Last updated: Friday, 03 December 2010 09:15
Former ACORN Employee: More Than Half Voter Registrations
Invalid
Thursday, March 19, 2009 11:00 AM
By: Ronald Kessler
More than half the voter registrations turned in by ACORN canvassers during the
last election were not valid, according to testimony to be presented before a
House Judiciary subcommittee.
The testimony is from Anita MonCrief, a former employee of an affiliate of the
Association of Community Organizations. MonCrief, who was fired for improperly
charging personal expenses to the ACORN affiliate, originally testified under
oath as part of a request by the Republican State Committee in Pennsylvania for
an injunction against ACORN. The request was denied. The FBI has been
investigating the liberal community organizing group for possible voter
registration fraud.
MonCrief will appear at the congressional hearing Thursday with Heather
Heidelbaugh, who represented the Republican committee in the civil suit and is
on the executive board of the Republican National Lawyers Association. She will
provide a legal analysis of MonCrief’s testimony.
“We will be presenting evidence that ACORN is engaged in voter registration
irregularities and fraud,” Heidelbaugh tells Newsmax,
According to MonCrief, ACORN considered 40 percent an acceptable level of
accurate voter registrations turned in by its workers. She said ACORN barely
trained its workers in how to register voters properly and would fire employees
if they did not meet a quota of 20 new voter applicants daily. If the
registration cards turned in did not meet the quota, supervisors were told to
“fire them right there; don’t let them waste your money for the day.”
If a canvasser was caught committing fraud, ACORN threw the individual “under
the bus,” MonCrief said. ACORN employees were briefed on how to deny that voter
registration fraud existed, she said.
According to MonCrief, the Obama presidential campaign called her in October
2007 asking for coordination in soliciting donations from people who had already
made the maximum contribution to Obama allowed by election laws. MonCrief
testified that she was given a massive database of Obama donors who had already
reached the limit. Her task was to cull it for potential donors who would then
donate to Project Vote, an ACORN affiliate which targets individuals and
entities to solicit donations.
If true, MonCrief’s allegations constitute violations of the Internal Revenue
Code, federal campaign finance laws, and laws against voter registration fraud,
according to a memo by Cleta Mitchell, co-chairman of the Republican National
Lawyers Association.
MonCrief said she worked as a development associate from 2005 until early 2008
for Project Vote. Project Vote was so closely aligned with ACORN that they were
essentially one and the same, she said.
Project Vote national spokesman Michael McDunnah has denied that the donor list
MonCrief worked on came from the Democratic nominee or his campaign. The Obama
campaign has denied the allegation.
Two ACORN officials from Pennsylvania have insisted that the group has policies
in place to train new employees and to spot and flag applications that appear to
be fraudulent.
ACORN Whistleblowers Produce Shocking Testimony on Capitol Hill
by Connie Hair
Posted 03/23/2009 ET
Late last week, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Committee on
the Judiciary, called for a hearing to investigate ACORN. You read that right.
At a Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties subcommittee hearing
entitled “Lessons Learned from the 2008 Election” last Thursday, witness
testimony not only drew Conyers to the subcommittee hearing but events led to
Conyers strongly urging that subcommittee chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.)
conduct a full hearing on ACORN, calling allegations made at the hearing
“serious.”
The shocking testimony that began the chain of events came from Pennsylvania
attorney Heather Heidelbaugh, who in October of last year represented “a
candidate, voters and the Republican State Committee of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania” seeking a preliminary injunction against ACORN and the Secretary
of the Commonwealth. The complaint alleged violations of the election code,
fraud and misrepresentation, and violations of equal protection and due process.
Heidelbaugh brought with her to the hearing ACORN whistleblowers, including
Anita MonCrief, a former Washington, D.C., ACORN employee who came forward to
testify last October in the Pennsylvania case. MonCrief, a Democrat who voted
for and still supports President Obama, made allegations including the exposure
of Obama maxed-out donor lists illegally shared with ACORN, allegations of
illegal intermingling of non-profit employees between ACORN and Project Vote,
and the use of intimidation tactics and training methods to skirt regulations,
among many other assertions.
Testimony also revealed ACORN’s unofficial “Muscle for the Money” program
directed at fundraising from corporations. Allegations were made of payments
from Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to ACORN's D.C office to
harass The Carlyle Group and specifically David Rubenstein, a founder of the
company. Even though ACORN D.C. had no interest in The Carlyle Group, they were
allegedly paid by SEIU to go break up a banquet and protest at Rubenstein’s
house.
It was called “Muscle for the Money” because they would go “intimidate people
and protest.” Targets of the protests included Sherwin-Williams, H&R Block,
Jackson Hewitt, and Money Mart among others, testimony revealed. The apparent
purpose was to get money from the targeted entities for ACORN.
Perhaps the most controversial accusation revealed by whistleblower testimony
was the scheme by which ACORN and Project Vote are paid by foundations per voter
registered and the submission of copies of actual voter registration cards to
the foundations, which is a violation of federal law.
I spoke with whistleblower Anita MonCrief at the hearing. “ACORN itself is
sometimes paid by foundations per registration and, in some case,s they would
send copies of the voter registration cards straight to the funder,” MonCrief
said. “Workers are improperly trained. … They are trained to never ask, ‘Are you
registered to vote?’ because if the person says ‘Yes,’ they have to move on.
They ask, ‘Did you vote in the last election,’ and if the person says ‘No,’ they
register them again. This is how they duplicate registrations and flood the
offices.”
When these allegations began to surface in hearing testimony, Conyers suddenly
appeared at the subcommittee hearing and asked to be recognized, saying that he
was “… unaware that this was a hearing on ACORN.” Conyers probed those
assembled, asking if any representatives of ACORN were present to defend the
organization. Conyers called the accusations made against ACORN a “pretty
serious matter.” When no one from ACORN came forth, he asked subcommittee
chairman Nadler to hold a hearing on ACORN so the organization could defend
itself, to which a shocked Nadler replied, “I’ll take it under advisement.”
Conyers pressed the matter, saying, “I think that it would be something that
would be worth our time. We've never had one person representing ACORN before
the committee. ... I think in all fairness we ought to really examine it.” An
exasperated Nadler said he would hold a hearing when he had “credible
allegations of misconduct.”
Nadler abruptly dismissed the panel shortly thereafter.
“I would encourage chairman Conyers in his call for a hearing and investigation
into ACORN,” Heidelbaugh told HUMAN EVENTS in the hallway outside of the
hearing. “The Judiciary Committee has oversight of the voting system in America,
and ACORN is interfering in it in a large, large way. The federal government in
some cases is providing the funding for that interference.”
I also spoke with Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), a member of the House Judiciary
Committee as well as the Constitution subcommittee, who questioned Heidelbaugh
during the hearing.
“We’re about to appropriate even more money, and we’ve already appropriated some
money that may very well be directed to ACORN,” Gohmert said. “If we know that
an organization is guilty of fraud, and we provide them the money and the
wherewithal to continue the fraud, then we are accessories to fraud. The only
difference between us and a criminal is that we have the ability to pass laws
that say even though we’re criminals we’re doing our criminal work legally. It
doesn’t make it moral, it doesn’t make it ethical, it just makes it legal to say
we can be accessories to fraud by providing the money.”
Connie Hair is a freelance writer, a former speechwriter for Rep. Trent
Franks (R-AZ) and a former media and coalitions advisor to the Senate Republican
Conference.