In response to public opposition, Secretary of State Michele Reagan now says she will not comply with Trump’s fraudulent ‘voter fraud’ commission

Last Friday, Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan was an all too compliant foot soldier for Donald Trump’s plan for voter suppression. She agreed to turn over “publicly available” voter information data to Trump’s fraudulent “voter fraud” commission.

Then came the firestorm of public opposition and the recognition that other secretaries of state were not so blindly willing to turn over their voter registration rolls to Trump’s fraudulent “voter fraud” commission.

As of Saturday morning, more than half of all US states – 29 at last count – had refused to comply with the commission’s requests, saying they are unnecessary and violated privacy, according to statements from election officials and media reports. 29 States Refuse To Give Data To Voter Fraud Panel.

As a result, Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan has done an about-face and on Monday said the state will not provide extensive voter registration information to Trump’s fraudulent “voter fraud” commission. Arizona to oppose handing over voter information to Trump commission:

Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan said Monday she is rejecting the Trump administration’s request for extensive voter information, saying it isn’t in the state’s best interest. [Or anyone else’s.]

Her decision, announced late Monday as the July 4 holiday neared, comes after nearly a thousand people had complained by email to her office about the possibility the state would hand over voter data to a commission looking into allegations of voter fraud.

It’s also a reversal from her position last week.

On Friday, Reagan’s office issued a statement that she would provide the White House with a less-detailed version of what it was seeking, based on media reports about what the federal commission would seek.

Reagan, a Republican, received the formal request from Washington on Monday.

“I share the concerns of many Arizona citizens that the Commission’s request implicates serious privacy concerns,” she wrote in response to the request for voter information. “Since there is nothing in Executive Order 13799 (nor federal law) that gives the Commission authority to unilaterally acquire and disseminate such sensitive information, the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office is not in a position to fulfill your request.”

In blocking the request, Arizona joins a growing number of states that have balked at aiding President Donald Trump’s commission, which is vice-chaired by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.

That panel is tasked with looking into the prevalence of voter fraud, something that earlier studies have found is extremely rare but is a central concern often repeated by Trump, who lost the popular vote during the November 2016 election to Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

Overwhelmingly, voters who emailed Reagan’s office since last week were dismayed. They asked Reagan to shut down consideration of sending any information to the committee, according to a sampling of emails shared by the office with The Arizona Republic. In those letters, voters asked Reagan to protect their “privacy,” called the committee a “sham,” and pushed back against the notion that there was “voter fraud,” as Trump has repeatedly asserted.

Matt Roberts, a spokesman for Reagan, said he had not come across correspondence supportive of releasing voter-related information.

Wait, not one Tea-Publican, not even our regular blog trolls, wrote to Secretary Reagan to tell her to turn over the state’s voter rolls to Trump’s fraudulent “voter fraud commission? Slackers! Quityerbitchin in comments here if you are too damn lazy to follow through with state officials where it matters. For those of you who wrote to Secretary Reagan to oppose turning over the state’s voter rolls to Trump’s fraudulent “voter fraud commission, job well done.

Of the correspondence he had read, Roberts said a handful of voters suggested they would unregister as Arizona voters if Reagan handed over the information.

Since news of the anticipated request from Kobach broke, the Secretary of State had received nearly about 950 emails from the public from Tucson to Chino Valley, Roberts said.

Legal questions

Even if Reagan wanted to participate, it’s not clear whether the state would be able to provide the voter information requested. That’s because the data is maintained separately by the state’s 15 county recorders.

On Monday, Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes said he was still examining the request, but was not inclined to support it because the White House was seeking information barred by Arizona state law and because its stated purpose was to create a database that would also run afoul of state law.

Reagan’s letter stressed security concerns.

“Without any explanation how Arizona’s voter information would be safeguarded,” she wrote, “or what security protocols the commission has put in place, I cannot in good conscience release Arizonans’ sensitive voter data for this hastily organized experiment.”

Now why did this obvious point not occur to her in the first instance? She had to learn this from public opposition, in particular from the County Recorders in Maricopa and Pima County and from hundreds of citizen complaints to her office, and from the opposition by numerous other Secretaries of State who had given this far more considered thought.

No state should comply with Trump’s fraudulent voter fraud commission, just let this fraudulent commission die.

UPDATE: The resistance is almost unanimous now. CNN reports Forty-four states and DC have refused to give certain voter information to Trump commission:

Forty-four states and the District of Columbia have refused to provide certain types of voter information to the Trump administration’s election integrity commission, according to a CNN inquiry to all 50 states.

