint presentation to Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity: A suggestion and some evidence o Apply the background check system for gun purchases to voting. o Democrats are supportive of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). 17-2361-A-002186 o The NICS checks for criminal histories and citizenship status; but not for immigrant visas, but can be added. o State pick up the cost for NICS like system for voter registration o Mexico's 1991 election Reform • Must go in person to register. Must show birth certificate or another fonn of government issued photo DC,and a recent utility bill. • Banned absentee ballots o How can fraud be reduce, while increasing voter participation and keeping costs low? • Determine whether different voter groups are effected differently. • What happens when requirements are tightened to voter participation rates in geographic area where there voter fraud is occurring? o Impact on Voter turnout • Campaign finance laws • Candidates o Hot Spots for voter fraud; • Cuyahoga County, Ohio • St. Clair County, Illinois • St. Louis County, Missouri • Philadelphia, Pennsylvania • King County, Washington • Milwaukee County, Wisconsin Panel Two Donald Palmer — no submission Robert Popper • Written Statement of Robert Popper to PACE,It is time to Start Enforcing the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)of 1993 • Robert Popper is a Senior Attorney and Director ofthe Election Integrity Project at Judicial Watch,Inc. Judicial Watch is a public interested nonprofit dedicated to promoting transparency, accountability, and integrity in government, politics, and the law. • Americans do not tnist the integrity of our Electoral System • The Voter list maintenance Goals ofthe NVRA are not being Met. o The first goal is increasing eligible registrants. From 1992 through 2012,the registration rate increased by more than 11%. This goal has been met. o The second goal is protecting electoral integrity by ensuring accurate and current voter rolls, by states making and effort to remove the name ofineligible voters. This goal has not been met. • Counties are not diligently conducting voter list maintenance. • The Department of Justice has failed to enforce the NVRA's list maintenance provisions and has impaired states' efforts to maintain their voter rolls. • The NVRA should be enforced. Ken Block • 2016 voter Fraud Research and Findings. Jul); 1.2017 17-2361-A-002187 o Based on voter registration and voter history data from 21 states, no state is enforcing federal election rules according to federal law. These 21 states comprised over 75 million votes for the 2016 general election. o Discovery of duplicate voting in the 2016 general election in every state, roughly 9,000 instances oflikely duplicate voting by an individual. o More than 15,000 clearly prohibited addresses were used by voters in the 2016 general election. This was found in every one ofthe 21 states' data. o In the 2016 general election, most ofthe 21 states had active voters who had the wrong or missing date of birth information. 48,880 votes were cast across 15 states by voters who had bad birth dates connected to their voter registration. o The Help America vote Act(HAVA)undermines 18 U.S.C. § 611,by allowing voters to register to vote in person without providing a driver's license or social security number. More than 30% of Rhode Island votes who casted a ballot in the 2016 general election did so without either a driver's license or social security infonnation. Since the passing of HAVA,8.5% of registered voters in Rhode Island have registered to vote without the required documents. o Access to state voter registration data was expensive and difficult to acquire. Hans von Spakovsky • Election Integrity Commission (Powerpoint Presentation) • Election statistics, voter statistics, false registration numbers. • 2013 Presidential Commission on Election Administration o Found that the lack of quality voter lists directly impact the ability of people to vote and reduced the ability ofthe political parties and election official to monitor elections to detect problems,fraud, and other irregularities. • Commission key areas ofinquiry o Examine which states are using what databases for accurate voter registration lists • Ensuring our Military overseas gets the right to vote Panel Three Dr. Andrew Appel • Recording and Counting Votes in a Trustworthy way o The public should be empowered to observe, verify, and (therefore) trust that their ballot will be recorded, each ballot will be counted in each precinct, and each precinct will be added. • This can be done by: voter-verified paper ballots, random audits before results are certified, and transparency in reporting. Dr. Ronald Rivest, MIT • Powerpoint presentation: Remarks on Election Integrity o 4 goals • Improve Security • Outcomes that are correct • Outcomes perceived correct 17-2361-A-002188 • Outcomes verifiably correct o 4 Challenges • Secret Ballots • Diverse voters and elections • Adversaries • No free lunch o 4 Principles • Election integrity is nonpartisan • It take a thief • Adversaries attack weakest link • Detect and recover o 4 Myths • Federal Certification ensures security • Logic and accuracy testing ensures security • Not connected to internet ensures security • Decentralization ensures security o 4 Tools • Public verification of(almost)everything • Voter verification oftheir own paper ballots • Compliance audit Harri Hursti — no document submission Other Submissions J. Christian Adams • Bellitto v. Snipes, 221 F.Supp. 3d 1354(S.D. Fla. 2016) o Plaintiff Bellitto with registered voter Bellitto brought suit against Defendant Snipes,the Supervisor ofElections of Broward County,FL and Intervenor Defendant United Healthcare Workers East, make two claims under the National Voter Registration Act. One,Bellitto claims that Snipes "failed to make reasonable efforts to conduct voter list maintenance." And two, Bellitto claims that Snipes "failed to respond adequately to Plaintiff's written request for data,failed to produce or otherwise failed to make records available, concerning implementation of programs and activities for ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists ofeligible voters for Brownard County." o Defendant Snipes filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Bellitto's amended complaint. o Plaintiff Bellitto filed a Motion to Intervene, which was granted; and a Motion to Dismiss claim one. • Voter Integrity Project NC Inc. v. Wake Cnty. Bd. of Elections, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23565 • Am. Civ. Rights Union v. Martinez-Rivera, 166 F. Supp. 3d 779(W.D. Tex. Mar.30, 2015). • Bellitto v. Snipes, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107355,2017 WL 2972837 o Decided July 12, 2017 • Public Interest Legal Foundation(PILF) o Garden State Gotcha: How opponents of citizenship verification for voting are putting New Jersey's noncitizens at risk ofdeportation. September 2017 • P1LF conducted county-by-county surveys of voter registration and found that foreigners successfully register to vote in the Garden State. 17-2361-A-002189 • 616 noncitizens, in 11 counties registered to vote,these are noncitizens who selfreported. • 9% of self-reported noncitizens cast ballots • 76% of noncitizens found in the NJ voter registration system admitted their immigration status at the outset and were processed anyway. • 75% of alien voter registration application were offered to register during a Motor Voter transaction. • On average it takes two years for a noncitizens to register, be discovered,and be 'deleted' from the system. Judge Alan King • Statement ofIssues and Recommendations o The Commission should be expanding the rights of our citizens to vote, Instead of looking for way to keep people from voting. o 10 areas that severely undermine the confidence in federal elections: • Funding to upgrade voting equipment every ten years. • Enact federal statutes that make it a crime to suppress the right of ALL Americans to vote in a federal election • Have three statistical experts independently study whatever data is submitted to this Commission for the 2016 general election • Reaffirm and enact legislation that requires each state to be responsible for conduct their elections • Enact federal legislation that makes it a felony for a voter to be registered to vote in more than one county, regardless of whether they vote or not. • Enact federal legislation that makes it a felony for any person or organization to 'hack' any voting machine,system, etc. in the US. • Voter information needs to be on secure servers, governed and operated by advanced business practices and not driven by partisan beliefs. • Have independent, knowledgeable 'hacking' experts testify before the Commission. • Focus on the alleged Russian 'hacking' ofthe 2016 Presidential Election and disclose findings. Sec. Matt Dunlap, • Bates College Voter Suppression Article • President Spencer, of Bates, says a flier posted on campus was "absolutely directed at suppressing the vote" o At Bates, fliers posted in the Commons and residences stated that a in order to vote in Maine a student must have a Maine's driver's license, and ifthey owned a car,it must be registered. Secretary Bill Gardner • Basically several quotes from Justice Stevens citing Crawford et. al. v. Marion County Election Board et. al., 128 S.Ct. 1610(2008). New Hampshire House Speaker Shawn Jasper 17-2361-A-002190 • Speaker Receives voter Registration Statistics Requested by Departments of State and Safety o 6540 individuals registered to vote on Nov 8th,2016 using out of state driver's licenses o As of Aug 30th,2017 only 1014(15.5%)ofthose have been issues NH driver's licenses o As of Aug 31st,2017,ofthe other 5526,only 3.3% had registered a motor vehicle in NH o As of Aug 31st,2017,5313(81.2%)ofthose who used out of state driver's licenses had neither a NH driver's license or a registered vehicle in NH. o 196 names are being investigated as to having possibly voted in NH and another state. Response to New Hampshire Speaker Jasper from Depts of State and Safety • NH Secretary of State William Gardner ofNH answered several questions from NH Speaker of the House Shawn Jasper. Those questions were: o Is this system of verification effective? o What percentage of newly-registered voters have a record with discrepancies between their voting and motor vehicle/driver's license records? o Does the matching process generate cases that require additional follow-up? o Do people who register a vehicle in NH or obtain a NH driver's license register to vote? o Does those who register to vote in HN also obtain a driver's license or register a vehicle in NH? o If additional education or enforcement regarding these rights and obligations were authorized, are there particular regions ofthe state ofdemographic groups where such efforts would be most beneficial? • Voter check Programs in NH o Interstate Crosscheck Program New Hampshire House Speaker Shawn Jasper • Letter to Commissioner John Barthelmes and Secretary of State Gardner ofNH o Request of statistical information Govt Accountability Institute • America The Vulnerable: The Problem of Duplicate Voting o No government or private entity oversight of voter rolls to detect duplicates o from the system. 17-2361-A-002191 Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov] 8/14/2017 4:34:03 PM adams@electionlawcenter.com; von Spakovsky, Hans UO=THF/OU=THFDC/cn=Recipients/cn=spakoskyh] Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] Fwd: Press inquiry: Elections Integrity Commission Mark Paoletta Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From:"Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP" Date: August 14, 2017 at 12:28:13 PM EDT To: "Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP" ,"Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP" Subject: FW:Press inquiry: Elections Integrity Commission Flagging for awareness Marc Lotter Special Assistant to the President Press Secretary to the Vice President Twitter: @VPPressSec From: Tierney Sneed Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:37 AM To: Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP Subject: Press inquiry: Elections Integrity Commission Hi Marc, Just wanted to give you the heads up that I have story related to the Elections Commission coming tomorrow, in case the VP office wants to weigh in. It's about the lawsuits J. Christian Adams has been bringing through various conservative groups over the last couple years against election officials claiming that their voter rolls are inflated in violation ofthe NVRA. Hans von Spakovsky is also involved in one of the groups, the Public Interest Legal Foundation. There's been a lot of scrutiny ofthe tactics they've used in the lawsuits: I have elections officials saying the data they cite is inaccurate and giving examples where PILF has mischaracterized the terms of settlements in previous cases. So I wanted to reach out to see if your office wanted to defend their presence on the commission, since that's the peg for the story. I am happy to go into more detail over the phone or through email if you think you'll want to comment. My office phone is My deadline is 4 pm EST. Thanks, 17-2361-A-002193 Tierney Tierney Sneed Talking Points Memo @tierney megan Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP IMark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.govi 7/7/2017 6:21:41 PM Kris Kobach Fwd: revised/clean version Kobach follow up letter 7.7.2017 CLEAN.DOCX; ATT00001.htm Revised, with minor edits. Please review asap. Mark Paoletta Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP" Date: July 7, 2017 at 10:43:00 AM Please see the attached, per our discussion. Thanks, Andrew Andrew J. Kossack Associate Counsel Office ofthe Vice President Email: Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov 17-2361-A-002195 [ EMBED Acrobat.Document.11 ] July 6, 2017 Dear [CHIEF ELECTION OFFICIAL] This letter is intended to follow up on my letter of June 28, 2017, which requested publicly available voter registration records on behalf of the bipartisan Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. I appreciate the chief election officials from 36 states who have already responded to this request and either agreed to provide this publicly available data, or are currently evaluating what specific data they may provide in accordance with their state laws. Some states have raised questions, which I will answer in this letter. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a top priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that states regularly provide to any other third-party who requests it through a public records request, including political candidates,journalists, and other interested members of the public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that state laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters. Individuals' voter registration data will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration of the Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personal voter data to the public. The Commission will approach its work without preconceived notions or prejudgments. The Members of this bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts, and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the NVRA's purposes "to protect the integrity of the electoral process; and to ensure that accurate and current voter registration rolls are maintained." 52 U.S.C. 20501(b)(3)-(4). I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, 17-2361-A-002196 : ''.4e•- ' Kris W. Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002197 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Kobach 9/18/2017 5:32:57 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack®ovp.eop.gov]; Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov] Fwd: Shorman/Lowry questions Andrew here's my tentative response: Secretary Kobach is serving as Vice Chairman ofthe Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in his personal capacity. Commission members are considered "Special Government Employees" under federal law. As such, the members ofthe Commission were never issued federal email accounts. They received ethics training and were instructed that they could continue to use personal email accounts while ensuring that all emails relating to commission business were retained. Because Secretary Kobach is serving on the Commission in his personal capacity, not as a representative ofthe State of Kansas, he determined that it would be inappropriate to use his Kansas state email account. The title "Kansas Secretary of State" follows his name in some printed material simply because it identifies to the reader who he is. It does not indicate that he is conducting Kansas State business while serving on the Commission. Similarly, for example, the title "Election Assistance Commission" sometimes follows the name of Christy McCormick in Commission material simply to identify her; it does not indicate that she is conducting EAC business while serving on the Commission. Secretary Kobach's personal mails concerning the Commission are therefore not subject to KORA,since he is not conducting public business on behalf ofthe State of Kansas while serving on the Commission. Forwarded message From: "Samantha Poetter" Date: Sep 18, 2017 9:29 AM Subject: Shorman/Lowry questions To: "Kris Kobach" Cc: This was sent to me: Samantha, Hunter Woodall from the Star here. Bryan Lowry and I are doing a follow up story on the election integrity commission today with a 2 p.m. deadline. We need some clarity from the Secretary of State's office regarding recent comments made by Secretary Kobach. Secretary Kobach told Pro Publica recently that he's on President Trump's election integrity commission as a private citizen. The portion of the story I'm referring to explains that"Kobach confirmed that he plans to continue to use his personal gmail account to conduct commission business. Using his Kansas secretary of state email address, he 17-2361-A-002199 said, would be a "waste of state resources" as he's acting as a private citizen on the commission and not in his role as secretary of state." How is that possible when the commission's materials always refer to him as the Kansas Secretary of State? You've been doing his communications work for that and the work on the commission is directly related to his election duties. Does that mean your office does not consider his private emails about the commission subject to KORA under the 2016 law? The law I'm referring to was written about at length by Bryan Lowry,including here. Per his story that law makes "private e-mails by public officials subject to the Kansas Open Records Act if they pertain to public business." Can you also lay out for us the policy of how you're viewing his work on the commission and how you're viewing the records related to the commission. Who is storing these records? Is the Secretary his own person in charge of record keeping? Essentially, we're interested in anything that clearly articulates the policy you have in relation to the Secretary's work on the commission. Also, does the Secretary not view the commission as public business? Does he still plan to continue using his personal gmail account to conduct commission business? How would using his secretary of state email address be a"waste of resources?" Thanks for your help. Hunter Woodall The Kansas City Star SAMANTHA M.POETTER 17-2361-A-002200 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Kobach 9/18/2017 4:35:48 PM Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/ Ovp [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov]; Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/ Ovp [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov]; Jarrod.P.Agen@ovp.eop.gov Fwd: Shorman/Lowry questions Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Samantha Poetter Date: September 18 2017 at 9:28:56 AM MDT To: Kris Kobach Subject: Shorman owry questions This was sent to me: Samantha, Hunter Woodall from the Star here. Bryan Lowry and I are doing a follow up story on the election integrity commission today with a 2 p.m. deadline. We need some clarity from the Secretary of State's office regarding recent comments made by Secretary Kobach. Secretary Kobach told Pro Publica recently that he's on President Trump's election integrity commission as a private citizen. The portion ofthe story I'm referring to explains that"Kobach confirmed that he plans to continue to use his personal gmail account to conduct commission business. Using his Kansas secretary of state email address, he said, would be a "waste of state resources" as he's acting as a private citizen on the commission and not in his role as secretary of state." How is that possible when the commission's materials always refer to him as the Kansas Secretary of State? You've been doing his communications work for that and the work on the commission is directly related to his election duties. Does that mean your office does not consider his private emails about the commission subject to KORA under the 2016 law? The law I'm referring to was written about at length by Bryan Lowry,including here. Per his story that law makes "private e-mails by public officials subject to the Kansas Open Records Act if they pertain to public business." Can you also lay out for us the policy of how you're viewing his work on the commission and how you're viewing the records related to the commission. Who is storing these records? Is the Secretary his own person in charge of record keeping? Essentially, we're interested in anything that clearly articulates the policy you have in relation to the Secretary's work on the commission. 17-2361-A-002201 Also, does the Secretary not view the commission as public business? Does he still plan to continue using his personal gmthl account to conduct commission business? How would using his secretary of state email address be a "waste of resources?" Thanks for your help. Hunter Woodall The Kansas City Star SAMANTHA M.POETTER 17-2361-A-002202 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans [Hans.VonSpakovsky@heritage.org] 8/2/2017 11:45:05 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] Fwd: Critics Try to Smear Trump's Election-Integrity Commission - WSJ >https://www.wsj.com/articles/critics-try-to-smear-trumps-election-integrity-commission1501709170< Hans von Spakovsky Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and Senior Legal Fellow Institutefor Constitutional Government The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington,DC 20002 202-608-6207 heritage.org 17-2361-A-002203 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans[Hans.VonSpakovsky@heritage.org] 8/3/2017 1:27:26 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov]; Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov] Fwd: Critics Try to Smear Trump's Election-Integrity Commission Critics Try to Smear Trump's Election-Integrity Commission Calling us racists and 'voter-suppression superstars' is shameful and corrosive to civility. ByHans von Spakovsky and." Christian Adams Aug. 2, 2017 5:26 p.m. ET It's one thing to attack a proposed policy. It's another thing to attack someone for simply asking a question. Yet that's exactly what President Trump's Advisory Commission on Election Integrity is facing from the New York Times,Washington Post, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and others. Since the president signed an executive order creating the commission in May,these organizations have attacked members of the commission personally, including the authors ofthis article. The reprehensible(and false) claim that we are engaged in voter suppression is a scare tactic, pure and simple. Ours is an advisory commission. It has no federal authority or power of any kind. It can't tell the states, local governments or even the executive branch of the federal government what to do in the administration of elections. Further, the commission's request for publicly available information from the states is not some nefarious plot. This basic information about the voter registration process is necessary for the commission's work. Many states have already given or sold the same information to multiple private vendors. It's clear the frenzied critics never even read the president's executive order, which empowered the commission to "study the registration and voting process used in Federal elections" and to identify "vulnerabilities" that may imperil integrity and public confidence. What could be a worthier goal than examining the electoral system and formulating recommendations to improve it? What American wouldn't want to improve our election process? It's also clear the critics didn't bother to watch the commission's first meeting on July 19. There was near unanimity among the commission's bipartisan members. All agreed on the need to 17-2361-A-002204 review the voter-registration process itself, the types of voting equipment being used, and election cybersecurity. Some critics seem offended that voter fraud was mentioned during the meeting, as if it doesn't exist or we shouldn't be concerned about it. But as the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in 2008 when it upheld Indiana's voter ID law,fraud has a long history in U.S. elections. The Heritage Foundation maintains a database of almost 1,100 proven cases of election fraud. In many counties across the country, registered voters outnumber residents eligible to vote. Hundreds ofthousands of voters are registered in multiple states or remain on the voter rolls despite being deceased. These may be administrative errors, but what fair-minded citizen would suggest we ignore the problem? The commission seeks answers to other questions. Are people exploiting administrative loopholes to vote more than once? How many noncitizens are illegally voting because we lack a system for verifying registration information? Are states taking advantage of available local, state and federal databases to check the accuracy oftheir voter rolls? Have online voterregistration databases been hacked? If so, when and by whom? Why is turnout among overseas military voters so low? We don't know the answers to these and other questions, because there has been no systematic, comprehensive study of our election system. The critics apparently don't want that work to be done. They don't even want anyone asking questions. Instead, they smear the commission and its members in an effort to denigrate our work. Americans once engaged in spirited but civil debate on contentious issues. Calling members of our commission racists and "voter-suppression superstars" is shameful and corrosive to civility. Fortunately, the American people value truth. They know that the commission's work won't harm a single legitimate voter. "Truth enlightens man's intelligence and shapes his freedom," wrote Pope John Paul II in 1993. Clean elections protect freedom, while elections tainted by fraud or administrative errors disrupt the consent ofthe governed. Mr. von Spakovsky is a senior legalfellow at the Heritage Foundation. Mr. Adams is president and general counsel ofthe Public Interest LegalFoundation. Both are members ofthe president's Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. 17-2361-A-002205 Hans von Spakovsky Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and Senior Legal Fellow Institutefor Constitutional Government The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington,DC 20002 202-608-6207 heritage.org 17-2361-A-002206 Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Attachments: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov] 8/14/2017 10:58:19 AM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] Williams, Ronald E. EOP/OVP [Ronald.E.Williams@ovp.eop.gov] Fwd:follow up/ meeting next week voter data study - final.pdf; ATT00001.htm Mark Paoletta Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Ken Block Date: August 13, 2017 at 8:51:07 AM EDT To: "Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP" Cc: "Williams, Ronald E. EOP/OVP" Subject: RE:follow up/ meeting next week Hi Mark Sorry I forgot to send along our original report language. Please find that attached I have booked a full day in DC for this coming Wednesday. I'll land at 7:30 in the morning and fly out at 5:00pm. Whatever time you need/want I am fully available to you. No worries on time that you do not need. I've got plenty of folks to drop in on. Also, an opinion piece I wrote ran in today's Providence Journal regarding some of our RI findings: >http://www.providencejournal com/opinion/20170812/ken-bIock-rhode-islandelections-are-not-secure< Please let me know where I need to go Looking forward to Wednesday! Ken Original Message From: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [mailto:Mark.R.PaolettaRovp.eop.gov] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 4:36 PM To: Ken Block Cc: Williams, Ronald E. EOP/OVP Subject: follow up/ meeting next week 17-2361-A-002207 Ken, Let's go with next Wednesday(Aug 16th). Let me know what time works for you in the morning. 10 am? Let's plan on meeting for at least a couple of hours or more. Also, you mentioned additional information you had prepared that did not make it into the GAI report. Can you send that down via email? Thanks. Mark MARK R.PAOLETTA Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Mark.R.Paoletta,ovp.eop.gov Original Message From: Ken Block [mailto:kblock@simpaticosoftware.com] Sent: Friday, August 11,2017 10:17 AM To: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP Cc: Subject: RE: Test Good morning, Mark. My cell is Looking forward to our conversation. Please forgive any typos, sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID On Aug 11, 2017 9:21 AM,"Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP" wrote: Ken, Read the GM report and would like to speak with you, and perhaps even meet with you next week. What's a good cell number for you? Thanks. Mark MARK R.PAOLETTA Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov 17-2361-A-002208 Original Message From: Peter Schweizer [ ] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 8:58 AM To: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP Cc: Ken Block Subject: Re: Test Ken meet Mark who works at the White House and is working on the voting integrity commission. Peter Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2017, at 8:26 AM,Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP wrote: Can you connect me up with Simpatico? Thanks. Mark MARK R.PAOLETTA Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov Original Message From: Peter Schweizer [mailto:peterschweizer1@gtnail.com] Sent: Friday, August 11,2017 8:24 AM To: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP Subject: Re: Test Mark great to chat yesterday. Peter Sent from my iPhone On Aug 10, 2017, at 9:52 PM,Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP wrote: 17-2361-A-002209 Mark Paoletta Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Sent from my iPhone 17-2361-A-002210 I Simpatico software systems 2016 Voter Fraud Research and Findings July 1, 2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. 20 Altieri Way Unit 3 Warwick, RI 02886 17-2361-A-002211 Preamble The rules regarding who can and cannot vote in the United States are simple and easy to understand. Individual states do a poor job of enforcing these simple rules, which are actually federal laws. Lax enforcement of federal election laws by states creates a lack of integrity in our federal elections. Based on our look at the voter registration and voter history data from 21 states, no state is enforcing federal election rules as proscribed by federal law. 52 U.S. Code § 10307(0(1) prohibits an individual from voting twice in a federal election. No government agency at any level of government is tasked with identifying and eliminating duplicate voting by an individual. We have discovered likely duplicate voting in the 2016 general election in every state, finding roughly 9,000 instances of likely duplicate voting by an individual. 52 U.S. Code § 10307(c) prohibits using false information for a voter registration. Voters must register at their residence. Post Office boxes are not allowed addresses for voter registration purposes. We discovered more than 15,000 clearly prohibited addresses used for voter registration by voters who voted in the 2016 general election. These bad registrations are in every one of the 21 states' data. These bad addresses(post office boxes, UPS Stores, federal post office addresses and public safety buildings) are the simplest address types on which to search. 52 U.S. Code § 10307(c) also prohibits registering deceased voters to vote, as this is a fraudulent activity. Most of the 21 states we looked at had active voters in the 2016 general election who had clearly wrong or missing date of birth information. 45,880 votes were cast across 15 states by voters who had bad dates of birth attached to their voter registration, including some voters with indicated birth dates of 1700 or earlier. Date of birth is a crucial piece of information to help uniquely identify a voter and assist with determining eligibility to vote. If states are not correctly identifying and addressing bad dates of birth (which is fairly easy to do), what harder issues are they missing or ignoring? 18 U.S. Code § 611 requires United States citizenship in order to vote in a federal election. The Help America Vote Act(HAVA) undermines 18 U.S. Code § 611 by permitting voters to register to vote in person without providing either a driver's license or a social security number. Without either of these two key pieces of data, it is impossible to verify citizenship via information in the voter registration system. We have discovered that more than 30% of Rhode Island voters who cast a ballot in the 2016 general election did so without either a driver's license or social security number information in the voter registration system. Since HAVA passed in late 2002,8.5% of registered voters in Rhode Island have registered to vote without this key information. Most states simply require registering voters to sign an oath that they are a citizen, essentially relying on an honor system for proof of citizenship. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 2 17-2361-A-002212 Headline issues which impact elections integrity • Nearly one third (30.7%) of voters who cast ballots in Rhode Island lack registration data to prove voters are real. HAVA (Help America Vote Act) creates a loophole that makes this scenario possible and likely in many states. • Voter registration and voting processes in Rhode Island allow a made up, non-existent voter to both register and cast a ballot undetected. • Strong data evidence shows that 8,400+ duplicate votes (voters who voted in more than one state) were likely cast nationwide, including nearly 200 couples who appear to have voted together in multiple states. Two families of 3 appear to have voted together in two different states. Several individuals cast 3 ballots in the 2016 general election. • Nationwide, voters registered to obviously disallowed (and illegal) addresses like UPS stores, post office boxes, public safety buildings, etc cast more than 15,000 votes in 2016. These were just the most obvious and simple to find examples. • The citizenship requirement to participate in federal elections is enforced on the 'honor system'. • No governmental organization at any level of government is tasked with actively ensuring the integrity of our federal elections. • It is not possible for an effort like this to acquire the data from every state that is needed to perform a national assessment of elections integrity. Hindrances include exorbitant price, no availability of data for elections research purposes and/or no availability of specific data elements crucial to this type of research. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com P. 3 17-2361-A-002213 Introduction Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. was asked to examine voting data from the 2016 general election to look at issues that may have impacted the integrity of the election. The analysis included an effort to acquire voter registration and voter history data from as many states as possible. Ultimately, data from 21 states comprising over 75 million votes from the 2016 general election were loaded into a system designed to perform data and fraud analytics on large sets of data. We performed our analysis using a technique called 'Agile Analytics'. Agile Analytics combines 'big data' data mining and analytics with data forensic analysis. Frequently, data investigations using the Agile methodology end with findings in very different areas than where the investigation began. Background Simpatico set out to determine if fraud analytics techniques could be applied to voting data in order to prove or disprove if voter fraud is likely happening. A great many national media stories regarding voter fraud draw a conclusion that voter fraud does not exist, since so few cases have been brought forward or prosecuted. An important question is: Does absence of proof provide proof of absence of voter fraud? Many of the media stories regarding voter fraud document'studies' of voter fraud. These studies do not undertake an effort to discover voter fraud - they are only efforts to document reports of voter fraud. There is not, to our knowledge, any organization undertaking a systematic effort to identify and report on voter fraud, which can take a great many forms. Most states maintain their voter data in a silo, with no effort made to work with other states to share and maintain data crucial to our federal elections on any basis other than an in-state perspective. There is no governmental group anywhere tasked with looking for voter fraud between states. States may voluntarily engage with a non-profit organization called ERIC (Electronic Registration Information Center) which does good work in helping the 20 member states fix duplicate registration and other voter registration issues. ERIC does not look for specific instances of voter fraud, although the data available to the group is the best data available for performing this kind of research, as ERIC is given driver's license and social security number information for all registered voters. Imagine an NFL game without officiating crews enforcing the rules of the game. When it comes to federal elections integrity, we are effectively without a referee on the field. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p.4 17-2361-A-002214 Data acquisition — state by state hurdles There is a shocking range of availability and cost for voter registration and voter history data on a stateby-state basis. While there are a good number of states that effectively provide their data for free, there are others that charge as much as $25,000 to $30,000 or more for their data. The chart below shows what each state charges for this data on a cost per 100,000 voter basis. Please note that we asked for all voters in the voter registration system regardless of status, and at least 5 elections of voter history if it was available. Some states like Virginia and South Carolina charge for each election's worth of data, making the cost of their data 5 times what it would be if we only wanted one election's worth of data. Also please note that we cannot determine the cost of acquiring data for Massachusetts, which we will discuss below. See chart on next page. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p.5 17-2361-A-002215 17-2361-A-002216 Massachusetts 1 1 b o b o New York Ohio Washington Florida New jersey Oklahoma Nevada Arkansas California Vermont Pennsylvania Wyoming Michigan North Carolina Washington DC Minnesota Delaware I Idaho I Colorado 1 Matyland I Missouri 1 Rhode Island I Alaska 1 Illinois 1 Texas 1 Georgia 1 Kansas I Connecticut il Kentucky • Oregon • Nebraska mi Iowa im Utah Tennessee Hawaii West Virginia Mississippi Indiana Montana Louisiana Maine New Mexico Wisconsin North Dakota South Carolina South Dakota Virginia New Hampshire Alabama Arizona 0 0 0 0 (79 0 1 1 b o 4A.P. 4‘). N.) 1 1 b o 0 0 4AoN 1 b o 0 0 4Aco b o 0 0 4Ab b o 0 0 4.A. 1..) sialon 000`00I lad lso: Several states make it impossible for anyone other than law enforcement or political parties to gain access to voter registration and voter history data. Included in this list are: Virginia, Indiana, Arizona, Massachusetts and others. Massachusetts deserves a special mention here, because while the state will not make voting data available to non-political parties, if you really want data from Massachusetts you can go to each of the state's 351 cities and towns and acquire the data from each one individually, who usually charge for the data and who may provide the data in formats that differ from town to town. The effort to obtain a full set of voter registration and voter history data from Massachusetts' 351 cities and towns is 6 times more difficult than obtaining the data from the entire rest of the country - combined. And we have no idea what the cost of obtaining that data would be, because the only way to know would be to ask each of the state's 351 towns for cost. We leave that effort to someone else. What public purpose does Massachusetts' policy on voter data serve, other than to discourage or effectively make impossible any analysis of voting behavior in the Bay State? It is important to note that the Help America Vote Act, which was passed in 2002, mandates that every state maintain a centralized, statewide database of voter registrations. Massachusetts, by law, must have this data. The state just chooses to withhold data crucial to our national elections from nearly everyone. Some states like Illinois and New Hampshire will make their data available to duly registered political entities, which we could have done and were asked to do by New Hampshire. New Hampshire's cost of more than $8,300 squelched any chance for us to acquire that state's data. To register in Illinois required an in-state bank account, which was a step too far for us. It took nearly a month of daily phone calls and a loss of patience to finally speak to someone in New Hampshire who could tell us what we had to do to acquire that state's data. Nearly every other state makes that information available online, or at least made someone available to provide answers with the first phone call. The Kentucky Board of Elections considered our application for data and rejected it. Availability of full date of birth Roughly half of the states provide a full date of birth with their voter registration data, and roughly half do not. This is problematic for any effort to look at election integrity because in the absence of data like driver's license numbers or social security numbers(which we had no expectation or interest in receiving), full dates of birth are critical to helping determine whether two people with the same names are the same person or not. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com P. 7 17-2361-A-002217 Please note that an exact name match and birth date match is still not conclusive proof of a match. There is a chance that two people with the same name and birth date are two different people. We recognize this and provide further data points that help to eliminate chances offalse matches. If a state did not provide a full date of birth, we did not acquire that state's data. Washington, D.C. will not provide any part of a birth date with their data. The wild variety among states of cost, data provided and even access to federal voting data is a problem in and of itself. It should not require a herculean effort to obtain this data. The data should be made available for elections research at a fair and reasonable price. There is no justification for a state to charge many tens of thousands of dollars for elections data that another state makes available for free. For elections-related research, full dates of birth should be made available by every state. It is our sincere hope that states that charge obscene amounts for their data or make their data impossible to get are not trying to prevent the analysis of their data. Data quality Of the 21 states in our system, there exists a wide range of data quality. We were able to make do with the data from every state, but some states required a fair amount of processing to import their data in usable form into our system. We are compelled to call out New York State's data with some serious data quality issues. New York is clearly working with old technology for their voter registration statewide database. There is no way to determine with certainty all of the votes cast in the 2016 General Election based on the data sent to us by the state. New York uses many different descriptions for votes cast in the 2016 General Election. Examples are "2016 General Election","2016 November General","2016 General State/Local Election","11/8/2016 General Election" and two dozen other varieties. Before we worked on cleaning some of this up, there were more than a thousand different descriptions for elections contained in the data, with many of those different descriptions referring to the same election. It would appear that different systems feed the central voter registration system in New York State, and those different systems refer to the same elections in different ways. More than 700,000 votes in the New York data are for "General Election" with no year indicating which General Election those votes are for. We are compelled to question the technological soundness of New York State's voting infrastructure. If the State cannot account for votes cast in a consistent way, it is possible and even likely that a great many other areas of functionality are not being performed well, consistently and/or accurately. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p.8 17-2361-A-002218 Duplicate voting analysis (Identifying likely examples of individuals voting twice) Methodology This was the most difficult of the analytics that were performed, because the data available is not good enough on its own to guarantee that two votes cast in two different places by a person with the same name and birth date were cast by the same person. For example, anyone who has worked in a hospital knows that it is not impossible that on any given day there are two patients with the same name and birth date inside the hospital. In theory, most voters who are registered to vote have provided strong, identifying information in order to be registered, like a social security number, driver's license or a passport. Information like this can be comfortably used to uniquely identify an individual. Of course, this sort of highly confidential information must be carefully protected by each state. We did not ask for and could not use this information for this effort. Our voter matching effort attempted to match voters by full first and last names,'fuzzy' middle names and exact birth date matching. Fuzzy matching means we looked for exact middle name matches, partial middle name matches, matches where one name had a single initial and the other a full name starting with that initial, and individuals without any middle name information at all. We also tried matching on middle names that differed by no more than 2 characters from each other. We looked for matches by comparing voters in each state with voters in every other state. We also looked for matches of voters with the same information in the same state. Generally speaking, the likelihood of a positive match declined as the middle name match got more 'fuzzy'. Matches for inter-state duplicate voting Our analysis identified more than 60,000 potential name matches for interstate duplicate voting, and more than 10,000 potential name matches for intra-state duplicate voting. To be clear, we do not consider these numbers 'strong' because the matching on its own is not certain enough. To help provide greater certainty, we looked for additional ways to add strength to the matches. One way was to look for pairings of voters who vote together in one state and then again in another state. We found nearly 200 pairs of voters who appear to be voting as a couple in two different locations in two different states. This same analysis also identified what appears to be 2 different families of three who vote together in two different states. We consider these matches to now be extremely strong. