Associated Press Joins In the Press Scrum Saying Illegal Voting Is No Reason to Tighten Voting Laws

Sean Rayford/Getty Images

It has become almost a predictable joke. Reports of illegal immigrants casting votes will be followed by an outlet suggesting there is no problem. The Associated Press is just the latest to report how that thing has never happened has been shown to have occurred again.

The latest example concerns a Census Bureau report that showed tens of thousands of illegals were found to have voted in the 2020 election. But rather than conduct an analysis on its own, the AP worked to minimize the issue, and then sought out experts who cast doubts on the report. They did not disprove anything in the findings, it is all smoke-blowing to create conjecture.

In calling the report “dubious,” the AP writers then fall back onto the common trope from the press; illegals who are voting are extremely small, and it is illegal for them to do so. How this is supposed to negate the drive to tighten up our voting rolls is never explained in these reports.

Evidence of noncitizens voting is continuing to “pile up,” White House spokesperson Lauren Bis said when asked about the census report. In fact, voting by noncitizens is extremely rare and is punishable as a felony that carries the potential for deportation. Even so, opponents say the hyperfocus on the issue by Trump and his allies is setting the stage for legal challenges to outcomes he may not like during the midterms

Saying “it barely happens” is the usual argument against efforts to correct the voting rolls, such as the bill in Congress, the SAVE Act. How we are supposed to look at what the press calls negligible figures and regard it as effectively Zero, and to do nothing to fix it, is forever the mystery.

The ruse is exposed in how the Associated Press reporters on this piece work to discredit that Census Bureau report. The voting experts they turn to essentially say they do not like the methodology used to come up with the examples. The gurus found by the Associated Press routinely state that the methods used “might” have been flawed. That is not disproving anything; it is pure speculation. This echoes a previous fact check from the AP on this report, where the desperation to discredit was evident. Look at the kind of language used under the heading of “Facts”:

• “May have created false positives”
• “Potential sources of error”
• “May have been falsely identified”
• “Could have been assigned”
• “Might not have been updated”

That is the opposite of being conclusive, yet for the Associated Press, this was all enough to serve as disproving the data. This has been the standard seen from the media throughout its coverage of the illegal voting saga.

Recently in New Jersey they admitted to finding thousands of illegal aliens on their voting registration lists. (Reported on, by the way, by the Associated Press.) But this confession was covered as a prime example of why tightening election laws was NOT needed. Each step of the way, the press maintains its opposition stance to legislation that wants to correct this.

Originally, there is no proof of illegals voting, which leads to saying there is no need for tougher voting laws. When proof comes out showing illegals voted, it is diminished and said there is no need for voting laws. Now as a study comes out showing it is a more widespread problem, the veracity of the study is attacked, and it is said that is not proof there is a need for tougher voting laws.

Note that in each step the press is inflexible and never compelled to explore the problem. They sit back in the cubicle and insist it is not happening, and the bulk of the effort is to pull up their preferred experts on speed dial to back up their opposition.

This is taking place despite polls showing that the general public wants to keep illegals off of the voting rolls. Consistently that figure rests at around three quarters of respondents supporting tightening voting eligibility with showing ID to vote. Now, the SAVE America Act garners less support. This is primarily because it contains other elements, since this is Congress and the act of forwarding a bill with a solitary component is harder than declining a phone call from a lobbyist with an expense account.

What can never be explained by these inertia-afflicted journalists is why seeing fit to remove illegal voters from voting systems is wrong, even if it is supposedly a small problem. Why would preventing it from taking place be the wrong move?

If they can ever explain what the acceptable amount of illegal ballots counted in our elections might be, and why that is acceptable, it would be the first time it is stated.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!