As of Tuesday afternoon, two states — Florida and Nebraska — are still reviewing the commission’s request. Another two states — Hawaii and New Jersey — have not returned CNN’s request for comment. And while six states are still awaiting a letter from the commission, four of them — New Mexico, Michigan, South Carolina and West Virginia — have already pledged not to provide voters’ private information. The other two of those six states, Arkansas and Illinois, have not released statements ahead of receiving the letter.

Just three states — Colorado, Missouri and Tennessee — commended Kobach’s attempt to investigate voter fraud in their respective statements.

34 Responses to In response to public opposition, Secretary of State Michele Reagan now says she will not comply with Trump’s fraudulent ‘voter fraud’ commission

  1. what is the penalty for government for removing an eligible registered voter from the polls and preventing that person from voting?

  2. John Huppenthal

    All they want to do is match those rolls of those who voted against the 15 million alien file to see how many illegal votes were cast.

    If you all are right, Kobach should end up very embarrassed.

    Its just a “nothing burger” right?

    • For Sure Not Tom

      Nope. Read and learn, FalconNada.

      https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/resources-voter-fraud-claims

      Kobach is doing what he always does, targeting likely democratic voters, because the country leans left and Republicans can’t win without cheating.

      It’s un-American, so it’s SOP for the GOP.

      • “…Republicans can’t win without cheating.”

        That must comfort you a lot with all the elections democrats keep losing. But it must hurt that you can’t figure out “how” they are cheating. I guess since democrats keep losing and you can’t figure out how, the GOP is really slick. That must be frustrating for you.

        Of course, that frustration would explain all the baseless accusations and throwaway lines about “voter fraud” and “voter suppression”. When you just KNOW something is happening, but you have no PROOF something is happening, you whine a lot.

      • John Huppenthal

        You cite sources? That’s amusing. That implies you are using logic and evidence to pursue the truth.

        You don’t want Kobach to run the voter file against the alien file in a computer run that would unassailable. You can’t get mismatches with that data set.

        In other words, you don’t want the truth to come out.

    • John Huppenthal

      Your article is totally nonresponsive. Kobach will have first name, middle name, address and birthday and a very accurate record of voting or not voting.

      There just won’t be any possibility of the mismatches your articles point to.

      I think Kobach will end up embarrassed. You evidently are scared of what he might find.

      That’s not where you’ll find the fraud. You’ll find the fraud in vote harvesting.

      Oh, by the way, the jobs report came out. 222,000 jobs. That’s 2.7 million per year. One sparrow doesn’t make a spring. Obama added 2.1 million his last year and he was decelerating at the end. The stock market says that this 2.7 million is going to accelerate – a lot. Its predicting that 2.7 million is going to 5 million.

      To do that, a ton of people are going to have to be sucked off of welfare and out of school. And, illegal immigration is going to heat back up.

      The burden of government will be going down.

      • For Sure Not Tom

        I’m actually starting to get onboard with your Trump is Midas for the economy thing, Thuckhead.

        By my math, what you’re saying is was can afford single payer healthcare after all!

        Hooray!

        The problem with Kobach isn’t that he’ll look silly, the problem is that he’s going to purge valid voters from the rolls because he doesn’t like Dems.

        He’s been sued and lost for trying this before.

        Stop pretending you don’t know what this is about, you folks worked with Kobach on SB1070.

  3. Sen. John Kavanagh

    With the exception of the maiden name and last four digits of the social security number, all of this is data is already public information that political parties get for free and anyone else can legally get for for a nominal fee (about $200,) so long as it is not used for commercial purposes.

    Not sure what all this outrage is about, other than another opportunity to bash Trump.

    Are you proposing that all this “personal information” be banned from everyone’s eyes?

    • Sen. John Kavanagh

      Sorry for the extra “is” on line 2. Ignore it.

      • For Sure Not Tom

        The internet is very forgiving of typo-type errors.

        Errors in logic or being disingenuous not so much.

        The real purpose of the request is for the same thing Kobach has been doing for years. trying to purge the voter rolls of people who don’t vote the way he wants.

        It’s un-American and sleazy.

        • Sen. John Kavanagh

          So you are OK with government officials refusing Freedom of Information requests, whenever they are suspicious of the requestors motives? Do you really want to go down that path? I am asking this as a serious question and not as the usual right-left banter.

          • Sen. John Kavanagh

            I would invite Bob Lord to weigh in on this one.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            My vote is not Trump’s business and in this case, motive matters.