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p.9 17-2361-A-002219 Another method we used was using out of state mailing addresses to try to confirm a match. In a voter registration, it is required by federal law that the main address be the residence where the voter lives. Every one of the states we examined also allows for a voter to list a secondary address, almost always called an "out of state mailing address". This analysis looked at someone who was potentially the same voter in states A and B. If state A's out of state mailing address is the same or close to state B's residential address, or vice versa, we consider that a strong match. We found close to 600 duplicate vote matches using this technique. Lastly, we still have 60,000 potential matches with no further way to strengthen the match using the data provided by the states. To attempt to strengthen the certainty of the match for these voters, we used an outside commercial database vendor with an extensive database of marketing and financial data. Each potential match was evaluated to determine in the commercial database if it was the same person or not. 7,203 matches were confirmed using this technique. We also attempted a 'fuzzy' first name match, which yielded nearly 350,000 possible name matches. We know for a fact that the quality of these matches is far worse than the middle name effort described above. When the potential matches were confirmed with the commercial database, another 315 matches were confirmed. Matches for intra-state duplicate voting This analysis used a fuzzy middle name match only. The commercial database confirmed 1,488 of the 10,000 potential matches. Our favorite intra-state duplicate vote occurred in a West Coast state. A man with the exact same name and birth date voted twice in the same town, once at his residence and once at his place of business - a barber shop. When we looked at the Secretary of State's business filings for the barber shop, we observed that the address for many of those filings was the residential address of the owner. Case closed. It is important to note that for the inter-state duplicate voting analysis, we only had the data from 21 states. Those 21 states can be paired with each other in 210 combinations. If we had the data from all 50 states, there would be 1,225 combinations of pairings. We currently cover less than 20% of the total combinations of states if all 50 states' data were available. We believe that our finding of 9,006 strongly likely duplicate votes could extrapolate out as high as 45,000 if we had the data from all 50 states. Finding No entity anywhere is tasked with ensuring that inter-state duplicate voting cannot occur. No entity anywhere is tasked with looking to see if duplicate inter-state voting is occurring. There is no required coordination between states to try to prevent a situation where the same person can have duplicate registrations in multiple states and cast votes using those registrations. There are even notable failures where the same person has a duplicate registration in the same state and casts votes using both of those registrations. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 10 17-2361-A-002220 The United States cannot have a federal election that adheres to the federal laws which mandate that a person may vote only once in a federal election with the system and oversight that is currently in place. The honor system is the only thing standing in the way of someone voting twice in an election, and we have identified individuals without honor who appear to be doing just that. Every act of duplicate voting is a felony per federal law, and also a felony per many state election laws as well. The federal penalty for duplicate voting is a maximum of 5 years in jail and up to a $10,000 fine for each violation. If every one of the 8,471 confirmed matches of individuals who appear to have cast ballots twice in 2016 are charged, convicted and fined the maximum amount per federal law,$84 million could be collected to help address voting integrity issues in our country. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 11 17-2361-A-002221 Using prohibited addresses for voter registration Federal law is very clear that voters must be registered to vote at their residence. It is a felony to do otherwise, with a maximum penalty of 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Further, post office boxes are specifically prohibited to be used in place of a residential address for voter registration purposes by federal law. Incredibly, voters who provided a post office box as their residential address cast 6,539 votes in the 2016 General Election. This is a failure of state election systems to enforce federal law. Most of these votes occurred in Pennsylvania, Missouri, Oklahoma and West Virginia. Voters who were registered to vote at UPS Stores, another clear violation of federal law, cast nearly 5,000 votes. Some individual UPS Stores had more than 100 votes cast, more than enough votes to impact or change a close local election. We found these voters in every state for which we had data. Voters who gave their address as the address of a federal post office building cast more than 3,000 votes. These were not post office box addresses - they were simply the address of the post office. We found these voters in every state for which we had data. Voters who gave an address of a public safety building like a police station or fire station cast roughly 1,000 votes. Not all of these matches are 100% certain, for the reason that some of addresses for public safety buildings can also house some type of facility where people live. We eliminated many false potential matches, but we have not looked at every single remaining match. We did observe that members of law enforcement are registering to vote at police stations, and we also noted one state judge who registered to vote at a court building. Multiple individuals are registered to vote at various fire stations. We attempted a limited effort to compare residential addresses given for voter registrations to a database of addresses that were commercial-only in nature. A huge number of potential matches were found just in Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. Many of these matches, however, were not exclusively commercial-only. Many of these addresses were of mixed use and had both commercial and residential units. We tried many different databases to perform this match without any residential component,and could not find one that worked as we needed. We were able, however, to manually identify many cases of voters registered to vote at commercial-only addresses. We submitted more than 100 instances of this issue to the Rhode Island Board of Elections for review. We found voters registered to vote at gas stations, vacant lots, abandoned mill buildings, basketball courts, parks, warehouses and office buildings. We were not, however, able to put any kind of a percentage on how prevalent this practice is, or credibly extrapolate a number based on our case by case examination of possible matches. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 12 17-2361-A-002222 Voters who have not provided strong personally identifying information like driver's license or social security number information in the State of Rhode Island The Help America Vote Act(HAVA), which became law in late 2002, put in place mandatory voter identification requirements in order to both register to vote, as well as cast a vote. These requirements pertain to all new voters who registered to vote after the act was passed. HAVA does not apply to voters who registered to vote prior to the passage of the Act. IDs required to be used by newly registering voters are: a valid driver's license number or the last 4 digits of the voter's social security number. If either of those forms of documentation are not possessed by the registering voter, alternative forms of identification are: a state ID card, passport, employee ID, student ID, military ID, utility bills, bank statements or paychecks. We became aware of a surprising number of active voters who do not have strong forms of identification in the voter registration system during a series of interviews with Rhode Island's Secretary of State's office officials who are responsible for the state's voter registration system. According to the data supplied to us by the Rhode Island Secretary of State's office, 466,499 votes were cast in the 2016 general election. Of those votes, voters who did not have either a social security number or driver's license number on file in the voter registration system were responsible for 143,211 of those votes. 30.7% of the votes cast in the 2016 general election in Rhode Island were cast by voters whose identities cannot be confirmed with the data contained in the voter registration system. When we looked at pre and post-HAVA registration numbers,there are 120,822 Rhode Island voters without social security number information or driver's license information who registered to vote prior to HAVA and voted in 2016,and there are 22,389 voters who registered post-HAVA and did not have either driver's license or social security number information in the voter registration system who voted in 2016. 4.7% of the votes cast in the 2016 general election in Rhode Island were cast by voters who did not provide either driver's license or social security number information for their voter registrations which were made post-HAVA. It makes very little sense to us that individuals registering to vote in the modern age do not have this necessary documentation, especially when it is federal law that only US citizens have the right to vote in federal elections. When we looked at state legislative races,9 out of 113 legislative races in Rhode Island in 2016 had margins of victory that were smaller than the number of post-HAVA voters in the district who did not supply driver's license or social security number information, including the sitting Speaker's district and the House Judiciary Committee Chairman's district. Every single contested legislative race had a margin of victory that was smaller than the number of voters in the district who, regardless of whether they registered pre or post-HAVA, did not supply driver's license or social security number information. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 13 17-2361-A-002223 Since HAVA does not require voters already registered as of 2002 to retroactively provide social security numbers or driver's licenses, we believe that there will be many states with similar percentages of voters whose identities cannot be confirmed with the data provided in voter registration records. One third of the states do not have voter ID laws. If those states(which include California) have the same percentages of registered voters without driver's license or social security numbers in their voter registration system as Rhode Island, roughly a third of the votes cast in a third of the states in our country are cast by voters who we do not have a clue as to who they are. According to the Rhode Island Board of Elections, HAVA is responsible for the 20,000+ postHAVA registered voters who do not have either driver's license or social security number information in the voter registration database. Apparently, HAVA only requires strong personal identification for voter registrations made by mail. If you register to vote in person, the State of Rhode Island does not require that driver's license or social security number information be provided or entered into the voter registration database. Without a driver's license or social security number, there is not a uniquely identifying piece of data for a voter. Without this information, it is impossible to vet a voter through other state or federal databases to confirm identity or citizenship. Without this information, it is impossible to identify if someone is impersonating a voter at the polls by providing a false set of documentation. It also becomes very difficult to identify and remove deceased voters from the rolls, as federal databases to assist with identifying deceased individuals use social security numbers. An elections official in one state told us that"When it comes to the federal law mandating that only US citizens may vote in federal elections, that law is enforced only via the honor system". In Rhode Island, more than 30% of the voters who cast ballots in 2016 do not have the personally identifying information in the voter registration database necessary to perform a citizenship check. This idea that someone can register to vote without providing strong personally identifying information led us to question whether it was trivial to register a fake person to vote and then actually cast a ballot in that fake person's name. Please see the section below. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 14 17-2361-A-002224 The John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt affair We became convinced that a gaping hole existed in the voter registration process that could allow a non-existent person to be not only registered to vote, but to actually cast a ballot. We put the following scenario together, and asked the Rhode Island Secretary of State's office if it would work. The answer that came back was "yes". The scenario: A voter registration form was prepared for John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, who was given a birth date of 1/1/1970 and an address of a commercial office building. No driver's license or social security number information was provided on the voter registration form. The form was sent in by mail. Would this individual be granted a voter registration? Yes, with the caveat that a letter would be sent by US postal service to the address given on the registration. If the letter was returned as undeliverable or returned with a comment that the registered voter did not live at that address, the registration would be rejected. Most people simply throw out mail that looks like bulk mail that is not addressed to them specifically, which is what the mail above looks like. Now that John has a valid registration, he still needs to provide ID in order to cast an actual vote. In Rhode Island, things become very complex at this point because there are HAVA voting requirements as well as state of Rhode Island voter ID requirements. Our scenario had John go in to request a Rhode Island Voter ID card. The state allows a wide variety of types of'proof of identity' that can be submitted that goes beyond the HAVA requirements, including health club photo IDs and photo IDs from a business. We had John provide a photo ID from a non-existent company. Would John be granted a Rhode Island Voter ID at this point? Or would anyone determine that either John or the address that he was registered at or the company he said he worked at be checked and rejected as non-existent or illegal? Per the Secretary of State's office, John would be given a Voter ID and would then be able to vote. There are other ways that John could also 'prove' his identity. HAVA allows a utility bill with the voter's name and address on it to be used to prove identity at the polls. It is trivial to scan a utility bill and change the name and address. Another way would be for John to go to the polls without any identification and cast a provisional ballot, which is a required option under HAVA. Rhode Island's voter ID law allows for the confirmation of a provisional ballot to be nothing more than a confirmation that the 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 15 17-2361-A-002225 signature on the provisional ballot match the signature on the voter registration card, which if you will remember was submitted with no uniquely identifying information on it. This loophole, when taken along with the huge percentage of Rhode Island voters who do not have strong personally identifying information in the voter registration system,seriously and negatively impacts the integrity of elections in the state. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 16 17-2361-A-002226 Bad data We evaluated the registration data for every vote in our system for the 2016 general election for data boundary testing. Boundary testing looks for things like voters who cast votes with birth dates that make the voter too young or too old. We already discussed address testing above, and do not discuss that here. 45,880 votes were cast by individuals whose date of birth as provided by the data made the individual older than 115 years of age at the time of the election. It is important to note that some systems can indicate a missing date of birth by using dates like 01/01/1900,01/01/1850 or 01/01/1800. 44,470 of these votes had one of the dates listed above as the birth date for a voter. 1,410 voters had other dates of birth. Oklahoma has 45 voters who have a date of birth in the system earlier than 01/01/1700 - the oldest having a date of birth that predates the Magna Carta. New Jersey has 31,396 of the voters in this set of data, most of whom have a date of birth of 01/01/1800. 292 votes were cast by voters whose data indicated that they were younger than 18 years old on the date of the 2016 general election. 128 of those votes were cast provisionally which would indicate that some exception occurred during the voting process. No state's voter history data appeared to provide information on the outcome of a provisionally cast ballot. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 17 17-2361-A-002227 Many types of fraud analytics remain to be done This effort is truly just a starting look at what at first glance appears to be a simple set of data but in reality is actually quite complex. Here are some examples of additional studies that should be performed. This list is by no means comprehensive. Likely fraud analysis by type of voter registration: While every statewide voter registration system should track how a voter registered to vote, none of the data that we were sent from any state contained this information. Examples of voter registration types could include (depending on the state): Department of Motor Vehicles, in person, by mail, by third party and online, as well as others. Evaluating likely voter fraud by voter registration type will provide valuable insight into whether or not certain forms of voter registration show up in likely voter fraud more often than other types of voter registration. Likely fraud analysis of primaries for federal races: Felony penalties for voter fraud apply to primaries for federal elected offices, as well as general elections. We did not include any look at primary elections in this effort. An example of things to look for besides duplicate voting would also be voters who vote in primaries in one state and general elections in another state. Maiden name/married name duplicate voting and/or duplicate registrations: In many state voter registration systems, a voter changing their name on getting married will often generate a new voter registration, leaving the maiden name registration still active in the system. Confidential data like driver's license numbers or social security numbers are required to electronically identify these types of registrations and look for duplicate voting. Bear in mind that in Rhode Island, and likely in other states as well, this confidential data does not exist for many voters in the statewide voter registration system, meaning this analysis is impossible to perform. Extended, national study of votes by voter registration types at commercial only addresses. Assessments of duplicate voting using confidential identifying identification. Confirming citizenship using the Federal Data Hub - a database provided by the federal government to confirm 'proof of legal presence' in order to receive social service benefits like Medicaid. Confirming that Green Card holders are not casting votes using a federal database. 7/1/2017 Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. I www.simpaticosoftware.com p. 18 17-2361-A-002228 Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@oyp.eop.goy] 8/14/2017 4:56:26 PM Kris Kobach Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@oyp.eop.goy] Fwd: Press inquiry: Elections Integrity Commission Mark Paoletta Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Date: August 14, 2017 at 12:42:12 PM EDT To: "Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP" ,"Hans Von Spakovsky" Cc: "Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP" Subject: Re: Press inquiry: Elections Integrity Commission We just finished a big trial vs Broward FL. Good chance we win. They don't like it. The left didn't like our datasets. Best data available through Census. Not surprised they are squirming. Some registered voters were aliens or 130 years old. From: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 9:34 AM To: adamsftelectionlawcenter.com; Hans Von Spakovsky Cc: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP Subject: Fwd: Press inquiry: Elections Integrity Commission Mark Paoletta Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP" Date: August 14, 2017 at 12:28:13 PM EDT To: "Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP" , "Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP" Subject: FW: Press inquiry: Elections Integrity Commission 17-2361-A-002230 Flagging for awareness Marc Lotter Special Assistant to the President Press Secretary to the Vice President Twitter: @VPPressSec From: Tierney Sneed Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:37 AM To: Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP Subject: Press inquiry: Elections Integrity Commission Hi Marc, Just wanted to give you the heads up that I have story related to the Elections Commission coming tomorrow,in case the VP office wants to weigh in. It's about the lawsuits J. Christian Adams has been bringing through various conservative groups over the last couple years against election officials claiming that their voter rolls are inflated in violation ofthe NVRA. Hans von Spakovsky is also involved in one ofthe groups, the Public Interest Legal Foundation. There's been a lot of scrutiny ofthe tactics they've used in the lawsuits: I have elections officials saying the data they cite is inaccurate and giving examples where PILF has mischaracterized the terms of settlements in previous cases. So I wanted to reach out to see if your office wanted to defend their presence on the commission, since that's the peg for the story. I am happy to go into more detail over the phone or through email if you think you'll want to comment. My office phone is My deadline is 4 pm EST. Thanks, Tierney Tierney Sneed Talking Points Memo @tierney megan 17-2361-A-002231 From: John Gore To: Christy Subject: Fwd: Chicago vote problems Date: Wed, Jul 5,2017 7:50 pm FYI - consider this me pinging you again. Hope you're doing well. Forwarded message From: Chris Cleveland Date: Fri,Jun 30,2017 at 3:36 PM Subject: Re: Chicago vote problems To: John Gore John, It appears that the Election Integrity Commission is finally gearing up. They're in the press today. Did you succeed in passing this matter on to anyone on the Commission? This might be a good time to ping them again. Chris On Mon,May 15,2017 at 3:03 PM,Chris Cleveland Thanks,John. Will do. wrote: wrote: On Mon,May 15,2017 at 2:44 PM,John Gore Thanks,Chris. I have sent this along to someone I know who may be closer to the task force than I am. If you come across any more info, please feel free to send it along. On Fri, May 12,2017 at 10:34 AM,Chris Cleveland Here it is: wrote: In January the Chicago Republican Party filed a FOIA request with the Chicago Board of Elections for the list of voters who had voted in the November 2016 general elections. The board responded with a list of 1,101,178 individuals. A quick check of the elections returns published on the Chicago Board of Elections website showed that 1,115,664 votes had been cast. The difference between the number of voters in the file and the number of votes cast was 14,000,or about 1.3%. There should be never be more votes than voters; every ballot cast should be recorded against a registered voter. A breakdown of the votes by precinct shows that the discrepancies are not evenly distributed. Fifteen precincts show 100 more ballots cast than voters. One precinct shows more ballots cast than registered voters. Some precincts show a negative discrepancy,that is, more voters than17-2361-A-002232 votes cast. Subtracting out those precincts,the total discrepancy is about 16,000 votes or 1.4%. The Chicago Republican Party made an inquiry, pursuant to FOIA,as to the source of the discrepancies. Despite repeated followups,the board has failed to respond except to say that they have been "reviewing all discrepancies" and that there will be a "final report". It's been more than three months since the first inquiry and more than six weeks since the report was due. At this point it seems to be more than a simple clerical error. Given the history of voter fraud in Chicago,the magnitude of the problem, and the Chicago Board of Election's history of favoring the Democrats,the problem warrants external scrutiny. A spreadsheet is attached. Tab one shows the discrepancies by precinct. Tab two shows the same data I sorted with the largest discrepancies first. On Fri, May 12,2017 at 9:17 AM,John Gore Chris: wrote: Good to hear from you. I don't have any relationship with the task force, but if you'd like to send me a write-up,I'll see if! can get it to someone who does. Thanks. On Thu, May 11,2017 at 4:39 PM,Chris Cleveland John, wrote: Thanks for speaking with me a few weeks back about the discrepancies in Chicago's vote. I saw this today: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/11/trump-to-sign-order-launching-voter-fraud-commi ssion.html Do you have any relationship with this group? Do you know anyone in charge there? I'd like to get a brief writeup on the problem into someone's hands. Chris Chris Cleveland Chairman, Chicago Republican Party Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party 17-2361-A-002233 Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party 17-2361-A-002234 From: John Gore To: Christy Subject: Fwd: Chicago vote problems Date: Tue, Sep 5. 2017 6:43 pm Christy: I hope you are well. Per below,Chris Cleveland sends the link and asks to be put in touch with you directly. Would you like me to do that? Thanks. Forwarded message From: Chris Cleveland Date: Tue,Sep 5,2017 at 3:48 PM Subject: Re: Chicago vote problems To: John Gore John, We finally got some national attention on the problem: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/05/chicago-reported-thousands-more-votes-than-voters-in-2016gpx-official-says.html Can you get this story in front of your friend at the Commission? Can you put me in touch with them? Chris On Wed,Jul 5,2017 at 6:49 PM,John Gore Chris: wrote: I did pass this along to someone close to the Commission. I just sent a reminder so it would be back on their radar screen. Thanks. On Fri. Jun 30.2017 at 3:36 PM,Chris Cleveland John. wrote: It appears that the Election Integrity Commission is finally gearing up. They're in the press today. Did you succeed in passing this matter on to anyone on the Commission? This might be a good time to ping them again. Chris 17-2361-A-002235 On Mon,May 15,2017 at 3:03 PM,Chris Cleveland wrote: Thanks,John. Will do. On Mon,May 15,2017 at 2:44 PM,John Gore wrote: Thanks,Chris. I have sent this along to someone I know who may be closer to the task force than I am. If you come across any more info, please feel free to send it along. On Fri, May 12,2017 at 10:34 AM,Chris Cleveland 1 Here it is: wrote: In January the Chicago Republican Party filed a FOIA request with the Chicago Board of Elections for the list of voters who had voted in the November 2016 general elections. The board responded with a list of 1,101,178 individuals. A quick check of the elections returns published on the Chicago Board of Elections website showed that 1,115,664 votes had been cast. The difference between the number of voters in the file and the number of votes cast was 14,000, or about 1.3%. There should be never be more votes than voters; every ballot cast should be recorded against a registered voter. A breakdown of the votes by precinct shows that the discrepancies are not evenly distributed. Fifteen precincts show 100 more ballots cast than voters. One precinct shows more ballots cast than registered voters. Some precincts show a negative discrepancy,that is, more voters than votes cast. Subtracting out those precincts,the total discrepancy is about 16,000 votes or 1.4%. The Chicago Republican Party made an inquiry, pursuant to FOIA,as to the source of the discrepancies. Despite repeated followups,the board has failed to respond except to say that they have been "reviewing all discrepancies" and that there will be a "final report". It's been more than three months since the first inquiry and more than six weeks since the report was due. At this point it seems to be more than a simple clerical error. Given the history of voter fraud in Chicago,the magnitude of the problem,and the Chicago Board of Election's history of favoring the Democrats,the problem warrants external scrutiny. A spreadsheet is attached. Tab one shows the discrepancies by precinct. Tab two shows the same data sorted with the largest discrepancies first. On Fri, May 12,2017 at 9:17 AM,John Gore Chris: wrote: Good to hear from you. I don't have any relationship with the task force, but if you'd like to send me a write-up,I'll see if I can get it to someone who does. Thanks. On Thu, May 11,2017 at 4:39 PM,Chris Cleveland John, wrote: 17-2361-A-002236 Thanks for speaking with me a few weeks back about the discrepancies in Chicago's vote. I saw this today: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/1 l/trump-to-si gn-order-launching-voter-fraudcommission.html Do you have any relationship with this group? Do you know anyone in charge there? I'd like to get a brief writeup on the problem into someone's hands. Chris Chris Cleveland Chairman, Chicago Republican Party Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party 17-2361-A-002237 From: John Gore To: Subject: Fwd: Chicago vote problems Date: Mon. May 15. 2017 309 pm Attachments: 2016_general_precinct_results.xlsx (376K) Christy: Chris Cleveland of the Chicago GOP reached out to me a couple months back regarding discrepancies in Chicago's vote totals in the 2016 election. We briefly discussed the issue and he promised to keep me apprised. Per below,he asked if I knew anyone on the task force to whom this information could be sent,so I am sending it along to you. Feel free to call me if you'd like to discuss it. Thanks. Forwarded message From: Chris Cleveland Date: Fri, May 12,2017 at 10:34 AM Subject: Re: Chicago vote problems To: John Gore Here it is: In January the Chicago Republican Party filed a FOIA request with the Chicago Board of Elections for the list of voters who had voted in the November 2016 general elections. The board responded with a list of 1,101,178 individuals. A quick check of the elections returns published on the Chicago Board of Elections website showed that 1,115,664 votes had been cast. The difference between the number of voters in the file and the number of votes cast was 14,000,or about 1.3%. There should be never be more votes than voters; every ballot cast should be recorded against a registered voter. A breakdown of the votes by precinct shows that the discrepancies are not evenly distributed. Fifteen precincts show 100 more ballots cast than voters. One precinct shows more ballots cast than registered voters. Some precincts show a negative discrepancy, that is, more voters than votes cast. Subtracting out those precincts,the total discrepancy is about 16,000 votes or 1.4%. The Chicago Republican Party made an inquiry, pursuant to FOIA,as to the source of the discrepancies. Despite repeated followups, the board has failed to respond except to say that they have been "reviewing all discrepancies" and that there will be a "final report". It's been more than three months since the first inquiry and more than six weeks since the report was due. At this point it seems to be more than a simple clerical error. Given the history of voter fraud in Chicago,the magnitude of the problem,and the Chicago Board of Election's history of favoring the Democrats,the problem warrants external scrutiny. 17-2361-A-002238 A spreadsheet is attached. Tab one shows the discrepancies by precinct. Tab two shows the same data sorted with the largest discrepancies first. On Fri, May 12,2017 at 9:17 AM,John Gore Chris: wrote: Good to hear from you. I don't have any relationship with the task force, but if you'd like to send me a write-up, I'll see if I can get it to someone who does. Thanks. On Thu, May 11,2017 at 4:39 PM,Chris Cleveland John. wrote: Thanks for speaking with me a few weeks back about the discrepancies in Chicago's vote. I saw this today: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/20 1 7/05/11/trump-to-sign-order-launching-voter-fraud-commi ssion.html Do you have any relationship with this group? Do you know anyone in charge there? I'd like to get a brief writeup on the problem into someone's hands. Chris Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party Chris Cleveland Chairman,Chicago Republican Party 17-2361-A-002239 From: To: Subject: Date: Rosemary Jenks Kris Kobach Fwd: Motor voter Wednesday, July 12, 2017 3:07:26 PM Have you seen the stories about the people asking to be unregistered to vote in Colorado? See the note from Dick Lamm at the bottom of this email. Definitely interesting stufffor the Commission to check into, especially since Colorado is cooperating! Just FYI,I mentioned this to Mark Paoletta this morning, as he briefed a meeting I was in. He hadn't heard anything about it. Rosemary Jenks Director of Government Relations NumbersUSA Office: (202)543-1341 LEGAL NOTICE: The information in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or duplication ofthis communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies ofthe original message. Begin forwarded message: Forwarded messa(e From: Dick Lamm Date: Tue, Jul 11,2017at 5:58 PM Subject: Re: Motor voter To: Roy Beck Yes, very thoughtful, but this seems like a surge timed to Trumps actions. We have a Republican Secretary of State who is conservative but also a Morman. I could see if he would take your phone call? I have no idea where he stands on immigration. I suspect he could do his own investigation if so inclined. rdl On Jul 11, 2017, at 3:20 PM,Roy Beck wrote: Thanks for the background and the now-ground and the suggestions. In reading the article you sent later, I kept wondering if we would be 17-2361-A-002240 given any inkling of what the de-registerers were most fearing. The illegality partjumps out as a possibility, although I would like to know other reasons I haven't thought of. Are there people registered in Colorado who have spouses and children in some other state looking for them for child support,for example? BTW,did you see that Phil Cafaro finally got his segment on Tucker Carlson last Friday night? https://www.youtub e.com/watch?v=AyRGh651dHl&feature=youtu. bact=85 --ROY On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:38 AM,Dick Lamm wrote: Roy; I signed Colorado's Motor Voter Law, with lots of reservations. How easy it is for an illegal person to register to vote by just falsely checking a box. Yesterday it was announced that hundreds of people in Colorado had "deregistered" from the voter roles. I suspect many/most of these were illegals now scared of Trumps new policies. We have a Republican Sect. of State, Wayne Williams. Could not he, and other Sect. of States not compare the recent deregisterations with their records oflegal citizens? Related,I read that California has 900,000 illegal immigrants with their driver liscences. Could not these be checked against the voting roles? I suspect you guys are way ahead of me on this, but I thought I would pass this along. rdl Roy Beck CEO,NumbersUSA 703-816-8820 www.NumbersUSA.com 1400 Crystal Drive - Suite 240 Arlington, Virginia 22202 17-2361-A-002241 LEGAL NOTICE: The information in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Roy Beck CEO,NumbersUSA 703-816-8820 www.NumbersUSA.com 1400 Crystal Drive - Suite 240 Arlington, Virginia 22202 LEGAL NOTICE: The information in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. 17-2361-A-002242 From: To: Subject: Date: Steve Bannon Kris Kobach Fwd: Politico: Trump election fraud panel apologizes in document disclosure flap Wednesday, August 30, 2017 2:46:22 PM WTF Begin forwarded message: From: Comms Alert Date: August 30, 2017 at 2:02:13 PM EDT To: undisclosed-recipients:; Subject: Politico: Trump election fraud panel apologizes in document disclosure flap Trump election fraud panel apologizes in document disclosure flap Politico Josh Gerstein August 30, 2017 — 12:14 PM http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/30/trump-election-fraud-panel-apologizes-242173 Justice Department lawyer says panel members were unclear on disclosure obligations before July meeting. A lawyer representing President Donald Trump's election fraud commission apologized to a federal judge Wednesday over the panel's failure to abide by a promise to disclose all relevant records ahead of the group's first meeting last month. Justice Department attorney Elizabeth Shapiro said the highly scrutinized panel and its staff did not realize that the pledge to make materials public could be interpreted to include the presentations and reports that individual panel members brought to the inaugural July 19 session. "I want to apologize first and foremost for the misunderstanding," Shapiro told U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly during a 45-minute hearing Wednesday morning. "It was truly an honest misunderstanding on the part of the commission...I wanted to convey our apologies and our sincere regret for that." The panel has been under fire since Trump first began publicly mulling forming it, after he claimed without evidence that 3 million people may have illegally cast ballots in the 2016 presidential race. Despite urging from lawmakers in both parties to drop the issue, Trump formally announced in May the creation of his Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, headed by Vice President Mike Pence and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach. The panel's executive director, Andrew Kossack, had promised before its first meeting on 17-2361-A-002243 July 19 that the group would make records public. But in an order issued earlier this month, Kollar-Kotelly noted that documents discussed by individual members at that July meeting weren't released in advance. The Justice Department initially argued it did not have to release those documents before they were shared with the full panel, but KollarKotelly appeared to reject that interpretation. On Wednesday, the DOJ's Shapiro said the panel acted "entirely in good faith" and had no intent to hide materials, but she said commission members were not fully aware of their obligations. However, she acknowledged that the commission's staff was aware in advance of one member's plan to share a PowerPoint presentation at the session. It was not released before the meeting. "It was a chaotic start to the commission," Shapiro said. "There was a little bit of unknown and a little bit of disorganization in terms of how the meeting would happen." Kollar-Kotelly said she appreciated the government's apology, but "you didn't live up to the representations" made before the meeting. The judge, a Clinton nominee, listed about half a dozen statements or studies presented at the July 19 meeting that weren't released in advance. She also said some of the legal positions the government has taken appear to be contrary to court precedents that the public has the right to know in advance what will be discussed at each commission meeting. Shapiro said a letter was sent to panel members Wednesday advising them that they need to submit materials and presentations in advance of future commission meetings so they can be shared with the public. In an emergency, she said, extra copies could be brought to a meeting to hand out to the public. It's unclear that the emergency option would always work in practice, however. The July meeting was held in the White House complex and was open to the public only via a video webcast. The public is invited to attend a second meeting of the commission set for Sept. 12 in New Hampshire. The judge welcomed the new guidance sent to members of the commission. "It looks like it's a good first step," she said. However, she also said she will order the panel to produce a log of all its records and to indicate whether they are or are not being made public and why. The hearing Wednesday took place on a lawsuit filed by the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The case is one of what Shapiro said are seven different suits pending against the commission. Those cases challenge the panel's compliance with its obligations under the Federal Advisory Committee Act or with data privacy laws. In some instances, the suits argue that Trump exceeded his authority or attempted to discriminate against minority voters by setting up the commission. 17-2361-A-002244 From: To: Subject: Date: Kris Kobach Desiree Taliaferro; Desiree Taliaferro Fwd: September Meeting - 9/12 in Manchester, New Hampshire Friday, August 25, 2017 10:15:05 AM Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP" Date: August 24, 2017 at 12:02:51 PM CDT To:'Kris Kobach' "cwlawson c sos.in aov" , "Christ McCormick" Mark Rhodes ,"von Spakovsky, Hans" qians.VonSpakovsky@heritage.org>, Christian Adams , "Alan L. King" "matthew.dunlap@maine.gov" Cc: "Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP" ,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" , "Williams, Ronald E. EOP/OVP" Subject: September Meeting - 9/12 in Manchester, New Hampshire Dear Members, Thank you for holding September 12th for our next meeting, and for your patience as we worked through some logistical details. I am excited to share that Secretary Gardner has kindly offered to host the Commission in New Hampshire at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at St. AnseIm College. The meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. Eastern on Tuesday, September 12th, and we expect to finish no later than 4:00 p.m. Please feel free to proceed with making your travel arrangements. As a reminder, here are the instructions for booking travel through GSA's travel services: Booking Travel to New Hampshire Instructions Members or their support staff who have established traveler accounts with GSA can call the travel agent directly to book their travel. ADTRAV(GSA travel agent): 877-472-6716, available 24/7 Key Information when calling the travel agent: . ADTRAV will recognize members by first and last name and agency—which is the General Services 17-2361-A-002246 Administration (GSA)for the purposes of this travel. . Have a personal credit card available—hotel will be booked using a personal card. Members can choose their hotel and will be reimbursed up to the maximum per diem rate for Manchester, NH ($108/night)(keep hotel receipts) . The committee has budgeted for travel for up to 3 days per member between 9/11 and 9/13. Arrangements should be made within those parameters. . . Hotel: Max lodging per diem rate reimbursed for Manchester, NH in September: $108(keep hotel receipts—reimbursed up to $108. Lodging taxes will be reimbursed separately as well.) The travel agent can help members find rooms at or below per diem. . Exceptions to contract fare must be documented/justified—e.g., Timing of contract fare flights do not allow traveler to meet mission or non-contract fare is less expensive . Meals & Incidental Expenses (MI&E): reimbursed $64 per day for Manchester; $48 on first & last day of travel (no receipts needed, reimbursed $64 for full day and $48 for first and last day of travel) . Rental cars: Receipt required for all expenses . Taxis/metro: reimbursed for official business related to the committee—e.g., to/from airport, to/from committee meetings (keep receipts) . Other (i.e. airline baggage fees): Reimbursed (keep receipts) Airfare will be booked through the travel agent and paid directly by GSA. All other approved travel expenses (hotel; MI&E; taxis) will be paid for using the member's personal card and will subsequently be reimbursed. Details on reimbursement process will be provided upon completion of the travel. If members or their staff have questions regarding the above that the travel agent can't answer, please don't hesitate to have the members'staff reach out to Valerie Whittington or Kris Palmer. valerie.whittington@gsa.gov - 202-501-3395 kris.palmer@gsa.gov - 202-501-0525 We will share more information about the meeting and agenda soon. If you have any questions in the meantime, please let me know. 17-2361-A-002247 Thank you, Andrew Andrew J. Kossack Executive Director, Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity Associate Counsel, Office of the Vice President Email: Andrew.J.KossackPovp.eop.gov 17-2361-A-002248 From: Christy McCormick To: email Subject: Fwd: Suggested TPs Date: Thu, May 11, 2017 8:12 am Attachments: Talking Points Election Commission.docx (20K) Begin forwarded message: From: "Paoletta, Mark R.EOP/OVP" Date: May 10,2017 at 7:55:18 PM EDT To: Cc: "Agen,Jarrod P. EOP/OVP" ,"Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP" ,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" Subject: Suggested TPs Hi Christy, Attached are some suggested talking points regarding the Election Integrity Commission.If you receive a call from a reporter, please refer the reporter to Jarrod Agen,the VP's Comms Director. His cell number is . I am also cc'ing Marc Lotter, the VP's press secretary, and Matt Morgan. Thanks. Mark MARK R.PAOLETTA Counsel to the Vice President 202456 2734(work) Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov 17-2361-A-002249 Message From: on behalf of Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans [/0=THF/OU=THFDC/cn=Recipients/cn=spakoskyh] von Spakovsky, Hans 7/25/2017 3:03:41 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov]; mark.r.paoletta@ovp.eop.gov FYI I was on WMAL's Mornings on the Mall today speaking about the commission. Here's the link: https://app.criticalmention.com/appptclip/view/28438483?token=2b3dec60-4950-42fc-b76098468f24f47e 17-2361-A-002250 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] 8/1/2017 10:14:30 PM Kris Kobach [ ] FYI http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/l/judge-mocks-opponents-trump-voter-commission/ Andrew 3. Kossack Executive Di rector & Designated Federal Officer Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002251 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Williams, Ronald E. EOP/OVP [Ronald.E.Williams@ovp.eop.gov] 9/8/2017 2:07:13 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] GAI Report and NH Reports Govt Accountability Institute The Problem of Duplicate Voting (July 2017....pdf; Submission from Sec Bill Gardner_Ltr from Gardner and Barthelmes (Septem....pdf; Submission from Sec Bill Gardner_Ltr from NH Speaker of the House (Septe....pdf Hi Andrew, Please see the attached. Thanks, Ron 17-2361-A-002252 GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY INSTITUTE America The Vulnerable: The Problem of Duplicate Voting Es a aal www.g-a-Lorg 17-2361-A-002253 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Government Accountability Institute (GAI) attempted to obtain public voter roll information from all 50 states to independently test for duplicate voting in the 2016 presidential election. Duplicate voting is one type of voter fraud, defined as an individual casting more than one ballot. There are currently no government agencies or private entities that compare all state voter rolls to detect duplicate voting fraud. GAI partnered with two reputable data analytics firms to perform the voter roll comparisons and duplicate voting matches. However, CAT was unable to conduct a comprehensive review since a complete data set of state voter rolls is currently unobtainable. Access to public voting data varies widely among state elections officials. Some share it freely, while others impose exorbitant costs or refuse to comply with voter information requests. Despite significant data acquisition obstacles, the reliability of acquired data, and an extremely conservative matching approach that sought only to identify two votes cast in the same legal name, GAI found 8,471 highly likely duplicate votes. • GAI obtained voter roll data from 21 states, amounting to 17 percent of all possible state-to-state combinations. • Using an extremely conservative method of matching names and exact birthdates with other unique identifying information, GAI found 7,271 highly likely cases of inter-state duplicate voting. We identified another I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002254 1,200 cases of likely intra-state duplicate voting. Each instance represents two votes with the same voter information. • According to GAI's commercial database consultant,"The probability of correctly matching two records with the same name, birthdate, and social security number is close to 100 percent. Using these match points will result in virtually zero false positives from the actual matching process. If there are false positives, they would most likely be the product of errors in data sourcing and/or human error at the polling places." • Extending GAI's conservative matching method to include all 50 states would indicate an expected minimum of 45,000 high-confidence duplicate voting matches. • In the process of identifying potential duplicate votes,CAT found more than 15,000 voters who registered to vote using prohibited addresses, such as post office boxes, UPS stores, federal post offices, and public buildings. • Using Rhode Island as a test-case, GAI and Simpatico Software Systems discovered voter identity loopholes that likely transfer to other states. I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002255 INTRODUCTION In May 2017, President Donald Trump issued an executive order establishing the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. The commission is tasked with promoting free and honest federal elections and has requested publicly available data from all 50-states and the District of Columbia,as well as feedback on how to improve elections integrity.1 "The integrity of the vote is a foundation of our democracy; this bipartisan commission will review ways to strengthen that integrity in order to protect and preserve the principle of one person,one vote," Vice President Mike Pence,the commission's chair, announced.2 The request for publicly available voter registration data and voter history data from state Secretaries of State has sparked a firestorm of controversy in light of President Trump's claim that he lost the national popular vote in 2016 to Democrat Hillary Clinton due to three million illegal votes.3 Many states have resisted the commission's request for data,claiming that it is searching for a voter fraud problem that doesn't exist. Other states have readily complied. Specifically, the commission has asked for names, dates of birth, the last four digits of social security numbers,and information relating to felony convictions and military status. In Colorado, elections officials have observed a record number of withdrawn voter registrations.4 In 2012, Pew Research found 24 million (one in eight) voter registrations were either invalid or significantly inaccurate. About 1.8 million deceased voters were discovered on state voter rolls, and 2.75 million I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 4 17-2361-A-002256 people were registered to vote in more than one state.5 These findings alone do not equate to voter fraud, but show a system rife with error and vulnerability. Elections are sometimes decided by small margins, making voter roll accuracy of paramount importance. Consider the 2000 presidential election between Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore. More than 105 million votes were cast nationwide, and the outcome was determined by only 537 votes. The election, and the course of history to follow, hinged on the state of Florida where the margin of victory for Bush amounted to only .009 percent of the state's total votes.6 In 2008, a U.S. Senate election in Minnesota pitted incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman against Al Franken. The election was initially too close to call. After an eight-month legal battle, Franken emerged victorious by only 312 votes and officially joined a 60-senator filibuster-proof supermajority that passed the Affordable Care Act.7Countless other federal, state,and local elections have been decided by narrow vote margins, and all of them are consequential. Irrespective of partisan politics, it is critical to ensure that the U.S. election system is open to as many eligible citizens as possible, and that every effort is taken to ensure honest votes are not undermined through either government negligence or voter fraud. Voter fraud is defined as illegal interference with the process of an election. It can take many forms, including voter impersonation, vote buying, noncitizen voting, dead voters, felon voting, fraudulent addresses, registration fraud, elections officials fraud, and duplicate voting.8 I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 5 17-2361-A-002257 With this in mind, GAI attempted to independently research and verify instances of duplicate voting in the 2016 general election, defined simply as an individual illegally casting more than one vote.9 This can occur within the same state, in separate states, or when more than one vote is cast in an individual's name—indicating identity theft. We attempted to obtain and compare every states' voter roll to determine whether duplicate voting may have occurred. To the best of our knowledge, the undertaking would have been the largest duplicate voting detection effort ever. There is currently no organization, governmental or private, that is tasked with performing this type of simple cross-check for all 50 states. There is also no requirement that states work together to eliminate duplicate voter registrations or check for possible illegal duplicate federal election votes. States can voluntarily engage with a nonprofit organization called the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC. It currently assists 20 states with resolving duplicate registrations and helps register new voters.'