Krebs Cites Ban on Posting SD Voter File Info Online to Justify Rejection of Trump-Kobach Data Request

Secretary of State Shantel Krebs
Secretary of State Shantel Krebs

Secretary of State Shantel Krebs has elaborated on her reason for rejecting the Trump election fraud panel’s request for sensitive personal data on all South Dakota voters. Secretary Krebs tells me that the request from the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity for electronic voter data files may well violate SDCL 12-4-41, which prohibits users of the statewide voter registration file from placing any of that information “for unrestricted access on the internet.”

The letter from commission vice chair and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach does not say the information would be posted online, but it does advise that “any documents that are submitted to the full Commission will also be made available to the public.” However, as we saw with the Deep Root analytics leak of data on 198 million voters, when Trump-Republicans gather data, we can’t count on their contractors keeping that data off the Internet.

Secretary Krebs tells KELO-TV she’ll reconsider the commission’s request if the commission resends its letter and makes clear the data will not be made public. However, the Trump election fraud commission will also have to revise its request to avoid the violations I reported Friday of releasing Social Security and driver’s license information and releasing the data without receiving the proper request form and the statutorily required $2,500 fee for the electronic master voter file.

Secretary Krebs says she supports the White House’s investigation of election fraud (of which there is no evidence) but says South Dakota is a model for secure elections.

As we can see, contrary to Trump’s insinuation, Secretary Krebs isn’t trying to hide anything; she, unlike Trump, is just trying to follow the law.

The National Association of Secretaries of State meets this week, July 7–10, in Indianapolis. The NASS has received a letter from the Congressional Black Caucus urging their members not to comply with the Kobach request, as the Caucus has “little doubt that if complied with, these letters — issued unilaterally without any vote or public discussion — would lead to an unprecedented, nationwide voter suppression effort.” So far, election officials in more than half of the 50 states and in the District of Columbia have fully or partially rejected the election-fraud commission’s request.

14 Responses to Krebs Cites Ban on Posting SD Voter File Info Online to Justify Rejection of Trump-Kobach Data Request

  1. I would feel VERY uncomfortable giving Kris Kobach ANY information. Fercryinoutloud, SD, look at this gent’s track record. Look at Kansas! Look at Trump and his minions, Bannon, Priebus, and The Kush, the folks that would use this information. You really want them to use YOUR info? Oh, I’m sorry. They have an “R” by their name. Everything will be OK…

  2. The Secretary of State should release the info when DonnyBoy releases his tax returns.

  3. mike from iowa Jim Wright does a fantastic job eviscerating the so called panel since there are only 8 known members out of 15 slots. 4 of those are extreme right wing nut jobs, At least 2 are moderate Dems-SOS of Maine and another New England state.

  4. bearcreekbat

    interesting link mfi – Thanks! As to Trump’s question:

    “What are they trying to hide?”

    I read a three word response that even Trump should understand:

    “Their tax returns.”

  5. I have to assume, Krebs being a good Republican, would have turned over everything if it wasn’t for state law. I would expect the legislative nut jobs to try to fix this for her in the next session.

  6. W R Old Guy

    Kobach’s home state of Kansas is refusing to release all the information citing state law. Kansas also gave Kobach the power to prosecute all the voter fraud cases in Kansas because the county DA’s refused to process the very few identified as possible fraud because the cases were weak.

    I think that Kobach has filed charges in 7 cases in over two years. One was a felony and the rest were misdemeanors. 5 of the misdemeanors were dismissed.

    A statistician at Wichita State University noted some possible voter irregularities in the votes cast in 2014 in Sedgewick County (includes the city of Wichita). She requested copies of the tapes from each voting machine in the county. The county refused to release them and she lost in court. You would think Kobach would want them released to the statistician to check for fraud.

  7. W R Old Guy

    I must make a correction on the cases. The misdemeanor cases apparently ended in guilty pleas and they paid a small fine. This article in the Garden City, KS newspaper covers it pretty well.

  8. Isn’t it possible that somewhere in the tangled, troubled mind of the trumpster that some of the supposed “frauds” voted for him ?? Isn’t Bannon registered in two states? Aren’t other members of the trump crime family also dual registered ??
    Wasn’t there a proven, prosecuted case of a trumpeteer voting twice in Iowa ??
    This is nothing but a blatant attempt to compile an “enemies list” ala Dick Nixon.
    Should Ms Shantel (sounds Muslim to me) release any info to this fraudulent “commission,” every registered voter needs to be ready to sue her.

  9. Tim, I would agree that Krebs is taking a careful legal stance on this issue. Note her comment to KELO-TV about supporting Trump’s investigation of voter fraud, even though the claims of millions of illegal votes that Trump has made are total bushwah. Krebs is avoiding making this a political argument; South Dakota law makes that possible.

    On that note, we won’t hear her take the tack Loren mentions and drag in any conversation about Trump’s own broken promise to share his tax returns. Make no mistake: Krebs is not distinguishing herself as a Republican rejecting Trump. If we want a Congress that stands up to Trump, we’ll have to elect someone other than her or Dusty.

  10. mike from iowa

    If wingnuts can have a national data base of voters to harass, the majority of us can have a national data base of all gun owners and their kids names and the number of guns and ammo they have.

  11. Douglas Wiken

    I thought Krebs might have demonstrated some real backbone until I read the post and comments. Were she actually serving the voters of SD she would have launched a tirade of abuse on Trump and his malignant narcissism regarding popular vote totals.

  12. I agree, Douglas: such a response would serve South Dakota voters and democracy better. We should demand such a response from the candidates to replace her in 2018. We should push our Democratic nominee for that position to push the Republican nominee on that position relentlessly: “Are you going to protect our data from federal overreach, or are you going to let DC bureaucrats create another national database that puts South Dakotans at greater risk of election meddling and identity theft?”

  13. Porter Lansing

    Dem’s Tell Trump-Kobach To Pound Sand …
    Election officials across Colorado are reporting a spike in voters requesting confidential status. Others are unregistering altogether with plans to sign back up after July 14 when Sec. of State Wayne Williams(R) sends Colorado’s voter data to the feds. The state has a confidential voter program, which allows certain people, mainly domestic violence victims or stalking victims, to sign a document saying their information shouldn’t be released because doing so would be a risk to their safety. Claiming that you believe sending your information to the Trump Administration puts you in danger is considered valid grounds for confidential status.

  14. It shouldn’t take Dems to get this message across. Republicans afraid of national databases ought to be hollering. Privacy advocates of all stripes ought to raise red flags about the leaky Trump administration’s overreaching request for such sensitive data.

    And all Americans should learn from this one instance how important it is to have a moral, trustworthy President and to elect a Democratic Congress to check the current defective model in the White House in 2018.