            Chris Kobach has a known track record of purging voters he doesn’t like, and the Trump administrations intention is to sift through voter data and come up with a criteria to eliminate people who don’t vote the way they like.

            I’m a little surprised you’re defending the federal government getting involved with voting, which I thought was handled at the state level.

            I wouldn’t mind a review of what happens to my vote after it’s been cast, I suspect there are some places in the country where D’s or R’s may have their thumb on the scale, but that’s not what Kobach is doing.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            Hey, how about this, what if it was the Obama administration asking for this data?

            I suspect the right wing media would be howling.

          • Sen. John Kavanagh

            So both of you want to remove voter information from the public disclosure law? Am I hearing you right or do you just want to deny it to people whose motives you do not trust? How would you write such a law?

          • For Sure Not Tom

            There are already state laws that prevent them form complying with Kobach’s request.

            That’s why over 40 states are telling Kobach “no”, they would be breaking their own laws.

            So states rights! Feel better?

            Voter fraud by illegal immigrants has been debunked over and over again.

            https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/resources-voter-fraud-claims

            This is about voter suppression, and that’s un-American and anti-Freedom.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            Here’s another “what if”.

            Would you be okay with Obama/Holder asking states for information on gun sales and ownership?

            That’s illegal as well, I’m just trying to find out where the line is with you.

            How much do you want the Federal Government to know about me?

          • Sen. John Kavanagh

            Arizona law only prohibits the release of the maiden name and social security number. Everything else requested is public record. Would you change that and make it all secret to everyone? That is the only way to keep it out of the commission’s hands.
            Your call Not Tom and try not to be not responsive.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            You’re deflecting and trying to change the subject.

            My issue isn’t the data, my issue is with what the will do with the data.

            Chris Kobach wants to use this information to purge the voter rolls of valid voters, all of them Democrats. He’s been sued and lost for doing this before. This is not news.

            It’s voter suppression. You know this, you remember HB 2305.

            If you can show me some evidence that millions of people, more than live in Utah or Nevada, are committing in person voter fraud, please show your work.

            Voter suppression is un-American. It’s un-Patriotic to try to prevent American citizens from voting.

            Didn’t millions of soldiers die so we could all vote?

            You’re on the wrong side of this one.

          • Sen. John Kavanagh

            I will try one more time. The freedom of information act makes almost all of what they want available. Would you make that information secret and not available to political parties and candidates and others for non-commercial purposes because that is the only way to stop the commission from getting it? You can’t keep it open to all but people whose motives you persomally do not like, especially government commissions. Focus on the issue and don’t deflect. The idea of these blogs is to discuss such issues. Are you up to it Not Tom.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            Okay, I’ll give it one more try as well.

            This is not about the FOIA, this is about you agreeing to turn over my personal information to the federal government so they can illegally remove me from the voter rolls.

            I should have control over my personal information, not the government.

            Argue that, so we can have some fun during your next election campaign.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            BTW, how does FOIA apply to my personal information?

            I’m not a government agency.

          • You are either clueless or evasive but either way it is a waste of time to talk with you.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            Or, maybe you are just avoiding the real issue, but I can’t argue with your logic this time, it’s pointless.

          • “You are either clueless or evasive but either way it is a waste of time to talk with you.

            Congratulations, John! You have finally realized what makes Tom tick. Tom is not interested in discussions, debate, or anything resembling an honest exchange of information. He is not clueless, but he is extremely obtuse and evasive, and if he finds he is losing ground in one subject, he will simply change the subject and act as if that is what you have been discussing all along.

            I could tell you were geuinely trying to engage him in a legitimate discussion, but I knew you were doomed to frustration. Good luck to you if you start to engage him again. You now know what he is and maybe you can have some fun with him.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            Hey John, Steve says you’re wrong, too. From his previous post:

            “There is no justification for such data collecting and the formation of the panel was poorly thought out.”

            So, we all agree, John Kavanagh is utterly wrong, and Steve is a groupie.

            And now my work is done.

          • “Hey John, Steve says you’re wrong, too. From his previous post…”

            I know this a very hard concept for you to grasp, Tom, but honorable people can disagree on a subject without resorting to name calling, attempts to humiliate, and otherwise having to be disagreeable about it. I happen to disagree with John about this because of privacy concerns. John sees it differently. That doesn’t necessarily mean he is wrong, it just means we don’t agree. And we do so without rancor or nastiness. There is a lesson in there for you, Tom, but I would give long odds that you are clueless as to what it is.

            “…and Steve is a groupie.”