() ERIC does not look for voter fraud. CAT was unable to complete the project as initially designed as it is currently impossible for independent research organizations, much less the executive branch of the federal government, to obtain voter rolls from all 50 states. Exorbitant costs, excessive hurdles, and outright rejected requests for information prevented a complete analysis. GAI was able to obtain voter roll data from 21 states at little or no cost, which represents about 17 percent of all possible state-to-state comparison combinations. In partnership with two data analytics firms, GAI applied an extremely conservative matching approach to eliminate any reasonable fl I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002258 possibility of including false positive matches. Our method ensures the integrity of our results while overlooking many less certain duplicate votes. We further attempted to identify duplicate votes cast in the same legal names. If an individual was inclined to illegally double vote using different names,our analysis would not detect it. GAI identified 8,471 high-confidence duplicate voting matches. GAI also found several irregularities that increase the potential for voter fraud, such as improper voter registration addresses, erroneous voter roll birthdates, and the lack of definitive identification required to vote. These issues merit immediate attention and are of bipartisan concern. We list our limited findings on the following pages and recommend the 8,471 cases of likely duplicate voting be investigated for possible wrongdoing. SIMPATICO and VIRTUAL DBS GAI partnered with Simpatico Software Systems and Virtual DBS,Inc. to perform the state-to-state voter roll comparisons and duplicate voting matches. Simpatico is a U.S.-based company specializing in large-scale database analytics. Among other projects, it works with state governments by applying waste and fraud analyses to health and human services programs to achieve program integrity and taxpayer savings.11 We set out to determine if fraud analytics techniques could be applied to voting data to detect whether duplicate voting occurred in the recent general election. GAI's voter roll project involved the acquisition of voter registration and voter history data from as many states as possible. Ultimately, data from I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 7 17-2361-A-002259 21 states comprising 75 million 2016 general election voters were loaded into a single system. Simpatico performed its research using a technique called "Agile Analytics," which combines data mining with forensic analysis. Virtual DBS is a commercial database firm that aggregates hundreds of business and consumer demographic variables to identify specific commercial prospects.I2 Applying the firm's additional data points, which include the first five digits of social security numbers, to pools of voters with matching names and exact birthdates effectively confirmed the existence of duplicate voting. "The probability of correctly matching two records with the same name, birthdate, and social security number is close to 100 percent. Using these match points will result in virtually zero false positives from the actual matching process. If there are false positives, they would most likely be the product of errors in data sourcing and/or human error at the polling places," said Brad Mitchell, Chief Executive Officer of Virtual DBS, Inc., (see Appendix B). ri I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002260 DATA ACQUISITION Difficulties Acquiring Data GAI was unable to obtain voter roll data from all 50 states (despite rigorous efforts). There is a wide range of availability and cost for voter registration and voter history records between states. Many provide such information at little or no cost, while others make it effectively impossible to obtain data for independent research. GAT requested records for all voters in state voter registration systems and at least five elections of voter history when available. We did not request or obtain confidential information such as social security numbers, drivers' license numbers,and passport information. We did not attempt to determine the outcome of any votes. The voting data supplied to CAT includes the first, middle, and last names of voters when fully available. The information also includes birthdates containing the day, month,and year of birth when available. Each state charged less than $5,000 for its data. GAI obtained records from Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,South Carolina, Tennessee,Texas, Washington, and West Virginia. Costs and Hurdles Some states charge exorbitant fees. Alabama and Arizona each charged GAI nearly $30,000. Wisconsin charged $12,500, and other states Fl I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002261 charged between $5,000 and $10,000. States like Virginia and South Carolina wanted payment on a per-election basis, making the cost of GAI's request five times higher than many other states. New Hampshire and Illinois maintained that public voter roll data is only available to duly registered political entities. Virginia, Indiana, Massachusetts, and several others states deny access to public voter registration data and voter history data with the exceptions of political parties and law enforcement. The Kentucky Board of Elections considered GAI's application for voting records and summarily rejected it.13 Massachusetts only provides voting data to law enforcement agencies and political parties, but as an alternative allows for separate requests to be made to each of the state's 351 cities and towns — many of which charge for voting data and would likely supply it in varying formats. Simpatico Software Systems determined the effort would require six times the attention needed to obtain similarly requested data from every other state combined. The Help America Vote Act of 2002 mandates that every state maintains a centralized statewide database of voter registrations.14 In effect, Massachusetts and other states withhold this data from the public. Data Quality The quality of information provided to GAI varied widely. Some states' data required Simpatico Software Systems to make extensive formatting adjustments for the information to be imported into a single, usable analytics platform. Sometimes the data was unreliable. I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 10 17-2361-A-002262 New York state voting data had significant quality issues resulting in part from outdated technology. According to Simpatico, there is no way to determine with certainty how many votes were cast in the 2016 general election based on the data provided. Too many descriptions are used to classify 2016 general election votes from a sound analytics perspective. Examples are "2016 General Election," "2016 November General," "2016 General State/Local Election," "11/8/2016 General Election," and two dozen other voting labels. More than one thousand different descriptions were used for all separate elections in the records provided to GAI, and many descriptions pertained to the same elections. Local voting systems appear to feed into a larger centralized voter registration system,and refer to individual elections in confusing ways. More than 700,000 votes in New York's data are labeled "General Election," with no corresponding year to indicate which general election the votes were cast. If the state cannot reliably account for votes in a consistently clear manner, it is possible that election outcomes could be affected. Other Problems In the absence of social security numbers and drivers' license numbers, full birthdates are critical information items to verify voter eligibility and voter identity. Birthdates are also necessary to perform duplicate voting research. Only about half of all states would provide full birthdates with voter registration data, if they provided any data at all. If a state did not provide a full date of birth, GAI did not use its data. n I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 11 17-2361-A-002263 The information GAI received did not always lead to the potential for high-probability results. It would have been useful to cross-check voter rolls between adjacent states and those with transient population relationships. For example, North Carolina and Florida are reciprocal travel destinations. However, North Carolina's voter roll data was unobtainable. CAT was only able to cross-check three of seven Southeastern states, all of which have reasonably substantive travel relationships. Acquiring voting data from neighboring states was also difficult. Neighboring states present an opportunity to cast duplicate votes for those inclined to do so. CAT was unable to compare some high population states with adjacent states,such as Arizona and Nevada with California, Wisconsin and Indiana to Illinois, and Texas with Louisiana. I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002264 Voter Roll Data Cost per 100,000 voters $1200.00 $1,000.00 SH0000 $60000 $40000 $200.00 ...11H11111111 $0.00 .E,,s1.?..E25 311 R 1 VTIg WP ;°° 1 -5 :1 2 1g = d 4 5. N e 8 .42 El E 3 -I - ca 4 1 .0. lg. e - I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 .5 a.. 6-2 t -g<.= 13 17-2361-A-002265 DUPLICATE VOTING ANALYSIS Identifying likely examples of duplicate votes Methodology GAI looked for duplicate voting matches by comparing 21 available state voter rolls, offering about 17 percent of all possible state-to-state pairings. Twenty-one states yield 210 unique combinations of pairs of states, while all 50 states would yield 1,225 unique combinations. GAI also looked for duplicate voting within each of the 21 states. We began by identifying instances of general election votes with matching names and exact birthdates (day, month, and year). This alone does not guarantee two votes were cast by the same person. Identical names often occur in large voter datasets,and matching names and exact birthdates can occur as a matter of coincidence. This is known statistically as the "birthday problem."15 GAI recognizes the birthday problem and removed the uncertainty by taking the additional step of running the pool of potential duplicate voting matches through Virtual DBS's commercial database to confirm the voter identities. Virtual DBS applied credit reporting data,social security administration data, and other commercial data such as magazine subscription information. GAI used full first and last names,"fuzzy" middle names, and exact birthdates. Fuzzy matching allows for slight variations to be considered when the item is either missing or incomplete. Fuzzy matching applied to partial middle names,full middle names with matching middle initials, and exact matches of all other criteria when middle names were missing. We also I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 14 17-2361-A-002266 considered middle names differing by no more than two letters. Highconfidence matches generally decrease the fuzzier the middle name, but the likelihood of confirmable duplicate voting matches remains very high given the exact matching of additional identifying criteria. The analysis only applies to potential duplicate votes that were cast using the same name and identifying information. Our approach does not identify individuals who may have cast more than one ballot using different names. The Institute's findings do not automatically prove that matched voters committed voter fraud, as voter or election official error and voter identity theft cannot be ruled out. Ideally, all voters would provide strong identifying information at the point of registering to vote to eliminate identification uncertainties, such as social security numbers, drivers' license numbers, or passport documents. These items comfortably substantiate the unique identity of individual voters,but are regularly not submitted when registering to vote. GAI did not attempt to obtain such confidential information. Matchesfor Inter-State Duplicate Voting GAI's initial analysis revealed more than 60,000 name and birthdate matches for potential inter-state duplicate voters. These could not be confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt using the data supplied by the 21 states. Virtual DBS evaluated the voter matches using additional unique identifiers and found 7,271 high-confidence matches. Another method employed was the matching of out-of-state mailing addresses. Eligible voters are required to list residential addresses as the I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 15 17-2361-A-002267 main address on voter registration forms.16 Every state we examined also allows for secondary mailing addresses to be listed. We looked for instances where voters listed secondary addresses in different states than their residential address. If a name and birthdate match also showed that voter's out-of-state secondary mailing address matched the residential address from a different state, or vice versa,then we considered it a strong likelihood that two votes were cast in the name of the same individual. Nearly 600 duplicate matches were found using this technique. GAI also looked for pairings of voters, or cases where individuals appeared to vote together in separate states. The odds of two individuals with matching names and birthdates voting together in two different states dramatically increases the likelihood of an inter-state duplicate voting match. We found nearly 200 pairs of voters who appear to have voted as couples in two different states. We also identified two families of three that may have voted together. The identities of the pairings of voters and those with duplicate matching addresses were confirmed through Virtual DBS's commercial database. GAI applied fuzzy first names to the analysis and found nearly 350,000 possible duplicate voters. Incorporating fuzzy first names presents a far weaker level of certainty than the fuzzy middle name matching method previously described. When these potential matches were conservatively cross-checked through the commercial database, another 315 duplicate voting matches were confirmed. I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 16 17-2361-A-002268 Matchesfor Intra-State Duplicate Voting GAI included fuzzy middle names with matching first and last names and exact birthdates to identify possible intra-state duplicate voting. The commercial database cross-check revealed 1,200 high-confidence double votes from an initial pool of 10,000 intra-state matches. In one case, two votes were cast in the same Oregon town with matching names and dates of birth. It is remotely possible these votes were cast by two different individuals. A closer look at voting registration records show one voter registered with a residential address, and the other to a business address. An evaluation of business filings lodged with the Oregon Secretary of State's office revealed that the business address listed on multiple department filings was also the residential address of the individual with the same exact name and birthdate. This is a high-confidence case of duplicate voting and was further confirmed through the commercial database. I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17 17-2361-A-002269 IMPROPER ADDRESSES Using Prohibited Addressesfor Voter Registration Through the process of identifying duplicate votes, GAI discovered several important voting-related irregularities. One such area pertains to improper voting addresses. Eligible citizens are required to register to vote using a residential address, defined as a fixed or permanent address where an individual physically resides all or most of a given year.17 Knowingly submitting a fraudulent address is a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.18 GAI found more than 15,000 clearly prohibited addresses within the 21-state voter rolls we examined. While some may be mistakes, all are easy to identify from an elections integrity perspective. The lack of attention from elections officials may increase the potential for voter fraud. Election laws specifically prohibit the use of post office boxes to meet the residential address requirement.19 However, GA! found 6,539 general election votes were cast by individuals who registered to vote using a post office box as a primary residential address. This mostly occurred in Pennsylvania, Missouri, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. GAI also found an additional 3,000 voters who listed federal post office buildings as their home address. GAI further discovered nearly 5,000 general election voters who registered to vote using UPS stores as residential addresses. This occurred in every state in our analysis. In some cases, more than 100 voters were registered to the same UPS store locations. GAI found another 1,000 votes I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 18 17-2361-A-002270 that were cast by individuals who listed public buildings as their home address. Public safety building addresses can sometimes be used to protect law enforcement, judges, and other officials from exposing their home addresses. We did not include any of these scenarios in our findings. We also found cases of voters whose home addresses matched the addresses of gas stations, vacant lots, abandoned mill buildings, basketball courts, parks, warehouses, and office buildings. BIRTHDATES Simpatico Software Systems boundary tested the 21-state voter registration records contained in its custom engineered database. Boundary testing, or boundary value analysis, is a method that determines maximum or minimum values,such as the maximum or minimum age of voters. The analysis showed 45,880 votes were cast by individuals whose dates of birth were more than 115 years prior to the 2016 general election. It is important to note that some state registration systems indicate a missing date of birth by adopting filler dates, such as 01/01/1900, 01/01/1850, or 01/01/1800. The vast majority of votes cast by individuals appearing to be over 115 years old had these three erroneous birthdates. The analysis showed 1,410 voters had other dates of birth indicating an age of over 115 years old. Forty-five of these voters had birthdates earlier than the year 1700. Additionally, 292 votes were cast by voters whose registration birthdates indicated they were under 18 years old at the time of the election, with 128 of these votes being cast provisionally. I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 19 17-2361-A-002271 VOTER IDENTITY Help American Vote Act The Help America Vote Act of 2002 is a major federal election reform law that was enacted in the aftermath of the highly contentious 2000 presidential election.2" More than 105 million votes were cast nationwide, and the deciding margin of victory was just 537 votes.21 It passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support and was signed into law by the election's winner, President George W. Bush. One of the Act's reforms is a requirement that eligible voters use definitive forms of identification when registering to vote. Valid drivers' license numbers and the last four digits of an individual's social security number were newly required for all subsequent registrants. Pre-HAVA registered voters are exempt. The Act also allows for other forms of identification to be submitted, some being less reliable than others. Alternative forms of identification include state ID cards, passports, military IDs, employee IDs,student IDs, bank statements, utility bills, and pay stubs. States can offer additional identification options. GAI discovered a surprising number of active voters whose identifying information contained in state voter registration systems is less reliable than the driver's license and social security number standard. The less exacting the form of ID, the more difficult it is to verify an individual's identity if an elections official was inclined to do so. I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002272 Identification and Rhode Island Voting GAI and Simpatico Software Systems analyzed Rhode Island's general election system as a manageable test-case for potential voter identity issues. What we discovered may broadly apply to other states. According to data supplied by the Rhode Island Secretary of State's office, 466,499 votes were cast by Rhode Island voters in the 2016 general election. More than 30 percent, or 143,111 votes, were cast by individuals who did not register to vote with either a social security number or driver's license number;120,822 registered before HAVA,and 22,389 registered after HAVA. The post-HAVA general election voters who registered without using drivers' license or social security numbers equate to 4.7 percent of all Rhode Island voters.22 Confirming the identities of some of these voters is impossible using only the data contained in the state's voter registration system as there are no other uniquely identifying pieces of voter data. The potential consequences of undetected identity fraud or ineligible voting are significant. Nine of 113 Rhode Island state legislative races were decided by margins of victory that were less than the number of post-HAVA voters in those respective districts who did not supply verifiable forms of identification when registering to vote. The Rhode Island Test-Case The possibility that an individual could register to vote without providing strong personally identifying information led GAI to consider whether voter fraud could occur. Simpatico Software Systems proposed the r'l I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002273 following scenario to the Rhode Island Secretary of State's office, to which Simpatico received an affirmative response.23 If a voter registration form was submitted by an individual with the name John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, with a birthdate of 1/1/1970, a residential address that was a commercial office building,no driver's license, no social security number, and the registration form was sent to the appropriate elections office by mail, would this application be approved and added to the Rhode Island state voter roll? The Rhode Island Secretary of State's office said yes, with the caveat that the registration validation process is performed at the local level. A letter would be sent by the U.S. postal service to the address provided on the voter registration application. If the letter is not returned as undeliverable, then the applicant is duly registered and no further checks would be performed unless the registration was challenged by a person or entity outside of government. If the letter was returned as undeliverable or if the improperly listed commercial business returned the letter with a postal comment that the registering individual did not live at that address,then the application would be put on hold. Assuming the John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt voter application was approved, the individual claiming to be Schmidt would need to provide a photo ID to obtain a state-issued voter ID card in order to then cast an actual vote. Schmidt could obtain a voter ID card by submitting a wide range of identity items that fail to meet the social security number and driver's license number threshold outlined in the federal HAVA law, such as a gym membership photo ID. Simpatico proposed that the individual claiming to I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 22 17-2361-A-002274 be Schmidt provided a photo ID from a nonexistent business. According to the Rhode Island Secretary of State's office, the individual would be granted a voter ID card. Another way the individual claiming to be Schmidt could attempt to vote illegally is to arrive at a voting poll without identification and cast a provisional ballot, a required option under HAVA. Rhode Island's voter ID laws allow for provisional ballots to be confirmed by nothing more than a matching signature on a voter ID card—which in Schmidt's case was submitted without uniquely identifying information. Broader Potential Consequences The vulnerabilities exposed in Rhode Island transfer to other states. Without uniquely identifying information submitted at the voter registration stage, the potential for voter fraud increases. Put another way, there is no way to confirm a voter's identity or citizenship without it. To further the Rhode Island test-case, Simpatico submitted a list of 225 general election voters who registered using clearly prohibited addresses. Simpatico's request to fully verify the identities of the individuals required a "voter challenge," according to state elections officials. It were further informed that a false challenge could carry the risk of a misdemeanor penalty,(see Appendix A). I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 23 17-2361-A-002275 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS GAI was unable to obtain voter roll data from all 50 states, but nevertheless identified 8,471 potential cases of illegal duplicate voting across 21 states. These instances should be investigated to determine whether two votes were cast by the same person or if identity theft occurred. GAI was unable to perform a complete cross-check of state voter rolls due to the wide range of availability of data between states. GAI did not seek to obtain confidential information such as drivers' license numbers and social security numbers which should be guarded by elections officials. We only sought basic voter identifying criteria such as full names, birthdates, and addresses, and we were able to obtain it at little or no cost from many states. Others make it too expensive or virtually impossible to obtain. This information must be made available across-the-board for bipartisan independent voter integrity research. States should also prioritize the accuracy of voter information contained in voting databases. Removing improper addresses, updating procedures to eliminate deceased voters from voter rolls, and confirming the identities of individuals during voter registration are necessary reforms to alleviate the potential for voter fraud. At a minimum,states should upgrade their database technology to better account for voting data, where appropriate. GA!, in consultation with Simpatico Software Systems, recommends additional studies be performed. The following list presents important steps forward, but is not meant as a comprehensive solution: I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 24 17-2361-A-002276 • Likely fraud analysis by type of voter registration o Statewide voter registration systems should track how voters registered to vote. None of the data we obtained contained this information. Examples of voter registration types include (depending on the state): Department of Motor Vehicles, inperson, by mail, by third party, online, and others. Evaluating likely voter fraud by voter registration type would provide valuable insight into whether certain avenues of voter registration produce more fraud than others. • Likely fraud analysis of primaries for federal races o Felony penalties for voter fraud apply to primaries for federal elected offices as well as general elections. We did not attempt to review any primary elections. One issue to look for, in addition to duplicate voting, would be whether individuals are voting in primaries in one state and general elections in another state. • Maiden name/married name duplicate voting and/or duplicate registrations o In some state voter registration systems, name changes will generate new voter registrations and leave former names, such as maiden names, active in the system. o Confidential data such as drivers' license numbers and social security numbers are required to electronically identify these I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 25 17-2361-A-002277 registrations, and to check for duplicate voting. In our Rhode Island test-case, and likely in other states, this confidential data does not always exist in the statewide voter registration system. Thus,the analysis is impossible to perform. • Extended, national study of votes by registrations citing only commercial addresses. • Secure assessments of duplicate voting using confidential identification. • Confirming citizenship using the Federal Data Hub — a database provided by the federal government to confirm "proof of legal presence" in order to receive social service benefits like Medicaid. • Confirming that Green Card holders are not casting votes by crosschecking them using a federal database. I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 26 17-2361-A-002278 1 https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/05/11/presidential-executive-order-establishmentpresidential-advisory 2 https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/06/28/readout-vice-presidents-call-presidential-advisorycommission-election 3 http://www.apnewsarchive.com/2017/President-Donald-Trump-s-commission-investigating-allegations-of-voterfraud-in-the-2016-election-is-asking-states-for-a-list-of-the-names-party-affiliations-and-voting-histories-of-all/id560b1aa3e1674d9ca308d95b6602fc16 4 http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/politics/hundreds-withdraw-colorado-voter-registrations-in-responseto-compliance-with-commission-request S http://www.pewtrusts.orelmedia/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs assets/2012/pewupgradingvoterregistrationpdf.pdf https://transition.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm 7 https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/07/20/al-franken-may-have-won-his-senate-seatthrough-voter-fraud; https://www.forbes.com/sites/physiciansfoundation/2014/03/26/a-look-back-at-how-thepresident-was-able-to-sign-obamacare-into-law-four-years-ago/#cee313b526b7 6 8 httPS://WWW.brennancenter.orgisitesidefault/files/legacy/The%20Truth%20About%20Voter%20Fraud.pdf http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title52-section10307&num=0&edition=prelim 10 http://www.ericstates.org/ 11 ii http://simpaticosoftware.com/about/ 12 https://www.virtualdbs.com/ 13 letter from Kentucky Board of Elections (Appendix C). 14 https://ballotpedia.org/Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002; http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/ebook/part5/hava.html 16 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=997888 16 http://www.ncsl.org/Documents/Elections/The Canvass May 2016.pdf 17 Ibid. 18 http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title52-section10307&num=0&edition=prelim 9 19 httpS://WWW.rOCktheVOte.COMiget-infOrrned/eleCtiOnSfireqUently-asked-ClUestions/ 20 http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/ebook/part5/hava.html 21 https://transition.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm 22 Rhode Island emails (Appendix C). 23 Rhode Island emails (Appendix C). I The Problem of Duplicate Voting 2017 17-2361-A-002279 APPENDIX A Rhode Island Improper Addresses In the course of GAI's duplicate voting study, Simpatico Software Systems supplied the Rhode Island Board of Elections office with a list of 225 Rhode Island voters who registered to vote using improper addresses, such as UPS stores, empty lots, warehouses, gas stations, etc. Our intention was to document how these irregularities might be resolved. A representative from Simpatico met with the Executive Director of the Board of Elections and a top elections official from the Rhode Island Secretary of State's office on three separate occasions. It was explained that the Board of Elections would take action by requesting local Boards of Canvassers to determine whether the 225 voters lived at their listed addresses. The canvassers would send letters to each address. If a response is not received, then the voter's registration is put on hold and no further actions are taken. The Board of Elections opted against directing local canvassers to perform any further actions to verify the identity of the individuals despite the authority to do so. Additional verification would require a "voter challenge." The Board suggested the Simpatico representative personally challenge each of the 225 voter registrations with improper addresses. A false challenge can carry the risk of a misdemeanor penalty. The relevant statute reads: "Every person who willfully and maliciously challenges the registration of a voter without reasonable cause to suspect that the voter is not qualified shall be guilty of a misdemeanor 17-2361-A-002280 and shall,in addition,be liable to the challenged voter for compensatory and punitive damages as well as for his or her counsel fees. The mere fact that a challenge was not sustained by the board shall not give rise to any civil or criminal liability of the objector." The Simpatico representative did not personally challenge the registrations. The risk involved was too high, and the scenario is perhaps instructive as to why some voter integrity efforts go no further than sending a letter. 17-2361-A-002281 (cirtual DE1 Extending Market Intelligence' Voter Fraud Matching Accuracy The probability of correctly matching two records with same name, birth date and SS# is close to 100%. Using these match points will result in virtually zero false positives from the actual matching process. If there are false positives, they would most likely be the product of errors in data sourcing and/or human error at the polling places. Brad Mitchell Chief Executive Officer Virtual DBS, Inc 85 Brown Street, North Kingstown RI 02852 1.401.371.0101 17-2361-A-002282 COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS ALISON LUNDERGAN GRIMES Secretary of State & Chief Election Official May 26,2017 Mr. Ken Block Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. 20 Altieri Way, No. 3 Warwick, RI 02886 Dear Mr. Block: The Kentucky State Board of Elections received your Request for Voter Registration Data. The Board is charged with the duty of assuring that voter registration data is submitted to only those individuals who qualify pursuant to the requirements of KRS 117.025(3)(h). This statute provides that the Board shall: Furnish at a reasonable price any and all precinct lists to duly qualified candidates, political party committees or officials thereof, or any committee that advocates or opposes an amendment or public question. The State Board of Elections may also furnish the precinct lists to other persons at the board's discretion, at a reasonable price. The board shall not furnish precinct lists to persons who intend to use the lists for commercial use. In your request, you state that Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. requests the voter registration because you are "conducting electronic research to determine the prevalence of voters voting in multiple states for the 2016 general election." Simpatico Software Systems, Inc. is not a "qualified- person as provided in KRS 117.025. On April 18, 2017, the Kentucky State Board of Elections reviewed and considered your request. The Board voted to deny your request as the stated purpose does not meet the exceptions to commercial use set forth in 31 KAR 3:010. 140 WALNUT STREET FRANKFORT, KY 40601-3240 Kentudry ,NBRIDLED SPIR, AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER M/F/D (502)573-7100 FAX (502)573-4369 OR (502)696-1952 17-2361-A-002283 WEBSITE: www.elect.ky.gov If you have future inquiries, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, Maryellen Allen Executive Director State Board of Elections 17-2361-A-002284 From: Rob Rock [mailto:rrock@sossi.gov] Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 1:54 PM To:'Ken Block' Subject: RE: Checking in on my request Ken, Below are the numbers you requested. I don't believe that anyone who registered before the Help America Vote Act would have their DL or SS information in our system. Also, before the voter ID law took effect, anyone who did not have a DL or SS on file would have had to show ID before voting. Now, everyone must show ID. Rob VOTERS COUNTS WITH NO DMV ID AND SSN TOTAL_COUNT CURRENT_VOTER_STATUS 217383 Active 5325 Active with NCOA Change 7670 Inactive 159 Pending Total Voters: 230,537 Total voters who voted in November 2016 Presidential election and don't have SSN and DMV are $00:00. Rob Rock Director of Elections RI Department of State I Secretary of State Nellie M. Gorbea Email: rrockasos.ri.gov I Website: www.sos.ri.qov I Twitter: @RISecState 148 W. River Street, Providence RI 02904 I 401-222-2340 Our Mission: The Rhode Island Department of State engages and empowers all Rhode Islanders by making government more accessible and transparent, encouraging civic pride, enhancing commerce and ensuring that elections are fair, fast and accurate. 17-2361-A-002285 From: Rob Rock [mailto:rrock@sossi.gov] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 3:07 PM To:'Ken Block' Subject: RE: Proof of Citizenship I don't know for sure about other states but I am pretty sure others states are in the same boat we are. 0 Rob Rock Director of Elections RI Department of State I Secretary of State Nellie M. Gorbea Email: rrocksos.ri.gov I Website: www.sossi.gov I Twitter: @RISecState 148 W. River Street, Providence RI 02904 I 401-222-2340 Our Mission: The Rhode Island Department of State engages and empowers all Rhode Islanders by making government more accessible and transparent, encouraging civic pride, enhancing commerce and ensuring that elections are fair, fast and accurate. From: Ken Block [mailto:kblock@simpaticosoftware.com] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 2:49 PM To: Rob Rock Subject: RE: Proof of Citizenship I used that because it is one of the easier ones to gin up, along with some of the paper documents listed in the next tier of identity "proof" documents like a utility bill or bank statement. So in short, my scenario is possible. In my opinion, this places an even greater burden on the State to ensure that registered voters actually exist. This idea that a passive mechanism like waiting for mail to bounce back is effective is conclusively wrong, based on the empirical data that I am sending you of votes occurring at clearly bad addresses. Do you know generally if any state deals with my scenario in an active way (i.e. pushing all registered voters through an identity checking algorithm), or is everyone pretty much where we are? From: Rob Rock [mailto:rrock@sossi.gov] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 2:36 PM To:'Ken Block' Subject: RE: Proof of Citizenship Ken, If John registers, a letter will be sent to 3 Altieri Way indicating that the voter is registered to vote. Ideally, the business would receive the letter and notify the Warwick Board of Canvassers that 3 Altieri Way is a business and that no one resides there. If not, John will be registered to vote from that address. 17-2361-A-002286 The cities/towns are responsible for their voter registration rolls, not the Secretary of State. A challenge to a voter's registration would be handled by the local board of canvassers. The Secretary of State maintains the database but the validation of any and all voter registrations is done at the local level. Voter ID cards do not list an address but anytime someone requests one, we ensure they are registered to vote by confirming with the CVRS. We do not do any background checks on a business ID card if one is presented. In the 5 years I have been issuing voter ID cards, I don't recall anyone ever showing a business ID as back-up identification. Rob 0 Rob Rock Director of Elections RI Department of State I Secretary of State Nellie M. Gorbea Email: rrock@sossi.gov I Website: www.sossi.gov I Twitter: @RISecState 148 W. River Street, Providence RI 02904 I 401-222-2340 Our Mission: The Rhode Island Department of State engages and empowers all Rhode Islanders by making government more accessible and transparent, encouraging civic pride, enhancing commerce and ensuring that elections are fair, fast and accurate. From: Ken Block [mailto:kblock@simpaticosoftware.com] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 2:23 PM To: Rob Rock Subject: RE: Proof of Citizenship Thanks, Rob. I want to run a scenario by you, in an attempt to ensure that I understand correctly how voter registration is handled in RI. Let's say I, for whatever reason, decided to attempt to register to vote a made up person and actually cast a vote using that person's non-existent "identity". So I am going to create out of thin air "John Jacob Jingleheimerschmidt" born on 1/1/1970 and residing at 20 Altieri Way,#3 in Warwick, RI (that is the address of my business). While filling out the voter registration form in John's name, I do not enter any info for RI driver's license or social security number. As I understand how the voter registration process works right now,John would be duly registered to vote based on the information that I provided and no checks would be performed to prove or disprove that John either exists or is registered to vote at a residence. As long as any voter mail sent to 20 Altieri Way,#3 is not returned as undeliverable, John's registration will not be looked at by the SoS office unless it is challenged by someone outside of the SoS' office. 