Election Integrity Project
A Judicial Watch Special Status Report
Prepared By: Senior Attorneys Robert Popper, Esq. and Christopher Fedeli, Esq.
Problem: Election integrity is threatened by inaccurate election rolls, voter fraud resulting from inadequate voter identification, lack of law enforcement intervention, and media’s inattention to the corruption.
Main solution: Interest group and government watch-dog Judicial Watch has initiated a defined Election Integrity Project. The project’s goal is to uproot corruption and restore integrity to the voting process by “researching, exposing, and filing federal and state law suits to enforce provisions of the National Voter Registration Act that were. . . violated; and by providing expert legal advice to state efforts. . . through passage of commonsense voter ID and other election integrity laws.”
Decision Makers: Department of Justice will decide the court cases and the U.S. citizens will choose to support the laws.
Audience for whom proposal seems to be written: The title for the report I read by Judicial Watch is Election Integrity Project, A Judicial Watch Special Status Report that includes a Battle Plan Executive Summary and an appendix that briefs of two case studies of Judicial Watch litigation victories in Ohio and Indiana. The summary identifies the problem, their proposed solution, and actions they will take. While it is an executive summary, the audience appears to also include the general public. The summary specifically includes a preface that is addressed to the “Judicial Watch Member,” or supporters of the interest group. It is written in not a purely legal tone, but more of an academic one that is accessible by the general public and appeals to ethos, logos, and pathos. Credibility is established by experience, knowledge, examples, and case studies and the appeal to pathos supports our democratic convictions by keeping our elections fair, legal, and uncorrupted.
Any rebuttal? The proposal does take in account that there are organizations such as the NAACP, League of Women Voters, etc., that are well-funded and actively oppose the Justice Watch’s objectives. The media and U.S. Justice Department also oppose cases that support voter ID and ignore cases in which states fail to remove the names of voters that have died or moved.