            Usually I am pretty good at interpreting what you write, but this one threw me. To whom am I a groupie? I believe an argument could be made that I am somewhat of a groupie for you because of my compulsion to respond to your messages, but I didn’t get the feeling this is what you meant. It would be nice if you could elaborate on that a little bit…

          • Sen. John Kavanagh

            Steve,
            Your assessment of my motives is correct and I suspect you are also correct about Not Tom. I kept pressing because even the most devout ideolog usually gets embarrassed and answers a question after being pressed several times, but not Not Tom.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            Steve agrees with me, per his comment on this post.

          • “Steve agrees with me, per his comment on this post.”

            As I said, Tom, reasonable people can disagree. But John is correct, you were tap dancing at 90-miles an hour to avoid answering him directly. And now John realizes, as I do, that you are not really here to discuss or argue issues, nor should you be taken seriously. You are here to name call and attack people that don’t agree with you and to publish your little screeds against the right.

          • For Sure Not Tom

            There are two things that we all share as Americans. We are all the children of immigrants, and we choose our leaders.

            Kobach’s past efforts and this current effort are un-American for those two reasons.

            Kavanagh is getting pissy because he wants to avoid admitting he supports something so blatantly un-American. He tries to deflect, and when the bait isn’t taken he claims victory.

            You had the chance, Steve, to take the high road and be Patriotic, but you instead took the time to do to me exactly what you accuse me of doing.

            I can show you a hundred of your own posts here where you name call, belittle, mock, and generally troll the day away. How many of your posts start with “BS AZ!”.

            You question motives instead of facts.

            In the world of internet trolls, I’d say you and I are looking at each other in the mirror.

            The difference is I will cite sources, where you claim AZ won’t let you, or that if you told us where you get your information from we would discredit the source.

            Because sunlight and critical thinking are the hard right’s worst enemy.

            BTW, Kobach’s request seems to violate the Privacy Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act.

            Seacrest out.

          • I must admit, Tom, that this time your message caused me to pause and think a little bit before responding. You seemed to be somewhat serious and sincere and your usual flippancy seemed missing…at least until the very end. I might be wrong and may regret this, but I am going to respond seriously. Lat’s see what happens…

            “You had the chance, Steve, to take the high road and be Patriotic, but you instead took the time to do to me exactly what you accuse me of doing.”

            I am always a bit skeptical when you discuss patriotism. You and I see patriotism from two different perspectives and I just don’t see you defining it for me. The same thing applies to “taking the high road”. Your definition of the “high road” is not the same as mine and I suspect I am much better off adhering to my own standards than yours. And, yes, I did do to you what I was accusing you of doing to others.

            “I can show you a hundred of your own posts here where you name call, belittle, mock, and generally troll the day away. How many of your posts start with “BS AZ!”.”

            I do all of those things, Tom, but I only do it to people I no longer take seriously. I much prefer open, reasonably polite discussions where we actually argue about a subject rather than calling each other names or cursing at one another. I hope you also noticed that “BS” is about as strong as my language gets. As a retired professional soldier, I can assure you that I can curse with the best of them, and in several languages, too. However, because I consider it both uncouth and the sign of a weak mind, I choose not to do so.

            “The difference is I will cite sources, where you claim AZ won’t let you, or that if you told us where you get your information from we would discredit the source.”,/i>

            And I stand by that. I am not going to laborously go through and cut and paste my relevant information into my message, only to have the person I am talking with ignore it and/or discount it without reading it. It is just that much easier – as you well know – to place a link in the message to offer up your source. Unfortunately, I can not do that. Whether you like it or not, that is the way it is.

            “Because sunlight and critical thinking are the hard right’s worst enemy./i

            That sounds wonderful to your ears, I am certain, but it works both ways. You are NOT a stupid man and I know that inside of you, you can see the illogic of some of the things you say. You don’t admit it when that happens, but I know that you realize it. That is when I get especially frustrated with you.

            “BTW, Kobach’s request seems to violate the Privacy Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act.”/i>

            That may very well be. I didn’t look into it that far. My opinion was that the request went too far and I was uncomfortable with it. That was as much “research” as I I did…

  4. For Sure Not Tom

    Kobach is a famous racist who wants to purge Democratic voters. He’s using Trump’s insecurity to push his racist/conservative agenda.

    The end.

  5. Whatever her reasons for changing her mind, it is good thing she did change it. There is no justification for such data collecting and the formation of the panel was poorly thought out. Maybe there was voter fraud, maybe there wasn’t…it is a moot point. The election is history. If we have genuine concerns about voter fraud, we need to turn our attention to future elections and not waste our time and money on the 2016 election.