17-2361-A-002287 To vote, someone assuming John's "identity" would have to visit the SoS office and provide a photo card from any business, commercial establishment or health club in order to receive a voter ID card. John provides a photo ID card from a non-existent business. Does the SoS office make any attempt to confirm the existence of the business for which a photo ID was produced? At this point, John can vote in the next election, and will not be looked at again in terms of his eligibility to vote for any reason unless someone outside of the Secretary of State's office specifically challenges his credentials. Do I have this correct? Thanks Ken 17-2361-A-002288 NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF STATE Robert P. Ambrose Senior Deputy Secretary of State William M. Gardner Secretary ofState David M. Scanlan Deputy Secretary of State September 6, 2017 The Honorable Shawn N. Jasper Speaker of the House State House Room 311 107 North Main Street Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Dear Speaker Jasper: The Department of State and the Department of Safety provide the following response to your questions regarding the data available from the system for matching the records of the Department of Safety on vehicle registrations and driver's licenses with the records of registered voters managed by the Department of State, as authorized by RSA 654:45, IV (b). The federal Help America Vote Act required New Hampshire to develop this data matching system for the purpose of verifying the accuracy ofthe information contained in the voter database. The Department of Safety's response is limited to the production of driver's license and motor vehicle registration statistics. We offer the following responses to your questions: Is this system of verification effective? The system is effective when an individual provides a New Hampshire driver's license number when registering to vote. When the same address has been provided for both driver licensing and voter registration purposes, the match contributes to verifying the accuracy of the voter checklists. The matched information is made available to local election officials by the Secretary of State through the statewide centralized voter registration system. New Hampshire law places responsibility for verifying an applicant's domicile for voting purposes with municipal officials. The matching system does not document how useful the local officials find the data. Where discrepancies exist, the discrepancies vary from minor differences in the address to circumstances where the individual has provided different addresses. Local officials determine which cases warrant additional inquiry. What percentage of newly-registered voters have a record with discrepancies between their voting and motor vehicle/driver's license records? In accordance with the Help America Vote Act the matching system compares only those newly registered voters who provide a New Hampshire driver's license number when registering with driver's licensing records. Local officials flagged the records of59 voters who registered on or after the November 8, 2016 general election as having a material discrepancy between the address provided for voter registration and the address on record for that individual's driver's State House Room 204, MO MafrOt., Concord, N.H. 03301 Phone: 603-271-3242 Fax: 603-271-6316 TDD Access: Relay NH 1-800-735-2964 www.nh.gov/sos email: elections@sos.state.nh.us 17-2361-A-002289 license. As of September 1, 2017,48 ofthose cases have been resolved, the individual's voter and driver's license addresses now match. Does the matching process generate cases that require additional follow-up? Under New Hampshire law, when a discrepancy exists the assessment of whether the information warrants further inquiry is made by the Supervisors ofthe Checklist and their counterparts in New Hampshire's cities. The statewide system does not record data on how many ofthe discrepancies local officials determine are minor, for example the address is the same in both records, but in one record omits a non-essential detail, versus those that raise uncertainty regarding whether the individual is currently domiciled where they reported when registering to vote. Do people who register a vehicle in New Hampshire or obtain a New Hampshire driver's license register to vote? The match process currently only allows matching the driver's license number of newly registered voters and those who update their address to all New Hampshire licensed drivers. The system does not include the date the individual obtained the driver's license or registered to vote in the match. Under New Hampshire law some individuals are legally permitted to obtain a driver's license who are not legally permitted to register to vote. Non-citizens who provide evidence that they are legally present in the United States may obtain a driver's license for the duration oftheir lawful presence. These individuals may not register to vote. There are also voters who are non-drivers. Therefore, it is expected that not all individuals who are licensed to drive will also be registered to vote. At the time the analysis was done to provide this response, there were 1,224,943 individuals licensed to drive in New Hampshire and 972,536 individuals who were registered to vote. Do those who register to vote in New Hampshire also obtain a driver's license or register a vehicle in New Hampshire? Analyzing data on individuals who registered to vote on November 8, 2016, approximately 92% had a New Hampshire driver's license on August 30, 2017. As the match system does not retain driver's license data, the election day voter data had to be compared to the current driver's license data. 6,540 individuals on November 8, 2016 registered to vote using an out-of-state driver's license. On August 30, 2017, 1,014 ofthose individuals, 15.5%, had been issued a New Hampshire driver's licenses. As of August 31,2017,213 ofthe remaining 5,526 individuals, 3.3%, had registered a motor vehicle in New Hampshire. 5,313 ofthe individuals who registered to vote on November 8, 2016 using an out-of-state driver's license, 81.2%, neither held a New Hampshire driver's license nor had registered a motor vehicle in New Hampshire as of August 31, 2017. It is likely that some unknown number of these individuals moved out of New Hampshire, it is possible that a few may have never driven in New Hampshire or have ceased driving, however, it is expected that an unknown Page 2 of 5 17-2361-A-002290 number ofthe remainder continue to live and drive in New Hampshire. If they have established their residence in New Hampshire,they may have failed to obtain a New Hampshire driver's license. However, under the Supreme Court's 2015 Guare decision, a person may be domiciled in New Hampshire for voting purposes and be a resident of another state for motor vehicle/driver's licensing purposes. The legislature has defined "residence" differently from "domicile." "Residence" is "a person's place of abode or domicile," and the phrase "place of abode or domicile" is defined as "that [place] designated by a person as his principal place of physical presence for the indefinite future to the exclusion of all others." RSA 21:6-a. Pursuant to RSA 21:6, a" resident" is "a person who is domiciled or has a place of abode or both in this state ..., and who has, through all of his actions, demonstrated a current intent to designate that place of abode as his principal place of physical presence for the indefinite future to the exclusion of all others." Our motor vehicle laws use this definition of "resident." See RSA 259:88 (2014). Upon becoming a "resident" of New Hampshire, one has 60 days in which to register one's vehicle here and to obtain a New Hampshire driver's license. See RSA 261:45 (2014); RSA 263:35 (2014). These requirements do not apply to citizens who are not "residents" of New Hampshire although they have their "domicile" here. The basic difference between a "resident" and a person who merely has a New Hampshire "domicile," is that a "resident" has manifested an intent to remain in New Hampshire for the indefinite future, while a person who merely has a New Hampshire "domicile" has not manifested that same intent. Annemarie Guare & a v. State ofNew Hampshire, 167 N.H.658,662(N.H. 2015). If additional education or enforcement regarding these rights and obligations were authorized, are there particular regions of the state or demographic groups where such efforts would be most beneficial? Limited demographic information is currently available from the match system. We will provide additional information if it can be derived from the system. Local election officials make a substantial effort to keep checklists current. The law provides that a letter be sent to the voter in a case where credible information is received that indicates a registered voter no longer resides at the address provided when the individual last registered or updated his or her address. These are referred to as "30 day letters" because the voter has a minimum of 30 days to respond confirming that he or she continues to be domiciled at the address in their voter record. If the individual does not confirm their address, the individual is removed from the checklist. ha 2016 11,942, thirty-day letters were prepared using the statewide voter registration database. As of December 31,2016, 11,320 ofthose voters had been removed Page 3 of 5 17-2361-A-002291 from town/city checklists. The remaining 622 either were verified as still domiciled in the town or city or remained under review into 2017. Secretary of State: Interstate Crosscheck Program The 2016 Legislature enabled the Secretary of State to enter into the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program to check for matches of voter records in other states. Work is progressing on data matches received from 27 other states. We are further analyzing 196 names that appear to have been marked on a New Hampshire checklist and one other state as having voted in the November 2016 General Election. We have begun verifying that information with other states, but this process is quite involved. We will be working with the Attorney General to determine next steps and to transfer those cases which are appropriate to the Attorney General for investigation. Challenged Voter Affidavits, Qualified Voter Affidavits, and Domicile Affidavits - Followup The following is an update regarding follow-up letters sent to voters who signed Challenged Voter Affidavits in order to vote and Qualified Voter Affidavits and Domicile Affidavits in order to register to vote in elections occurring between May 9, 2016 and December 31, 2016.(RSA 654:12 and RSA 659:13.) On January 9, 2017 and subsequently on April 20,2017 (for those who had moved to new addresses identified by the U.S, Postal Service (the "U.S.P.S.")), the Secretary of State sent 1,423 letters to voters who signed challenged voter affidavits("CVAs") between May 9, 2016 and December 31, 2016 in order to vote (in the 2016 State Primary and General Election). Pursuant to RSA 659:13 (revised in 2016), the Secretary of State was required to "revise the list based on input solicited from the supervisors of the checklist" and "...forward the revised list of names to the Attorney General." Accordingly, the Secretary of State has reported to the Attorney General that there were a total of 129 voters(71 with no response and 58 envelopes returned as not delivered by the U.S. P.S.) who: a) b) c) had signed a CVA between May 9, 2016 and December 31, 2016, had not returned a signed post card, and could not be verified by election officials. Please find attached a copy of our May 24, 2017 letter to the Attorney General with the outcome of the new protocol to follow up on Challenged Voter Affidavits. On January 9, 2016, the Secretary of State sent letters to 764 persons who had signed qualified voter affidavits for identity purposes in order to register to vote between May 9, 2016 and December 31, 2016. Among these, 377 were delivered to the address but the voter did not return Page 4 of 5 17-2361-A-002292 a postcard, and 63 letters were returned by the U.S.P.S. as not delivered to the address provided on the voter registration form. The U.S.P.S. may have placed a forwarding address on the returned envelope. In compliance with RSA 654:12, (a) no follow-up letter was sent to any forwarding address that may have been provided by the U.S.P.S., and (b) no further input was solicited from local election officials. On January 10, 2017, the Secretary of State sent letters to 6,033 persons who had signed domicile affidavits in order to register to vote between May 9, 2016 and December 31, 2016. Among these, 458 letters were returned by the U.S.P.S. as not delivered to the address provided on the voter registration form. The U.S. P.S. may have placed a forwarding address on the returned envelope. In compliance with RSA 654:12, a) b) no follow-up letter was sent to any forwarding address that may have been provided by the U.S.P.S., and no further input was solicited from local election officials. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this response. Sincerely yours, Pwt William M. Gardner Secretary of State eftladlio-0 Barthelmes J commissioner, Department of Safety End: May 24, 2017 Letter to the Attorney General's Office Cc: Governor Chris Sununu Senate President Charles W. Morse Senator Regina Birdsell, Chair, Senate Election Law and Internal Affairs Committee Representative Barbara Griffin, Chair, House Election Law Committee Page 5 of 5 17-2361-A-002293 NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF STATE Robert P. Ambrose Senior Deputy Secretary ofState William M. Gardner Secretary ofState David M. Scanlan Deputy Secretary ofState Anthony B.S. Stevens Assistant Secretary ofState May 24, 2017 Brian W.Buonamano, Assistant Attorney General Department of Justice 33 Capitol St. Concord, NH 03301 Re: Challenged Voter Affidavits Dear Brian: This report reflects the current status of the follow-up letters and returned post cards with respect to those individuals who signed challenged voter affidavits("CVAs")in order to vote in the elections occurring between May 9, 2016 and December 31, 2016. Pursuant to RSA 659:13, we have sent follow-up letters to 1,423 individuals who were recorded as signing challenged voter affidavits in order to vote in the elections occurring between May 9, 2016 and December 31, 2016. The deadline for individuals to return post cards in response to the initial follow-up letter was February 8, 2017. Among these follow-up letters, 107 letters were initially returned (not delivered) by the U.S. Postal Service. The U.S.P.S. stamped "TEMPORARILY AWAY"or provided forwarding or corrected addresses on many of these returned envelopes. On April 17, 2017, we re-sent 53 follow-up letters to those individuals whom the U.S.P.S. indicated were "TEMPORARILY AWAY"or provided forwarding or corrected addresses, instructing recipients to return a post card no later than May 20, 2017. As a result, we are left with a net amount of 58 returned (not delivered) by the U.S.P.S. letters following the second mailing. We have enclosed those 58 envelopes. Pursuant to RSA 659:13, the Secretary of State "shall revise the list based on input solicited from the supervisors of the checklist." Accordingly, the Secretary of State's office contacted local supervisors ofthe checklist to follow up on those voters who had not returned post cards. State House Room 204,107 N. Main St., Concord, NH 03301 Phone:603-271-8238 Fax:603-271-8242 TDD Access: Relay NH 1-800-735-2964 www.sos.nh.g9v email: NHVotes@sos.nh.gov 17-2361-A-002294 As a result, we present the following breakdown that is reflected in the attached spreadsheet: Envelope returned (not delivered) by USPS 58 No response 71 Post card returned by individuals 978 Sent in error 5 Verified by election officials 311 Total CVA follow-up letters sent 1,423 In response to the above mailings, individuals signed and returned 978 post cards, leaving a total of 129 voters(71 with no response and 58 envelopes returned (not delivered) by the USPS)who: (a) had signed a CVA between May 9, 2016 and December 31, 2016, (b)had not returned a signed post card, and (c) could not be verified by election officials. With the emailed version of this letter, we are attaching a spreadsheet with information on voters who signed challenged voter affidavits in the elections occurring between May 9,2016 and December 31, 2016. The two yellow highlighted columns include the 129 voters that could not be verified. As and when further pertinent mail is received by our office, we will send it to you for your tracking purposes. Sincerely yours, Anthony B.S. Stevens Assistant Secretary of State encl: a. January 9, 2017 letter to individuals who signed challenged voter affidavits b. April 17, 2017 letter re-sent to individuals who signed challenged voter affidavits c. 58 challenged voter affidavit follow-up letters returned by the U.S. Postal Service d. Spreadsheet reflecting all challenged voter affidavits (sent only as email attachment) signed May 9, 2016— Dec. 31, 2016 cc: Anne M. Edwards, Department of Justice David M.Scanlan, Deputy Secretary of State State House Room 204, 107 N. Main St., Concord, NH 03301 Phone: 603-271-8238 Fax: 603-271-8242 TDD Access: Relay NH 1-800-735-2964 www.sos.nh.gov NHVotes@sos.nh.gov 17-2361-A-002295 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE House of Representatives 107 North Main Street Concord, NH 033014888 SHAWN N. JASPER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE August 16,2017 William M, Gardner Secretary of State State of New Hampshire Commissioner John Barthelmes Department of Safety State of New Hampshire Dear Secretary Gardner and Commissioner BantleImes: Please provide the General Court with any available statistical information on the findings of your efforts to insure the accuracy and validity of New Hampshire's voter checklists through matching records of registered voters with the records of the Department of Safety. RSA 654:45, IV (h)authorized,and it is my understanding the Departments ofState and Safety have initiated, a system for matching records for the purpose of"verifying the accuracy of the information contained in the voter database," This statute provides that The commissioner of safety may authorize the release of information from motor vehicle registration and driver's license records to the extent that the information is necessary to department of state and department ofsafety cooperation in a joint notification to individuals of apparent discrepancies in their records and to the extent that the information is necessary to resolve those discrepancies." Statistical information on your current findings as a result of this work will assist the Legislature in assessing the current election laws and any hills proposing to change those laws in the upcoming session. understand that these efforts to match records are required by the federal Help America Vote Act as part ofa requirement that states act to keep voter checklists accurate and identify those who fraudulently register to vote, is this system of verification effective? At any given election, what percentage of newly-registered voters have a record with discrepancies between their voting and motor vehicle/driver's license records? Does the matching process generate cases that require additional follow-up? Concerns have been raised with whether the current laws governing voter registration, vehicle registration, and driver licensing are effective at addressing an increasingly mobile population. As people `TOD Access: RELAY1 3111:3,4101.10NE5s60.S? Z73-3083 17-2361-A-002296 (2) move into New Hampshire,out of New Hampshire„ and between different towns and cities in New Hampshire, how effective are our laws at insuring voter registration, vehicle registration, and driver licensing is kept current? Do individuals who register a vehicle or obtain a driver's license also register to vote? Do those who register to vote in New Hampshire also obtain a driver's license or register a vehicle in New Hampshire? If additional education or enforcement regarding these rights and obligations were authorized,are there particular regions ofthe state or demographic groups where such efforts would be most beneficial? This request is only for statistical information; this request does not seek identification of or information on any particular individuals. Thank you for your assistance. Sincereiy, Shawn N. tasper Speaker of the House cc: Senate President Charles W. Morse Sen. Regina Birdsell, Chair,Senate Election Law and Internal Affairs Committee Rep. Barbara Griffin, Chair, House Election Law Committee 17-2361-A-002297 Message From: on behalf of Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans [/0=THF/OU=THFDC/cn=Recipients/cn=spakoskyh] von Spakovsky, Hans 6/29/2017 7:24:13 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] here is the GAO report I mentioned - see page 43 for information on noncitizens excused from federal jury duty http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05478.pdf but this is a good report to refer to. 17-2361-A-002298 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov] 7/19/2017 11:49:57 AM Kris Kobach Great job on fox Mark Paol etta counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734 (work) Sent from my iPhone 17-2361-A-002299 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kopan, Tal 9/18/2017 6:36:01 PM Kris Kobach Hans von Spakovsky Hey there, I spoke with Matt Dunlap from the Voter Integrity Commission who says he thinks it would be best if Hans von Spakovsky resigned after the email became public of him demanding the commission not include Democrats. That or at least apologize. Do you have any response? Thanks! Tal Tal Kopan Political Reporter I CNNPolitics.corn =I Twitter: @talkopan 17-2361-A-002300 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP; Aaen, Jarrod P. EOP/OVP - Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP hans Friday, June 30, 2017 11:50:57 AM Hans is willing to do press and Kris would like him to. His number is MARK R.PAOLETTA Counsel to the Vice President 202 456 2734(work) Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov 17-2361-A-002301 Message From: on behalf of Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans [/0=THF/OU=THFDC/cn=Recipients/cn=spakoskyh] von Spakovsky, Hans 6/29/2017 3:22:20 PM 'Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] here is the best practices booklet on accurate voter rolls https://publicinterestlegal.orafiles/PILF-best-practices-report-FINAL.pdf 17-2361-A-002302 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans [Hans.VonSpakovsky@heritage.org] 6/29/2017 7:24:14 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [/o=Exchange Organization/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=39ff6c312e514f0fac9dd16139907782-Ko] here is the GAO report I mentioned - see page 43 for information on noncitizens excused from federal jury duty http://www.gao.govinew.items/d05478.pdf but this is a good report to refer to. Hans von Spakovsky Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and Senior Legal Fellow Institutefor Constitutional Government The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington,DC 20002 202-608-6207 heritage.org 17-2361-A-002303 Message From: Sent: To: von Spakovsky, Hans [Hans.VonSpakovsky@heritage.org] 6/29/2017 3:41:09 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [/o=Exchange Organization/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=39ff6c312e514f0fac9dd16139907782-Ko] Subject: here is the paper on automatic voter registration Attachments: Heritage-Universal Voter Registration.pdf See pages 2-3 for discussion of the Census surveys on nonvoters. Hans von Spakovsky Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and Senior Legal Fellow Institutefor Constitutional Government The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington,DC 20002 202-608-6207 heritage.org 17-2361-A-002304 11 1 (The Heritage Foundation LEADERSHIP FOR AMERICA BACKGROUNDER No.2780 I MARCH 27,2018 Mandatory Voter Registration: How Universal Registration Threatens Electoral Integrity HansA. von Spakovsky Abstract There is no question thatthe U.S. voterregistrationsystem could beimproved.However, the answer to America's voter registrationproblems is notfederal mandates orfederalinterference in election administration.Indeed,thefederalgovernment has almostno experience administering elections;states administerelections in the laboratories ofdemocracy.As a resultofthis exercise infederalism,states are implementing numerousimprovements to the voter registration system—and they are doing it atless cost to our treasury, our Constitution, and the integrity ofour elections than mandatory universalregistration. It has been said that for every complex problem there is a solution that is clear, simple,and wrong. Washington soon may seek a complex solution— preemption of states' responsibility; federal micromanagement of elections; eventual coercion of lackadaisical citizens—to the nonproblem of people choosing not to vote. —George F. Will' Mandatory voter registration(MVR),previously termed "universal" registration, could significantly damage the integrity of America's voter registration system. The "voter registration modernization"2 concept of automatically registering individuals through information contained in various existing government databases would throw the current system into chaos. Specifically, voter registration modernization could result in the registration of large numbers of ineligible voters as well as multiple or duplicate registrations of the same individuals. When combined with the accompanying proposal that states allow any individuals who are not automatically This paper, in its entirety, can be found at http://reportheritage.org/bg2780 Produced by the Edwin Meese Ill Center for Legal and Judicial Studies The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 (202)546-4400 I heritage.org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress. KEY POINTS •Mandatory voter registration(previously termed "universal" registration)could significantly damage the integrity of America's voter registration system. •Census Bureau reports demonstratethatthe major reason individualsfailed to register was thatthey were not"interested in the election/not involved in politics," not because they were disenfranchised. •Electoral reforms—such aseasing voter registration through motor-voter legislation,same-day registration,or uncoupling registration from jury duty—have had at besta negligible net effecton voter participation. •It is rather ironic that many of thesame organizations pushing to register individuals automaticallyfrom governmentdatabases oppose states'attemptsto verify the accuracy of the information provided by individuals registering to vote by comparingto thosesame databases. •States are implementing numerous improvements in their voter registration systemsand at less costto our treasury,our Constitution,and the integrity of our electionsthan mandatory universal registration. 17-2361-A-002305 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 registered to register and vote on Election Day,MVR presents a sure formula for registration and voter fraud that could damage the integrity of elections. Automatically registering individuals to vote without their permission would also violate their basic rightto choose whether they wish to participate in the U.S. political process. Indeed,this new scheme threatens one ofAmerican's most cherished liberties: the freedom to be left alone by the government. A "Solution"in Search of a Problem Lack of registration is not the reason people do not vote. Ideological organizations such as FairVote and the Brennan Center for Justice are proposing that states automatically register all individuals to vote using existing government databases. Such proposals are based on the false premise that large numbers ofAmericans do not vote "for no Proposals that states automatically register all individuals to vote using "existing government databases" are based on the false premise that large numbers ofAmericans do not vote "for no other reason than they are not registered to vote." other reason than they are not registered to vote." Yet after every federal election, the U.S. Census Bureau publishes reports on the levels of registration and voting, including surveys of individuals who do not vote, that disprove the claims that the major reason individuals do not vote is a lack of registration opportunities.4 For example, of the 146 million people who the Census Bureau reported were registered to vote in 2008,15 million(10 percent) did not vote. Of those who did not vote, only 6 percent cited registration problems as the reason for not participating. Rather, the vast majority of these registered but nonvoters said they did not vote for reasons ranging from forgetting to vote to not liking the candidates or the campaign issues or simply not being interested. With regard to those individuals who are not registered to vote,the Census Bureau's 2008 report demonstrates that the major reason individuals failed to register was that they were not"interested in the election/not involved in politics." That represented 46 percent of the individuals in the Census Bureau's survey. Another 35 percent of individuals did not register for a variety of reasons such as not being eligible to vote,thinking their vote would not make a difference, not meeting residency requirements,or difficulty with English. Thinking that their vote would not make a difference is quite true in some cases even if the rest of us enjoy and encourage civic participation for its own sake:"[E]ven a smart and hardworking person can rationally decide not to pay much attention to politics. No matter how well-informed a person is, his or her vote has only a tiny chance of affecting the outcome of an election."5 Only 4 percent of individuals reported not registering to vote because they did "not know where or how to register." This may be true, or it could be a convenient excuse for many who are too embarrassed to tell a pollster the truth given how easy it is to register by mail,at the many locations where registration is available such as libraries and numerous government offices and agencies,or(in many states) by using the Internet. 1. George F. Will, Mandatory Voting: Is This the Obama Administration's Goal? INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY, DEc.18, 2012,available at http://news. investors.com/ibd-ed itorials-on-t he-righ t/121812-637540-no-evidence-autornatic-voter-registration-needed.htm?p=fu II. 2. The Brennan Center's first paper on this concept in 2008 was entitled "Universal Voter Registration." In 2009,the Center issued an almost identical paper in which the title had been changed to "Voter Registration Modernization." Apparently,"modernization" was believed to be a better term than "universal" for advocacy on this issue. The latest reissue of this paper,"The Case for Voter Registration Modernization," appeared in 2013 and keeps the modernization language. 3. Fa irVote, 7 Ways to Universal Voter Registration, http://www.fairvote.org/7-ways-to-universal-voter-registration. 4. U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, VOTING AND REGISTRATION IN THE ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 2008,TABLE 6(2012),available atHrrP://www.cENsus.aOv/ PRo0/2010Pues/P20-562.PDF.Since this is a survey of registration and turnout as reported by voters, it may vary from actual registration and turnout reported by state election officials. 5. Ilya Somin, Are American Voters Stupid? Maybe Not, SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST, SEPT. 27, 2004,available at HTTP://WWW.CATO.ORG/ PUBLICATIONS/COMMENTARY/ARE-AMERICAN-VOTERS-STUP10-MAYBE-NOT. 17-2361-A-002306 2 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 The Census Bureau's 2010 report indicates simi- impact." For example, the percentage of voters with lar results.6 Only 3.3 percent ofindividuals reported a familyincome of$100,000 to $149,000 who did not not voting because of supposed registration difficul- vote because ofpurported registration problems was ties. Given the tendency of many people not to take 3.5 percent; the percentage of those with an income responsibility for their own failings or perceived of$15,000 to $19,999 who claimed registration probfailings, the actual number of people who did not lems was only 1.9 percent; and the percentage of votvote because of registration difficulties may be even ers with an income of $10,000 to $14,999 who supsmaller. The overwhelming majority of those who posedly had registration problems was 2.8 percent, did not vote said they were not interested (16 per- just slightly more than the 2.6 percent reported by cent); were too busy (27 percent); forgot to vote (8 individuals making more than $150,000. percent);did not like the candidates or the campaign issues(9 percent);or had various other reasons? Registration problems do not disproportion- The claim that"the single greatest ately affect minorities and low-income citizens. cause ofvoting problems in the United Among the tiny percentage of voters who said they did not vote because of "registration problems," States" is the voter registration there was also almost no racial differential. For system is false. The greatest causes instance,the percentage of whites who claimed they ofindividuals notregistering and did not vote because of a registration problem was not voting are their lack ofinterest 3.2 percent, compared to 3.3 percent of blacks and in politics and candidates and other only 2.8 percentof Hispanics. There is little evidence to support the oft-repeat- reasons that have nothing whatsoever ed assertion that"voter-initiated registration" has a to do with registration or lack of "disproportionate impact on low-income citizens and registration. those who are less educated."8 In fact, the Census surveys show otherwise. For example, in 2008, the percentage of registered voters who did not vote Thus,according to the federal government's own because of "registration problems" was 6 percent; surveys,the claim that"the single greatest cause of among voters with a bachelor's degree or more, the voting problems in the United States"9 is the voter percentage was 7.4 percent compared to only 3.2 registration system is false. The greatest causes of percent for those with an educational attainment of individuals not registering and not voting are their "less than high school graduate." Furthermore,those lack of interest in politics and candidates and other attaining "high school graduate or GED" had a rate reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with of 5.8 percent. registration or lack of registration. The Census survey,in other words, actually demExperience with the National Voter onstrated that less-educated voters had fewer regis- Registration Act of 1993 shows that voter regtration problems. The 2010 survey reported similar istration is not a barrier to voting. The push to results for those who did not vote due to registration pass the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) problems: less than high school, 2.5 percent; high of 1993 was based on the same, similarly flawed school graduate, 2.6 percent; bachelor's degree or premise; that voter registration is a barrier to voting. more,4.3 percent. Before its implementation,"many researchers were With regard to income, the 2010 Census survey optimistic about NVRA's projected impact on voter demonstrated no discernible "disproportionate turnout"; but while the act "did lead to millions of 6. U.S. Census Bureau, VOTING AND REGISTRATION IN THE ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 2010—DETAILED TABLES(OcT. 2011), http://www.census.gov/hhes/ w.r.v/socdemo/voting/pubIications/p20/2010/tables.html. 7. Id. at Table 10. 8. WENDY WEISER ET AL, BRENNAN CTR. FOR JUSTICE, VOTER REGISTRATION MODERNIZATION(2009),available at http://www.brennancenter.org/ pagek/publications/VRM.Proposal.2008.pdf. 9. Id. ati. 17-2361-A-002307 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 new registered voters," it apparently made "no significant change in voter turnout."10 In other words, the NVRA only led to an increase in the number of registered voters who do not vote. Other researchers point out that overall registration levels have not increased substantially since passage of the NVRA. The Census Bureau's 2008 report shows that the reported voter registration rate in 1996—three years after the NVRA became law—was 70.9 percent. The reported registration rate in 2008 was 71 percent—an increase of only one-tenth of 1 percent after the NVRA had been in effect for 15 years." In 2008, the highest level of turnout according to the Census Bureau was among non-IIispanic Whites (66 percent) and blacks (65 percent);turnoutamong Asians was48 percent,and turnout among Hispanics was 50 percent.12 The experience with the NVRA shows the basic flaw in the underlying assumptions that led to its passage: that registration "barriers" were somehow the reason for the claimed decline in voter turnout. Research shows"that the motivation to vote is especially internal: people register because they plan to vote. Therefore people who are registered are very likely to vote. However,people who have no interest in voting do not register to vote."13 One detailed study of nonvoters concluded that it is "[a]nother misconception about nonvoters...that they would vote if only the [registration] process was easier.' The study concluded that the reason people do not vote is because for many ofthem,"voting is neither duty nor ritual." They are not interested in politics, or are cynical about its outcomes, or do not believe their votes will make a difference (public choice scholarship confirms that such cynicism is often well-founded). In other words, there are "competing strains of alienation and complacency" among the ranks of nonvoters.15 Consequently,electoral reforms—"such as easing voter registration through motor-voter legislation, same-day registration, or uncoupling registration from jury duty—have had, at best, a negligible net effect on voter participation."16 Those with greater faith in government's efficiency and efficacy may be more optimistic about its ability to have a positive impact on American's lives. In the long run, however,that faith may do more to undermine civic virtue than a healthy cynicism about government bureaucracy. MVWs Numerous Practical Problems Various recommendations made for a federally imposed,national mandate would require states and local governments to: I Use existing state and federal government databases to automatically (and permanently) register all citizens to vote. • Create an overriding policy to ensure that voters left off the rolls can register and vote on Election Day. • Require U.S. citizens to register to vote when completing taxes or actively opt out of the process. • Tie Post Office change-of-address forms to the voter registration database. • Require state or local governments to send every residence a notice of those registered at that location; residents could then make changes as needed and return the updated form. • Provide every U.S. citizen upon birth or naturalization a voter registration number similar to a Social Security number, to be used in all elections and activated when a voter turns 18.17 10. Jason Marisarn, Voter Turnout: From Cost to Cooperation, 21 Sr. THOMAS L.R.190,202-03(2008). 11. U.S. CENSUS BUREAU,supra note 4,at Table 1. 12. /d. at Table 2. 13. Randall D. Lloyd, Motor Voter: A Dismal Failure, NEVADA JOURNAL (Feb.1999),available at http://nj.nprIorg/nj99/02/vote.htrn. 14. JACK C. DOPPELT & ELLEN SHEARER, NONVOTERS: AMERICA'S NO-SHOWS 214(1999). 15. Id. at 220. 16. Id. at 219. 17. FairVote,supra note 3;see also WEISER, supra note 8. 17-2361-A-002308 4 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 Some of the groundwork for these proposals and claimed that one of the "biggest barriers to voting federalization of the voter registration process was in the country today is our antiquated registration laid at aSenate Rules Committee hearing by Senator system."22 The Brennan Center's 2008 proposal Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) on March 11, 2009." was relaunched in January 2013 when the Brennan Senator Schumer advocated overhauling America's Center issued another report on "voter registravoter registration system in favor of the "Voter tion modernization," and on January 23, 2013, Registration Modernization" proposal from the Representative John Lewis(D-GA)introduced the Brennan Center." This proposal shifts the respon- Voter Empowerment Act(VEA).22 sibility of voter registration from the individual to These mandates involve numerous practical difthe government, leading to the erosion of distinc- ficulties. The most common proposal—for states to tions between state and federal responsibilities in use existing government databases"to build"24 their election management and the responsibility of indi- voter rolls—presents several immediate problems. viduals to take the steps required to participate in _First, many government databases may lack a the election process. signature, which is required for voter registration The push for mandatory voter registration has and essential for verifying both petitions for canaccelerated recently. In December 2012, a month didates and ballot initiatives, as well as requests for after the November election, the leaders of more absentee ballots and voted absentee ballots that are than three dozen liberal advocacy groups met in received by election officials. Washington for an off-the-record meeting (though covered by Mother Jones in some detail) to plan strategy on election-related issues. One of the top As an enormous unfunded mandate three goals was mandating "voter registration modon the states,these proposals would ernization" and same-day voter registration; at the prove costly: a diversion oflimited same time, one of the other goals agreed on was to oppose any efforts to improve election integrity government resources for little to through voter identification and proof-of-citizenno appreciable increase in voter ship requirements.2° At a speech in Boston on December 11, 2012, participation rates. Attorney General Eric Holder voiced the Obama Administration's support for automatic registration." The head of the Justice Department's Civil Second, using government databases such as Rights Division, Thomas Perez, said on November "motor vehicle departments, income tax authori16, 2012,that"all eligible citizens can and should be ties, and social service agencies," as recommended automatically registered to vote" based on compil- by the Brennan Center, would fail to differentiate ing "from databases that already exist." Perez also citizens from non-citizens. All states, for example, 18. Voter Registration: Assessing Current Problems: Hearing Before the S. Comm.on Rules & Admin.,112th Cong.(2009)(statement of Sen. Schumer, Chairman, S. Comm.on Rules & Admin.), available at http://Www.rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=CommitteeHearings&ContentReco rd_id.c33b5ae8-aee8-4130-85db-a256ce6169f6&Statement_id=f96f308a-48ab-4f47-affa-969a8e28aac3&ContentType_id=14f995b9dfa5-407a-9d35-56cc7152a7ed&Grouojd=1983a2a8-4fc3-4062-a50e-7997351c154b&MonthDisplay=3&YearDisplay=2009. 19. WENDY WEISER ET AL, BRENNAN CTR. FOR JUSTICE, UNIVERSAL VOTER REGISTRATION (2008), available at http://brennan.3cdn. net/9bdO5fbb9675fc4cc8_lom6bnevg.pdf; Weiser,supra note 8. 20. Andy Kroll, Revealed: The Massive New Liberal Plan to Remake American Politics, MOTHER JONES(JAN.9, 2013), http://www.motherjones.com/ politics/2013/01/democracy-initiative-campaign-finance-filibuster-sierra-club-greenpeace-naacp. 21. Scott Malone & David Ingram, U.S. Should Automatically Register Voters: Attorney General, REUTERS(DEC. 12, 2012), http://www.reuters.com/ article/2012/12/12/us-usa-vote-holder-1dUSBRE8BA1EN20121212. 22. Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Address at the George Washington University Law School Symposium (Nov. 16, 2012), available at http://www.justice.gov/crt/opa/pr/speeches/2012/crt-speech-121116.html. 23. H.R. 12 is also cosponsored by Reps. Steny Hoyer(D-MD), James Clyburn(D-SC),John Conyers(D-MI), and Robert Brady(D-PA). 24. WEISER,supra note 8 at 8. 17-2361-A-002309 5 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 provide driver's licenses to aliens who are legally in the United States, and several states provide driver's licenses to illegal aliens. Many individuals who reside in the United States but are not citizens also file tax returns, which would allow individuals who filed with "income tax authorities" the ability to register to vote. It would also lead to duplicate and multiple registrations of individuals listed on different government databases,such as individuals who own property or pay taxes in more than one state. Third, as an enormous unfunded mandate on the states, these proposals would prove costly: a diversion of limited government resources for little to no appreciable increase in voter participation rates. In addition to DMV,social service, and income tax agencies, the VEA would require automatic registration of individuals from state agencies that pro- of Defense, and the Indian Health Services and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services of the Department of Health and Human Services. No transaction with any such agency could be completed "until the individual has indicated whether he or she wishes to register to vote." Every time an individual applied for services or assistance, and "with each recertification,renewal,or change of address relating to such services or assistance," the agency would have to ask the individual about registering to vote and could not provide any requested service or assistance until the registration issue had been addressed.25 Proponents of mandatory registration from government databases oppose even limited use of such databases to maintain accurate voter rolls. It is rather ironic that many of the organizations pushing for automatic registration of individuals based on government databases oppose states' attempts to verify the citizenship, identity, State registration lists are and accuracy of the information provided by inditransparent such lists are available to viduals registering to vote by comparing them to candidates,political parties,and the other government databases.m In 2007, for exampublic—butfederal databases lack such ple, the Brennan Center, along with the National transparency,and election officials and Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the Advancement Project, the public therefore cannot verify the sued Florida for running database comparisons accuracy ofsuch lists. on registered voters' information with "the state driver's license database or the Social Security Administration's database."27 In a related press vide benefits under Title III of the Social Security release, the Brennan Center complained about Act, that maintain records on students enrolled at "common database errors" and opposed matching secondary schools, that are responsible for admin- as an error-laden practice.' istering criminal convictions, or that determine Furthermore, in 2006,the Brennan Center and mental competence. Additionally, automatic regis- other so-called civil rights organizations sued the tration would be required from the federal offices state of Washington, claiming that attempting to of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement match voter registration information with other Bureau, the Social Security Administration, the government databases violated the Voting Rights Federal Bureau of Prisons, the U.S. Probation Act and the U.S. Constitution and would disenfranService, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the chise voters.29 In fact, the Brennan Center issued a Defense Manpower Data Center of the Department report in 2006 complaining about the supposedly 25. Voter Empowerment Act of 2013. H.R.12, 113th Cong., §111(2013). 26. See, e.g., Arcia v. Detzner, F.Supp.2d. --, 2012 WL 6212564(S.D. Fla. 2012). 27. Florida State Conference of NAACP v. Browning,522 F.3d 1153,1155(11th Cir. 2008). 28. Press Release, BerlinRosen Public Affairs, Voting Rights Advocates Challenge Florida Registration Law in Federal Court(Sept. 17, 2007). 29. Washington Ass'n of Churches v. Reed,492 F.Supp.2d 1264(W.D. Wash. 2006). 