Do you remember that presidential election commission organized by President Trump and its request to the states for voter registration information? So far 14 states have refused, as catalogued in this piece at NPR, California among them. The response from California Secretary of State Alex Padilla to the request by the commission is here. It reads in part:
The President’s commission has requested the personal data and the voting history of every American voter–including Californians. As Secretary of State, it is my duty to ensure the integrity of our elections and to protect the voting rights and privacy of our state’s voters. I will not provide sensitive voter information to a commission that has already inaccurately passed judgment that millions of Californians voted illegally. California’s participation would only serve to legitimize the false and already debunked claims of massive voter fraud made by the President, the Vice President, and Mr. Kobach. The President’s Commission is a waste of taxpayer money and a distraction from the real threats to the integrity of our elections today: aging voting systems and documented Russian interference in our elections
Voter registrations are public records. Under the California Public Records Act, modeled after the federal Freedom of Information Act, he is required to provide that information—it does not fit under the exemptions listed in the act. The state routinely provides that information to political parties, candidates, polling organizations, and others. There is no presidential commission exception to the law.
Fortunately for the secretary of state, CPRA presently carries no penalties. Fortuitously, a bill, supported by the state’s major media outlets, is making its way through the California legislature that would impose penalties for non-compliance. The penalty is nominal but it’s something.
Most if not all states have similar public records acts. California and the other states that have refused to supply the voter registrations should comply. That is what it means to have a rule of law. Civil servants have no right of civil disobedience. Such a thing would be tyranny. They do have the right to resign rather than obey laws they believe to be wrong.
The commission is also asking for Social Security numbers and other personal data, at least that is my understanding. That means that the nut case who is the co-chair cannot release all the information requested from his own state. Also, one of the commissioners is the Ohio guy who kept accidentally releasing millions of social security numbers to the public.
Since no state has been able to find illegals voting in any significant number, this is clearly politically motivated. I am not even sure that the commission has any special powers to request stuff. I think the response should be voluntary on the part of the states, and they should be paid. Ideally, not with tax money either.
Steve
The motivations are irrelevant. The states should comply with their own laws. The commission requires no special powers. Only the ordinary powers that you and I have.
Whether this commission is worthwhile is a different topic: should the Congress act to abolish the commission or prevent it from acting? Those are worthy of discussion.
The key words are “public records” not “Donald Trump”.
Well here is a sample request.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2017/06/PEIC-Letter-to-Connecticut-1.pdf
Its reasonable to be suspicious of what the commission intends — but the request is pretty clear they want the publically available data.
Although one of the things they list as being potentially publically available is rather eyebrow raising — last 4 digits of SSN. I checked and my state does include that that if I order the data.
I don’t know, the letter mentions the states should upload the data to some website, which is not how everyone else would get the data. It seems the commission should simply pay and order the data from the various states like anyone else can; if the states refuse we have a problem.
Also, in my State they have laws that the data cannot end up being used for non-political telemarketing – having the data publically available to the public as the letter suggests seems to make that impossible.
Typo – My state does NOT include last 4 digits of SSN.
I assume this is the Secretary’s political response is solely intended to organize political support, and a formal written response will come, otherwise he’s probably violating more than one legal provision. According to Balotpedia’s information, the scope of the statute is broad: “Every person has a right to inspect any public record.”
https://ballotpedia.org/California_FOIA_procedures
@steve, the request I’ve seen asks for the “last four digits of social
security number if available.” That’s utterly reasonable, and if its not authorized by state law it doesn’t justify rejecting the entire request.
As a tangential point if I know where you lived when your social security card was issued and I know the last four digits, I can infer your SSN quite quickly. Short version: there’s no such thing as privacy.
I genuinely wish that those who believe in a right to refuse to obey laws with which they disagree (without consequences) would flesh out their views a little for us. To whom does it pertain? To what laws? Under what conditions?
“I killed person X because he really needed killing” doesn’t sound like much of defense to me but I don’t see much distinction between that and “I disobeyed the law because I don’t like politician Y”.
Wow! Didn’t realize states were handing out last 4 digits. And we wonder why identity theft is so common. Anyway, if that is the case then states should either release the information, or (has been common the last few years) challenge the legality of this in court. They can probably make the case that one of the commissioners has been negligent in the past and ask to have him removed.)
Steve
Curiosonlooker posted before I posted my comment. You cannot get social security numbers in Illinois unless specifically authorized by law or court order. I believe lawyers/investigators can get the last four digits of a SS# through Lexis/Nexis.
In my experience, the means of disseminating the information is a process. The rules are flexible enough given that different agencies have different capacities and preferences, so it usually makes sense to request the preferred format, even if the Agency decides to use a different preferred means. Right now, it seems like digital is the preferred means (mailing a CD or google drive).
While journalist and lawyers are probably the most frequent users of FOIA, the rules are written for regular people. A lawyer isn’t required to make the request. They are not written with the idea that small issues contaminate the whole request.
@steve, the social security number is a red herring; the state can provide it if its available, but it cannot refuse to respond to the rest of the request.
Deeds, donations and other public records contain partial SS#s in Louisiana. But if Republican Mississippi refuses to comply, there’s something wrong with the request. IANAL.
“While journalist and lawyers are probably the most frequent users of FOIA, the rules are written for regular people. A lawyer isn’t required to make the request. They are not written with the idea that small issues contaminate the whole request.”
That is true – I’ve made three FOIA requests myself and the process is fairly straightforward.
Tangentially, the State’s Attorney for St. Clair County (East St. Louis) has thrown his hat in the ring for the Democratic nomination for a Congressional set that was gerrymandered to be Democratic last redistricting, but has been held by a Republican and Cook now grades as +2R.
He established a record of fighting public corruption in a county believed to be highly corrupt and highly Democratic. He pressed criminal charges against police officers for the equivalent of stealing office supplies, and people handing out money and booze for their votes. He published voter information to get citizens involved as watchdogs. Some of the convictions he got were minor (and some were actually prosecuted by the feds, when they involved committeemen and precinct workers from his own party).
It will be interesting if someone from the populist wing can get the nomination of his party and defeat the Republican incumbent.
A taste:
“The head of the East St. Louis Central Democratic Committee and others bought votes in a 2004 election that included hotly contested races for Illinois Supreme Court justice and St. Clair County Board chairman, according to federal indictments made public Wednesday.
Besides committee Chairman Charles Powell, the accused include Kelvin Ellis, director of regulatory affairs for the city, who was named in an earlier indictment that among other things accused him of trying to arrange the murder of a witness against him in a vote fraud investigation.”
If one were to root corruption out of East St. Louis government, I’m not sure what would remain.