Fact check: Jody Hice, running to oversee Georgia elections, makes yet more false 2020 claims

Read Time:6 Minute, 8 Second



Fact check: true.

Hice, who has been endorsed by former President Donald Trump, has centered his campaign on false claims about the 2020 election — including the claim that Trump would have won Georgia if the election had been “fair.” And Hice has repeatedly made false claims about Raffensperger’s actions as Georgia’s elections chief.

Here is a fact check of some of the things Hice said at the Monday debate. Hice’s campaign didn’t respond to a CNN request for comment.

Hice said to Raffensperger: “You created ballot harvesting in Georgia.” He repeated later: “Ballot harvesting was created, in the state of Georgia, because of Brad Raffensperger.”

Facts First: Hice’s claim is false. Raffensperger did not create ballot harvesting in Georgia. In fact, less than three months after Raffensperger became secretary of state in 2019Gov. Brian Kemp signed a law that outlawed ballot harvesting in Georgia.
“Ballot harvesting” can be described more neutrally as “ballot collection.” In general, the phrase refers to the practice of organizations or activists collecting voters’ completed absentee ballots and submitting them for counting — rather than voters sending in their ballots themselves or getting a family member or friend to submit them.
The 2019 law gave Georgia voters two basic options: “personally” mail in or deliver their absentee ballots, or have the ballots mailed in or delivered by someone they live with or by a family member. In other words, the law prohibits third-party groups from collecting and submitting the ballots of strangers.
It’s at least possible that there was some ballot harvesting in Georgia in the 2020 election; Raffensperger’s office is investigating allegations of harvesting made by a right-wing group. But even if illegal harvesting did happen, that wouldn’t mean Raffensperger “created ballot harvesting in Georgia.” (It also wouldn’t mean the actual ballots delivered by ballot collectors were fraudulent or invalid.)

Raffensperger and Stacey Abrams, Part 1

Hice claimed that Raffensperger “was making deals with Stacey Abrams” — the Democratic gubernatorial candidate and former state House minority leader — “and opened wide the door for election fraud in this state in every way.” Hice referred to Raffensperger’s supposed “deal ” with Abrams at other moments of the debate as well.

Facts First: Hice’s claims are false. Raffensperger did not make a deal with Abrams. If Hice was referring, as he has in the pastto a March 2020 legal settlement between Raffensperger and Democratic Party entities about the state’s signature verification process for absentee voters, Abrams was not involved in that agreement — as one of the debate panelists, Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter Mark Niesse, pointed out to Hice. And there is no basis for the claim that this legal settlement or anything else Raffensperger did “opened wide the door for election fraud in this state in every way.”
Claim after claim about supposed major election fraud in Georgia in 2020 has been debunked. It’s possible that a smattering of Georgia ballots were fraudulent, but there is no evidence of voter fraud even close to widespread enough to have changed the outcome in a state Joe Biden won by 11,779 votes.
And there is no evidence that the 2020 settlement agreement about signature verification led to any widespread fraud. A signature audit of a sample of more than 15,000 absentee ballot envelopes in Cobb County, a major Atlanta-area county won by Biden, found zero fraudulent ballots .

Signature verification

When debate panelist Niesse pressed Hice to explain how the settlement agreement supposedly weakened absentee ballot verification, Hice insisted, “Well, it did weaken the signature verification. It made it much more difficult for it to take place. You had to eventually notify the voter themselves.”

Facts First: This is misleading. Even before the settlement agreement, the elections law passed by Georgia Republicans in 2019 had required counties to “promptly” notify voters of problems that were about to get their ballots tossed out, such as missing or nonmatching signatures, and give the voters a chance to correct these issues. The settlement agreement set out specific deadlines for notifying the voters, instead of relying on the vague word “promptly,” and laid out the methods by which the notifications had to be done.
As Niesse noted to Hice, the percentage of absentee ballots rejected over signature problems in the 2020 general election, after the settlement agreement, was nearly identical to the rate in the 2018 midterm election, before the settlement agreement.

Raffensperger and Stacey Abrams, Part 2

Hice decried Raffensperger’s decision to send an absentee ballot request form to each of Georgia’s active registered voters during the 2020 party primaries. (Raffensperger, like officials in other states, sent out these forms because of the Covid-19 pandemic. He did not send out unsolicited ballot request forms during the 2020 general election.)

Hice said, “We had a conference call, the Georgia delegation, with Brad, urging him, urging him not to send out absentee ballot requests to everyone on our voter registration file. He did it anyways. In fact, the deal was already made with Stacey Abrams before that call ever took place.”