17-2361-A-002310 6 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 "wide variety of common database matching errors" Even worse, in 2012, a number of civil rights caused by "data entry" mistakes.3° Yet the Center organizations and the Department of Justice sued now wants to use those same supposedly inaccurate Florida in an unsuccessful attemptto stop the state's databases to register voters automatically. verification of citizenship status through database As Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler comparisons.32 Florida had to sue the federal govpointed out during a January 2013 discussion at ernment to get access to Department of Homeland The Heritage Foundation, there is no question that Security (DHS) immigration databases to which there are inaccuracies in state voter registration it is entitled under federal immigration law to get rolls. However, federal databases are also riddled citizenship information. DHS has also fought states with errors that may eclipse inconsistencies at the through administrative measures, such as using state level. It is important to note thatstate registra- bureaucratic red tape to prevent states from accesstion lists are transparent—such lists are available ing its own databases—something Secretary Gessler to candidates, political parties, and the public— but experienced firsthand in Colorado. federal databases lack such transparency, and elecAs the trail oflitigation makes clear,these organition officials and the public therefore cannot verify zations would fight any implementation of an autothe accuracy ofsuch lists. matic registration program that would allow states Gessler has witnessed many inaccuracies in first to compare the information in one database Social Security Administration information as well with the information in other state and federal dataas the National Change ofAddress(NCOA)database bases to ensure that the information is accurate and that only eligible individuals are being registered. used by the U.S. Postal Service. For example, the MVR makes maintenance of existing regisNCOA reports a move only if an individual informs tration lists even more difficult. The VEA introthe Postal Service of a move.Errors can also occur if the NCOA database classifies everyone at a particu- duced by Representative Lewis would make it diflar address as having moved when only one person ficult—even more so than it already is—for states in the household has moved. Gessler believes these to maintain accurate voter registration lists. For federal databases are valuable when they are being example, the legislation would amend the NVRA used by states to check the information contained in to prevent states from requiring further documenstate voter registration lists, since any discrepancy tation of new registrants—documentation, such as can be researched and corrections made,but to use proof of citizenship, that might be needed to deterfederal information to automatically register indi- mine eligibility. Section 104 of the bill requires viduals to vote would be to court disaster. states to register anyone who has provided the state The Brennan Center says that many of these gov- with a "valid voter registration form" that has been ernment databases"already include all the informa- "completed" and "attested" by the applicant. The bill tion necessary to determine voter eligibility, and also prohibits the "transfer" of information from those that do not can easily be modified to include "the computerized Statewide voter registration list that information."31 However, as just one example, to any source agency."33 Election officials would not many of these databases do not contain citizen- even be allowed to retain the "identity ofthe specific ship information—a basic requirement for eligi- source agency through which an individual consentbility to vote. Organizations such as the Brennan ed to register to vote" after the individual is added to Center have opposed states requiring proof of citi- the statewide voter registration list.34 zenship from registrants that would provide "that Consequently, if election officials later deterinformation." mined that registration information was inaccurate 30. JUSTIN LEVITT ET AL., BRENNAN CTR. FOR JUSTICE, MAKING THE LIST: DATABASE MATCHING AND VERIFICATION PROCESSES FOR VOTER REGISTRATION (MAY 24, 2006),available at http://brennan.3cdn.net/96ee05284dfb6a6d5dJ4m6b1cjs.pdf. 31. WEISER,supra note 8. 32. United States v. Florida,870 F.Supp.2d 1346(N.D. Fla. June 28,2012); Arcio, 2012 WL 6212564. 33. Voter Empowerment Act of 2013 §112(b)(3). 34. Id.§ 112(d). 17-2361-A-002311 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 or even fraudulent, they would be unable to notify whatever state orftderal agency provided them with information on that registrant, making it impossible for the source agencies to investigate possible fraud in the state and federal programs they are responsible for administering. Lewis's bill would even give noncitizens a get-out-of-jail-free card: It provides that any ineligible individual who becomes registered to vote "shall not be subject to any penalty" for registering "including the imposition of a fine or term of imprisonment, adverse treatment in any immigration or naturalization proceeding, or the denial of any status under immigration laws."35 In fact,government officials would be prohibited from using "the information received by" election officials"to attemptto determine the citizenship status of any individual for immigration enforcement."35 The Lewis bill also prohibits comparison ofvoter registration information "with any existing commercial list or database" at the risk ofimprisonment for not more than one year and subject to fines.57 Many commercial databases are more accurate than government databases. There is no reason for such a prohibition—let alone such criminal penalties— other than to remove a valuable tool that could otherwise be used by state officials to deter fraud. Supporters of a federal mandate for automatic and same-day registration rarely, if ever, mention that Canada has had such a system in place since 1997. This registration system is administered by Elections Canada, which is responsible for conducting all federal elections and referenda. The United States, for a number of good reasons, has no such equivalent federal agency, but one is particularly relevant to the current registration debate: America's system of dual sovereignty is constitutionally guaranteed, and elections traditionally have been administered by the states. Canadians are automatically registered from a host of government databases similar to those proposed in the VEA, including the Canada Revenue Agency, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, National Defense, provincial and territorial driver's license and vital statistics agencies, and provincial electoral agencies.55(Canadians can also still register and vote on Election Day.) Yet Canada's automatic registration system has had no effect in increasing turnout. Even before the implementation of Canada's new system in 1997, Canadians voted in larger numbers than Americans, but Canada has still seen a steady decline in turnout since the 1970s.39 The reasons that Canadian voters who have been automatically registered by the government give for not voting are similar to justifications given by U.S. voters: 28 percent were not interested; 23 percent were too busy; and the rest said "they were out of town, ill or didn't like any of the candidates."4° Automatic voter registration is no panacea for declining turnout or the unwillingness of individuals to participate in the voting process. Thus, it seems clear that Canada's approach would cause considerable mischief in America's state-administered election system while providing no benefit in terms of voter turnout. MVR raises serious privacy concerns. Requiring individuals who would not register on their own to "opt-out' from registration" if they want "to remain unregistered for whatever reason"'". interferes with the basic right of individuals to decide whether—and to what extent—to participate in the political and democratic process. While society might hope that all citizens will vote, each and every American has the liberty not to do so for whatever reason. Americans who choose not to vote should not have to act every time they make a 35. Id.§ 112(d) and §112(f)(1)(although this section does not "waive the llability of any individual who knowingly provides false information to any person regarding the individual's eligibility"). 36. id.§ 112(0(2). 37. Id.§ 112(j) and (k). 38. See Elections Canada, http://www.elections.ca. 39. Conference Board of Canada, How Canada Performs: Voter Turnout, http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/society/voter-turnout. aspx?pf=true. 40. John I bbitson, The Alarming Decline in Voter Turnout, THE GLOBE & MAIL(Oct. 14,2011), http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/thealarming-decline-in-voter-turnout/article4247507/. 41. WEISER supra note,8 at 9. 17-2361-A-002312 8 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 transaction with a government agency to avoid registration or to remove themselves from a government list that they had no interest in joining in the first place, particularly if it involves investigation of their citizenship,felon status,and other factors that are important to eligibility. Even if individuals can ask to be removed from the registration list after the database information has been transferred to election officials, such automatic registration raises serious privacy concerns. Voter registration lists are public documents that are (and should be) accessible to journalists, candidates, political parties, and individual citizens. In fact, this transparency is an important component of our election process since these lists are often bought by candidates and political parties for the purposes of identifying voters for political campaigns and organizing get-out-the-vote programs for Election Day. In contrast, not only are state governments obligated to keep the information in many types ofother databases maintained by government agencies private, but information on individuals such as police officers, government officials, or victims of domestic violence must be kept confidential. Automatic voter registration could reveal information such as residential addresses, thereby violating the privacy ofindividuals who have registered for various other types ofgovernment benefits. The VEA does require that such information be kept confidential, but that may be very difficultfor election officials to do when they are receiving large amounts of information on hundreds of thousands of individuals from other government databases. The source agencies, which may otherwise be required by law to keep all oftheir client information confidential, may not be aware that certain clients are police officers or victims of domestic violence—individuals with specific privacy requirements. A Slippery Slope:Permanent Registration The Brennan Center and others are also proposing that the federal government require states to institute statewide permanent registration. This requirement would mandate that"once a voter is on the rolls,she would be permanently registered within the state and able to vote without re-registering even if she moved within the state or changed her name."42 Already,the National Voter Registration Act has curtailed states' ability to clean up bloated voter registration rolls by removing ineligible voters who have moved or died. Making registrations permanent would exacerbate this problem. In fact, many states became so fearful of lawsuits by the Justice Department to enforce these NVRA restrictions that they simply stopped maintaining the integrity oftheir voter registration rolls. The U.S. Postal Service's NCOA is supposedly so inaccurate that liberal civil rights organizations have objected to its use by private parties trying to investigate the validity ofvoter registrations. Citizens have a responsibility to inform state election officials when they change their residence or become ineligible to vote for other reasons, such as being convicted of a felony. Notifying election officials of a change of address within a state is especially important because election officials estimate the number of ballots needed ata polling place based on the number ofregistered voters and past turnout. Allowing individuals who are registered elsewhere in a state but who failed to notify election officials of their move to vote at a new precinct would undermine election officials' ability both to estimate how many ballots are needed and to ensure a smooth voting experience without long lines. Indeed, underestimating the number of ballots needed or the number of voters expected at a given precinct makes it more likely thatsome voters will be disenfranchised. Furthermore, the proposal on permanency would require government agencies like state Departments of Motor Vehicles, the Social Security Administration, or the Post Office to provide updated address information to election officials in order to change the registration addresses of registered voters. Again, such a proposal smacks of hypocrisy: The U.S. Postal Service's NCOA is supposedly so inaccurate that liberal civil rights organizations have objected to its use by private parties trying to investigate the validity of voter registrations. 42. WEISER,supra note 8, at 10. 17-2361-A-002313 9 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 "Vote Caging." These groups even have coined a term—"vote caging"—to describe this practice. Specifically, they claim that private parties' use of the U.S. Postal Service's practice of returning nonforwardable mail to challenge the eligibility of voters constitutes voter suppression even if its records show that the individual no longer resides at the registered address.43 Indeed,a number of bills have been sponsored in Congress that would make reliance on the U.S.Postal Service's mail service in this manner a federal offense. Not surprisingly, Section 301 of Representative Lewis's VEA would prohibit such "vote caging." If the NCOA database is so inaccurate, why are some suggesting that it be used to pad the voter rolls? The real problem with such a system is that without a unique identifies; it would be very difficult to match many ofthese records.44The onlysuch unique identifier is a Social Security number. Only a handful of states require that an individual registering to vote provide a Social Security number,and these states, such as Virginia, are allowed to do so only because they were grandfathered into the federal Privacy Act of 1974, which restricts the use ofSocial Security numbers. Any states that did not require a Social Security number to register when that act was passed cannot implement such a requirement today.45 When the Help America Vote Act of 2002 was being debated in Congress,a proposal to allow all states to require a full Social Security number from new voter registrants was defeated. The proposal to provide every U.S. citizen upon birth or naturalization a voter registration number similar to a Social Security number,to be used in all elections and activated when a voter turns 18, would require the creation of a new federal bureaucracy. A more logical approach would be simply to amend federal law to allow all states to require that any individual registering to vote must provide his or her Social Security number. However,in the current political climate,such reform has little chance. Furthermore, political concerns aside, the use of Social Security numbers for voter registration raises valid privacy issues. To the extent that state voter registration lists can be linked to state DMV records and other state databases, states should—and often do—conduct regular database matching to update registration information as individuals move, die, or become ineligible. But due to the inherent inaccuracies in all such databases, as well as the inability to keep up with all changes in the status ofindividual voters, states should not be prohibited from removing voters who do not vote in a certain number of federal elections—after they are sent notice of the impending removal. That failure to vote is one indication that a voter has moved or otherwise become ineligible without notifying election officials. Election-Day or Same-Day Registration Election-Day registration is highly vulnerable to organized election fraud. The proposal for a federally mandated "fail-safe" that would allow anyone to register and vote on Election Day raises constitutional concerns and is poor public policy.46 Indeed,such policy is a prescription for fraud, Allowing a voter to both register and vote on Election Day makes it nearly impossible to prevent duplicate votes in different areas or to verify the accuracy of any information provided by a voter. Election officials are unable to check the authenticity of a registration or the eligibility and qualifications of a registrant by comparing the registration information to other state and federal databases that provide information not just on identity, but also on citizenship status and whether the individual in question is a felon whose voting rights have been suspended.Since Election Day registrants cast 43. Project Vote, Voter Caging, http://projectvote.org/voter-caging.html. 44. Additionally, a change of mailing address does not always mean that an individual has changed his or her residential address for residency and voting purposes. 45. See 5 U.S.C.§ 552(a) note (Disclosure of Social Security number);see also Schwier v. Cox, 340 F.3d 1284(11th Cir. 2003). 46. Voter Empowerment Act of 2013 *121. Currently, eight states(Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and Wyoming)and the District of Columbia allow Election Day registration. Two additional states have passed Election Day legislation; Connecticut's new law will take effect on July1, 2013, and California's law will take effect on January 1 of the year following the year the secretary of state certifies that the state has a statewide voter registration system that complies with the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (no sooner than January 2014). National Conference of State Legislatures, Same Day Registration, http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/ elections/same-day-registration.aspx. 17-2361-A-002314 10 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 a regular ballot, even if election officials determine "convenience voting," which includes "mail voting, that the registration was invalid after the election, no excuse absentee voting, early voting and even they have no means of discounting the ballot. election-day registration," may actually hurt turnFor those states entering into cooperative agree- out." The general election voter turnout in 2008 ments to compare their voter registration lists to was the highest in a presidential election since identify individuals registered in more than one 1960. However, an American University study state, same-day registration would also eliminate reported that of "the 12 states which had turnout that safeguard. In fact, many of the same organiza- declines in 2008 as compared to 2004,10 had some tions that are proposing this type of"fail-safe" have form of convenience voting. Of the 13 states which vigorously fought Wisconsin's effort to begin provid- had the greatest increases in turnout, seven had ing some verification of Election Day registrants by none of the forms of convenience voting."49 In fact, requiring such individuals to show a photo ID.After four of the eight states with Election Day registraa comprehensive investigation of voter fraud in the tion reported lower turnout in 2008,when turnout 2004 election, the Milwaukee Police Department generally went up in the rest of the country, than concluded that the "one thing that could eliminate they had reported in 2004. The state with the larga large percentage of fraud or the appearance of est decrease in turnout in 2008 was Maine(minus fraudulent voting in any given Election is the elimi- 3.6 percentage points), which also has Election Day registration. nation ofthe On-Site orSame-Day voter registration system,' In 1986,voters in Oregon got rid ofsame-day registration after the Rajneeshee cult tried to take over Pouring huge amounts ofinformation, a local county by not only engineering a bioterrormuch ofitfull oferrors and mistakes, ist attack using salmonella to sicken hundreds of from federal databases into state residents (and potential voters), but also planning to bring in large numbers of nonresidents(many of voter registration databases would them homeless) on Election Day to flood the polls only make the current problems with ineligible voters. As Kansas Secretary of State exponentially worse.States are solving Kris Kobach said at The Heritage Foundation in January 2013,double voting becomes almost impos- the problems that exist in registration lists; additional federal bureaucracy sible to stop with same-day registration. Voters can just make up names and false addresses and go from will not help. polling place to polling place to vote. Kobach was not aware ofany state where the registration system is so automated that the temporary poll workers Similarly, a study by the Maine Heritage Policy who staff precincts on Election Day could check the Centerfound thatElection Day registration in Maine identities and residential addresses ofinstantvoters had "had no recognizable impact on voter turnout" against other state databases. Election Day registra- since its implementation in 1973. In fact, the three tion invites fraud. election years in which Maine had its "lowest turnElection-Day registration is not likely out years since 1960 occurred after EDR was impleto increase voter participation or turnout. mented."5° Nationwide,turnout in the 2012 election rvlo'st important, however, is that what some call was generally down from 2008, dropping a little 47. MILWAUKEE POLICE DEPT., REPORT OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE NOVEMBER 2, 2004,GENERAL ELECTION IN THE CITY OF MILWAUKEE 26(2008), available at http://media2.620wtmj.com/breakingnews/ElectionResults_2004_VoterFraudInvestigation_MPD-SIU-A2474926.pdf. 48. American University News, African-Americans,Anger, Fear and Youth Propel Turnout to Highest Level Since 1960,14(Dec. 17, 2008), available at http://Www.american.edu/research/news/loadercfm?csrViodule=security/gettile&pageid=23907 49. Id. 50. MAINE HERITAGE POLICY CTR., PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY OF MAINE'S ELECTIONS: ELECTION-DAY REGISTRATION IN MAINE 4(2011),available at http:// www.mainepolicy.org/Wp-content/uploads/The-Maine-View-Same-Day-Voter-Registration-100511.pdf. 17-2361-A-002315 11 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 over 5 percentage points, yet the turnout in Maine went down over 8 percentage points.51 Curtis Gans of the Center for the Study of the American Electorate has concluded that states that adopt "convenience voting" reforms "have a worse performance in the aggregate than those which do not." The only temporary exception is for Election Day registration, which apparently helps turnout only "in its initial application and for a few elections thereafter." In fact, in election years where turnout generally increases, "the increase in states with convenience voting" is smaller than the increase in those states that have not adopted such measures, while "in years of decrease, the decreases in the states [with convenience voting] are greater."52 Election Day registration, particularly with its increased risk of ballot fraud, is not the answer to low turnout or registration. Alternative Approaches to Registration Reform States can help to ensure voting roll accuracy. There is no question that the U.S voter registration system could be improved. As the Pew Center on the States found,one of every eight registrations in the United States is "no longer valid or[is] significantly inaccurate."52 Over 1.8 million deceased voters remain registered, and almost 3 million people are registered in more than one state. IIowever,the answer to these problems is not federal mandates or federal interference in election administration, which should be reserved to the states, consistent with America's decentralized election administration system. According to Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, federal mandates would be "completely unworkable"and would"make a mess" of state voter registration databases.States have already begun to implementstate-based,bipartisan remedies to voter registration problems that preserve the balance of power between states and the federal government while maximizing new registration technology in order to ease, rather than remove, an individual's responsibility to register himself. For example,Secretary Kobach has initiated the "Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program" to "increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote" while ensuring "that accurate and current voter registration rolls are maintained."54 As of January 10, 2013, 21 states are participating in this program,55 comparing their voter registration lists to detect multiple registrations(and votes) by the same individual in different states. By the end of 2012,15 states had compared over 45 million records,turning up hundreds of thousands of potentially duplicate registrations. For those voters who registered in a new state because they moved but neglected to notify election officials in the state of their former residence, this program gives them an opportunity to correct their registration. For those who intentionally register in more than one state to commitfraud,it helps states to discover violations ofthe law that threaten the integrity of elections—violations thatin the past have been almostimpossible to detect.Prosecutions of individuals who were found to have voted in two different states under this program, according to Kobach,have already been initiated. Similarly, the Pew Center on the States is working on a project with seven states—Colorado, Delaware, Maryland, Nevada, Utah, Virginia, and Washington—to improve the accuracy of voter registration lists and improve voter registration rates. This initiative consists of comparing registration lists with "other data sources to broaden the base of information used to update and verify voter rolls," using the same proven data-matching techniques developed in private industry "to ensure accuracy and security," and developing new ways for voters to 51. BIPARTISAN POLICY CTR., 2012 ELECTION TURNOUT DIPS BELOW 2008 AND 2004 LEVELS: NUMBER OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS INCREASES BY EIGHT MILLION, FIVE MILLION FEWER VOTES CAST 2(2012), available at http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/2012%20Voter%20Turnout%20Full%20 Report.pdf. 52. American University News,supra note 48. 53. PEW CTR. ON THE STATES, INACCURATE, COSTLY, AND INEFFICIENT: EVIDENCE THAT AMERICA'S VOTER REGISTRATION SYSTEM NEEDS AN UPGRADE 1 (2012), available at http://www.pewstates.orgjuploadedFiles/PCS_Assets/2012/Pew_Upgrading_Voter_Registration.pdf. 54. Kris Kobach, Kansas Secretary of State, Presentation at Meeting of Nat'l Ass'n of State Election Directors(Jan. 26, 2013). 55. Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Dakota,and Tennessee. 17-2361-A-002316 12 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 submit registration information to "minimize manual data entry" errors.56 After a long struggle with the Obama Administration,states such as Florida and Colorado are also starting to gain access to the Department of Homeland Security's records on aliens in order to check the citizenship status of registered voters. However,as Secretary Gessler noted while speaking at The Heritage Foundation, the DHS records are incomplete and contain errors. While access to the DHS database is needed,such access is no substitute for, or nearly as effective as, requiring individuals registering to vote or voting to provide proof ofidentity or citizenship as Georgia,Alabama,and Arizona have done. Pouring huge amounts of information, much of it full of errors and mistakes,from federal databases into state voter registration databases would only make the current problems exponentially worse. States are solving the problems that exist in registration lists; additional federal bureaucracy will not help. Moreover, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, created by the Help America Vote Act of 2002, is one of the most dysfunctional agencies in the federal government and does not have the resources, personnel, or knowledge to direct states. These proposals that supposedly are intended to help states improve the accuracy and validity of state voter registration lists could instead sabotage the progress that states are already making. States are improving the voter registration process.The National Voter Registration Act made voter registration easy: It requires voter registration at state DMV,welfare, and disability agencies and military recruitment offices, as well as mandating mail-in registration. Yet states have been initiating new measures to make registration even simpler. States like Colorado, Louisiana, and Georgia have implemented online registration that allows individuals who already have a state driver's license to register to vote over the Internet. Colorado voters can register using the state's online voter registration system through their computers, phones, or tablets. And Louisiana has implemented a smartphone application that allows voters to access information about their registration, polling location, voting district,and sample ballots. In 2012,Colorado Secretary of State Gessler sent notices to 700,000 Coloradans who might be eligible to vote but were not yet registered to encourage and help them to register for the upcoming election."By Election Day, Colorado voter registration reached a record level:440,888 more voters registered than in 2008,a 13.7 percent increase. Colorado's increase in turnout is even more notable when considering that most ofthe nation saw a decrease in turnoutin 2012 compared to the 2008 election. Secretary Gessler attributes this increase to the deployment of"new technologies and systems such as multi-state data matching,electronic ballot delivery for military and overseas voters, and high-speed Ballot on Demand printers."" Conclusion The federal government and Members of Congress should respect differences among states. America is not homogenous,and one size does not fit all, especially when it comes to issues like voter registration. Citizens in different states have different needs, desires, and values; therefore, it makes little sense for the federal government to micromanage state voter registration systems. Indeed, the federal government has almost no experience administering elections; states are the experts on voting and,as such,are already implementing new programs and systems to improve the accuracy, effectiveness, and ease of the voter registration process. Requiring automatic registration from government databases risks the integrity of the election process and improperly shifts the responsibility for registering from the individual to the government. States are already using federalism and their unique responsibilities in the voting process as originally intended: to experiment in the laboratories of democracy. The improvements these states are implementing come at less cost—to our treasury, 56. PEW CTR. ON THE STATES,supro note 53. 57. Press Release, Scott Gessler, Colorado Secretary of State, Colorado Registers Another Successful Election: Voters Exceed 2008 Turnout(Nov. 9, 2012). 58. COLORADO SECRETARY OF STATE SCOTT GESSLER, 2012 GENERAL ELECTION REVIEW: A COLORADO SUCCESS STORY (FEB. 7, 2013). 17-2361-A-002317 18 BACKGROUNDER I NO.2780 MARCH 27,2013 our Constitution,and the integrity ofour elections— than mandatory universal registration. —Hans A. von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a former Commissioner on the Federal Election Commission. He is the coauthor of Who's Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk(EncounterBooks, 2012). 17-2361-A-002318 14 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: John Lott [johnrlott@crimeresearch.org] 9/22/2017 1:36:35 PM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] The Hill: "Democrats should embrace FBI background check for voters and gun purchasers alike" >http://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/351767-democrats-should-embrace-fbi-background-check-for-votersand-gun< John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D. President Crime Prevention Research Center >http://crimeresearch.org< johnrlott(acrimeresearch.org (484)802-5373 Crime Prevention Research Center crimeresearch.org 17-2361-A-002319 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Kobach [ ] 6/30/2017 5:30:11 PM 'Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov];'Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP' [Marc.E.Lotter@ovp.eop.gov];'Agen, Jarrod P. EOP/OVP'[Jarrod.P.Agen@ovp.eop.gov] I will be on Tucker Carlson's show Just don't know the hit time yet. 17-2361-A-002320 From: Christy McCormick To: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/ Ovp Subject: IG Complaint Date: Thu. Jul 13, 2017 6.28 am Good morning Andrew, This Complaint came to my attention last evening through a friend who saw it posted on a blog. I have not received a copy myself, nor has the Inspector General informed me of it. I thought I should send it to you in case you hadn't seen it. http://fairelectionsnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/PELN-Complaint-to-EAC-Office-of-Inspector-GeneralRe-Commissioner-McCormicks-Service-on-PACEI.pdf Thanks very much, Christy 17-2361-A-002321 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Christian Adams [adams@electionlawcenter.com] 6/17/2017 1:09:13 AM 'Kris Kobach [ ] You are in my latest: Ignoring the Signs In Alexandria: Baseball, Bullets and Bloodshed "... So let's give them one last chance to practice what they started preaching on June 15. The civility can start the next time they talk about voter fraud. . . . Let's see what they call von Spakovsky and Kobach after June 15. Here's my best guess: the same uncivil things they were called before June 15. . . ." https://pjmedia.com/ichristianadams/2017/06/16/ignoring-the-signs-baseball-bullets-andbloodshed/?print=true&singlepage=true Ignoring the Signs in Alexandria: Baseball, Bullets and Bloodshed By J. Christian Adams James"Tommy" Hodgkinson must not have seen the signs. They were hard to miss in the Alexandria, Virginia, neighborhood known as Del Ray where he gunned down Republicans playing baseball. "Practice Kindness" yard signs are ubiquitous in Del Ray, signs that began to appear on a similar trajectory to Trump's march toward the White House. Hodgkinson must not have taken the signs very seriously. 17-2361-A-002322 "Practice Kindness" sign, blocks from shooting (Christian Adams photo) Del Ray prides itself on being a diverse and progressive neighborhood. In 2016, Hillary got 4,549 votes in Del Ray and Trump just 883. Another house flying a United Nations flag with a "Proud Democrat" sign a few blocks from the baseball diamond has a "Little Free Library" to take and give books in a birdhouse shaped hutch. Next to it is a chalkboard:"Kindness Is Everywhere, I Saw It Today When..." it says, inviting folks to complete the story. "Traffic stopped for me to cross," said one answer."Friends came to my defense when an infernal troll targeted me on FB." A good chance that last spat involved politics. Since Trump's win, yard signs sprouted up in front yards all over Del Ray,just blocks from the shooting scene. "Practice Kindness, Build Communities" is the most common. There are others, with multiple implications "Make America Kind Again." Then there's this long-winded cause-cornucopia:"In this House We Believe Black Lives Matter, Women's Rights Are Human Rights, No Human Is Illegal, Science Is Real, Love is Love,Kindness is Everything." 17-2361-A-002323 Another banner posted at the ball field before the shooting, captures lots of causes, some in Arabic — including "In the Future I Hope That Coming Out Doesn't Exist Because Everyone is Just Who They Are." In the photo below you can see the baseball field in the background. There was also:"No Matter Where You are From, We're Glad You're Our Neighbor." No sign in Del Ray may say more. No rna te hvetil,ou are from, we're.glad you're our neighbor. Which brings us back to ball field shooter James Hodgkinson, because he was apparently a neighbor to everyone in Del Ray for the last few weeks living out of his van. We now also know Hodgkinson was a dedicated soldier in the #Resist movement. His rage at Trump and Republicans led him to abandon his life in Illinois and travel to Alexandria and live in this overtly welcoming community in a van loaded with ammo. We may never know what led him to live a vagabond's life in Del Ray, but I suspect it wasn't the custard at the Dairy Godmother. Hodgkinson had murder on his mind, and his trek to the Washington D.C. suburbs points at a small universe of targets. He came to kill Republicans, the more conservative, the better. 17-2361-A-002324 There's no disputing that Hodgkinson's political views were right at home in Del Ray — even the New York Times headline "In Congressman's Shooting a-Like Minded Gunman Shakes a Liberal Enclave" makes that plain enough. Nothing was strange enough, it seems, about his daily showers at the Alexandria YMCA,chatting with the exmayor and working on his laptop all day at the Y to trip any additional scrutiny or questions. No matter where you are from, we're glad you're our neighbor. I also used to live in Del Ray, and I visited the site ofthe shootings today. An orange pole marks the spot where Representative Steve Scalise fell. The bullets that blasted into the YMCA landed in a pool where I spent many hours. It's hard to square all these calls for civility with the bullet holes and blood. Sign in Del Ray (Christian Adams photo) Now instead of yard signs in Alexandria, the calls for civility are coming from everywhere, with the loudest on the Democratic side ofthe aisle. On the afternoon of the shooting, MSNBC and CNN played what amounted to a tape loop "Chance to come together. Dial down the rhetoric. Civility, and more civility." How many times on June 15 did we hear that the shooting gives us a chance to start again? Noble aspirations, of course. I'll forget for a just moment exactly which side ofthe political divide has been decapitating Trump look-alikes, fantasizing about blowing up the White House and beating people up on campus. So let's give them one last chance to practice what they started preaching on June 15. The civility can start the next time they talk about voter fraud. Of course the Left doesn't believe voter fraud is a serious concern. Fine. But they go much further. 17-2361-A-002325 I'll name names in a moment, but the left not only disputes the threat of voter fraud, but demonizes anyone who thinks it is a serious issue. And when I say demonize, I mean demonize. Take my friend Hans von Spakovsky. It isn't hard to find articles in purportedly credible left-of-center publications calling him a "vote suppression guru" or even a Nazi. The latter attack is particularly repugnant considering his family's repeated history dealing with the Gestapo. Even the relatively milder charge of"vote suppression guru" carries with it the connotation that Hans deliberately seeks to prevent eligible voters from voting, and that he teaches others to do the same. But if you take the very real crime of voter fraud seriously, in good faith, as Hans does, that makes you the "wanker ofthe day," or a serial vote blocker. All ofthis is not only uncivil, it's defamatory. The radical writer An Berman doesn't hesitate to demonize anyone who talks about the problem of voter fraud. "Few people in the Republican Party have done more to limit voting rights than Hans von Spakovsky," Berman leads a breathless column in the Nation designed to sabotage Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court — all because the Justice said something nice about Hans. Ari Berman didn't see the signs in Del Ray either, it seems. And I doubt Berman will end the uncivil personal attacks on von Spakovsky any more than scorpions will start giving rides to frogs. It's who An Berman is. 1 '4P 7.6-4". 8=1... far114... H 1111 Perhaps critics of Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach will spread kindness and build community after June 15. Kobach is a co-chair ofPresident Trump's voter fraud commission and has been a leading election integrity advocate for years. Before June 15, to the left, that means Kobach is a Klansman. Before June 15, Kobach was "the most racist politician in America," the King of Voter Suppression (by Amrit Cheng ofthe ACLU),shady, a "hate group figure," and if that wasn't enough, Kobach was the feature in a Vanity Fair piece headlined "Trump Team Outlines Plan to Turn America Into a Racist Police State." Naturally, Vanity Fair portrayed Kobach as the architect ofthe racist police state blueprint. 17-2361-A-002326 mrit Cheng Let's see what they call von Spakovsky and Kobach after June 15. Here's my best guess: the same uncivil things they were called before June 15. After all, by any means necessary, right? You can't expect them to stop Rule Thirteening folks just because someone further along the crackpot continuum shot up a ball field and a couple of Congressmen, can you? Don't expect genuine and civil debates about voter fraud, election integrity or the very real threat of alien voting in our elections before June 15, or after June 15. Name calling is easier than substantive discussion. Too bad. It would be a chance for Democrats and the #Resist Left to practice what they preach, even if they preached it for just one day. 17-2361-A-002327 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Kobach [ ] 6/30/2017 4:37:56 PM 'Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov];'Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP' [Marc.E.Lotter@ovp.eop.gov];'Agen, Jarrod P. EOP/OVP'[Jarrod.P.Agen@ovp.eop.gov] I'll be using this talking point as well Pew estimates 1.8 million deceased on the rolls and concedes that their number is likely a low estimate. Why wouldn't we want to find out what the real number is? And who voted? http://www.pewtrusts.orelmedia/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs assets/2012/pewupgradingvoterregistrationpdf.pdf 17-2361-A-002328 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans [Hans.VonSpakovsky@heritage.org] 7/23/2017 11:51:20 AM Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] I'm on CSPAN's Washington Journal at 8:30 am talking about the commission Hans von Spakovsky Manager, Election Law Reform Initiative and Senior Legal Fellow Institute for Constitutional Government The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 202-608-6207 heritage.org 17-2361-A-002329 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: von Spakovsky, Hans[/0=THF/OU=THFDC/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=SPAKOSKYH] 7/23/2017 11:51:20 AM Andrew J. Kossack [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] I'm on CSPAN's Washington Journal at 8:30 am talking about the commission 17-2361-A-002330 Siv.3120f? ' :00* - Let An'wric.-11161e .s.Os LO ifl•:•-• orn MOis?is.,VA Kan Bta:ckwell Let America Vote sets up an office in Manassas, VA movaoco, 'Kan Blackwell Mon. Aug.14, 2017 at 4:00 PM Te: Kris Kobach Cc:.'ikossaelc, Andrew J. EOROVP" .,"Psoletta;Matk R. 1.:7::01, :ki0S/0" -4itark.k.Paoletia@ovp.eop,gov:;-• FYI The Resistzinee: Let(anybodyin)Arnerica Vote The foaming excerpt gives::aqui6k summery of what they're doirm. enociurageyou to read the.entire article,. linked hare: siOarloYa M tia 41'"i lec r‘4iMi.Ciff;n0Vas<>6M&U .s.txios%'4.0.7%z".i::F.-Offii):::ii:)1.6:Q2724:70.18Atitn:L(nedibneri).nit&utTn_cotIte!t=tlendi J.:17•1:abfi4.102b- In the days since President D:orrald Trimip's ele.ottoO (and Knodar's:cityri'3.-point lose to.Sen. RoV.Blant,.RW0,1443. ;foonee MiesouetSeoretaq,of state has been .crarting ::;1'new kind.of bbliticat organb:ation: "Let Amente Vote,." a group :tcanOer sake is .ffeei9bed lo 'nfeote poVUc connectmences.for politiciSns. who'vernadO %/.P:tinc:1 more diffiattor felect to stahd.iip for:voting rights?' 17-2361-A-002331 4pe,:vmii.cpc(4.io..wefiftrAite.tvni7(:if:e.2sAitvoatz.t4.agiondAitiver...,fqoetRocJto,:i4yii,..§yy---pt&q,:ykristre.w..41.:Kns*,-0.A0*vf.),00p:t.N.NevciVinA•4($08(ch:444.kt...1 1,1 9i1812b1.'i Girtail • My.ixilumfi at:tho Day f',•atior: les' Mr:6' Cif.3 Our poctio.rss. Kbn Mack,,rea.ckshrtothia4a$k*Ogi:93(c,,D.:,girali.corn> ; My column at the Daily Caller: It's Time To Clean Up Our Elections rwissage Ken Blackwoll Ad 1:4, 2017: g.it 7:5o.PM -17() Ken Blacikwe BOr: PHUrleY, *Carolina L. EOP11111-10" .,."Henn, Alexa A. EOP/WHO" , *Ppitorqude:, Megtdr C EOPIOVP". cltileghan.aPatenautiegDot".0.5.?.Opsgaii>, "Honriesspy, PiliPiteint.S. EOPANHO" ‹Millicerft.S.Henni5),ssey@villoop4o> Please:.tweof,.0.8r.en FB .0c.I.ottver socatmedi. Hefe hRiViricailyy.-Aist.pori:11.20.1 Tnks?. 1:9999RMAMMOW/// 17-2361-A-002332 , -,,,,,,xogf-WeNtWX, I /momer4bdtWX*7,71,4444$0:::, irs...Tin* (.*iA tip Ow- Ecor I1e Streqr: /1 .,—,,,...i•e..'' •/, :e1,,,P ,....,...,,k 1.,...„•:t: .. :.., • e,;,-1.,..,:,; k.,,„.. i. •4::-... f / ' '••••- '''': .f'•:A '.'1:•:;• ., -f:5-'kr 1. e:!:.). ,.: s Time to Clean Up Our F ecJons 45 By to.„ :201 DeVite thelattebtiOb given to the &UM that Russia attempted to:intinerteelatyear'aelection. AnteriCan democracy greatest threat is vote fra udat home,: Couniies acrinI the country have more people registered to vote ban theyltave residents eligible to. do Some jurisdictions.00.ye . ox their rolls Voters Mio've reached their 200.birthday and beyond. thnusandsf non-cirizens:haveben found to be registered:to vote:and across the rtation. ihtt that munbetrea,„i well reach irao:the:millions. 4• • 1.'"f ime•clean-elect,.iptveki • .... 17-2361-A-002333 4... }1.1.1.10,. ........••• • •• Vefet , ..Y.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.N 11;001:Mr3.1100P-a;A:fiffiA31.4eatrigi:04i:gi 17-2361-A-002334 poa y:-Lkoptti o fA3NR:$11.1.0 -1-tki1m unDtpartrya.Toapoj u*eft!rm. orgoi'l ssosmeflO.1Ii3:04.1noT? 4.111,11 aqvu.i.e;)1pnoLT01‘1115SII)AtEK!..:E14 uodalp •poept.i.t pue:Iuetgaid 0.):'ALapisalti in)v qi.Itinottpl.ted at:ttl).1.94,:,:;.itt . :i))...:ole 411:0 Item ar• 2uput-itx) icika s..qcs..13,41:,i3uI;301:1X0(I ',..)1T:Ipq.,StIV31,T4111V 11013.1011 $1.Tpf,i0.;.‘44f1.?:Aa.:3V.y.tp a'stjj .:(;>tpo*tirp.p..TeILL q0 ca;:,iy.pt.314.'Op.(1)(11...404.1.10010,11./ ripq o iouix pa:NI AIN.O,lad8op at do;)(1 i.t3?..)!3:aVrV. ILL 15mtal rr)v q'acT liuom 14/na palit'elaP 0:211 Op 01 pf.X.V 011M ZO.016.1k zPiqc1.>T1 ou mmoipplip.tibfkoti)f q isvziàuiq opt 114t paplgp t;a:i13,1, atew,f. alt131g `sapnoti inudlOplid aitrArsuinlIg) sT ;Jul)loitletf,^4 ItIeuadirq sl .!:- n•i3U.K1`.?";1*?.f) •auyou •.tr))..)610...t4.44 -ppt.4..IF):6A i)ff3 t ava ati.e_lau..tos Act JO prippq).311f go,/ tiopensf2a.cia:m4. Lro s...Marlde 1041 0§xE0u Amila OtTpl,rtil e.lts>1 Jwy JO 1.t aq /AIN ugela atIt los' DIM !Via) aTIals111 quaiIU. Als.tvalAtio •;p..c01.1 ulrfreplcii)cl. Ilia:Li:xi 0,itTi+441.0.0:.> 0 01 .p.14`.'sqa:zpt.:12triatioti snag s..;tfa:fnj LIION IK$A0"ki10.1. Au Uuianrtbai inaLS 0.11. 4.t.V.OIe'grgli;E:p,e0max .a 142110filyv 'aAtT,vimi! Arien.r,)1?oipa.aelf;O:f4a a,014.4am)..m.{ glawm an st,I.Tfarza :#37c; (11.4tP I:ex:41:14J 430 trilVotir! .4itgl.PD ekalil:$0rItto•Varw.sT 1111::.:Ar 'tpuoui.gftP:.jatel larjrp.a/a fi,941.?mato da10,1 ati.T.AAolf ogi.:zp3 aq,1 alotk.61 tramf 11) : .eep attl. 011-: st01 4OA.3tzgl puats.Tap).m.Aatil.asIleaact ti.xoDeZitiaxa Bufpuods-lico,q )U o_0 a.:146o!),,ciat:411IT'suit? svkt ma-1 411:1 pyre fitatiotft fmosti nh OS IOU iuJtj, .1OA UTVI",..ip?1,E1 01.1 111441 Wala!ill)aa• 3.13.10cL tvaM$tt 'oa 14thli0 a! ans ol:AT.r(kittl) .s:rea4.411 ,sturaja.a.q1V; 6.1.*LiPUP U011:);NDla 0)gi4L1 64P1:)t-iU', ; a.14,1 3 ? ..1 1Tzwizrqi plIv "SlICI wrislLt2I1t. .aq- ojPatmitIQI dhoa coP v()S 11100-altio.:):411;1 %Al ampe dtioac,,quo *alp .tc.11:E S'f frr,),V 3.11:i: 1.401,149V qj. 01.al ) P.ili-xe. DA:iv -;>Reto.(1 431.4 tpdeta tax9.. q4at:xidos.u.fm 4,trezojelain 41t0411.1.0.Ac1;30 10:110(13 azlin Xclmatt4 aD44 flittPA •riTtusouTquO-4.3.1Opng 1.10:6001.1)112.ATOTIVO:pVtpl.€11) SUOTI:1!..E1.5i0.1 OIVOIWIta attl.a..ej upo. Oj0.1.00ANtalm4i e'z,ripalo.slAn.,ki.:(yov.affi mq.1.1.x?.cfn,...:(10.41,1113;) o puetg.E.10:PPI-0.ialai%ii latpo...mtf uosvas JO.1.€04,I. Mi)'30; '4.;.4•ir.14; wigoptyu A 'paxl-Jmyi3e1.P.4.01./A4 1l JO uo d.puiaq1:tralietn.elaNeidoed 11,01Ftik:s;irLyao ATtraItam 41V040 1u111 In0 sttit13. i.):'1F..)11.E.,411p5m 9.3 ux qUWYDA:fast:4)R s1ixopi5oadottt paft,i %McflTV a oq 1SC.11;)10.4.at(112110 Atuo i psu Du :trEq R,10),1 attioad . o.ozatitt 'Siftqj, pirval:vinrun /nay ViXiptiNppu uxi o dn..gtiT4, 41 ar.{ pr.n.o.As E.i) 2tqJ.E1sue .13110 51101awicitt.4014:drk xupviajams:143ppn.31'W.3ii.XiXJ3A0', pII1SacsR11 1)ite:g: opata su.or.iinjo.eattegAa 13upt4uolvm etri tfvfm -103A ttaJ0(ith;M. )t1P1,0)datt SOW 0111.;;I: slaprat .rintp af,:of.0.1:).t4 .111.11.i.,0uu.)1.:f3tuv ItuT.palaJA et aa:de PinoW •aLtolCzima:41IUIR141xassa.aav satr,a,liIatuwae,aV a.;.3A0 pur stu.Eailn -00.).s Mpltp‘4 vOr4.4401a .1. tor;$1.§Alus>3 4,;(0$!Aiyv U.•aut patismeria thUL preu0rpirovcs0.ki ivugaai)uom ou:s;:q Ut)...4 - 1145.3.:aiv.if iktearlsaiti. sutiO4n Ano.dri ue?..10.ol aktiu_!.zi .8!2.017 EN POO to.Cloan Up Our eeetiorui Th6 p.trOort: Kenneth Mackweg, tOrnier:/..nOor orCiiiiiinnati.cold Ohio Secretory ofState, is the a?Vricilii CiVitniett$ a Polizy BoOra:).nersii,i0r td tjorPiT.Vow for 6 Joy in thAHurricane 1, f4M,C:ri• *No ,ate4 posts. imorgit 17-2361-A-002335 - RE: AilarRs /kip&1st Ken pael0 . 0 argi -1.:rvertlYs: VeC ,6118'?(117 3n 0e:bunko's:I by tFtEkei0•oil Kest Bia0Weli RE: Attacks Against Ken Blackwell and Trump's Voting Commission Debunked by the Facts - Breitbart 2 rr:s'ages Agert „Wicket P. EOP/OVP -4Jarrod,PAgent§ovp,eop.guy› To:."Patiletta Mark R,:EOP/OVP" ; totter, Marc,' E.1..otter@ovp, ..•,,:g0',,?