Indiana

White Fight

By Abdul Hakim-Shabazz

I’ve got teaching obligations this afternoon, so I’ll make this quick.  Indiana Democrats are calling for the Secretary of State to investigate what they claim is voter fraud on behalf of Republican candidate Charlie White.  I’ve pasted their news release in this blog post.

Today, Indiana Democratic Party Chair Dan Parker held a press conference and outlined a detailed timeline of significant voter registration irregularities undertaken by Mr. White. In the last week, several irregularities have become public concerning the timing of Mr. White’s residency at two separate addresses as it relates to his eligibility to vote within the Delaware 12 precinct of Fishers, Indiana in the 2010 May primary. Despite Mr. White’s knowledge of the voting laws of the State of Indiana he knowingly voted illegally in the Delaware 12 precinct.

In response to these repeated discrepancies and offenses by Mr. White, Dan Parker issued the following statement:

“Charlie White clearly has some explaining to do to the people of Indiana. The events from January 2007 up to September 2010 clearly show that Mr. White had sufficient time to realize his mistake and take appropriate steps to change his voter registration address. However, Mr. White did not do this.”

Since Mr. White knowingly provided false addresses and voted in the wrong precinct in the May primary, it is my belief he has violated Indiana Election code – potentially carrying serious consequences. How can someone seeking the office of Secretary of State – the chief elections officer of the state — be trusted to hold such a position yet lack the ability to follow and understand the laws he is expected to uphold?”

3-14-2-11 Voting in other precincts Sec. 11. Except as provided by IC 3-10-10, IC 3-10-11, or IC 3-10-12, a person who knowingly votes or offers to vote in a precinct except the one in which the person is registered and resides commits a Class D felony.

?It?s unfortunate that a set of personal and family-related circumstances created this scenario, but the simple fact is that Charlie was entitled under law to vote one last time at his old polling location.  The only issue here pertains to filing a change of address for his voter registration form, an oversight that has been previously brought up and already fixed.  Charlie has repeatedly taken full responsibility for any mistakes he may have made and has taken all the steps necessary to correct them.?

Full post as published by Indiana Barrister on September 28, 2010 (boomark / email).