Facts First: This is false. Again, Raffensperger did not make a deal with Abrams. And Raffensperger’s settlement agreement with the Democratic Party entities had nothing to do with his decision to mail out the absentee ballot request forms during the primaries. In fact, the settlement agreement did not say anything about who should be sent a ballot request form. The agreement was about the signature-matching process in particular.

Abrams campaign spokesperson Seth Bringman said Monday that Abrams was among the voting rights advocates who urged Raffensperger to send ballot request forms to Georgia voters of all ages rather than just older voters, as an Atlanta Journal-Constitution report in March 2020 had said Raffensperger was initially planning. But the Raffensperger campaign said Abrams had no involvement in or influence on Raffensperger’s decision, made public about a week after that news report, to send ballot request forms to voters of all ages; Raffensperger campaign spokesperson Lance Dutson said Raffensperger’s office “pushed back” on Stacey Abrams and her liberal allies” on various proposals, as Abrams-founded group Fair Fight Action noted in tweets criticizing Raffensperger at the time.

Regardless, there is zero indication that there was any kind of “deal” between Raffensperger and Abrams about this Raffensperger decision.

Absentee voting and voter identification

Hice said that Raffensperger had opened the door to changes that harm “election integrity,” including “sending out absentee ballot requests, having virtually no voter identification associated with these.” Hice added, “Those are the things that really must be corrected that have not been dealt with under this current leadership of Brad Raffensperger.”

Facts First: It’s not true that Georgia hasn’t “corrected” the issue of requiring voter identification for absentee voting or the issue of the secretary of state sending out absentee ballot request forms. In 2021, Kemp signed a law that required absentee voters to provide a kind of identification other than just their signature and that banned governments and government officials from sending out unsolicited absentee ballot request forms. In addition, Raffensperger wasn’t the reason that identification other than a signature was not previously required for applications to vote by mail. State lawnot Raffensperger policy, had specified that only a signature was required.





Source link
You have to be inform about what is happening in USA go to united states news to see more.

Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %
We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. View more
Cookies settings
Accept
Privacy & Cookie policy
Privacy & Cookies policy
Cookie name Active

Who we are

Suggested text: Our website address is: https://updatednews24.com.

Comments

Suggested text: When visitors leave comments on the site we collect the data shown in the comments form, and also the visitor’s IP address and browser user agent string to help spam detection. An anonymized string created from your email address (also called a hash) may be provided to the Gravatar service to see if you are using it. The Gravatar service privacy policy is available here: https://automattic.com/privacy/. After approval of your comment, your profile picture is visible to the public in the context of your comment.

Media

Suggested text: If you upload images to the website, you should avoid uploading images with embedded location data (EXIF GPS) included. Visitors to the website can download and extract any location data from images on the website.

Cookies

Suggested text: If you leave a comment on our site you may opt-in to saving your name, email address and website in cookies. These are for your convenience so that you do not have to fill in your details again when you leave another comment. These cookies will last for one year. If you visit our login page, we will set a temporary cookie to determine if your browser accepts cookies. This cookie contains no personal data and is discarded when you close your browser. When you log in, we will also set up several cookies to save your login information and your screen display choices. Login cookies last for two days, and screen options cookies last for a year. If you select "Remember Me", your login will persist for two weeks. If you log out of your account, the login cookies will be removed. If you edit or publish an article, an additional cookie will be saved in your browser. This cookie includes no personal data and simply indicates the post ID of the article you just edited. It expires after 1 day.

Embedded content from other websites

Suggested text: Articles on this site may include embedded content (e.g. videos, images, articles, etc.). Embedded content from other websites behaves in the exact same way as if the visitor has visited the other website. These websites may collect data about you, use cookies, embed additional third-party tracking, and monitor your interaction with that embedded content, including tracking your interaction with the embedded content if you have an account and are logged in to that website.

Who we share your data with

Suggested text: If you request a password reset, your IP address will be included in the reset email.

How long we retain your data

Suggested text: If you leave a comment, the comment and its metadata are retained indefinitely. This is so we can recognize and approve any follow-up comments automatically instead of holding them in a moderation queue. For users that register on our website (if any), we also store the personal information they provide in their user profile. All users can see, edit, or delete their personal information at any time (except they cannot change their username). Website administrators can also see and edit that information.

What rights you have over your data

Suggested text: If you have an account on this site, or have left comments, you can request to receive an exported file of the personal data we hold about you, including any data you have provided to us. You can also request that we erase any personal data we hold about you. This does not include any data we are obliged to keep for administrative, legal, or security purposes.

Where we send your data

Suggested text: Visitor comments may be checked through an automated spam detection service.
Save settings
Cookies settings