>; Kos <1.cic Andre*1 EOPIOVP „'Walt Kathryn E. EOPLOVP". Cc:"Ppok...tta,. ICelark R EOPidVP" V9995:1=2:99999:MfebW/My. , Paul S.: EORWHO" 17-2361-A-002336 .tmcq'e...t.tss‹.i•:.:.11.s.., .69•Z itat2.017 i.31nat. • RE.. Ai:tack's Against Ken alsmkwell and Pump's Votieig Corr:mission DilbonIced by tha Fai-43 Braimart Subject Attacks Against Ken Blackwell and Trump's Voting Commission Debunked by the Facts Breltbart ;Please. tweet and share wilh your various networking. http:II*0.1.0reith d..centilAg?govefrinlerIti201 7107105/at conftnisSion-del:p.iriked-by,the,facts! nst, rict-trurn pS-voting, My first htis tomorrow i CNN 8:30u.m. Thanks -all! Teller, Paul S. fEOPIINHO To:"'Fetter: Paul S. EORWHO" Foiks—As foilO*.up to my Wast.yesterday about the Pr this pitme. below.,„ Thu, jut 6, 2017 all:24 PM dent elet(ion ntv‘;:onirnission,.plese see ansd share Thank you! Pau/ Wier Specidl Assiste..irt the Presidentfor LegiSiative: AffoirS The White t-.1Q1..ie ?.'agr,SSrelieq9who:eoo.goy- Attacks Against Ken Blackwell and Trunto'f.; Voting Commissi on Debunked by the Facts 17-2361-A-002337 iltipw,galail.goosje..a.iinirtisil!ta/OPui4128A=1;k1466: -.0eJ&Isvet=t3j06RgEIC.INO.arLaviewzpi&trzAncir ew.,.1.K.ossack".44riovp.e.w.gov&gs.in.le&serctizzqks ., 215 - RE: Atiacka Against Min Aiolicsv.e0 and TbaTib's Voting Comaiission ObbLibuqd by tb.e. Fadn Stiiitbart .•::.....•..•..... .:.:.: : : .: •. . ••• . •••• ' . .•::: : .... :... . •••• • . .. .... . •. ........... ...:::.. : •. . :.•..: AP b).!.Ken Kkc 5 jul, JO 2ot7NiVasbi '1)C562 Jul, 2017 Partisan Democrats are aggre.ssively attempting to delegitimize President Donald Trump's Election Integrity Commission, in part by smearing one of its most prominent members, Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, as a vote suppressor. Bet:thefaets story vindieateihe former big-elty wtiayor and 1.LS, afnba&soslor,.and by extension,‘ra/klate the rK...p resents. •President'Ilnpt;igubd Exeentive.Order May 11.,.*0.17,:elvatiing:theiPmsiden.tig1.Advisory Mer.tion Integrity, Itslni;izeion to kipritiCybtAtkir -ways to pil'itgaUi btbnx..against:xiowr ft-awl:111W (Aber f/egg that undermine.theillitegrityrlt lite dertioeratle.prneess.OVectio.n.Thty. President Trtmrpiappointed Vlee Preeklc.n.t Mike Tenet.as iiisicluirnxim, KlmsasSeeretarrofStayte chairman,..a.Ad:Ambassador Blackwell as oueol It' te.pulber,s: KDk.A.0..vs3IC Liberal activist.groaps.ifunded. by 3dtril.4eft Geo:rge.Soros are using.-tactics frem 8attI insky's REiksfor Rad1611 Lattac:k the coramitision, oclitding.Sin ding out ejtiple Individuals :its the navies and faces reptesenting the: Orp,:-in:lization. While.rn aty:ofthe attaeks,am bellig directed a Kob.aeh, Oen more.seem to be aimed'at Iftekwell. Ken BinkweIl has' .3:f4-3 (Car higtetY o Ole?*issues:. into modest CiremnsiatIEW:111 Canciymati„lle beeante.it public. 'grt h many privo,te.rse!e,f;Ori WOrk•-!SerS;Kx.1 .mhybr ac 313n4t1 30 at&dty 111.11fiNv bloC.Iti.ufrQm the plibliebowing.Whetehe:. 17-2361-A-002338 .htiPS1433a:E11)0.ge.(39n-.11(iliVOlill?kg•::t2A.i%=".1a1:4tiebOdaljticerz061t0C.,1NiOni MIr07,302MWAWAKO. • , Dovp.siop..9ouk&q$::ta s• a;f5 Ze2721=ZOMM:K=WW•ge doo-drso()vv,..W3?-sso>rr'PAELIPIIV::bigki.moV,2' 17-2361-A-002339 3,1) 00.p:pc#4;[0.11...140011pthi. Aa8:10.,:m05'mu sativs! wottl uo NI IA:XL IRsvp!?llafp;E:301:Mt(f 1,10.0"01?311101.4.14:44,. S.IF0p136 asca!!,.-p.Km)01*q npom a.KH.[Ak `ast) oqpaptp:E.P40 spf.)1.pap jin.),,veog.tref;tisvilq pT.m 3;uotptiv u(31:01•0t:tit) etti:q:Mp SVC:1.7,0111 0110.. irjaiTe,..-P ;:51.11.-.! 20.1 put'.Durt..tzs.v.j0iN3101.4C103 5e.‘,1 q 144iy.)/j30 u1.043 .!)06. . 0u3.):1W1 ,CtfotioxV) 0:pwapiukpa 013.o.oRte !;:est i0Lf.e.A 1.11:1>Ckiii0(1 0040 Ini)IllE.110:ai atri R-3,u3IM1 10(ter pw!Pet.i.0; j,$) 1. .q0111R,U,910 Jo imPuTetra 0 ; 14,L.A:pirtD xrwitimq. ' uf>4):(1V ii!,ff.SMAI.1700?; •61.raNItiza(I sx1 i. puttt ;)alt.anItipop ewoq ) . 1. C'Pi.ls:!4cfkinx j3i.Wu4f.),A.3.6.1.tiotp!app4d ritua tionly.aps Mil.k(q.:if)peta tot) st )n i.i,pftto U sagpv10..0 2pipas 40 .1. 004 p.a4109 'opto ';prouul -olevjo /Sat? valaas 41:1p.:g!Iror.mgravlvitt.1.4-3p4. Exonp.a.upj, .7.)4:4pnotuau .41;!nati tplti..A 4$11(10,.01.190 : Aplestact!,pp llampprgle.m.5q sg01.1441;.:3.io, naaaag akLL 410 paisig.4facloat atsttuoj ;341:1 3:1121401...W.$W.:91.11,60.aa 11;)11S u0! pap .f.mixii.k:f.ra • f '. "AsiVi 1,11111411C1 • Hvf 'atil e)4 pal.0,1Tpl?..TOTA:! pup ,AA;)t 3 33'part991 ai.)4111.110-11:?.ratiTap-fskm it litiF:;x1 . . Suikk uq:q(ilivg la;")10•Tii 01.:1:1Vo:4u! ;RR s4.01 .4.01143a)o .3.(1.0)0.:ttx lelZKY,',M svt.mv:E:p30,1.1 ppniaktto. tp.mq;ygiq piop;4441.s. atolug • p.m"pIalls.1,[vq) uopr.o.,:qe.:01.00.atT.ott Avo8 fra.APpUta.pue 'satu.S.;.31.4041.aop ig,3coAaspnq .pir.p>qs 7.14N4 papttodsoa 'qt,oR..01;14.pu33.11-01vilzeig ito!.40:›auky,:i;,141..10 011:4 iNIIAPIP:tt,T,..p,stp&Tels.1112011,t1 n Zlkitrf, ,suur/03:1,..305..1 n!toet<;?!.! pa>ifq? s! trf 'umdxa u30I 14(.4tIsm.11 ;MOM SiSp.11*.)11 :N:fipaQt1:1(11):all.'itQfp:flpille!4t).,01s..;;O. ataqfIlm..)(>11.r,c1 1.410;T:yrg4);..) •;.A.‘ o'i-;.100!) txtr.).q<1.0d0;z1 ;umpv.i. 0;007;'gun ',".) LIE OS i_' AVajpiln.inZ pirn (.0 1.p. , ;!4n0T . ;;:) tboz (Y4 lolgi••••110(1411s..09coouIaa.II.r9:41.1m---wl'a4‘:'" tei.:§fpap timafog .1t),4 pos:rt alay...StIALit>.y.1 .0:eati , 4,1, -40c1p0 S/30141.p.0 at.p. par.);:41.01; Nth S.V41;YfIlttp ,X.rgi041 1Va. .utprigral.% 1) luau n:) WiAln.4I:$01'; .10.,,i:Efi 3.R:q 0Tim,{:r0TrultIsq..3:-tmuttor , qqt.!4"mwrg:t ..,05s00;:ms ,raptErfi. u!N:W pOrK1i43,VYZ's ( aa4:ptu 2.04:4111•04, , ,A0 `,1011U0d0 irtsgstA p:trttriti -113N Utigt.'Afif)()Igo ( 444m.1:.1;' ,.jKi.i-cpliqtrw.,,otru.:Tpiti.1.4•11111.11.4.u„. ay.Ix! aq. j.IDSIX1fItpAaid.4jesT,',•.1.01LI:m1V; gr. 4.:A.414.0.M.y.E3V . .4.4 sam.:EON .-mujo.:pgri.01 pro•ap Mla ofiwa ;E4 doDi.m.,{140 -"1.110"..atI4 P•I ktolqaPt> ;;3.: ,.4)4s.;;?i4 4.KsiV.E.rt 4 -1kMi;;a10 . pRx owsi la i-gopq.i...rx.).4 rid iqsum jTuammtig lqOJ. SVIA Q:1141K , ..(4111:143a5':11)::(11:p)g. 7paall 4;(42.1? 41:01.1p:( ! 1:••ptop..10.oEu.0$qnp R£St5iX ;).(tro pi)mm sem csoo.g!,tlyi %E.,:xfue.iq O‘§fs. gv.••••,:odad ag:35 pr.p),:f Vt1:1 '21c) popfiglaPs wi.fh pagIVr..tqfkbi:tild. ittipup.ttaa IajOE11.114.0.1gA13.1.11.0;3gVtr Xsparg t'32! tuguut u04.4.0 G.G.0c.E0Ad •iyasod ipp. 'trip pp).1. qiiq'at:g0 50,1 pt .3.p:44:1:1.,0.114. ..; '..i,k)m) Eiyic)I ',m;ovig ;rpm. PI no.`Iiitossps. utaoratil pu*); 1.TO .pittom ,:taispi%xtaidu ir ifi.islITS0J;t11)!Ip.):!sl'Aloa delpA rinsoct wFrapp0,4d03:13itTfPgGipfi• 044(:) ato itoli.c3).,:atr.) Iodtxt •tti-og i,114 .‘,'k).4up-oad q.'1,00?;IP11.11.1N' 6•3' 53 PalmN;. , ' = 8661- gAnd.14-ofe. ioxe:re.144 il4M5Perawq -;i0dtd.1301.:u pap ;NIA13.4.14 If”.M. qafr..9.111/61gal .:1;110A Nn133:d .ttl-tlf?..211Vinb`4•1.4:q. tU0.1°A 131:1ISPC:P1-11";g11-`:3 1P.:6•TIAN 110;Magrif.1-Pti4 (M;11.5mti',.4 .700?; ig-11 1.11.044 SLEOrrart:3.;Ye:21:flin&O•JJ ;23,M;c014. .1s..tIty. '41031.tri;p32;:8r 't)g TIOISSIgn:t10%) 4111,/.1.1.0 9)..FM:11% OUa1IS an1101 alp.4suIteac.:5.pulzu 4sed-o.mI 4i011-) 1 .1 -1I1111:0A0P ap3 icla4atx;.uval..xoxixy.Up!,..p)aurift.v..4.11,:aw uu'sop,1.0q.triu. 10 0.4.s044 .1.01141(4.Uril StlP:Jo.valteao.A.pw, (3 IA! 1•S liam>fg!49:)1 p;Namez un UPT-)R ucu;N,ft -1110.04p01i O 3WO.jumo:Rel.ini.t/ ;:•qt.jo .fmtagega aanksLquij, . 0414)114suri.:5 0i.)!;v44!!!1,...) t p;>4..) 0104 raam.-0;!.1 ..t.fpgo4 It4)14!.cp.u../ g4Outo,m, :Na:T.41:g1X "inVIA :114.4). zod •!1s0.t...uop fa* 'i4.1k.:!:6 `f.J.0!3;ilurum.,.;)134i113111 ulnartgip.i.ww.fgwon.aqz :441 :4O Jpune• Re•Frama.t.: 40.:1131 .f.szxplp wiliv,„/0734,0 p :x01-Asvix4.!.z!:v Itp?uldoRA;(3: 111.411-11:0 vatve.19.-.• sped vtitAq p,s(lanc..p.a. uogaigitwatra 61.401 :-;;citigui.pufiv‘ANoNo 7040f..i.te 6.4;01.1.* .V18001-I R‘H.; Macka Niainsi.Ken RI3 wWTtur Volingtemaiission Cieborktgi by the Facts. • f4etaw.t . . For that matter,.BtackweibeMS.k.-nown a.refornier whoimp.undedvo6.ng rights Oirrirts hi terntre. Hfolight ih Ohio legislaturefor futtdirt;.;.to r(Vace.th tat&s ..IntkiitAted.iirottug.:roachines. Hs also dssigUed a robust voteprograrilz...which Wu? exmptioual votcr error r.lites:oh Election Day: As•a result of his poliCieS', when people coul0 not meet thebaiint-caSting standards on Election Day, thio h 20.04.was 031£?: of thetop lime gatesin the natiOil for validafing proVigortal ballotz? and.eounting he extra vbics. All this liappenod.apinst The backdrop of record votev registration alid aveord tarnOutfor tkie Buckeye State.in 2004. 3nder:00y leVei ofii.”ponsiblescratinyrthe artacits.ori SeoriEiLary Bat:kWdi fail apart. Americans ihouid not be.surprised if OR!accusations against. Iresident Trilrup's Eicetiqn.Integrity Commission Jikewa iaH a.part.whcm :;ohjec7tod.to the light of day. Ken Klukowski ssvliorlegel editorAr Ibilow him on.Twii`.ter.@kenidi4ketemki. 17-2361-A-002340 httin:iin4i.googhl.,.f.N.Yroitil;.!:ii.;•::iv7u1.2a.if:aidt146(irGajsverg4lotrztec.g.g.:4:1,&vierv=pf:50:Filcluiraw.J.Ko.:),3ck%40(.:vp.et:li).clov6.,Is-i:.u::::scNi;F-c:i1,-(.1::... A.:KKK...W. •,,,,,,• .F.• r111111...... 5; -• Ker-.1 641/.,;kwoll Thursc.0y August I'M.- S'sr-idy Rios.;in ihe:K.,/onik'sg - Guest 91.18)26.i7 M$tirsio:- Ken .E3iktolicwall FW:!Meryfew Request ken Blackwell - Thursday August 17th - Sandy Rios in the Morning - Guest Host Mat Stayer 4 messages Alice Chao To: Ken :Blackwell Thu, Aug 1O.2017 at 10:09 AM wo:got a adi rizw rtzquaS.I..froto..Mal..Sfaver.... wilo is filling i.n.folininly Rios.ottl105•..a'irw,. ate. yz:m AM eastern to. dii;coss:your.work on.the.E.1 :,ction Int:egri:ty.e.Qmiissi.oya j1.).(c.,s am,t call Hhe Iwo(ee,...)r..ti):.get:iiiis..conlIttneed, PJl.j st.d the be:st th:1:::in to t-.v,e.ii..),c9ti.at .6,:ff the intesa,,,,.that4.,:&. Holt P:111..s v tiOt?.:O From: Adorit.Suddoth [mailto:ASuCth.qh§af.a..ne.li Sent Thursday, August.10; 2017 947 AM Alice•C.No'<:.::•;.oh*.I.s:i'6.:pfte,erg> Sobje:..interView P.'4.2,opest - Ken Dlackwell -Thursday August 1 7th -Sandy Ries in the Morning Quast Am.t *Mat Slam. Mat:Stayer isfilling Irrior Sandy Rios on ThlOday.August 1710(Ne*.Thursday)and would 'like to have Ken 3ckwWon tha.show.to discuss the Election Integrity .Qe.iremiSsiOn and any updateehe might have on that.subje.d. Met wbUld Lk r.) iirtaiYiew Ken at about 8:20AM Eastern.. It would beabout I. :friinutes, Work with.Whawa:t4.0.get. Aettiai snment Mart s 8:23 Eastern. can only do 10-15, V18Ei will Thank you Mr your time Adam Sudduth — ProOoer. Sandy Rio*:i in tne Morning: 17-2361-A-002341 Ntps;ilmalgoa9le..comiroaiiikAPtii;, :26:ik.zIdalaitOcAisver.:406kgBOJNIleolLiforit3V4=0M:ziri'.;.b.1,42:oser;1200;cgoriff4).fliritsiiy%520gtup*isR&o.,. ...... • • ..... .....,, ••••• 1/2 .2M7 Grnai!FW inamilew Request- Kvirt BlackleYoU Thigsday. Augu$117th -Sandy Rios Vow: - Guest i-iosz Met Stayer „.. Ken Blackwell < To:•Aiice Chao <4.tehao t@jrc.org> > *Thu, Aug .1.0 2017et1.013.AM. Thanks Alicel Please confirm for 1.0mins Oh the 17th at.8:20a.r.n. Ciiiie•thern myceøphone number. te: Subject: Re:I:M.:Interview Request - Ken Blackwell - Thursday August 17th SandV Ries in the Wintning. Guest.HoSt heist. Stayer rag:1W Ken Slackw To: Boo: Ken Blackweil Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 206 AM ioxt, httPs'illTiAil.009iex.'0$•,•11rasittUiprI:uix:2,1*:11def466::0El&IsverttujOSROBCJNO.*ttl MIXXXXXXMOW£64£///reAy. , Aowyx,o, 17-2361-A-002342 vic.-.,yipt&cIzzi;l'"?..esse:It"::1:20:.)1o(*(?n`;<.:20i;E:;;cviZy:4•20::"(:qr:(1;;>:>i,:;;Icqs 911612.0'17. • Le fromVcChrth •."'Y Ken Btackwati Letter from Vice Chair Kobach irii:E*Sa.cgi•• • • ••• Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP . Mark Rhodes , Christian Adams eadan-t@lectioniElwc*.nter.cm>.i."Al.ar) L. King" Cc:"Paolett6, Mark R. EOPPOVP'‹Ker.R.PEtolettat)ovp.eop.gov>,'MorgaiL Matthew E. EOPiOVF.;" ‹Matrapw.E..M.prgan@c.nee..eop,gm. peer:Members, Measo see theatWched letters•from Vioe. Chair Kobach, Which•will betraTismitRid to States soon.. Thank you, Andrew July, 26,2017 Letter from Vice Chair Ktie Koba.pttf ch 601 17-2361-A-002343 WAY FW ai,maifssioti;S.(:>Es and 1.11•E t.of.Cagification. Ktalackw FW: Commission SCEs and the Hatch Act Point of Clarification inessNe. . .: Kossack, Andrew S. EOP/OVP To: Kns kobedl "owlawson@ses.in.gov" . Christy McCormick ..... Wort At„t( 2,2017 at david(g)capitolparinersar.corri". , ark Rhodes --.-4nrhodes@Woodr,Ounlywv.00m>, Non Spaitovsky, Hans" , •..1-;.. ,, r ,*".-4 Arita/le...mg>, Christian Adams <*adarris@electionlawcenter,corn:?, "Alan King" .L. Cc:"Paeletta, Mark R,. E.C.WICAIIP' ,"Morgan, i'viattheW E. EOP/OVP" :‹Matthew.E...MorgeneEkrop.eop.gov>."Baykan, i'..)aniz.M, . EOP.I0VP" ‹.Deniz.,M..Baykan(g.ovo.aop..gov> Deer Mernbem, GSA be:low:froni If.fla.1 .regard'irig thellatcli Act.•trvuu have eny•ciuiti•o•as, plea$e:likme know. We are happy to provideyou with an acitlitional information of'derifieatioh. you need. Please::effie iharik5; Andrew Andrew J..Kossack ExeCative•Nreor &DeSignated Federal Officer PreiJenthl ..ekits.fisory commission on Election 1raegrhy • Hi Andrew., This t follow-upte our ethics briefing on Julyl%2017.I wanted to provide the meitberS of the.Presidehtial Commission on Election integrity the "Commission") with additional ihformation on the Hatch Act wici clarify what "duty hours" for the Commission means since they are in a non-pay status. Under the liatch Act,. 5 CFR § 734,661, Subpart F—Ernpioyees Who Work on:An Irregular or Occasioriai Basis Employes, la]empioyee who woks on an irregular or occasional tyasiiii or is a special Government employee„:15 sUbject:to the: (MCI) Act) whet) he or she is on duty," 17-2361-A-002344 . 2.8acitic•6466cocrif.js,vdrzi.ijOaRt.)8(.'t.liVa.efi.akiiew:Vg01:::,:kritkow.J.K08satiN..400;ep.eop.say&qs4r,trireUerch:::.1;,;... lOgis:irleK90013fo.coinhymiu,T.Ouiz: Akt.'"?......:0:4 4:PW0555§5^1..:M.S?:::?: " Iffe.11114AW00,2e4MZ:$.1aileeffeffiSPNAME.W.Mi.:;>:**KMOK:i***** -FW:..Corrnkssio . rt $GEs.W3ii tha Hatph As.;Pi3oF:C1:4Effiction The Hatch Aet governs the poiitical actiAties of federal employees, including special .government employees. Politica/ activity is defined as an activity directed at the success or failure of a political party, undidatefor partisan poiltical office OF partisan politica! group. For purposes of the Hatch Act, because the Commission members are special government employees and are not in a pay status,"on chity" means. the hours each member perfomis government business (i.e,, Commission busirr:tss). A Commission me,mbers duty hours include, but are not limited to: 1) attendance at official meetiNgs; 21 attendance at sub-committee meetings; 3) e.search performed on behalf of the (:ortimission; and 4)the review of re.searchjpreparation to attend meetings. For example, 'an employee appointed toa special coqiniission or task force who does not have a reoular tour of duty may: run as a partisan political candidate, but may actively campaign only when he or she is not on duty." 5 C.F.R..§. 7:34.601. An example of "on duty" for ComMissionmenters commission member attends a committee meeting from 8:00 &m. .-Lzfj0 p.m., during this time the Cbrnmission member is prohibite.d from (!ngaging in political activity, including but not limited to sendino a tweet about a candidate for partisan political office or send out emails asking for donations to his or her campaign for partisan political office. On the very same day,from 3:00 p.m. to 7 p.m., the Commission member is not prohibited from attending a political fundraiser and even solitino political contributions from the attendees, because the event if, not during the Commission member's duty hours. Please note that bawd on the heightened level of interest this Commission has received;:to alleviate potential appearance Coritimis, when Witiibie, Commission members may not want to engage in political activities on days where tiv Cfornmissbn rnember has or will peform work on.betialf of the Commission. best Regards, Shane $harta.T.. Vinson Assistant General Counsel: Ethics Law Staff -General taw Division U.S. General Services Administration CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message and any attachments to this, email message may contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is legally privileged. Tile information is intended only for the ase of the individual or entity to whi-n it is eddiessed. Please do not forward this message without permission, If yoUare notthe intended recipient or the. employee or agentresponsible.for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any idisclosure, 17-2361-A-002345 hkOinvi.i,a(xvii6.wrritinaliiiiidhiaiis.ziiodriiewd&is.yerzEijorkibecAio...w).&viipia4iiAritir6si.J.Kpopols%40ovp.eop.gov&cminietUkr.oith.e:qq... 2/5 ii?.Gertait d the i•knoh Act- poifit a eiarirication copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance• on the contents of' this transmission is strictly prohibited, If you have received transmission in error, please notify us immediately by telephoile or return email and dtlete. and destroy the original Egriail fnessage, any attachments thereto and ail copies thereof. (;ro #illp&Iimeil.cpi)gie.corlihreitittifintg:42Aik:::Itid4Ciaalkajsver•-zitiCIfiRgBOJNO.enAviewrrat&e.Atidrew..I.Kosseel6541ovp . : : 17-2361-A-002346 govEelAz,n Ik‘•'4..n'3Y'''-9 u033.34.• l'' X Wit/2O17 Gmail • Meese HQLD next meetin0: Ken Blackwell please HOLD for next meeting rIlemel•- Kossack,Andrew J. EOP/OVP To: Kris Kobach "owlawsong soeitt, ov" , Mark Rhodes, , *Von Spakovsky, Hans" , Christian Adams , "Alan L. Kings' 'metthew.dulliap@maine.gov" "Pecletta, Mark R. EOPIOVP" ,"Mon..lan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" „ "Williams, Ronald E. EOPIOVP" Dear Mambeie, . . Please mark your calendars for Tuesday, September 12th for ournext meeting'. Youft likety waritto plan b travel the afternoon/evening of the 11th. We'll.be back in tout.% early next week with additional dettAils. Thanks for your patierttx:: we lock down all tli logistics. if you trc:..lve any questions or concerns at this point, pleaaa let.me know. Thanks, „Andrei, / And.rew)..Kossar.:k :Executive i.t.ifelOtor,,Presidential Advisory CommissiOn on Election Integrity Asso-C- Coffice of the Vice President Andrew,J,K;:iaql;i@f.tv:p.eop..jo.,.; 17-2361-A-002347 hflps:Arnail.gvegles:on't,rriallitAl?tli.2•&ik:::ttlor46.E.;c0atilsvorzzuj061:4j:DCJKI010,4,,riewr•pik..Andsim.,1:K.os,sacti%•40evp,eop.gov&nr5FIrt.Q>>> krep.eop.q.cv&qs:lilifAsarchagis . >;,..k.v.v.e.yeozo.....,::::,:.:269.400r,z,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,00;0...... &roil Pia tw-1; .„. • Pis calf rne.asagii? Paokitta, Mark R. EOP/OVP Fri. May 19, 2017 at 9.57 AM Mk Paoieft Counsel to Vce 202.456.2734 'work: .Se.ntfrorn ray.iPhone 17-2361-A-002349 1512017 Gimil • Welcome;ti Orgartizetioml Call Ken Elackwelt Welcome; Initial Organizational Call message ..• •. • • . .• • KOS:sack, Andrew j. EOP/OVP , "davidOcapitolpartnersarcom" ,"luis,boruncla@maryland,gov" ,"mrhodes@woodcountyw.coW ,"Morgan, Matthew:E.:EOP/OVP" 4:Matthew.E.Morgarr(dlovp.eop.gov Dear Members, Congratulations for your appointment to the Presidential Advisory CortunitSion on Election Integrity (,Commitsien")..% aptoeiate your leadership and look Forward to working with you. The General Services Administration filed the Commission's charter this past Friday, which officially establishas.the Commission as a Presidential advisory committee and permits the Commission to commence its official duties. under Executive Order 13799. As the Commission's Designated Federet.Officer.(uDFO"), I will support tile Corilmissionle work arjd.ffs merribers with adrhinistrative needs and ensure the Comrnission complies with the Federal Mvisory Committee Act("FAc41, Th update you, begin preparing for the Commission's first meeting, and answer any questions you have at this time, we would like to hold a conference call this Wednesday at 11:30.a,m, Eastern. Please let me know if you cannot participate in this call. I will send a lender invitation with call-in infornlation soon, Please also hold July 19th on your calendars. This is the date we are tracking for the CMTI171iSSiOft'S first meeting. Please note that FACA requires public meetings and 154ay advance notices for "piny gathering of advisory committee members(whether in person or through electronic means)held with the approval of an agency for the purpose of deliberating on the substantive matters upon which the advisory committee provides advice or recommendations." Thus, on this call the Commission may not "deliberat[e] . substantive matters" such as what final recommendations the. Commission might provide in its report However, FACA allows discussion of the following withoutreouirino an open meeting Preparatory work, Meetings of two or more advisory committee or subcommittee members convened solefy to gather information, conduct research, or analyze relevant issues:and Facts in preparation:for 6 meeting of the advisory committee, or to draft position papers for deliberation by the advisory committee: and Administrativagerie Meetings of two Or moreadvisory committee or subcommittee members convened solely to discuss administrative matters of the advisory committee or to receive administrative information from a Federal officer or aoenoy, 17-2361-A-002350 lIttp4naii.poqle.cearniMailitiltr?ill=2&ill.altict.466c0ElkjsVerMile%R.. t00.1r40..m.&vie.wz-plAq:••Alldrew..l.Kos$tce.4.400,4),o0i)„cyre&18.2--IrilEASOOrcht:•;:r.i... 540W/ Mc2:2M:20030, ee ed. X..., AO,/ •• • , swedigIOR:............................. ••..W4(4..651614 1I2 1812017 hi other words, we &tail - L'Velcorne; initial Ofganixational may freely discuss administrative matters and issues related to meeting preparation on this call: but we must be careful not to engage in deliberation on substantiv e matters. With that said, please let me know if you have any questions or items you want to discuss during this call. And if you have any other questions in the meantime, please do not hesitate to let me know. Again,thank you for your service. We look forward to speaking with you this week. Best regards, Andrew Andrew J. kossack ASsociate Caw-MEd Mk* oi the Vice President Email: Andrew.J.Kossack&rvp,eop.:,-.Jov 17-2361-A-002351 illIps:llmail.googire.comisnoilitifOi?Esfr-laits=:111 (1466c0r.j&jsveratiptiRgf3C,M40.en.&vikovv&r.i.-Anelfew..1.1 Mon Jun 26 '7 at 11:37 AM "cmccormick@eac.gov" , "Inis-borunda@tnarytand,gov" •=luis.borurxiiEl@maryland.gov>,"mrhodes@woodrountywv.co rn" ,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" Ken Eltackl,vell To:"Kossaek. Andrew J. .1:0P/OVP" ,"davicidcapitotpar nersar.com" , lois.borunda @maryland.gov" ‹luis.bcrunda©maryland.gmr>,"rnthodes@woodcourtty wv.corn" ,"Pac.,letta, Mark R. EOPIOVP" ,,"Morga n, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" ‹Matthew.E.Morgan© ovp.eop.gor> Call in details? On WI,Jun 26, 2017 at 11:37 AM, KossacK Andrew J. EOP/OVP wrOte:. Kossack, Andrew J. EOPIOVP To: Ken 8 I Cc: Tue. Jun 27,2017 at 11;20 AM twisty McCormick "oavideJicapitoipartnersar,com" ,"luis.borunda@marylaftripov" < uis,borundat§rnarylarid.onv›,"mrhodesras ,woodoounlywv.corn” , "Paoletta, Mark R, EOPIOVP" , "Morgan. Matthew E. EOPIOVP" kiiS.borunci*.rnarylanci.gOV; ic .,t-4cf-30tc.)ipar leil.-Ilar;co#1`.;COm Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP .; Morgan, Matthew E. €0P,/ovP c:tv'latthe.0.f..Y.Mortj o ovpseop.gop> Subject: Re; HOLD: Organizational Call • PCEI Ca in details'? :On Mon. Jun 26., 2047 at 11.:37 AM,.Kossack.. Andrew J. EOPlOVP.,:Andraw.S.KtmackdOVIti-ePP,gOV> wrote Ken Blackwell To: H Kossack. Anr r Co: `OVP" The,.Jun 27,2017 at 11:23.AM Christy *McCormick ,"davld,doapitolpartnersar.corn ,"rnrhocies@woodcountywv.corn" ,"Paoletta, Mark R. EOP1OVP" ,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" Great. I'm a day early anyway! Call in details for On Mon,.Jun 2.6.2017 at t1:37 AM,kossack, Andrew 3: .EOPIOVP ---Andrew.J.keesack•fomeop.c..,:•OV> Kossack, Ancinew.J. EOPIPVP 27,2017 at 12:53 PM t's aw.(qcapitolpartnersar.com < %i‘ff capitolpartnersar.com>, "luishorunda@roaryland.gov" ‹luis.boiunda@maryland.gov>,"rnrhodes@woodcountywv.com" "Paoletta Mark R. EOPIOVP's -4 44atthew.EMorgan@ovp.eop.gov).Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp..eop.gov›,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" Attachtl.,d is the agenda fi:s.torn row's cag_ once.we haw : ,the.a!fj.in inforrndor, ll !„..,ffloaii.updatEd cencir jny!tation and attach this to that.rnes5age:as.well, but wewanted yOU b% have this in :;.icivolce, Ti-Rhks, Andrew Andret,s,J.:.Kossack Asso!....iate 17-2361-A-002353 4 16/20:17 amail Hot.o: orgooittationai •••Pi;;EI VicePrdnt :A.ndraW..i:koss'ak@op,eop,gov. From: Ken tliackWell [Mato.: Sent.TOesday, June 27,2i317 :24 AM Kossack, AntireW.L F.DP/OVP .;iMuim, Matt.he.w E. EOP/OVP.‹Pettthz.l*,.E.:;,100,Van@cryp.eop,gov> $ubja: Re:'HOLD: Orgartikarional.Call PCE1 day eariy anyway! Ca W details- for On. Mon. Jun 2e, 217 I II Kossack AndremsJ,. EOPIOVP Organizational Conference Can 6.28.2017.clocx —.4 200K David Dunn <.claVid(<7(4pitOlpartrterar.com> To::."Ko:seack,.Andrewl E0.0,10VPs 4 :Andre.w.A.Kossack'z.")ov .eort.00V>. Go: Ken BlackWell The, Jan 20.17.0t4:14 pro nary McCormick "A.as.botuncia@rnafyl'antig. iu borunda dynaryland.gov>,"mrhodes @woo countywv..corn" Look forward to it :David K Dunn. Capitol Part:nem...14C P.O. Box 7627 Litile Rock, AR 72217. 1.ext.?cg.ives;j 17-2361-A-002354 googte.cornifnaititigr.kti::2i)..:,---1.cicril66606&j:gverntil06R5f6C..INC !*.$,4e.t.4":29t8r.p: Anifrow.4.Kosmdk%40oyp.eop.gov&t.;;;:tRil&r( 5:,:Arc.):.:,,,tii.:... 4.•••••••••"•••••••••••,, •.••••• .r.okr afia,i2:07 • OLD Ca - OcE.J jirj •5_::::::•••• „.••••.: Ken Blackwell 4 s HOLD: Organizational Call - PCEI KOSsack, Andrew J.E.OP/OVP The Jun v.— 1.7.at 7:34 PM 'david@ceortclpartriersoccolir avk saw r. par inarsar.corn>„ luis.borunda@rnaryiand.gov" ,"Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVPY 4.1.1ark.R.Paoleita0ovp.eop.gov>,"Morgark..Matthew E. EOPICNP" ,"IlliS,borunda©maryland.gov" , "rnrhodesftwoodo:::luntywvs.s.onr , Christy McCormick. Cc:"Paoletta, Marl( R. EOPIOVP" Dear Members. Please see the attahed letters to seaetanesof state and chief state election officials. These will be transmitted soon. Thanks; Andrew Andrew J. KrissSack Associet Counset Office of tre vice President Cell: Ancirew.J.Kossai, ..-kef.wp..eco,gov • OS Letters.pdf 17-2361-A-002357 htls.m.lhnialLgoo.06..ctjinimai.i.tiilOrkiis:2AikzzlOct406.0114sver=upaRgErsINO.e0.S.Niew:pt&grAndreVo..3,k6ss-clk%400v.p.oro4.3:5yZicqpirkm8istiAfdr-rp.l.s., 111 .,1812411 Gmail • roKzelit eittail re: ciate:requeei rri Ken Star:km:8 recent email re: data request messoge Kossack, Andrew J. EOPI To: Kris Koinch v.J.Koseack@oVp.eop,gov> iCtsos.in.gov" at 10:04 AM Christy McCormick "davi. @capitolpartnersar.com' <.4y? ,cgcanito partriersar.com>, Mark Rhodes < mrhodes©woodcountym.com>,"von Spakovsky, Hens" Cr: "Psoleita, Mark R. EOP/OVP" < Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp,eop.gov>,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP". Dear Members, Please ee ti'e email below, which just went out to state election officials a few minutes ago. As you can see, in the recent litigation, we have asked states to hold light of off on submitting data at this time. Please let Tie know if you have any questions. Thanks, Andrew Andrew J. Kossack Associate COUI/Sei Office °I the Vice President Cell: Emsu: From; Ft\t-OVP-Electien Integrity Staff Sent: Monday, July 10,20179:40 AM Subject: Requestto Hold on Submitting Any Data Until Judge Rules on TRO Dear Election Official, As you may know,.the Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a complaint see.lung a Temporary Restraining Order ("IRO")in connection with the June 28, 2017 letter sent by Vice Chair Kris Kobach requesting publicly-available voter data. See ElectrOnic Privacy Information Center v. Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity filed:k the U.S.. District Court for the District cif Columbia.: Vntil the Judge rules on the TRO, we request that you hold On data. We will follow up with you with further instructions submkting.any once the Judge issues her ruling, Andrew Kossack Designated Federal Officer Presidential Advisory Commission on Election tritegnty ElectntegrityStifig;4ovp..e9p.1ov ra.4.k.,:firrg.:A..gobill..z.cerfi;n:ii:ii101'hii::2.1s,ijotitJef466t048, 17-2361-A-002358 ,jsvestrujb6RgBojNO.4m.klkview.placiAndrew...1.kaoack%4Orrip.eop.iovLitger•=trileASi;archzqu.... ill 4i.18r2017 arna -POttiAvel instrodlons -Merrthers<::an Begin Boaing ken Bia To; Kris Kobach "owlawson. sosin &vs'.< Fri J at 11/43 AM "claw gcapi o pa nersamorn , Mark Rhodes ,"von Spakevsky, Hone , Christian Adams Cc: "Paoletta, Mark R, EOP/OVP" ,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" Please see the below note from GSA with instructions for booking travel. I've highlighted the telephone number for the travel agent, which is available 24/7 to help you book_ Asa reminder on our schedule, please plan on being at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (just west of the White House)by about 8:06.zt,m. on Wednesday mornitv. Feel free to travel to D,C on Tuesday and 00111 elt.hrr rater on Wednesday or anytime Thursday, We expect the meeting to adjourn by midfafternoon. I will share a full agenda with you soon.. if you have any qiie&tforiS or concerns,just let me know. Thanks, Andrel.v From:Jonathan Clinton Mirnaitto:joriathari.clintonftsa:cjovj Sent: Friday, July 14, 2017 10:30 AM To: Kossack, Andrew j, Er...)P/OVP .e..Andrew..4,KosSack@o'vp.ec.V.90v> Cc: Kris Palmer M ,;Valerie Whittington OW .VCIliei:16,:Wliittiilgtori(U'ig3a.140.v>.; c•.=,tizabeth..cainigg8a.90.1.; Christine Courter 1-11CT'c-y sti he.eaurter@gseg..gr);:p; kaUlerinejurucker@ovp.eop,.gov Subject:Travel instructions Members Can Begin Booking Andrew All.traVeling rnemberS! accountshave been established (with the exceptions Of Ms. McCormick and Mr. Adams, Who we: understand are DC baSed).. The members or their support staff can now call our travel ageritdirectly to book their travel. 17-2361-A-002359 :2017 0'1184 - Travel inatructions - Mernbers Can Begio Ekoking ADTRAV(GSA travel agent):11.1M1,available 2417 Key Information when calling the travel agent: ADTRAV will recognize members by first and last name and agency—whic h .is the General Services Administration(GSA)for the purposes Of this travel. 4. Have a personal credit card available—hotel will be booked using a personal card. Members can Choose their hotel and will be reimbursed at the maximum per diem rate for DC ($172/night)(keep hotel remipts) * - The committee has budgeted for travel fortio to 3:days per member between 7/18 and 7/20. Arrangements should be made within those parameters. * Members(or theirstaff) should tell the agent the travelers date of birth if making airline reservations. This is. a requirement in order for tickets to be issued. Travelers will need to follow federal regulations governing travel. Key points: * Hotel: Max lodging per diem rate reimbursed for Washington. DC in July; $172(keep hotel receipts— reimbursed for max cif $172. lodging taxes will be reimbursed separately as well) e Airfare: Must use coach class and the contract carrier fare(booked by travel agent) o Exceptions to contract fare must be documented/justified—e_g., Timing of contract fare flights do not allow traveler to meet mission or non-contract fare is less expensive • Meals & Incidental Expenses(MI&E): reimbursed $69 per day for DC; $51.75 on first & last day of travel(no receipts needed, reimbursed full amount regardless c.)f expenses—above or below) * Rental cars: Receipt required for all expenses ' Tax/fro:reimbursed for official business related to the committee--e.g., to/from airport, to/from committee meetings(keep receipts) * Other (i.e. airline baggage fees): Reimbursed (keep receipts) Airfare will be booked through the travel agent and paid directly by GSA. All other approved travel expenses (hotel; MI&E; ts vU be paid for using the member's personal card and will subsequently be reimbursed. Details on reimbursement process will be provided upon completion of the travel. If members or their staff have questions regarcimg the above that the travel agent can't answer, please don't hesitate to have the members staff reach out lo Valerie Whittington or Kris Palmer. valeirie.whitiingtoriggsa.gov:- 202,501-3395 kris.palmOrgftrisa.tiov 202.;•50141525 Best, Jon 17-2361-A-002360 hq.;:vilen:Agos.10.con.Vtrailimi017u1::2alk-Itir3c6156e.Od&jsvarr-tijO6RgBCJIY0.03).tsviewz:pt&q. =Ancirew.,;.Kc.$svack%40ovp.eop .govaqs.‘:inaa,searcilmqo 213 2D1.7 Gma11 - FAN: Travel frtstnictions- Members C.:an Begin Booking Jan Clinton Chier.of Staff Offite.of.00.Yeinment-wicia Peiicy U.S. General Servicas AdrninkAation '2(12,549-241.-36 17-2361-A-002361 31flps:liffiail.gcs(;gie.cc?infras3iIIWORUinMikr41d.:1466c0fiNsvElrz;Ji0:3Rpf3C...g4f).c.1-Aviow.pta,q::A:Id:E:w...3,1 0 , The, Jul 11. 2017 at 5:56 PM .. -on@sos,in. ov" , Mark Rhod 3f nersar.com es ,'von Spakovsky, Hans" . Christian Adams . "King, Alan" Dear Members. FiNI, I'd like welcome our two newest members, Judg e Alan King and J. Christian Adams, whom yesterday. We are grateful for their willi the President appointed ngness to serve and excited to have them . Congratulations, and welcome! Thanks for your patience as we've coord inated with the General Services Admin istration on your travel arrangements. We've been wailing for our commission's budget to be allocated so that we can start approving expenditures, We expect final approval and dedication of funds soon, so we wanted to go ahead rtind initiate some of the travel processes so can begin planning acc.ordingly, The most you urgen and then scan and email it back to me as soon t step is to please fill out the attached form titled "EFT Enrollment Form." as possible. Related to travel. I also wanted to make you aware of a scheduling note. The meeti ng on the 19th will begin at 11:00 8,31„ but we will need all members present at the Eisenhower Executive Office Build ing tiy about 8:15 a.m. to orient you and oonduct required ethics training and Feder al Advisory Committee Act training. For those of you traveling from outside Washington, D.C., you are welcome to fly in the day before and stray in town overn ight, We expect the meeting to adjourn by mid-afternoon at the latest, so you may plan to fly out in the evening on Wednesday or anytime on Thursday if you care to remain in D.C. Wednesday right. So that we can begin the process of getti ng your travel arrangements booked, pleas e reply to meanly and let me know if you'Ii be flying in for the meeting, If so, HI also need your full name as d appears on your gove.rnment-issued ID, your dale of birth, and your TSA Pre-Check number (if you have one). Also. jIjfla‘, not yet submitted your financial dis losure form olegse s rid that back to me as soon as possible. Its critical we get these reviewed as soon as possible., so please try to send them within the next day or so if you en. back in touch soon with more informatio n, but please don't hesitate to email or call me anytime if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks, Andrew Andrew J. Kossack Designated Federal Officer 17-2361-A-002362 tIttp:MIvaii.gong4).PorntroniliolOi?uv:428,ik==. 14:5ctgleepc0:38:jsver=uprAgliCliNilen.&view=pt& q.,:Ancirew...I.Kossack%4Ciovp.eoo.uov&o vInIr44%Pwri l:2^,, ia.a017 Grnaii -updates on July 19th meeeng; st:hc;chtle an travel alrengernents Presidential Advisory Cornrnissiori on Election Integrity Cell: Email: AE.girevv.J.k.ossack(g23:i I), 2 attachments z;la4 EFT_Enrefirnent Form,pdt 532K 4i) 00E450(Jan2017)(fillabie).pdf 398K . .......... . . .. Kassa(*)Andrew J. EOP/OVP ‹Andiew.J.KOssack@ovp.eop.gov> To: Kris K, ."owlawson sos.ins ov" .,' 4 Th, ‘' I. et.6:50 PM c .ormic "davir %,capitolpartnersar.com" •oavida)c%apitt:Apartnerse:r.corn>, ivtark Rhodes < mrhodesAl , voodcountywv.corn>, "von Spakovsky, Hans" •5Hans.VonSoakovskyheritaw.org›, Christian Adams ••: adarns@electionlawcenter.r..om>„ "King; Alan",ckinga@ircalsor > Cc: "Paoletta, Mark R. EOPIOVP" < Mark.R.Paoletla©ovp.eop.gov>,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOPIOVP" Thanks again for your patience on travel . . arrangements. The interagency funding agreement was which was the last roadblock:to allowing GSA signed this twerritlg, to start booking your travel, IT be back in touch either sometime this evening or tornorroW morning with detailed instructions on next steps. The process will be fairly simple: GSA will connect you directly with their White Glove travel service, which is a 24/7 service that you can call and book airfaro,. hotels, rental cars: and whatever else you'll need. I also wanted to let you know that the Commission's webpage is now live on WhiteHouse.gov, You can view it here: tIttps://wwv,f.whitehouse.goviblog/2017/07/13/presidentialadvisory-oommission-E.Aection-integrity, Last, if you haven1 yet sent in your 460 Financial Disclosure form, please get that to me as soon as you can so WO 4"40 Clear.you before the meeting: i'llibeietouch again soon, but please math out anytiMeif you have any questions. Thanks, Ahdrew. Andrew sr, Kossack Executive Director and Designated Federal Officer Presidential Advisory(.7.:OrniniSsion on Election Intinty Ardrew.sl,Kossack@ovp,eop.gov 17-2361-A-002363 ?Iti.ps:.ilfrai.$:.i<*ipi...t.Oinimaqt0/()P".0:441,k.411.1cf466c0cf$jskmilzOiC)M911C130.e.il...8,5iiewie lit4qz:/i,ritlfew.,.1..tco.ssad4400vp.pop.gova qs=ltua&soaitrsoo.... )•.• • ......................................................... ' (81261 Zfewl arrangemenif3 From; Kossaok, Andrew 1.E0P/OVP Sent Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:57 To:'Kris Kobach' +CI v' 'Christy McCormick' : nersar. '4•‘Anavir.,1(ii.lcar.)itolpartrie(SeV.COn":>;'Mark Rhodes' i T!>;'von Spakovsky, Hans' .;'Christian: SukijectUpdateeon July 19th meeting::Schedule and travel arrangements toza KoSsack, Andrew J. To: Kris Kohach ,w.J.Kossack@ovp.eop,gov> cwlaw n@sos..in.gov" , Mark 'da:viaLcapitolpartnersar.com" Rhodes ‹.inrhodesca.3.wooricountywv.com>, "von Spakovsky, Hans" ‹Hans.Von"Soakovsky@heritage.org>, Christian Adams < aciaitts©,electionlawcenter.corn>, "King, Alan" Cc: "Paoletta, Mark R, EOP/OVP" < Mark.R.Paolettarpovo,eop.gov.>,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" e smatitiew.E.Morgan©Ovp.eopsgov> Please see the attached agenda for next week's public minutes to introduce yourself and talk about your vision meeting. As you can see, we hope each of you Will Take about five for your role on thecommission. During the the meeting, there will be time to explore discussion portion of and decide what topics the commission will address. If you have any questions, please let me know, Andrew J. Koss:a?* Designated Federal Officer Presidential Advisery.CQmirtiss:ion .on Ejottiort integrity Agenda for July 10, 2017 Initial Meeting.pdf .^-.4 70K niye 17-2361-A-002364 ;%?rnirsailiukV'h.iPF2&ikFz.lcfcfO6;:0IS&jav6rz:ujCi6RgfiC,JNO,tm.3.:rieie.fapf&q::Ar:dmm,..1,Kt)ssac:k?ri,•IOOvp.ci)pl-pv&t.iw::twe&so8rch=:qt:,.,. ............ ....... •""• .........•••• gitEtt.2017 °mei' • my °penning Rernerim the rooetirg of the. PACE Kea Wackwell My Openning Remarks the meeting of the PACE Ken Blackwell To: "Kossack. Mc.row "-t.!;nclrew4Kossack ovp:eap.gov> Co:'Paoletta, Mark. R. EOP/OVP". Tue. Jul 18, 2017 at :414 PM Hi! Please make copies for the other Commissioners, the official records and others as you deem appropriate. will send you a PDF copy of Vale Lew & Policy Review article. shortly. Thanks° 170719 JKB opeeing remarks-PACELpdf • 78K Ntps:14nAil..ciicifA.-4o.a.:inirnailitiniait-224ili::lilof,iiii6c0d8t 17-2361-A-002365 isvemij061-2gE3C..INO.erayitimpzptamsr 1fiili.i7aP51c7a4gfe;2:iig=Ancirow ...i.Kos*iecf, .%40;:ivn.eo.. AWreasx,ssrMkkwv•::::::::::::::::::::::: 1%1 '111a/2017 Septeraber Meeting 9112 in manehesier, Nm,Hampshire Ken Blackwell ••••• September Meeting - 9/12 in Manchester, New Hampshir e message - •. ,J,Kossack©ovp.eop.gov> H etwlawson sosin Kossack, Andre r a. Thu. Aum 24, 2017 at 1:02 PM Ov›. ,C risty icCormick "clavid@capitalpartnersar.conl" • *cap a pa nersar.com>, Mark Rhodes , Christian Adams , "ALI.in L. King" "matthew,dunlapgmeine.gov" 9Paoletta, Mark R, E.OPIOVP" ,"Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" ,"Williams, *Ronald E. EOP1O VP" a I pear Members. Thank you for holding September 12th for our next ineeting, and for your patience as we worked throug h some.logistical deViils. I am excited to share that Secretary Gardner has kindly offered to host the Commission in New Hampshire at the,. New Hampshire InstiWte of Politics at St.•Anselm College. The meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. Easter n on Tuesday, *September 12th, and we expect to finish nelater than 4:00 p.m. Please feel rree to Proceed with making your travel arrangernerits_As•a reminder,. here are the instrUt lionefor booking travel through'GSA's travel services: Booking Travel to New Hampshire Instructions Members or their support staff who have establi shed traveler atcOurits with GSA can call the travel agent directly to book their travel. ADTRAV(GSA travel agent): 3T7-4726716,availab le 2417 Key Information when calling the travel agent: ADTRAV will recognize Members by first and last name and agency-.which is the General Services Administration(GSA)for the purposes of this travel. 4: Have a:personal credit card available--hotel will be booked using a personal card. Members can choose their hotel and will be reimbursed up to the maxim um per diem rate for Manchester, NH ($108/night)(keep hotel receipts) • 8. The committee has budoeted for travel for up Ito 3 days per member between 9/11 and 9111 Arrangements should be made within those parameters. * Members(or their staff) should tell the agent the traveler's date of birth if making airline reservz;Rions. This is a requirement in order for tickets to be issued. Travelers will need to follow federal TegLiWions.governing travel_ Key points: 17-2361-A-002366 6c0e1ajever=uj()6Rpf3C,INatiriAviev.r.p1RiqzAndriaw...i.Kw..sec10640ovp.sop.gou& gs=-1fm:Ufor:e.z::qa... 112 :filips:ilmaii.goragle.mn*Akqiu.T.ti?ti2ik:1.1tior<16 •••••• • ............ • •.... ••,,•,•••• ... Gmail - September Meeting - 9112 in Manchester, Now Hampshire t, Hotel: Max lodging oe . dik.klri.rate reimbursed for Manchester, NH in September: $108(keep hotel receipts—reimbursed up to $108. Lodging taxes will be reimbursed separately as well)The travel agent can help membersfind rooms at or below Per diem. Airfare: Must use *Coach class and the ctr .rreç fare(booked.by travel agent) o Exceptions to contract fare must be documentedijOstiffed—e.9„ Timing of contract fateffights do not allow traveler to meet mission or non-contract fare is less expensive • Meals & Incident Expenses(Ml&E): reimbursed $64 per day for Manchester;,$48 on first & last. clay of travel(no receipts needed, reimbursed $64 for full day and $48 for first and last day of travel) e Rental care: Receipt required for ali expenses • Taxis/metro: reimbursed for official business related to the comrnittee..—e.g., talfrorn airport,'Ea/from committee meetings(keep receipts) ss Other (i.e. airline baggage fees): Reimbursed (keep ree..viptS.) Airfare will be booked through the travel agent and paid directly by GSA: Alf other approved travel expenses hot!; Mi&E; will be paid for using the member's personal card and will subsequently be reimbursed. Details..on relmhureen.iont process Will be provided upon completion of the travel If M.tmlberb. or their staff have questions regarding the above that the travel agent cant answer, please don't hesitate to have the members'staff reach out to Valerie Whittington.or Kris Palmer, iori312),Igg:a,g.OV -•202-501-3395 kria.palriter(Ptisn,pv 202-5:01.0526 Wewiri Share more information eboutthe meeting and agenda soon, if you have any questions in .let•me knoW. the meantime, please ThankyoU, Andrew Andrew kossack Executive Director. Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity Associate Counsel, Office Of the Vice President C,eW Email:.Andrew..4.:KOsSack4evp.adp,gov htfPs' -'!ffiah-goVe-cornirtrafii10,1?iiii--4ik irteletfii:iced&jsvar:AtaiOtiRgB.,"....ING.en.80.,•.k.,. W• ":4697 *A 4 ;•• 17-2361-A-002367 , • lf ""w. ,,,03444444444M*A::::::ittRcRia=:;:v•WP: s‘k .1; • ,•••••I• • : 4 4 • • ) \ ...e • 6/E-'1, . 1 cl''• • • •• •• 1.‘....)...qt—L•• : •• : . .:... . •,;) . I 1 •• ...er... 411,4— 0 Gt. - ....... . . . s .. . . /7 . . • An, t ••><' .. P < I '1 11. • fl r-• <1'3 1 -2 7 I. . . ,••44/ ei • •• ?• _A I,/ P ; o • ,........1!".."•••••••••••••• -2- 17-2361-A-002368 • .•. • • • • : ,,,D.,1„;_s ,S14 ; •. •" ' • ... . . . .. 7 ,• . .. cbci . 14 ...... • •• • • • • •• A.. . I) C,* •-••••••.. os, •...AN 'e.At N if • Is,A ' , a, ( 4:n \ • 17-2361-A-002369 ieeer from Vice Cheirkebch girciirc isrin Of iseeiiiv metoilie.s Ken Blackweil letter from Vice Chair Kobach regarding submission of meeting materials .1 message Kossack, Andrew J. EOPiCiVP To: Kris Ko' "cwlawsoncd)sos.in.( ov" , Wed AIR. 30 2017 at 9:13 AM Ioniiic "davi _capitolpartnersar.com" dvlect„capi o bartnersar.com›, Mark Rhodes ,"von Spakovsky, Hans" , Christian Adams < adams@electionlawc,enter.com>,"Alan I King" 'matthew.duniap@maine,gov" , "King, Alan' Co.:"Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP" ,"Morgz.m. Matthew E EOP/OVP" , "Williams. Ronald E. EOPIOVP" Dear Members.. Please see the attached letter from Vick. Chair kobach regarding the submission of theating materials for the September 12th meeting. Also, attached as a reminder is the litigation hold letter from August 7th. Please review this letter and ensure you are preserving materials accordingly. As always, if you have any questions, please let me know Thank you, Andrew Andrew J. Kossaok Executive Director,.Presidential Advisory Commission on .Elebtion hi adrity Associate Courisei, Office of Vice President Email:+And Koss r,Pu.v.p.erup.fiCk„; Forwarded message—....From:"kossacit, Andrew 3. E.'OPIOVP" To:"Kris Kri "oWlawsonasos.in. "< ov> Christy cCormick "davi Ocapitolpartnersar.00m" -oavi 9.capito,partnersar.corn>, Mirk Rhodes < mrhodesigwoodcountywv.torn>,"von Spakovsky, Hans" , Christian Adams < adarns@electionlawcenter.com>,"Alan L. King" 00 a ta, Mark R. EOPIOVP"‹ ,"Morgan. Matthew E. EOP/OVP" "Williams, Ronald E. EOP/OVP" Boo: Date: Mon. 7 Aug 2017 15:02:45 +0000 SuNect: Litigation Hold Qear Members: Please see the ettadted litigation:hold letter from our Department of Justice attorney. This letter details .reclOiremebi aSsociatIA +with:the litiqation record retention pendii1g. Against :the OtfiremissiO, seA &review it cerefi.fliy, The coriiplainis froth each of the pending laWSuits are also attached. for your reference:..1f.yoi.i have any questions, please let me Know. Also, wei+re; close to finaliir stails lof the September.meeting. I Will be ilaot‘, ii touch :wed With more informetiOn. 17-2361-A-002370 istkis..;+;rn00if..9tre.#0,COTOirna ifiliOtt:1442&ik :,10Cre000MciSVerzllio6RgriC040.611.&-vicrs'ezpteci.rAtuirtAtv,..1,KoStpick%40ovp.eap,gov&qtrztas4Si.Nstor:7,qtL., ............. ."" 112' .40:17 Grwit-:lensOffOln Vice Ctii§ir Kobach.regeirdin3 su.brnission.of maotintmateriats pkasecall zmytfme if you haVt:3.any quethian?....or. Thai*s: Andrew Andrew J. 14:ciskitek. Diractoi-& 1).e:51i:3mi:116d. Fedekii Officer Pres'i(lential Advisoryi:" ,ornraielsion t)el 10fellity. 9 attachments ,:zr) Vice Chair Kohach letter ne meeting material cleadline.pdf 202K 4w.i Commission Lit Hold Ltr FINAL (8-4.17).pdf 35K Compl.pdf :••••' 134K Complaint.pdif 614K iv,1 33 - Second Amended Complaint.pdf 243K •,?,?! "4 COMpbint.pdf 816, 4K LDF-Complaint.071817,pdt 3366K Comp (0O2)pdt "*1. 945K noname.emi 18480K V999Al2:52:99999=5444Wee.:44 ,"x4444444,4""" 17-2361-A-002371 00;9.6-op.gov&r,o,..zriKA.,;::atcs;;;.qt?... •••••••••••••••••••••"xv ••••• ••••••••••• .49A,7 2;•:, gilt.4.017 Gala Updatos % Ken Blackwell Updates mk.3ssiage Kossack, Andrew JEOP/OVP ‹Andrew.J.K65.isfi ck c@ovp.00p.gov> To: Kris Kobe le "ewlawson(a)sos:in. o "< sos.ire,owe' Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 6:28 PM risty McCi ic "davi „.31 o pa riersancom" < avi Q,upitolpasinersar_corn>. Mark Rhode s ,"von Spakovsky, Hans" , Christ ian Adams e:adams@electionlawcentecoorn> ,"Alan L.. King" "inetthevedunlap@maine.gov" ,"King, Alan" ,"Williams, Ronal d E EOP/OVP' Dear Members, A couple quick. updates.'First. we anticipate sending you 8 proposed agenda this Tuesd ay. As I've discussed with each of You. we have a fairly full agenda with a rItiii1b .ir c)f diStinguished panelists. There will be time for CAA after each panel, as well as a discussion period towards the end of the meeting„ but we do not anticipate allocating time for opening etatements from each of the members so there's no need for you to prepare openi ng remarks. By 3,6iay of follow up to Vice Chair Koleac h's letter, we would like to request that you please make every effort to submi any written materials thet you plan to share t at the meeting:I by Tbursdays_September 7th by 6:00 p.m. This will ensure that we can provide of the materi als, including the presenters meterials, to you by Friday so that you can adequate time to review the material before our meeting. It will also help ensure that we are able to post eve.rything.on ()LB webpage prior to our meeting so that the public is also able to review all materi al before the meeting This would include any presentations, reports, or simila r written materials for the mee.ting, If you have any cere",:ente with this timing, please.cali me any time to discuss further. If you have any other questions, please let MO know, Hope you all have a great Leber Day weekend! Thanks. Andrew Andrew J. Koseaok Executive Director, Presidential Advisory Commi ssion on Election Integrity Associate (.- Ourieel, Office of the Vice Presid ent ,ei•idrew.j.Koseacleg.;..ovp.eOp.gov ttlipslirnia.g.goo{lie,cofiVrrediolOPh*Q&11:zz.lilcr4.66 17-2361-A-002372 c0ci&jsverlujOCiRg13CARItinAview:44ptAtrzAndfew..1.1 TO: Kris Kobach "c.wlawsonesos.in c , Mark Rhodes ,"von Spakovsky, 4:Hans.VonS .akovs f7heritage.org>, Christ Hans" ian Adams ,"Alan L. King" "mattnevv.dunlegginaine,gov" ,"King, Alan" ‹kinga@jccalorg> "Peoletth, Mark R. EOPIOVP","Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/ OVP" ,'Williams, Ronald E EOP/OVP" Members, want to remind you of the ethics rules that govern teaching, speaking, and writing while serving on the Presidential Advisory Committee on Election Integrity. During your appointment, you may continue to receive fees, Honoria, and other compe nsation for teaching, speaking, and writing undertaken in your personal capaci ty on topics that are not directly related to your position as a Special Government Employee. However, you may not receive fees, Honoria, and other compe nsation for teaching, sptaking. and writing that specifically focuses on the Presidential Advisory Committee on Electi on Integrity itself. if you use your government posttion as one of several biographical details given to introduce yourself in connection with your personal teaching, speaking, or writin g, and the subject deals in significant part with the Presidential Artvisory Committee on Election Integrity (i.e., voting processes and voting integrity). you MUST use a di.sclaimer(at the beginning of your speech or prominently placed for written material), stating, The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily or positions of the White House, the Trump represent the views, opinions, Administration, or the U.S. Government." If you are asked to speak on behalf of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Election Integrity, please contact me first and our office will coordinate directly with WH Communications. am also sharing a link to the presentation from GSA's ethics attorneys, which we would encourage you to review from time to time as a refresher: https://www.whitehouse.eoWsiteelvvhitehuuse.govifilesi doesiPACEI-GSA-Ethics-Surnmery.pa If you have any questions or concerns, pleas e let me know. Thank you, Andrew htip3:.11nisil.goofile.cornimaillteOPt0=22a*::ltid 17-2361-A-002373 466:1)d&Oviir.:43j9f3Rt49(..:."..111(.1.-.EinAv.ip.w.rit&q --Andrew.sc.Kossar.VA4t)ovp,00p.govSi cgsr-IrwUi)was:,‹In. 9900X4W.4950MMW6://1.e.x......., " . .4$2017 .Gtriali resiirldo'r Fegardih,giwching. Vea169; Andrew J. Kossack. Executive Director, Presidential Advisory *ind:writing Commission on.Election Integrity lke.:oniat<4.COUnsel, Office. of the.Vice President Cell: Kossack, Andrew. J.. EOPIOVP , nesos.in,gov" Tue,Sep 5, 2017 at 7:37 PM ,Christy McCormick"davi , Mark cp,oapitotpaitnersar.corn'' Rhodes ,''von Spekovsky, Hans" , Christian Adams ea.."mattliew.durtle {grnaine.gov" ---,:darnsp.electionlawcenter,com),,''Alan L.Sing" rnalthew.durilapftmaine.gov:>,"King, Alan" , Deer tvlernbers. The agenda for next week's meeting.is attached. We plan to post this publicly tomorrow. If you have any questions, please it me know. Thanks: And Andrew J. Kmacki ExeMitiVe Direcor, PresidentiaiAdviSory *Commission on •EleotiOn.intQw.ity Assodate COunset, Of.flQe t eice Pretident Cell: ArtdreW..J..Kossackig)ovri„aop,gov ..;z1 Agenda for Sept. 12th Nieeting.pdf 482K 17-2361-A-002374 hflp.s.-,00aii.g.ovglo:cornfirsailtisliP?tzi!r4ikf410cf4(gicOdSisver=pj0i3ROECJNO:en.t.view=pt&EirzApereve,,J.Koun.k%40ovp.d0p.govkpizztrire&goarct::03. .212 A/1812.017 Updated Nlencta (TI Ken BladomeA Updated Agenda messac.yi.i . , Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP To: Kris Ko "owlawson Ctsos.in. ov" . 201? at 2:53 PM C nsty 4oCorrnick , "davi ...trapito partnersar.com". goapitolpartnersaccom>, Mark Rhodes , "von Spakovsky, Hans" , "Alan L. King" arnatth t,, a a ©maine.gov" < matthew.cluntap@maine.gov>,"King, Alan" , avid Donn Co:. "Paolette, ar ,. EOP1 OVP"=:Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov>, "Morgan, Matthew E. EOP/OVP" , "Williams, Ronald E...EOPIOVP" Pteas,e, see.the alteoll:.1d tIndlElled agenda: The Only. c:Ilang, is thi. addn c.:1- l'orreor Soy. John H. Skifitmi.i,...vim ie,A welcome.-the em•nroisielim at the start of the•pleistihg, • 'Thanks.; Andre* Andrew J. iEn,S To. Kris Kobach )0.)sos.in, oY7 a 2017.6t620 PM :,.Christy McCormic "david@capitolpartnersar.coV , Mark Rhodes ; : Old:Stier' Adams -4te17ms@electionlamenter,coM7-,"Nara_ .1. David Dunn .Co: 'Paoltrita, Mark R. EOPIOVP" , "Mergan, MatthewE EDP/.0VP" ,"Williams, Ronald E. EOPI:OVP" , "Passantillo, Stefan E5OPIWilQ* .,-"Gptt,.$cett F. EOP/WHO" :'Mark Rhodes' :,'von Spakovsky, Han$'. 3'Christian Adams!. ; 'David Dunn' L. Cc:.Paoletta, 4 arK .OP gyp -"Merk.R.Paoletta@oip.eop.gov>.; Morgan, Matthew E "EOP/OVP <,MattheW.Eltriorgan@avp..e.4):OrYt.P-I.Wilgarns, Ronald E, EOP>i0VP ; Gast, Scott F, EOPMIHO .Subjett:. Meating*Materials for :September 12in. N.,lembors. Attached are materials for next week's meeting. My apologies for the large fife slzes. We are in The process o posting these materials on our webone for public vieWin0. 1%41i/et you know once,they are. available there. Many thanks to..all Of you for your hard work and flexibility on thetimeline for submitting these tmaterials. :Thank you, Andrew. Andrew J. KOsseck. Executive Director l'.5.r..Si.d., ,ri.tial.Advisory-Commissiorl on Election integrity 17-2361-A-002376 Gmei.1,FOE: Meeting Matedais for Septinnher 42th A8sociale Counsel; Office of the Vice President. Erna 17-2361-A-002377 thIps:Ifinaii.gvidg.!e..4gimirOgiplOui.z.Ait.id:146,0004t&ffiveP:uptiROCJNO.ellAyiet,;=-- ptAtrAtRire.w...1.1. <*s%=„c4%,40ovp.et.v.govhf.Is trueagmtvaamw.mmw., cxxxxxamvxxxxv.,Kezy . '''•*.Ff7temcmegal=......" ..,41181201 - Attacks Against Kan F:".!ackwoll and Tramp's V.Ititig Cornmigsi*ri DeburikaSby•the Fac:U • 3reitb24. Ken Blackwell Attacks Against Ken Facts - Breitbart Blackwell and Trump's Voting Commission Agen,jarrod P. EOP/OVP ‹Jarrod.s.pAgen@ovp,eop.gov:7, .5 To:"Paoletta Mr ark,R,Paolette ov.p.00p..gov>, Debunked by the Thi 0,2017. at 7:57 AM Ken, Cit;r0 yoki..have thk rect.wts-.::ase Virgipigi case it.:ocnneils.up.on CNN si.eday, 6.0.rilt.01719f31251a.i-kdf'iirvv.soieles-gu i Ky.:plea Front Paoletta„ Mark R. EOP/OVP Sent: Wednesday,July 5, 2017 11:30 PM Agen,Jarrbd EOP/OVP <,.arroc.i,P,Ageh(Otiv0..do0,gOV>.; Lotter, Marc E. EbP/ow •Kossad;' Morgan, Matthew. E.: EOP/OVP 41,latihes4v.E.Mor9ank9o0..eop.gov> Subject FkAirl: Attacks Against Oft ilaCkWell.and Th.nno's Voting Comn*sion Debunked by the Rack's.,areitbart mos pacotta COunsel to the Vice President 'Az 456 274.(work) ((jell) Sentfrom my Phone Begin forwarded message:. From: Ken Olac.kyvpi/• Date: July 5,.2017'at 11420:32 PM EDT To:"Hurley, Caroline L., EOP1WHO" , "Wall; EOP/OVP" Kathryn -c.kathryn.E.VMiii.:0\9•00P.90 .Y.> Co.!:"Paoletta, Mark.R, EOPIOVP"'‹Merk.R:P.i;-ioleit4,01ip,edo.gov>.. kFait Eopiwi--0' Subject: Attacks Against Ken Blackwell and Trump's Voting: CoremissIon Debunked by the Facts .• Breitbart 17-2361-A-002378 carnimaifia1011;jizzaik:?•-.10046fiad.4werr-Ltj06FIg6 'CJNO,ea.41 viewzzplgatai.;.•=i5d17C;N10$3616422(akaw.,1.K6sseck?.Clotvp.ap... 1 Gir A9ainst Ken Bia*WOV.Prgi TfurtiP's Cbibmolltburilled by the.Facts fireitiWt :010-ase.NifiaetAtd shf.ire with your Vairious ilet;,vorking, C.01771*.SiOrl-eltht.mked-by-lheo-factsi My CNN 13`300:0: 17-2361-A-002379 htiPs:grlialLgoogio•e0fnlnlaiYug-Y?;31":28tiktzlch=f466c:Oci&jsmo-94061Rig3CJNO.en,avicir.re.-:zoV!.ansgt-'16d1 7c2.(if)56 ?i422&•:3::Ar.drew. . 212 qi.1.612017 Omit.- tomorrow's cat Ken Bfackweli tomorrows call :3 messages Kossack, Andrew d. EOPIOVP .• Tut-4 '(J'17 at.7A6 PM "david@capt o pat nerser.com' , itliS.borunda@maryland.gov" , "rnrhodeseiw.s.odcountywv.wm" Dear Members; I juaIupdatod the calendar mutation fortornorrovv, but wanted to send the cat-in information via email as well to ensure receive it: Call Procedure: Beginning as early as 11:00am, Signal via the White House Communications Agency will,call you dim:6y oil the either of the numberssog_provided below, This mcess is done to ensure that all f:nferees are in the conference on tune, and line quality is validated before adding the Vice President into the conference last at 11:30 am. If you have any difficulties connect ing, please call: 202-757-0000. .:E i : . ; i •1 .i. I Emetnissiett Membor i Pthilary Phong ,ittsmodibsttls s S`' I '1 3. MiChaet R.. Penee ..•.:.• . . . .. . . i 3 Krki•g.fitiactt ., ;Va. 1 . .,. rila f t 1( /141,1.785-2E06-4 .75 1 : . .i 232-60'1 :13 N4317: ... 1 (.( i :Connie f..liv)sen • t. i• 4 im Gardncr. • .60 Ma-274-2403 • :• 5 Mat Dunlap 6. *Km:Blackwell te (w)207-626-8401 OV:i 5137221-070a • '7 Christy Aiceon.nick (w)7:30.1.563-soos (c. David Men 9 • Lilia Borumitt. (c) Mark . Rhodos t.e) • s Ai is e (V) 46A0. , 306d • https:..rlirsit.i.:;:....;io.00rt110:14tuRithli:::, :'Si#,;.:14OMiiitc03*,jsverutilatiggEle.ftsaer (se) 3t4,424-1an 17-2361-A-002380 i.8,1:10w4.08(erAntImw...1,Kostsch%40ossep.00p.go4t1S.•%rtiorisEwt.:tizT fti 113 Gmail - Wrnorrtwe's r,ail I've attached a copy of the age.nda .to this email for your convenience as well. Also attached are two docurnentS related to ethics Standards for special government employees. We will discuss these in more detail during the call, but:feel.free to review them in advance of the call if you are able. We look forward to speaking with you tomorrow. Thanks, Andrew Andrew J. kossack Associate Counsel Office of.tht: Vice President AndreW.J,Kossack@ovp,eop.gev 3 aftachments —1 Organizational Conference Cali 628.2017,p df 65K ,.- oge450(June 2015)(fiRable).r..)df .355K bkServelionor pdf 241K Ken Blackwell To: Thomas Schutzman Tom, . . Fit Jul 7,2017 at'3:09 PM P „t A V If A• Here you go. Thanks! Ken froi.:svio 2 attachments 4F1 ege450(June 2015)(fillable).pdf 355K bkServeHonoLpdf 241K Thomas.i,.Schntztrian Int.ps:Vrnail.goof.ju;. coretispailit3.01,ui:F2.4.45.1f.R.A456cAi&jgver4-Ltj06098GAO.,:m . Fri,.17-2361-A-002381 Jul 7,2017 at 3;30 PM .a.v:i%Pttpl&f.p:Ancitow,,I.KfalmatiOVOT.eop.gov&t.pc,-true&mlie dv:,1zi;13 A...,......,-.6reare.(A/mmiss5:4,:s$w•:-..xww.4-moss§swAcsszacsms: :::::::::::::05::::::m:::m: • Kenneth: BletkWell President Trump's .-Voterintegrity::;ommission is essential to protecting democracy and the voice of citizens! 170719 Ji(E5 opening romarks-PACEloof Share(i with i.DroKibi:pi; 'Kenneth elarkweIJ President Trump's INcifteriritegrityComrnission is essential to protecting democracy and the voice of citizens! 17'0719 JKS remorks-PAcElpeit Silar.ed • 17-2361-A-002382 J. Kenneth Blackwell We don't bel eve in 'Voters Without Borders @Elector ttr @nvonspakovsky tfPKriskol)a, 1787 3F • .(?y,:j.: . .. J, Kenneth Blackwell As @kenktukowski & I wrote in the Yale Law and Policy Review, we must protect every citizen's vote: bitty/Pith/SI° 17-2361-A-002383 wig/2.01'i My Dooming Romarke the meting of the PACE! • Ken Blackwell My °penning Remarks the meeting of the PA.CE1 I message Ken Blackwell To;"Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP", Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov> Cc "Paoletta, Mark Ft EOP/OVP" -=Mark.R.Paolettagtovp.eop.gov> TIM, Jul 18, 2017 at 5:44 PM Pleaw make copies for the other Comaiissiciners, the official records and others as you deem appropriate. I Wii/ send you a PDF copy Of Yale Law & Policy Review article'shortly. Thanks! 170719 JKB opening remarks.PACap-af, -..; 78K 17-2361-A-002384 htips:iimil,googiacoinimailif41?iiii:,:28,ik=1:R1466cOri&jsvertujOtiRgBCJNCLettAtieidvsavt&qi:A!idr inei.J.Kossne4.400vp.eop.gov&q5=1.rtie&t3ogr.chwa:i.t...Ill 'Pl1812017 .Grria - rness*ge Ken alackweli : message .•. ...• •.•• • Kossack, Andrew j EiOPIOV < To:' w.J.Kossack@ovp.eo av> Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 414 PM Hi Ken, Hope you're: dbing well, just left you a voicernall, dust wanted to catch up as We get closer to next week's meeting. No have a ministe1d love to connect. rush, but if you Thanks, And:few Andrew.,/, Kossack Executive .Director, Presidential: Advisory Commission on Election Integrity Asz.soolate Counsel. Office Of:the Vice *President *Celt:: Etrtai; Andritam.:J.Kosigzi:E:::k@cm:i;vzip,nov 17-2361-A-002385 iltips.:1:TiaiLgoagie,catn/rtlailitilar?uizI&Ikz:ldcMfi6tati&jsver=uiCARgi3C.,11:10.efi.&view.ptS.q=AndmiN.si.Kossack:%<100vp,et)p.gov&c...pqrt3e&$%3rai,:tp.:.. • 1/1 ;t11-8i2017 - updated *venda: draft by-laws- Ken Blackwell s• updated agenda; draft by-laws 4 rn.,:!ssage:-. kossack, Andrew J. F:-OP/OVP ‹Andrevit.J.Kossack ovp.eop.gov> To: Kris Kobacti "owlawsonalsossin crov" • l- Tue J 11 14 ' 7 at 418 PM 4'4 > hnsty cCorrnick "david(Cocapitaipartnerser.com" ‹eav;dgcapttolpartnersar.corn>, Mark Rhodes ,"von Spakovsky, Hans' ‹Hans,VonSpekovsky@heritage.org>, Christian Adams , *Alan L King" Cc: "Paoletta: Mark R. EOPIOVP" ,.;IViark.R,Peoletinegnvpeop,gov>„"Morgan. Matthew E. EOPIOVP" ‹Matthe*E.MorgaflbOvp,eop.gov? Dear [Members, AS you can see from the attached revised agenda, the schedule has been adjusted slightly to ensure we have sufficient :time for the public meeting. The ceretnonial swearing= in will no longer happen at the public rnee.ting. Instead, you Mil be sworn in following the required briefings in the morning and just prior to proceeding to the public meeting room, Vice Chair Konach haeasked me to send the attached draft set of by-laws for your review. During tomorrow's meeting, the COMIlliSSiOn Wig adopt by-laws to govern the Commission's operations, and the Vice Chair thought it would be helpful to share ‘Nith you his proposed draft by-laws. These by-laws were modeled after sample by-laws published by the General Services Administration on its website. If you plan to'bring any documents with you tomorrow to distribute to the other members, please send me an electronic copy so that we can make copies for you here. Having the documents in advance will help us ensure we can make them available in a timely manner to the public on thewebpage. Last thing: A scheduling note. The Vice President needs to depart the meeting at noon. Therefore. we ask that vou limit 2.11Pling remarks to no more than five minutes each. We'll have more flexibility with timing during the discussion session afte.r the break, Thank you, Andrew Andrews!, Kosseck Executive Director and Designated Federal Officer Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 2 attachments draft PACE1 By-Laws•FINIAL.PIN: 60K 17-2361-A-002386 hiips:thneil.weve.cemimaw0r2&ik-.1cicmsacotsjlives:uptiggacm,40.43nAview.:pt&trAndrew.J.kessack%400vp.eop.goviiqs.truegseerolz,w.,. Ii2 •••••• ..... •••••• ,,,,•• 1/8/201.7 Gala- tAxiaeci 8,4eri(16.; Omit 41 . Revised Agenda - Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity.pdf 244K Ken Blackwell To:"Henning*,A exa Tue, Jul 18,2017 al 4:33 PM Looks like a fuflschedue from:8-11 p../Tis can do hits from 3 tO.60m, Thursday from 103.1Z11-30M. ... . .„. , . ..... . . . ••• • . 2 attachments draft PACO By-Laws FINAL,PDF 60K Revised Agenda - Presidential Advisory Commission rm Election Integrity ,...pdf 244K • • . Henning, Alexa A.EOP/WHO 'rue, Jul 18: 2017 at5:50 PM .SOufie.:15 good. MSNBC with Chris Jansing at 3PM iS interested, you could do frf.)E": the North Lawn tomorrow. Haiiie is interested in having you on Thufsciay in the10 AM hour: Let me know if both of these are ok3y. From; Ken Blackwdl[tnaitto1.11111111111111111111 111 Sent; Tuesday, July18,2017 4:34 PM To: Henning..Alexa A. EOPM110 Subject: Fwd: updated agenda;draft by-laws r.Quoted !Hcfi,ant Ken Blackwell To:"Henning, Alexa A. C., ,A,HO"-rzkatherine.A.Henning0who.eop.gov> Tue. Jul 18,2017 at 5:59 PM Sounds good. Thanks Alexa (second halt of the 3 o'clock is best) 1-dtps:Hrmil.goc:ille..corahnaglisiONWzinciktzldef4t4c:0.084s.verF0061:98CINtI.striA C.X6094-0 , 17-2361-A-002387 vi.ts,0,,=01,&(FAncirew:J.KoswicA•40Qpiri,e•op.gos&zis 4-itrueas'intcfrz-zi:.3.., 212 .4- .0 Mir.V.071/.49400.00M00000...W.X.M.X.:VeX.X.NO,X1 • ••••••- 3ii BieCkwei1110,:kowski yaie Law 8. pow, 7Realink Ken Blackwell BlackwelliKlukowski Yale Law & Policy Review article 1 rnenatx • Ken Blackwell To: "Kossock, Ancrew .) P" Bcc:'Paoletta, Mark R. EOPLOVP" The. Jul 18. 2017 at 0:08 OM Here you go! Thankell . \ .:, ...."" • ---• r . - - .. . • .1 gp, ,.....1 Blackwall-K/Oowski-The-Other-Vating-Rights-28-Yale4.-1,,poly.Rav.407-2010.pcli 1.25K \:. ...,/ .../... 17-2361-A-002388 1 dcf466cOd&jsvor,zujOfiftgEM."..INO.en.&vievexpliAq=Andte.w.J.Kossmol.;'',i:40ovp,eop .govgals=0.:eggsearch;:qu, . Ma1.21)17 &nail - found a typo Kon.Blackwell. • found a typo 1:roesiaags. • Ken Biaokwell Th:"Kossack, Andrew J. FOP/OVP .osr ack@ovp.eop.aov> "Paolethii, Mark R. EOPIOVP Tue. Jul 18, 2017 al64PM •Jut ran mar. Fixed it. Atteched is the c.:tril.,,b%(1 PDF.. ... 170719 JKB opening remarks-PACELpdf 77K 17-2361-A-002389 rittps:1:4naii.google.coralow;1;:..LVOui:2.aik:::1rio1466t:DiMittYar2:21406Rigc:INO..eti.-4ViewV18,c1.4krictrisvd:K(m.sack%.40Afp.aop...f.p.-$Y&T5--iftgqx:prc.:1:::qii wozzzzzxzwre6wer.6: , ,,,,,mmx.....4 , .v.,x•xtveybee:SSZVOZZ.W5:::::::ss.s.t4:605555555ffom.r3::::::MW.1;::::::::::::::::::4,Y 1 1 ' 2{.. Grpil.- 10'tte0 from two•slaiw: Ken Madmen letters from two states 2 rrxfsszges Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP , o Kris Kobaon "cimlawsongsoSin, Ov" oar* OP; Fri; Jot21, 2011 at:4:18 PIVT : Christy McCormick "davidacapl .o partnerser,otim" son', 'cap .o pan.tiersar.c>om>, Mark Rhodes •iilrfiodes@„Woodcountywv,corn>, "von Spakovsky, Hans" ::Christian:Adams ,"Morgan, t%,4atthew E EOP/OVP" To Kria kobath ."owlaw. on(„Sos.in.gov" .cowlawt-lori sos.in.cov> Toe,•Jul 25,.2017 at 1.Z.28 PM Chr4Ay McCormic ,"daViti@capitolpartnersar.com". , Ma.rk Rhodes -mm hodesgji woodayntyysw,com> vnr Spakovsky, Hans" , Christian Adams:‹adarns(ipalectionlawcentertom,"Alan L King" ache a, Cr;„ ,PIMP” ,"Morgan, Matthew E..E0P/OVP" -IviatthaW.E..Morgari@ovp,eop..gov> FYI PleaSe:.tE*.the.....iii,:tbOleti'le0.ar. fit)rh Ohio So8 John From: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP. Sent: Friday; July:21, 2017 4:18 PM To:'Kris Kobach` it Christy McCormick' "ce.ivioil3?;•apir.:tiparThf3r.sorxzom! k:if.);;:•', '.4.)itdOlirs1•!r..c.den.>,','Mark Rhodes'..rilthodez!iz.a.willo.• oeiwityv,04;.e.orn.)..; 'von Spakovsky, Hans' -4,-,.1, :ittfAgo,org•:-.-: 'Christian Adams',s'adarns@deutionlam,,cerder,Com›:"Alan L. Kirify Cm Paoletta, Mark R. EOPIOVP . Subjeot:letters from :two states 17-2361-A-002390 1(2 Gm611 -.1eAter . . , . m two siates . Reply Letterto PACEI.PDF 350K 17-2361-A-002391 hti4) .$..litn;:i;:..);..)00E.cotnialai!ItafOr?kif,--2.3.iivilc.ic14.5ficaAjsverzujOGRgfiQ,ND,p,.kfie,,v::pia.cr---Arairew,.),K0.5sacR%elt)ovp.eop.gov&qsv,i31.1E?:`i ciii:ard,zqU.. 2;2 : tun. sse \\ /YAW, The Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrityli REAL NEWS Russian Hacking into Voting. Systems : , 17-2361-A-002392 17-2361-A-002393 / 111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 * 111111111111W11111111111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111;1111111111111111111111111111111111111111,111111111111111111111111 cea. joismigll Finumminno" "Vair IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ob eni 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 .:11ave moved, dattierler*: Ro 4,0:Eiggics for Comm(5100a0444,0ress $ed / 440( AfflAt XXXXXXXXX....o. ORROOROXO,ox ox ::.fi333U0kilk5 ; •' ' :24? : • —. Z;;;;;;;;;;;,• f 'Mgpoz- H: .4'7z:333333333:z. ' r"(1 A44414 mmr Paz .333j Ir.1 24.$ rEggEM3MIL0',, 4'''104' Wg:X: ' i‘e";*35' 4 43 •••: ?• 3c..2 ::SNES0.3,44r '1:40a0' It46 P4 3,33 AggSfW 33a3,3,33,3",ezzz'w <4.W44:Vr roISSW el* 0P3-- ' VA` • „ .• zeg :41 t: lJ '4 40.f. X> .] ftsti rold 3344opi.$ Ag4 '4n :::2< ,M33333333,4„ r. 01,1 , :33333, • •• 333333311'1% '1'1%33333a" 333331'............ 3333 , e ,,,.,,ro:Xftli:K''.,Eg?`:6<,:g 17-2361-A-002399 - .v , pr4 07,;57Piy 4,2 , k4s4.;;Fqpnyk, 1.?-W " ;r-r?rlipr§gt 4074 .+ )n7:71;44. A>w/11;:3,' , •,<11 - ..... xf erif4$ ,V-1; - • .; -orrrligge 7::m•e, " nvrel4i #>D0 7,p3 , l /r . 72,g1 Y"er]I;MI ?..:40.70gpm / ir'y 7 mggraggggge" mm, ... Agw0". rW;' def-4t 4.,, ....,. ..., • " 2222 T : .> , 1•11 -"" rip4c. 14; 44 m„ ljgrm,, Date: May 17, 2017 at 2:34:48 AM CDT To: mmday@ksraweb.org Subject: Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity Dear Moriah: I was hoping to get a hold of Chris Kobach. We met a few years ago when we both spoke at the Kansas State Rifle Association, and I believe that Chris is pretty familiar with my empirical research on guns (I am probably best know for my book "More Guns, Less Crime"(University of Chicago Press). However, I have done probably at least as much empirical research on vote fraud, and I think that I have a number of ideas that I would like to talk to him about on how to measure the extent to which it is occurring. I wrote the minority report for the US Civil Rights Commission after the 2000 vote recount in Florida and I have done extensive academic research on everything from voting machines to racial discrimination issues. I was also the statistical expert for Mitch McConnell's For example, with respect to vote fraud, you can see one of my papers here. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=925611 But, more importantly, I have some very simple ideas of measuring how frequently illegal aliens are voting. If it is possible to talk to Chris or someone else on the commission that he is the vice chairman for, I would greatly appreciate it. This is something that I care intensely about, and I believe that I can be of some help. My telephone number is 484-802-5373. Thank you very much. John John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D. President Crime Prevention Research Center http://crimeresearch.org 17-2361-A-002406 johnrlott@crimeresearch.org (484)802-5373 Crime Prevention MEMO Research Center crimeresearcn.org 17-2361-A-002407 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Kobach 6/29/2017 4:47:27 PM 'Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov];'Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP' [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] John Lott's contact information And here's John Lott. I called him after receiving this. He wants to help. From: Moriah Day [mailto:moriah@kriskobach.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 7:31 AM To: Kris Kobach Subject: Fwd: PresidentialAdvisory Commission on Election Integrity I got this email from John Lott sent to my KSRA account. Figured he'd actually be someone you might want to get back to. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: John Lott Date: May 17, 2017 at 2:34:48 AM CDT To: mmday@ksraweb.org Subject: Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity Dear Moriah: I was hoping to get a hold of Chris Kobach. We met a few years ago when we both spoke at the Kansas State Rifle Association, and I believe that Chris is pretty familiar with my empirical research on guns (I am probably best know for my book "More Guns, Less Crime"(University of Chicago Press). However, I have done probably at least as much empirical research on vote fraud, and I think that I have a number of ideas that I would like to talk to him about on how to measure the extent to which it is occurring. I wrote the minority report for the US Civil Rights Commission after the 2000 vote recount in Florida and I have done extensive academic research on everything from voting machines to racial discrimination issues. I was also the statistical expert for Mitch McConnell's For example, with respect to vote fraud, you can see one of my papers here. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=925611 But, more importantly, I have some very simple ideas of measuring how frequently illegal aliens are voting. If it is possible to talk to Chris or someone else on the commission that he is the vice chairman for, I would greatly appreciate it. This is something that I care intensely about, and I believe that I can be of some help. My telephone number is 484-802-5373. Thank you very much. John John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D. President Crime Prevention Research Center http://crimeresearch.org 17-2361-A-002408 johnrlott@crimeresearch.org (484)802-5373 Crime Prevention MEMO Research Center crimeresearcn.org 17-2361-A-002409 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Alabama The Honorable John Merrill, Secretary of State PO Box 5616 Montgomery, AL 36103 Dear Secretary Merrill, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002410 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002411 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Lieutenant Governor of Alaska The Honorable Byron Mallott, Lieutenant Governor PO Box 11001 Juneau, AK 99811 Dear Lieutenant Governor Mallott, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002412 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002413 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Arizona The Honorable Michele Reagan, Secretary of State 1700 W Washington St Fl 7 Phoenix, AZ 85007 Dear Secretary Reagan, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002414 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002415 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Arkansas The Honorable Mark Martin, Secretary of State State Capitol, Suite 256 500 Woodlane Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Secretary Martin, In my capacity as Vice Chair ofthe Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure 17-2361-A-002416 throughout the duration of the Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eQp gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members of this bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely. Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002417 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of California The Honorable Alex Padilla, Secretary of State 1500 11th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Secretary Padilla, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002418 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002419 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Colorado The Honorable Wayne Williams, Secretary of State 1700 Broadway, Suite 200 Denver, CO 80290 Dear Secretary Williams, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002420 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002421 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Connecticut The Honorable Denise Merrill, Secretary of State 30 Trinity Street Hartford, CT 06106 Dear Secretary Merrill, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002422 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002423 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 District of Columbia Board ofElections Ms. Alice Miller, Executive Director 441 4th Street, NW,Suite 250 North Washington, D.C. 20001 Dear Executive Director Miller, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002424 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002425 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Delaware Department of Elections Ms. Elaine Manlove, Commissioner 905 S. Governors Ave Ste 170 Dover,DE 19904 Dear Commissioner Manlove, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002426 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002427 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Florida The Honorable Ken Detzner, Secretary of State R.A. Gray Bldg., 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, FL 32399 Dear Secretary Detzner, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002428 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002429 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Georgia The Honorable Brian Kemp, Secretary of State 214 State Capitol Atlanta, GA 30334 Dear Secretary Kemp, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002430 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002431 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Hawaii Office of Elections Mr. Scott Nago, Chief Election Officer Office of Elections, 802 Lehua Avenue Pearl City, HI 96782 Dear Chief Election Officer Nago, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002432 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002433 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Idaho The Honorable Lawerence Denney, Secretary of State PO Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720 Dear Secretary Denney, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002434 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002435 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Illinois State Board ofElections Mr. Steve Sandvoss, Executive Director 2329 S. MacArthur Blvd. Springfield, IL 62704 Dear Executive Director Sandvoss, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002436 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002437 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Indiana The Honorable Connie Lawson, Secretary of State 200 W. Washington St., Room 201 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Dear Secretary Lawson, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002438 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002439 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State ofIowa The Honorable Paul Pate, Secretary of State First Floor, Lucas Building 321 E. 12th St. Des Moines,IA 50319 Dear Secretary Pate, In my capacity as Vice Chair ofthe Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure 17-2361-A-002440 throughout the duration of the Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eQp gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members of this bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002441 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Kansas The Honorable Kris Kobach, Secretary of State 120 SW 10th Ave. Topeka, KS 66612 Dear Secretary Kobach, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002442 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002443 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Kentucky The Honorable Alison Lundergan-Grimes, Secretary of State 700 Capitol Ave., Suite 152 Frankfort, KY 40601 Dear Secretary Lundergan-Grimes, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002444 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002445 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Louisiana The Honorable Tom Schedler, Secretary of State PO Box 94125 Baton Rouge,LA 70804 Dear Secretary Schedler, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002446 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002447 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Maine The Honorable Matt Dunlap, Secretary of State 148 State House Station Augusta, ME 04333 Dear Secretary Dunlap, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002448 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002449 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Maryland State Board of Elections Ms. Linda Lamone, Administrator 151 West Street, Suite 200 Annapolis, MD 21401 Dear Administrator Lamone, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002450 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002451 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts The Honorable William Galvin, Secretary ofthe Commonwealth State House,24 Beacon St., Rm. 337 Boston, MA 02133 Dear Secretary Galvin, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002452 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002453 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Michigan The Honorable Ruth Johnson, Secretary of State 430 West Allegan St., 4th Fl. Lansing, MI 48918 Dear Secretary Johnson, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002454 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002455 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Minnesota The Honorable Steve Simon, Secretary of State 100 Rev. Dr. MLK Jr. Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Secretary Simon, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002456 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002457 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Mississippi The Honorable Delbert Hosemann, Secretary of State 125 S. Congress St. Jackson, MS 39202 Dear Secretary Hosemann, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002458 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002459 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Missouri The Honorable Jay Ashcroft, Secretary of State 600 West Main,PO Box 1767 Jefferson City, MO 65101 Dear Secretary Ashcroft, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002460 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002461 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Montana The Honorable Corey Stapleton, Secretary of State P.O. Box 202801 Helena, MT 59620 Dear Secretary Stapleton, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002462 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002463 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Nebraska The Honorable John Gale, Secretary of State P.O. Box 94608 Lincoln, NE 68509 Dear Secretary Gale, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002464 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002465 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Nevada The Honorable Barbara Cegavske, Secretary of State 101 N. Carson Street, Suite 3 Carson City, NV 89701 Dear Secretary Cegavske, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002466 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002467 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of New Hampshire The Honorable William Gardner, Secretary of State State House,Room 204 107 North Main Street Concord, NH 03301 Dear Secretary Gardner, In my capacity as Vice Chair ofthe Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure 17-2361-A-002468 throughout the duration of the Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eQp gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members of this bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002469 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey The Honorable Kim Guadagno,Lieutenant Governor PO Box 001 Trenton, NJ 08625 Dear Lieutenant Governor Guadagno, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002470 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002471 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of New Mexico The Honorable Maggie Toulouse Oliver, Secretary of State 325 Don Gaspar, Suite 300 Santa Fe, NM 87501 Dear Secretary Oliver, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002472 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002473 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 New York State Board of Elections Mr. Robert Brehm and Mr. Todd Valentine, Co-Executive Directors 40 North Pearl Street, Suite 5 Albany, NY 12207 Dear Co-Executive Directors Brehm and Valentine, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002474 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002475 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 North Carolina State Board ofElections Ms. Kim Strach, Executive Director P.O. Box 27255 Raleigh, NC 27611 Dear Executive Director Strach, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002476 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002477 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of North Dakota The Honorable Alvin Jaeger, Secretary of State 600 E. Boulevard Ave., Dept. 108 Bismarck, ND 58505 Dear Secretary Jaeger, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002478 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002479 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Ohio The Honorable Jon Husted, Secretary of State 180 East Broad Street, 16th Floor Columbus, OH 43215 Dear Secretary Husted, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002480 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002481 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Oklahoma State Election Board Mr. Paul Ziriax, State Election Board PO Box 53156 Oklahoma City, OK 73152 Dear Secretary Ziriax, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002482 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002483 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Oregon The Honorable Dennis Richardson, Secretary of State 900 Court Street NE Capitol Room 136 Salem, OR 97310 Dear Secretary Richardson, In my capacity as Vice Chair ofthe Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure 17-2361-A-002484 throughout the duration of the Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members of this bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002485 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania The Honorable Pedro Cortes, Secretary ofthe Commonwealth 302 North Office Building Harrisburg,PA 17120 Dear Secretary Cortes, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002486 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002487 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Rhode Island The Honorable Nellie Gorbea, Secretary of State 82 Smith St., Rm 217 Providence, RI 02903 Dear Secretary Gorbea, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002488 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002489 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 South Carolina State Election Commission Ms. Marci Andino,Executive Director P.O. Box 5987 Columbia, SC 29250 Dear Executive Director Andino, In my capacity as Vice Chair ofthe Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002490 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002491 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of South Dakota The Honorable Shantel Krebs, Secretary of State 500 East Capitol Avenue Ste 204 Pierre, SD 57501 Dear Secretary Krebs, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002492 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002493 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Tennessee The Honorable Tre Hargett, Secretary of State State Capitol, First Floor Nashville, TN 37243 Dear Secretary Hargett, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002494 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002495 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Texas The Honorable Rolando Pablos, Secretary of State 1100 Congress, Room 1E.8 Austin, TX 78701 Dear Secretary Pablos, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002496 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002497 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Lieutenant Governor of Utah The Honorable Spencer Cox, Lieutenant Governor PO Box 142325 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Lieutenant Governor Cox, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002498 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002499 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Vermont The Honorable Jim Condos, Secretary of State 128 State Street Montpelier, VT 05633 Dear Secretary Condos, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002500 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002501 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Virginia Department of Elections Mr. Edgardo Cortes, Commissioner Washington Building, 1100 Bank Street, First Floor Richmond, VA 23219 Dear Commissioner Cortes, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002502 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002503 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Washington The Honorable Kim Wyman, Secretary of State PO Box 40220 Olympia, WA 98504 Dear Secretary Wyman, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002504 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002505 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of West Virginia The Honorable Andrew Warner, Secretary of State 1900 Kanawha Blvd. East, Suite 157-K Charleston, WV 25305 Dear Secretary Warner, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light ofthat decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002506 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002507 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Wisconsin Elections Commission Mr. Michael Haas, Administrator P.O. Box 7984 Madison, WI 53707 Dear Administrator Haas, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002508 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002509 Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity July 26, 2017 Office ofthe Secretary of State of Wyoming The Honorable Ed Murray, Secretary of State 2020 Carey Avenue, Suite 600 Cheyenne, WY 82002 Dear Secretary Murray, In my capacity as Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, I wrote to you on June 28,2017, to request publicly available voter registration records. On July 10, 2017, the Commission staff requested that you delay submitting any records until the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on a motion from the Electronic Privacy Information Center that sought to prevent the Commission from receiving the records. On July 24,2017, the court denied that motion. In light of that decision in the Commission's favor, I write to renew the June 28 request, as well as to answer questions some States raised about the request's scope and the Commission's intent regarding its use ofthe registration records. I appreciate the cooperation of chief election officials from more than 30 States who have already responded to the June 28 request and either agreed to provide these publicly available records, or are currently evaluating what specific records they may provide in accordance with their State laws. Like you, I serve as the chief election official of my State. And like you, ensuring the privacy and security of any non-public voter information is a high priority. My June 28 letter only requested information that is already available to the public under the laws of your State, which is information that States regularly provide to political candidates,journalists, and other interested members ofthe public. As you know,federal law requires the States to maintain certain voter registration information and make it available to the public pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA)and the Help America Vote Act(HAVA). The Commission recognizes that State laws differ regarding what specific voter registration information is publicly available. I want to assure you that the Commission will not publicly release any personally identifiable information regarding any individual voter or any group of voters from the voter registration records you submit. Individuals' voter registration records will be kept confidential and secure throughout the duration ofthe Commission's existence. Once the Commission's analysis is 17-2361-A-002510 complete, the Commission will dispose of the data as permitted by federal law. The only information that will be made public are statistical conclusions drawn from the data, other general observations that may be drawn from the data, and any correspondence that you may send to the Commission in response to the narrative questions enumerated in the June 28 letter. Let me be clear, the Commission will not release any personally identifiable information from voter registration records to the public. In addition, to address issues raised in recent litigation regarding the data transfer portal, the Commission is offering a new tool for you to transmit data directly to the White House computer system. To securely submit your State's data, please have a member of your staff contact Ron Williams on the Commission's staff at ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov and provide his or her contact information. Commission staff will then reach out to your point of contact to provide detailed instructions for submitting the data securely. The Commission will approach all of its work without preconceived conclusions or prejudgments. The Members ofthis bipartisan Commission are interested in gathering facts and going where those facts lead. We take seriously the Commissions' mission pursuant to Executive Order 13799 to identify those laws, rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that either enhance or undermine the integrity of elections processes. I look forward to working with you in the months ahead to advance those objectives. Sincerely, Kris W.Kobach Vice Chair Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity 17-2361-A-002511 Mark Rhodes From: Sent: To: Subject: Kira Lerner Thursday, June 22, 2017 11:15 AM Mark Rhodes RE: ThinkProgress follow up Also, would you be able to send me a photo to use in my reporting? Your headshot or a photo of you working? Thanks! From: Kira Lerner Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:49 AM To:'mrhodes@woodcountywv.com' Subject: ThinkProgress follow up Hi Mark, Thanks again for taking the time to talk this morning about the Election Integrity Commission. If you could keep me updated as you learn more and when you find out when the first meeting will occur, I'd appreciate it! Best, Kira Lerner Political Reporter, ThinkProgress 202-741-6353 I 301-633-1989 I klernerPthinkprogress.orq I thinkprogress.orq 1 17-2361-A-002512 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Kobach [ ] 6/30/2017 6:38:16 PM 'Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov];'Paoletta, Mark R. EOP/OVP' [Mark.R.Paoletta@ovp.eop.gov];'Lotter, Marc E. EOP/OVP'[Marc.E.Lotter@ovp.eop.gov] Just recorded interview for this afternoon on NPR (State of the Nation or All Things Considered, I think) It will be run opposite an interview with KY SoS Allison Lundergran Grimes (D), who is refusing to provide KY rolls. 17-2361-A-002513 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@oyp.eop.goy] 8/24/2017 6:04:46 PM Just tried to call you for DHS meeting Strange number - Will try you again Andrew J. Kossack Associate Counsel Office of the Vice President Email: Andrew.J.KossackAovp.eop.gov Cell: Sent from my iPhone 17-2361-A-002514 Message From: Sent: To: Subject: Kris Kobach [ ] 7/27/2017 5:23:31 PM 'Kossack, Andrew J. EOP/OVP [Andrew.J.Kossack@ovp.eop.gov] Kansas matching program Andrew, My election director, Bryan Caskey, will be calling you about giving the WH a copy of our matching program (which was created in-house). We should be able to get that to the Commission today as well. On a second matter, I'd like to get that September meeting date (and place) nailed down,so we can have a firm deadline for completing the match of Kansas voters against the DHS files. Can we shoot for Tuesday September 12 or Wednesday September 13? Any ideas on location? We could do Florida since it's a critical swing state, or Maine because Matt invited us, or anywhere else in the country. Maybe DC for meeting #3 and save California for meeting #4. Kris 17-2361-A-002515 17-2361-A-002516 Stquoi4.2000 D16°14,2002 Vcdscam,1991 SO Some DBE voting computers(in about 3 states ofthe U.S.)are outfitted with a "Voter Verified PaperAudit Trail" that the voters can see before they cast.their vote, and that drops into a scaled ballot box that can be recounted by hand. That's an important check on the computer memory; but it still has many problems: most voters don't understand what that printout is for; and they don'tcheck it very reliably; the thermal paper("cash register tape")is hard to recount by hand. Better technology is now available,for example, voters that are unable to use pen-andpaper can use touch-screen Ballot Marking Devices(BMDs)that can produce optical-scan ballots to be counted by op-scan voting machines. In the.1980s and 1990s,voting-machine vendors developed "direct-recording electronic"(DR_E)voting computers. In this system, the voters indicate their choices on atouchscreen (or some other input device), and the computer records and Counts the vote in its internal memory,and/or in an electronic memory cartridge. There's no paper record ofthe vote(but see note below). At the closing ofthe polls, the machine Can print a cash-register-tape printout ofthe results; this along with the memory cattridge are transported ton central place for aggregation (adding up all the per-machine totals). After the polls close, the machine can print out a list ofevery vote cast, from its internal memory; butthat's not the same as a paper ballot that the voters can see, and ifthe computer is wrong thy accident or cheating), then the paper is rust a printout ofthose umng numbers. %mestizoic,19a0 Strplow, 13 How does the computer program in the voting machine 'know' What candidates are on the ballot'? The answer is that there is a"ballot definition flle'' prepared by election administrators, listing all the contests and candidates. 14 17-2361-A-002517 Z6 JaPullil Ballot Definition Cartilage Is The election administrator(a county employee, or a contractor, etc.) uses software on an ordinary laptop or desktop computer to prepare the ballot definition Mt Then the ballot definition is written to a removable memory cartridge (like a thumbehive,or some similar technology). This is the "ballot definition cartridge.- ec 15 .... Welt aleatory card Imo ita5PCMCIA dotof a writ* macb.tax . .......... ... . ...... ,,,,,,, The ballot definition cartridge is then inserted into a slot on the votingmachtne. Here. you can see that Me 5i01 is down lowon the right-hand side. Now the voting computer is ready roz election day. 3411()Ei:::11Q.17.1 .................. 16 17-2361-A-002518 .... .... . ..... 'nuffsaid. decides what election results are reported by the computer program inside the voting machine Whoever programs the computer, ..... 17 18 BUT,it's easy to make a cheating vote-stealing program that isn't detected by logic and accuracy testing! Every voting machine (just like any other kind ofcomputer) has an internal clock,so it',mows when its election day So you just make your cheating program cheat only on election day, after Sam. Since the LATA is done before election day the cheating program will be on its "best behavior when. LATA urdone. Somme someone wants to steal an elettion by hacking a rating machine. They can replace the legitimate vote-counting program inside the voting computer, witli fraudulent program that deliberately miscounts the votes. If you were doing this, you wouldn't make it aInTlys cheat, because the electionadministrators sometimes test the machines, before the election, by casting a few votes and then seeing the total. This is called "logic and accuracy testing." or LATA. LATA is good for some things—for example, making sure that the touchscreen isn't misealibrated, or that the ballot definition is generally OK. • Load your program into voting machines • At the factory,. or - in the field • Write a computer program that • On nonelnction days, accurately counts votes - On election days, between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., cheats: adds votes to the wrotte column • Voter won't see anything amiss • Nor will pre-cle.ction "logic and accuracy" testing! 18 17-2361-A-002519 P6 .i.Puia 2days .19 By the way, the Ballot Definition File has each candidate listed with hisler party affiliation {Democrat or Republican). So if you want to steal votes generically in favor ofone party or the other,it's easy to program Mat up. Once you install that program in the voting computer,it will steal, votes in election after election for many years to come. Then, writing the vote-stealing program is easy—it took just a couple ofdays to vane and test By the way,don't try this at home! It's a felony to install vote-stealing programs into a government owned voting machine that will be used in an election. I did mine as part ofa court-ordered forensic study,inside a secure building at the New Jersey State Police headquarters. But an election hacker wouldn't have that kind of respect for the law Here are some things my vote-stealing program did,so as to avoid detection. Basically, it waits until apm when the pollworker turns the key to shut down the election and prim out the results. Just before panting out the results, my program shifts 20% ofthe votes from candidate A to candidate 5- The computer program stores the votes redundantly in two different memories,so my program makes sum to cheat in both memories. The computer program has an "audit trail' in its electronic memory that's supposedly some sort ofprotection,so my computer pogrom changes the audit tool .7Don't cheat in.Pre-LAT mode /Cheat only when at least N votes cast ./Modify "audietrail" consistently with vote totals /Modify in-cartridge results consistently with internal-memory results • Don't cheat until polls open at least 0hours • Don't cheat except on election day • Don't cheat if time/date very recently changed ITII1 warei7,;11.al: In connection with my expert-witness testimony in a court case in New Jersey (2008-2009), I did a forensic examination ofNew Jersey's"AK Advantage" voting machines. As part ofthat study,I wrote a vote-stealing program. First, my team had to understand how the legitimate program works, before modifying it to cheat This is called "reverse engineering." We tried it two ways: first; without the "source code,- and second, with the "source code." It's much easier with the source code,ofcourse, but either way it's well within the capabilities ofa moderately qualified hacker, 10 seconds • pick lock: 2 minutes • unscrew 10 screws: • pry out.ROM.press in new: 1 minute • replace screws: 3 minutes - Time to install fraudulent ROM:.7 n limes • Writing the program that cheats: (122 lines ofsource code) • Reverse-engineering the program: —25 person-weeks = If you get a copy ofthe source code: 1 w,zelz. Selected lecintieattonclustons 20 17-2361-A-002520 By the way,you might think that the state could install some tamper-evident security seals,and that would prevent the crooks from getting in there. But you would be wrong! Supposedly "tainper-evideor seals don't provide much protection. See any paper,"Security Seols on Voting Machines: A Case Study," by Andrew W.Appel. ACM Trunsitctioiri on Wort:nation aridSystem Security vol. 14; no. 2, pages 18:1--t8.29, September 2011, Then,to install that vote-stealing program in the AVC Advantage voting machine,.1 picked the lock on the back door ofthe machine. That's easy, it's a cheapo lock; I'm not at all an expert lock-picker, butt can pick this lock in about 10 seconds. Thenl unscrew 10 screws on the panel that covers the motherboard. You cansee the motherboard here, its green. Those four computer chips with the white labels on them, hold the computer program that runs the election, lust replacing one of them,at lower right, is enough to install my vote-stealing program. The whole process lakes about 7 minutes, using a screwdriver. 1thlitIC ts OM IL MOS 01, '''''e.t voig' 21 On most voting computers these days,"you don't need a screwdriver to replace the vote-counting program It's loaded in on a memory card, a removable media like a ihumbdrive or the equivalent. In fact, on most voting machines, you use the same memory-card slot where the Ballot Definition Cartridge is inserted. if you put a card into that slot,that instead"the ballot definition, has a new vote-counting program. then the computer will replace its old vote-counting program with your new one, Or,linen memory card atm thePCMCIA slot ofa voting machine Load it flunk CO-Itatd, HOW.iiddiyouireptaotithe,s0fivstal'e? 22 17-2361-A-002521 CNS Right before an election, voting machines are delivered to the polling places: school gymnasiums. firehouses, churches,town-hall lobbies. There,in many cases, they are left unattended and unsecured. Anyone could get access to those machines and stick in a cartridge. And what about after an election, before the voting machines are collected from the polling places? Backing them at that point won't change the election that just happened, but it will make the machine cheat in the next elections, for years to come. lb steals big election, the attacker would have to install cheating software in many voting machines, notjust one. But surely that's well within the capabilities of a corrupt political machine—or even a freelance criminal who steals votes in favor ofa candidate who's not even aware of the fraud, Between elections, voting machines are stored in warehouses. County employees have access to them, to perform maintenance such as replacing batteries: I'm sure 99.8% ofthose public servants are trustworthy and of the highest integrity. But we organize our elections so you shouldn't have to trust every single election worker That's why there are witnesses in the polling places, and witnesses to recounts, and so on. And therefore, ifyou can get unobserved access to a voting machine . forjust a minute or so,you can install vote-stealing software into it. Invort nunsuly utt iutatfloPCMCIA slot ofa votittg otachnir ... can hack a voting machine by insetting a card. „ 23 Security Analysis ofthe Diebold AccuVote-'1'S Voting Machine, by Ariel I., Feldman,I. Alex Haldeman,and Edward W. Felten. Proceecithg;ofthe2007 USTNIXeACX:URATE Ecctronic Voting Technology Wontehop (HY7.''07), August 2007. This attack was Ilist demonstrated in 2006,on a real voting machine: And here's how to hack a voting machine from the Internet. The attacker hacks in to the election administrator's network, and gains access to the computer used for programming Ballot Definition Files. He hacks that computer so that, in addition to putting Ballot Definitions into the removable cartridge, the election management system computer also writes a fraudulent vote-counting(vote-stealing) program to the cartridge. The continuer will put the vote-stealing program into every Ballot Definition cartridge destined for every voting machine. Then, when that cartridge is loaded into the voting machine,before the election, it will be installing the volestealing program. An election adminisuator may say,"our voting machines don't connect to a network,so they can't be hacked from the Internet.” That's not ape: even ifa voting machine has no network connector, it con be hacked from the Internet. Voting Trttiain 24 17-2361-A-002522 nusdon)we shot tun out eltrtions iA a wy htn &tootand unmetfor computeritedina,without:baying Wpm all tfltX1wirgrans. 26 lificking. efertioa drezials shouldusegoal security pxosticea to wake their cowpony tetsmthwohle., but(litre mo vsuy waketh,aWe. Cornputerficonsimita to the Wallet.gym indiract6;CM be volatroble biikiow,Hbatkatuhty ,ofvotio. re:6111pUtur 25 ib* One by one, states are witching to optical-scan. Since 2004,no states have switched to paperiess voting. Only a few states still use them. 11.01,WW:tkrAKPONty Don't use papetless touch-screen voting computers! They are a fiztallyfienved technology. .‘crdithierefot, 26 17-2361-A-002523 86 JaPuila About 10 states still use paperless direct-tecording electronic(DRE)'-touchscreen" voting computers, for most or all often.voters. Two or three states use touchscreen DREs with a voter verified paper audit trail," which is not quite as bad. About 37 states use optical-scan balloting for almost all their voters. 4••••••••••••r••••• (rig yai.xxic-4 DR.Es Stiltti Matt* nbati.•••pi 27 '• • Rue's a better idea: Voters mark their choices on a paper ballot, and feed the ballot into an optical-scan computer that counts it accurately. 131 28 17-2361-A-002524 Well,that *is, the op-scan computer counts it accurately itehe computer has.not been reprogrammed to cheat! So, why is that any better than a touchscreen DU? e7f4:..p X CI, cs83 N•:;y' • • ers toot tic cmi re I„„.,:,,,,,,„,„„„„„„„„„,„,„,„„„ 29 it .•• •••R• ^Pen ?iX• ffif: Asto.„ tkelx.r : • • f. •: : 3fs Here's why: You can recount the paper ballot that the voter actually marked by hand, in the presence of witnesses pont both parties, without any computer "Interpreting"the ballot to you. : : • y atn6 >,1 Hse Voter-lierified Paper Ba !et i 30 17-2361-A-002525 001 JaPu!El These audits help protect trot only against cheating inside the voting computer. They also protect against accidental miscvlibration, accidental mistakes in the layout ofthe Ballot Definition File, and so on. • BeWes "recount a random sarrq>le of the ballot buttes." there are other cost-effective methods for making -riik-limiting audits" a standard part ofall elections prior to certification of final re.sults. • Ifthere's widespread computer fraud in many precincts, tecountine paper ballots inter a few precincts will thxI evidence of a discrepancy • Solution: Recount a random sample of precincts! • Ifyou have to recount the ballots by hand, what's the point ofhaving a computer? 31 Solute ofdata:Verified Valk* FOUM46,0111 fa \ s tt• ar 44.4%,:* its, >vox..4:30 52 • Note: some states(1N,PA,NJ)have statutes requiring audits, but most oftheir voters use unauditable paperless DR.Es,so in practice they don't do ballot audits. A few stales do random audits. but unfortunately. 1. Not very many states do it(justthe ones shovm here in light wren and dark green) 2. Even in most of the states that do audits, the audits are inadequate. They don't audit enough percentage of the ballot boxes to catch fraud(ifit were to occur); or they do the audits after the restrits are officially certified. when it's too late; or they don't audit the actual paper ballots, which means that a cheating computes could still fool them. Audits are the best way to protect against computerized election theft; but they have to be done well in order to provide protection. Colmado and New Mexico have models that other states should emulate. „ AgEa,ze . e 32 V. to1 • :sr F. 81? . i.6-4: ‘,. . _ --, , .?:... . .c. • :r.fs '.Z..'o g 1 t -g. t -§ ,.,;:.n. g.14 .,. ..sz IA ,.. R. „ . .;.' . :-. g iz. v . ....2 g..1 5 1 — ..... ''''` „ ,. . .4 A .1: ' . .. ; vvfl Ii 1st . -..- .r 4- ill , d 41'; 17-2361-A-002526 Binder 101 Page 2 of 7 Voter Integrity Project NC,Inc. v. Wake Cnty. Bd.of Elections DISCUSSION Both motions to dismiss are Filed pursuant to 13yjs 126)(6)..' In a Rule 12_119(6) context, the reviewing court must determine whether the complaint alleges sufficient facts "to raise a right to relief above the speculative level" and "to state a claim to reliefthat is plausible on its face." This directive ordinarily limits a 1*31 court's review to the "well-pled facts in the complaint[, which it must view] in the light most favorable to the plaintiff," While no absolute bar exists, a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(61 does not typically resolve the applicability of defenses to a welIpled claim. Goittlarb v. Mayor & 1CIIyCtwncil ofBaltiniore, 791 F.3d 500, 508 (4th Cir. 2015) (citations omitted) (alteration in original). With this standard in mind, the court will consider VIP-NC's NVRA claims. The NVRA reflects the view of Congress that the right to vote "is a fundamental right," that government has a duty to "promote the exercise ofthat right," and that discriminatory and unfair registration laws can have a "damaging effect on voter participation" and "disproportionately harm voter participation by various groups, including racial minorities." Congress enacted the NVRA in order to "increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote" in federal elections, "enhance[ ] the participation of eligible citizens as voters," "protect the integrity of the electoral process," and "ensure that accurate and current voter registration rolls are maintained." 1 Because WCBOE tiled its answer with its motion to dismiss, its motion technically is one for judgment on the pleadings under Mile: See BurbczelLikoad Co.ofDeLL=.14klasidio Cont.27814'.3d :401,403 i46 Cir. .2002). "However, the distinction is one without a difference," as the court applies the same standard as Refirj2thal motions.Id. at 404. Project Vote/Voting for Am.. Inc. v. Long. 682 P.3(.1 331, 334(4th C.vir. 2012)(citing 42 1.1.S.C. § 19730,g (now codified at 52 U.S.C. § 20501))(alteration in original). Section R ofthe Act, which is at issue here, imposes 1*41 various duties and obligations regarding voter registration. The NVRA provides a private right of action to "[a] person who is aggrieved by a violation of[the NVRA]." 52 t.:7,C.C. 20510(b)(1). The aggrieved party must first provide "written notice of the violation to the thief election official of the State involved," id., unless "the violation occurred within 30 days before the date of an election for Federal office," id. 20510(by3). "Ifthe violation is not corrected within 90 days after receipt of a notice.. or vvithin 20 days after receipt of the notice if the violation occurred within 120 days before the date of an election for Federal office," the aggrieved person may file a suit. Id.I 205/0(122(21. V1P-NC alleges WCBOE violated Section 8 ofthe NVRA.In Count 1, VIP-NC asserts that WCBOE has failed to make a reasonable effort to conduct voter list maintenance under § 20507(a)t4).2 In Count II, it asserts that WCBOE has failed to respond to VIP-NC's written requests for data and failed to provide records in accordance with § 20507a). WCBOE initially argues that because the mandates of the NVRA are directed to states, it, as a local government unit, is not a proper party. WCBOE is correct that the particular subsections at issue are phrased in terms of state 1*51 obligations. "[E]ach State" is required, "[i]n the administration of voter registration for elections for Federal office,. .[to] conduct a general program that makes a reasonable America Vote Act ("HAVA"), JLC. 4;• 21Q8. 12(41. which requires the appropriate state or local election official to perform regular voter list maintenance,(Compl., DE # 1,1 30.) It recognizes that the HAVA does not provide a private right of action but contends that the provision is relevant to determining "whether the Defendant has a 'reasonable' program for voter list maintenance."(R.esp. Oppin WCBOE Mot. Dismiss,DE # 19,at 6 n.3.) IVIP-NC also claims WCBQE violated a provision of the Help 17-2361-A-002527 Binder 102 Page 3 017 Voter Integrity Project NC;Inc. v. Wake Cnty. Bd. of Elections effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists ofeligible voters by reason of—(A) the death of the registrant; or (B) a change in the residence of the registrant .. . ."). 52 USX:. cY 205071a)(41."Each State" must also "maintain for at least 2 years and shall make available for public inspection . . . all records concerning the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists of eligible voters...." Id. § 2050710(11. However, the NVRA also contemplates local government involvement in carrying out the State's obligations. See 52 US.C. 20501(a)(2)(finding "it is the duty of the Federal, State,and local governments to promote the exercise ofthat right" to vote),(b)(2)(recognizing one ofthe purposes of the NVRA is "to make it possible for Federal, State, and local governments to implement this chapter in a manner that enhances the participation of eligible citizens as voters in elections for Federal office"). In North Carolina, the State •Board of Elections ("SBOE")[*61 is charged with adopting a program to comply with the NVRA's list maintenance requirement. See N.c. Gen. Sun. 163-82.14(a). However, North Carolina law also designates local county boards of elections as the entities directly responsible for performing list maintenance in accordance with that program. See id. L16382.100 ("Each county board of elections shall conduct systematic efforts to remove names from its list of registered voters in accordance with this section and with the program adopted by the State Board."). Pertinent here, each county board of elections is required to remove from its voter registration records any person who is listed as deceased on a monthly report from SBOE,id. .$2.14th); to "conduct a systematic program to remove from its list of registered voters those who have moved out of the county, and to update the registration records of persons who have moved within the county, id. ;'163-82.14(d); and to remove 3 in the context ofEarldess,Section 7requires that "any time a person enters a DIPS office to receive food stamps, Medicaid assistance, a person from its list who has moved after following statutorily mandated procedures, id. Based on WCBOE's explicit list maintenance obligations, the court concludes that VVCBOE is a proper party. See Bellitto v. Snipes. No. 16-cr-61474-BLOOM/Valle. 2016 U.S. Dist. LENS 148234, 2016 WI, 6248602 at *3-5(Si). fla. Oct. 26, 20161(denying motion to dismiss AIVR..4 Section 8 claims against the defendant local election official I*71 where the plaintiffs had not sued the Secretary of State or the State of Florida and recognizing that because the local election official has obligations under the NVRA based on state law, the plaintiffs may bring" an action against her for her alleged failure to meet those obligations); Am. civil Rights Union v. Martinez-Rivera, 166F. Supp. 3d 779, 791-93(WD. Tex. 2015) (rejecting the defendant county tax assessor-collector's argument for dismissal of NVRA Section8_ claim because the plaintiffhad not sued the Texas Secretary ofState). The decision of Harkless r. Brunner. 545 F.3:I 145 (6 . .111 Or. 2008), on which WCBOE relies, does not support a different result. There, the plaintiffs sued Ohio's Secretary of State and the Director of Ohio's Department ofJob and Family Services("DJ FS")for failure to comply with Section 7 ofthe NVRA.3 The Eighth Circuit considered "whether states should be held responsible for implementing the requirements of Section 7 ofthe NVRA." Harkless, 545 F. 3d at 449. The Secretary of State argued she should not be held responsible for any NVRA violations. Specifically, she claimed her only duty was to coordinate the state's responsibilities under the Act,"[a]nd, because Ohio chose to implement its requirements through the county departments and to make local officials responsible, those local officials, not the Secretary, are the proper parties to this lawsuit." Id at 451. The court Nil concluded that the state could not abdicate its responsibility under the NVRA through delegation to local officials and that the Secretary specifically was welfare, or disability benefits assistance, that person should receive a voter registration tbrm for federal elections and assistance in filling out the form."545 F..td 150. 17-2361-A-002528 Binder 103 Page4 of7 Voter Integrity Project NC,Inc, v. Wake Ctity, I3d.ofElections responsible for implementation and enforcement of Section 7. Id. at 452-53. Accordingly,the court held the Secretary, as the designated chief election official, was a proper party. Id ,at 455. The Harkless court went on to consider whether the Director ofDNS,a state agency,could also be liable under the NVRA, A portion of its analysis bears repeating: Because Ohio law authorizes the statewide DJFS (and thus the Director) to ensure compliance with Section 7 of the NVRA, the Director relies on the following curious proposition: because local authorities have the independent responsibility to comply with the NVRA, the Director should not be held accountable. True, the Ohio General Assembly has tasked the county offices with implementing the NVRA; but, as previously explained, the General Assembly also tasked the Director with the power to enforce any county transgressions of federal law. This is not an either-or proposition.The fact that some states, like Ohio, delegate the administration of public assistance programs to counties or municipalities should not mean that those states are free of rsi all statutory obligations. kkat,4,57..(citations omitted)(emphasis added). The court held that the Director was also a proper party based on her responsibilities for meeting the requirements of the NVRA distinct from the Secretary of State's responsibilities. See id at 45657 .458. Contrary to WCBOE's suggestion, the court did not hold that the state (or a state official) is the (only) proper party in a NVRA action. WCBOE next appears to argue that VIP-NC's letter to WCBOE dated 2 June 2016 did not comply with the notice provision of§ 205.10(b) before filing suit. By that letter, VIP-NC notified WCBOE that When notice of the violation is required, the NVRA obligates the aggrieved party to provide the notice to the state chiefelection official. See 52 U.S.C. In North Carolina, the Executive Director of SHOE is designated as the chief election official for WCBOE was apparently in violation ofSection 8 of the NVRA by failing to conduct a reasonable effort to remove ineligible voters from its rolls and identified the basis for this belief: the "county has significantly more voters on the registration rolls than it has eligible living citizen voters." (Compl., Ex. A.) VIP-NC also requested that WCBOE make available for public inspection records under 20507(0. The letter states, among other things, that it serves as the statutory notice required by $ 205 tO(.122, and that ifthe county did not fully comply with Section 8, V1P-NC may file suit under the NVRA within 20 days after receipt. (jst.) The Executive Director of SBOE was No] copied on the letter.4 In National Council of La Raw P. Cegavske, 800 F.3d 1032. 1035 L9di Cir. 201.11, the court summarized the notice requirements of.§105/06) as follows. Whether the aggrieved person is required to give notice and how long the person must wait to file suit after giving notice depends on the timing of the next federal election. When the violation upon which a suit is based occurs a substantial time before the next federal election, the aggrieved person must notify the state of the alleged violation and must then wait 90 days before tiling suit.[52 U.S.C.,1€20510thwi)-(2j., However,"if the violation occurred within 120 days" ofa federal election, the aggrieved person must wait only 20 days after notifying the state before bringing suit. Id. '21_11.JM. . "If the violation occurred within 30 days" of a federal election, the aggrieved person does not need to give any notice before bringing suit. Id. § 205.10(b)3. Furthermore, A plaintiff can satisfy the NVRA'S notice purposes ofthe NVRA.ICcerLAR.d. S 16342,2. Therefore, having provided the Executive Director with a copy oldie 2 June 2016 letter, VIP-NC satisfied its obligation to provide written notice of the Violation to the chiefelection official. 17-2361-A-002529 Binder 104 Page 5 of7 Voter Integrity Project NC,Inc. v. Wake Cray. Bd.ofElections provision by plausibly alleging that a ongoing, systematic violation is occurring at the time the notice is sent or, if no notice is sent, when the complaint is filed within 30 days of a federal election. Neither the notice nor the complaint needs to specify that the violation has been actually observed, and that there is thus a "discrete 1*11.1 violation," during the 120—day or 30—day period. It is enough that the notice letter and the complaint plausibly allege the existence of an ongoing violation within the appropriate time period, whether or not it was "discrete" during the period. Id. at 104(citations omitted). Here, WCBOE emphasizes that "plaintiffs lawsuit was initiated forty-six(46)days after the date ofthe letter" and "the letter was dated five(5) days before the June 7, 2016 North Carolina Congressional Primary."(Mem., DE # 15, at 9(footnote omitted).) WCBOE then argues that "the 'violation' plaintiff alleges, even if... taken as true, occurred in 2014." (Id. at 10.) While not explicitly saying so, WCBOE's contention appears to be that because the alleged violation occurred more than 120 days before a federal election, VIP-NC was required to wait 90 days after VVCBOE's receipt of the notice letter to file suit. VIP-NC has, however, alleged an ongoing violation of Seciton 8 in that WCBOE is continuing to violate the NVRA's list maintenance requirements. (See Compl., DE # 1, 1111 14, 15.) Because VIP-NC alleges an ongoing violation at the time ofthe notice letter, its filing ofsuit 46 days after the 2 June 2016 letter complied with the notice requirement of 4' 20.510(W2j. See Ce4ravske, 800 F.3d at 1044. program that makes a reasonable effort at voter list maintenance.5 In support ofthis claim, VIP-NC alleges that "voter rolls maintained by [WCBOE] contain or have contained more registrants than eligible voting-age citizens." 't 9.)Further, it cites to 2014 data from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission and the U.S. Census Bureau.(I.d. 111 10, 11.) Using that data, it alleges "the registration rate in Wake County has been 104.75 percent during the conduct ofa federal election."(Id.112.)ft also cites to more recent data, as of2 July 2016,from SBOE, 13),and based on that data along with the 2014 census bureau data, alleges "the registration rate in Wake County remains in excess of 104 percent of eligible citizens residing in Wake County," (Ld, 111 14), Also, as an example of WCBOE's "failure to reasonably maintain the voter rolls," VIP-NC alleges WCBOE "undertakes absolutely no effort whatsoever to use data available from the Wake County Clerk of Superior Court obtained from jury excusal communication" I*131 to identify "residents who self-identify as non-citizens or non-residents" or to identify "potentially obsolete mailing addresses of registrants." Usk I 19.) (j WCBOE characterizes VIP-NC's reliance on 2014 census bureau data ofeligible voters(which is based on an average from 2010 to 2014) as a "threadbare basis" to support its allegation that the number of registered voters in Wake County remains in excess of 104 percent ofeligible voters.(Mem.,DE# 15, at 10.) Somewhat relatedly, defendant-intervenors argue VIP-NC's conclusion based on the cited data is "oversimplified" because it disregards the NVRA's requirement that, absent his/her written request, a registered voter cannot be removed from Finally, both WCBOE and defendant-intervenors the official list of eligible voters on the ground of a contend that VIP-NC's allegations are insufficient to changed residence without written notice and only show a violation of the obligation to conduct a after two federal general elections after the notice. rill Defendant-itiwrvenors move only to dismiss Count I. Although WCBOE generally contends that VIP-NC's factual allegations fail to support a cause of action under the NVRA,(Mem., DE # 15, at 3), WC130E make no specific arguments to support dismissal ofCount II other than continuing its argument that VIP-NC has sued the wrong party,(kl,at 8-9). For the reasons set forth above,the court disagrees and concludes WCBOE,to the extent it maintains records concerning implementation ofits list maintenance activities(which incidentally it does not deny that it does), is required to make such records available for public inspection. 17-2361-A-002530 Binder 105 Page 6 of7 Voter Integrity Project NC,Inc. v. Wake Crity. Bd.ofElections (Mem., DE # 28, at 8.) See also 52 U.S.0 2050741)(1). "Thus, [according to defendantintervenors,] it is entirely plausible that the number of registrants would exceed the eligible voting age population in a jurisdiction with high voter participation and a relatively transient population." (Mem.,DE # 28, at 9(emphasis in original).) in and of itself that WCBOE has failed to make a reasonable effort at voter list maintenance. However, it, along with other evidence, may be relevant to determine the reasonableness of WCBOE's efforts at voter list maintenance. As such, the court will consider the allegation along With VIPNC's other allegations to determine whether it has stated a claim under the NVRA, The court notes that r141 there is nothing inherently wrong with VIP-NC's reliance on census data to Delendant-intervenors argue that ion S's "safe support its claim. See Martinez-Rivera, 166F.Supp. harbor' provision defeats VIP-Nes ittirn::under 3d at 791 (recognizing "that United States census 20507(a)(4::',. Under the "safe harbor" prOVOiort, data is reliable"); id. at 805 (report and A State may meet the requirement of.sulyeetion recommendation) (taking into consideration .(d(42 by establishing a program under which— registration rate based on census data to determine (A)change-of-address information supplied by whether the plaintiff stated a claim for failure to the Postal Service through its licensees is used make a reasonable effort to conduct voter list to identify registrants whose addresses may maintenance under Section 8 of the NYRA). While have changed; and reliance on older data might arguably weaken an (B)if it appears from information provided by inference of wrongdoing, VIP-NC used the most the Postal Service that— recent census data available at the time ofthe filing of its complaint. See (i) a registrant 1*161 has moved to a Iittpi://www.census.govirdoidata/Por;ng age zopul different residence address in the same Won by citizenship and race cvatz.himi (last registrar's jurisdiction in which the visited 2/16/17)(2011-2015 data published 2/1/17). registrant is currently registered, the And, while defendant-intervenors have advanced a registrar changes the registration records to potentially reasonable explanation for the high show the new address and sends the registration rate, that being the two-election cycle registrant a notice of the change by waiting period to remove a registrant from the forwardable mail and a postage prepaid preofficial voter list, the validity of that explanation is addressed return form by which the not appropriate for determination at this early stage registrant may verify or correct the address of the litigation, where the court views the factual information; or allegations and inferences drawn therefrom in favor of VIP-NC. (ii) the registrant has moved to a different residence address not in the same registrar's Both WCBOE and defendant-intervenors take issue jurisdiction, the registrar uses the notice with VIP-NC's supporting its claim with the procedure described in subsection (dE2) to allegation that WCBOE has failed to use data from confirm the change ofaddress. jury excusal 1*151 communication. The parties all appear to agree that the NVRA does not mandate 52 US.C. 20507(c)(1). Defendant-intervenors that election officials use a particular tool to conduct direct the court to a voter registration guideline a voter list maintenance program, rather the Act SBOE has adopted which implements a program provides election officials with discretion in how to whereby the SBOE compares quarterly the statewide conduct that program. Thus, the fact that WCBOE voter registration database against the Postal does not use a "readily available tool,"(Compl., DE Service's National Change of Address Program and # 1,1 19),to remove ineligible voters does not mean makes available to the county boards of election a 17-2361-A-002531 Binder 106 Page 7 o17 Voter integrity Project NC,Inc. v. Wake Cnty. Bd. ofElections report showing voters with changes of address. /s/ W.Earl Britt (Ment,DE # 28, at 7(citing 23:20 N.C. Reg. 201920 (Apr. 15, 2009))) In accordance with the W. Earl Britt guideline, the county boards ofelection are required Senior U.S. District Judge to check the report and follow certain procedures for any registered voter who is likely to have moved. 23:20(*VI N.C. Reg.2019-20(Apr. 15, 2009.) Lfal 0::e Given the stage ofthis proceeding, the court has no information about WCBOE's compliance with those procedures. Whether WCBOE's compliance is sufficient to satisfy the "safe harbor" provision is best resolved after further development of the record. See •13ellitro 2016 US. Dist, LEVIS 148234. 2016 WI,624860Z t-tt *8(concluding that whether a letter attached to the amended complaint from the defendant local election official "establishes Defendant's full compliance with subsection (q(/) and defeats Plaintiffs claims is a fact-based argument more properly addressed at a later stage of the proceedings"). Therefore, at this time, the court is unwilling to find that the 'sate harbor" provision applies to bar V 11)-NC's claim. Considering VIP-NC's allegation that the number of ivgistered voters in Wake County has exceeded, and continues to exceed, the number of eligible voters, which allegation is in turn supported by reliable data and WBOE's failure to use available jury excuse information, a. reasonable inference can be drawn that WOE is not making a reasonable effort to conduct a voter list, maintenance program in accordance with the NV RA,• See Martiner—Rivera, .16.6 Supp. 3d ai 793-94 (holding that allegations of voter rolls containing more registered voters than Citizens r181 eligible to vote—a 105% registration rate—gave rise to a strong inference ofa violation ot the MIRA- and stated a plausible claim for',relief), Accordingly, the court finds- VU -NC has stated a claim for violation of12 tI.s •$ 20507, III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons,the motions to dismiss are DENIED. This 21 February 2017. 17-2361-A-002532 Binder 107 Bates in the News: Nov. 11, 2016 By Jay Burns. Published on November 11, 2016 Voter Suppression President Spencer says a flier posted on campus was "absolutely directed at suppressing the vote" — Washington Post A dastardly attempt to discourage Bates studentsfrom voting caught the attention of local and national media. "Somebody doesn't want Bates College students to vote Tuesday," reported the Lewiston Sun Journal on Nov.6. Orange fliers posted in Commons and residences on Sunday by an unknown person implied that voting in Maine meant that a student must get a Maine driver's license and, if they owned a car, register it, which could cost "hundreds of dollars." Wrong,wrong,wrong. 17-2361-A-002533 Binder 108 Orange fliers with.false votinginformation posted on campuson Nov.6 werea deliberate attemptto discouragestudents from voting, said President Spencer.(Photograph by Sarah Frankie Sigman'18) In a statement issued Monclaymorning, President Spencer took to the bully pulpit, reaffirming Bates students' legal right to vote and to same-day registration and denoundng the fliers as "dearly a deliberate attempt at voter suppression." She added: We are proud of our students' interest and participation in the electoral process,and I am deeply disturbed that anyone would seek to deter their exercise of the most basic form of citizenship.... Any unofficial communications that suggest otherwise are contrary to the ideals of American democracy. President Spencer leads off this story by WCSH-TV in Portland bysaying that the orange fliers seemed "absolutely directed atsuppressing the vote." • Subject: RE: Checking in on my request Ken, Below are the numbers you requested. I don't believe that anyone who registered before the Help America Vote Act would have their DL or SS information in our system. Also, before the voter ID law took effect, anyone who did not have a DL or SS on file would have had to show ID before voting. Now, everyone must show ID. Rob VOTERSCOUNTSVATH Nt DMV -TOTAL...COUNT AND SSN CURRENT VOTEkETATUS 217383 Active 5325 Active with NCOA Change 7670 Inactive 159 Pending TotAntattn.,:,230'53 Total voters who voted in November 2016 Presidential election and don't have SSN and DIVIV are 143866> Rob Rock Director of Elections RI Department of State I Secretary of State Nellie M. Gorbea Email: rr.pck ,sos.ri.gov I Website: v,,,ww.sos.liagy I Twitter: @RISecState 148 W. River Street, Providence RI 02904 I 401-222-2340 Our Mission: The Rhode Island Department of State engages and empowers all Rhode Islanders by making government more accessible and transparent, encouraging civic pride, enhancing commerce and ensuring that elections are fair, fast and accurate. 17-2361-A-002584 Binder 159 From: Rob Rock fmailtosrock@sos.ri.govj Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 3:07 PM To:'Ken Block' Subject: RE: Proof of Citizenship I don't know for sure about other states but I am pretty sure others states are in the same boat we are. Rob Rock or% Director of Elections RI Department of State I Secretary of State Nellie M. Gorbea Email: rrockA§pmbg.pv I Website: www.sos.ri,gov I Twitter: @RISecState 148 W. River Street, Providence RI 02904 I 401-222-2340 Our Mission: The Rhode Island Department of State engages and empowers all Rhode Islanders by making government more accessible and transparent, encouraging civic pride, enhancing commerce and ensuring that elections are fair, fast and accurate. From: Ken Block [mailto:kblock@simpaticosoftware.com] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 2:49 PM To: Rob Rock Subject: RE: Proof of Citizenship I used that because it is one of the easier ones to gin up, along with some of the paper documents listed in the next tier of identity "proof" documents like a utility bill or bank statement. So in short, my scenario is possible. In my opinion, this places an even greater burden on the State to ensure that registered voters actually exist. This idea that a passive mechanism like waiting for mail to bounce back is effective is conclusively wrong, based on the empirical data that I am sending you of votes occurring at clearly had addresses. Do you know generally if any state deals with my scenario in an active way (i.e. pushing all registered voters through an identity checking algorithm), or is everyone pretty much where we are? From: Rob Rock [mailto:rrock@sos.ri.gov] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 2:36 PM To:'Ken Block' Subject: RE: Proof of Citizenship Ken, If John registers, a letter will be sent to 3 Altieri Way indicating that the voter is registered to vote. Ideally, the business would receive the letter and notify the Warwick Board of Canvassers that 3 Altieri Way is a business and that no one resides there. If not, John will be registered to vote from that address. 17-2361-A-002585 Binder 160 The cities/towns are responsible for their voter registration rolls, not the Secretary of State. A challenge to a voter's registration would be handled by the local board of canvassers. The Secretary of State maintains the database but the validation of any and all voter registrations is done at the local level. Voter ID cards do not list an address but anytime someone requests one, we ensure they are registered to vote by confirming with the CVRS. We do not do any background checks on a business ID card if one is presented. In the 5 years I have been issuing voter ID cards, I don't recall anyone ever showing a business ID as back-up identification. Rob Rob Rock Director of Elections RI Department of State I Secretary of State Nellie M. Gorbea Email: rrocksossi.cov I Website: www.sos.ov I Twitter: @RISecState 148 W. River Street, Providence RI 02904 I 401-222-2340 Our Mission: The Rhode Island Department of State engages and empowers all Rhode islanders by making government more accessible and transparent, encouraging civic pride, enhancing commerce and ensuring that elections are fair, fast and accurate. From: Ken Block [mailto:kblock@simpaticosoftware.com] Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 2:23 PM To: Rob Rock Subject: RE: Proof of Citizenship Thanks, Rob. want to run a scenario by you, in an attempt to ensure that I understand correctly how voter registration is handled in RI. Let's say I, for whatever reason, decided to attempt to register to vote a made up person and actually cast a vote using that person's non-existent "identity". So I am going to create out of thin air "John Jacob Jingleheimerschmidt" born on 1./1/1970 and residing at 20 Altieri Way,#3 in Warwick, RI (that is the address of my business). While filling out the voter registration form in John's name, I do not enter any info for RI driver's license or social security number. As I understand boys' the voter registration process works right now, John would be duly registered to vote based on the information that I provided and no checks would be performed to prove or disprove that John either exists or is registered to vote at a residence. As long as any voter mail sent to 20 Altieri Way,41.3 is not returned as undeliverable, John's registration will not be looked at by the SoS office unless it is challenged by someone outside of the SoS' office. 17-2361-A-002586 Binder 161 To vote,someone assuming John's "identity" would have to visit the SoS office and provide a photo card from any business, commercial establishment or health club in order to receive a voter ID card. John provides a photo ID card from a non-existent business. Does the SOS office make any attempt to confirm the existence of the business for which a photo ID was produced? At this point, John can vote in the next election, and will not be looked at again in terms of his eligibility to vote for any reason unless someone outside of the Secretary of State's office specifically challenges his credentials. Do I have this correct? Thanks Ken 17-2361-A-002587 Binder 162 4 . . heriti..TC.Org . IVOte.."faikjej: .. oven') en 2017Stud\‘. 'Atherica teountabliitv . i the Nruinerabie; The , A comp;[r ........... .....]:::: . i)uplicate \;()11tig toter•history from 2J states. .. Data represents U 1 in s e-ed Lxtra.00 ation nfl -around t: 000 vo e5, U rid bu dH STO vote ieg aSketbal ' state comparisons ,'n ent state GAL found 8.47 Nov„ electio ....... .. WO gs ,ederai pos, :r n ed addresses such as , "gas sta Jns,.vacantiots, dbar s. arehouseS;!and off 17-2361-A-002589 Binder 164 /0-of uit• • () ulaticto 0/ , N7(.)t,nil! Age ...... ton '• • • Calift)r] t,, t , DC oi hid taa o. .4). Ken rt Licky--1oo27'),,‘ Ailaine- 01.6.1% MICJ an- 1.8 • `si)t.kt.,./.': • • .. ..•• ....... ........ „...... .... . •::• ........... ••• : ••: . :.. . .............‘i.. •.:•••••:. • ...... ..ire Y01,( •. • 0 fig!,.:.•. ..... . .. ..... : ............ .. .•::. :••::: •••, . • e ••tqT.:R...R.I.tt ......olt iitatik ttt ist ••••••::. . . • . .::::••.• ' •.. ............ .. . . • ..• . . .... .... 1.?,6p . .. .. . f.tsper..„ 1\111. . „ ............ ........... . . . .. . • • ... ...... . resetabi . „.... ,. . -43s 1ien•( ••• • • • • ••• • • ••• , •• •• d ' • • t „• • • • • • • • <1 • •• • • • • • • t'it:tr.):(!d. ....:... (1...5..„5') O .... hire ..... ... ... • ; . .... .. ..... ..... „ : ..„ ..... to ' ..... tieritaT;.4a•egf:v1)J•eerad ...... „„:, ........ . .......„:„: ... • 17-2361-A-002590 Binder 165 Heritage Elertion Fraud Databas eritag..„.orgivoterfrauct. . . . . . . Search county, ta 8r federal court records, contact state Attorneys General and Secretaries ofState offices; investigate local newspaper reports. 1-1eritage Voter Fraud Database documents oyi proven incidents ot election raud ranging'from one i egal,votetodhundredaridiresultiriglitthe. disenfranchisement ofthousands oflawful voters 938 Criminal Convictions 43 Civil Penalties 74 Diversion Proarams 8 Judicial Fndings 8 Official Findings h.r tae Heritage EI on Fraud Database heritage orgivoterfraud Exatlipks:ofkMieiotthei!list% ouiT1g thelintA ttlaIw ifterent dd,ii.k:mawggitOd. pi.re da ithaso.6;not comproliertsrvc lista% honmiao i)f the diffienlty Printers • (Video)cameras ), Mobile phones In voting technology they're used to: r ), Store encryption keys . Transfer election results from the central tabulator to the reporting system • Read and program election information cartridges etc • ••••• , .1;.; ASRYPIMS:4101VItl. 17-2361-A-002603 Binder 178 NLIPPrcii USB is everywhere ... and it is never'just a cable or disk' USB device are always controlled by a miniature computer >. A USB memory stick is an active computer, which responds to the computer's requests to read / write data • Even your USB charger is an 'intelligent device which talks with the device to be charged • If the programming of the USB device cannot be trusted, nothing the device communicates can be trusted • ... but about half of the devices are reprogramrnable ) and the computers like to trust them ) ... and the standard has serious flaws, the issues are not bugs • ... and the devices are unidentifiable from each other ) the serial number is optional and usually non-existent on many of the devices 420.1 twdo, reRe.al NO M nkft: [NC]nordic USB is everywhere and it can bring many things to the table USB device can be from many classes • Storage ). Printer ) Display • Camera • Keyboard > Mouse Network adaptor (wireless, Ethernet, Bluetooth, whatever) TV/Radio ) Etc etc etc .0;4111 M.S., kabs. NI CWVM.tV. 2016 17-2361-A-002604 Binder 179 Nci r1Prclic USB is everywhere ... and it is flexible It can have many identities and described functionalities > I am your Disk and Keyboard with Mouse It can change its mind any time ▪ USB device can register and de-register itself and the services it provides Become a keyboard only 12 hours after been plugged in, and only for 20 seconds USB can register to be a display • ... and ask to be a mirror display of the primary screen , Now it can see everything you see, and either use it for autonomous attacks or send it to the Master ... and it has enough horsepower to OCR the content for attack directing .Y.X"sa Nweic komp. Pow. .1, USB is everywhere ... and it can easily take the control to seriously undermine network security As a programmable device, USB device is intelligent • malicious features only after trigger activity observed USB device can announce itself to be a network device • Windows will prefer wireline network connection over wireless > ... and then some good old Ethernet spoofing and other fun stuff . Scenario : USB device spoofs Ethernet adapter • USB device replies to OHCP query with DNS evil server on the Internet, but without default gateway • Internet traffic is still routed through the normal WiFi connection DNS queries are sent to the evil server, enabling a redirection attack .1016 ticsale L.1. Now.; Novaa,,, 17-2361-A-002605 Binder 180