Say NO to Orwellian, Fascist Demand for Voter Data

A hollow, meaningless Independence Day is upon us.

Many of our rights are being attacked – rights that I, for one, am not willing to part with.

The right to voter privacy is one of them.

Trump, in his endless quest to stroke his own weak ego, wants our voter data.

He hopes that, if acquired, this data will reveal that most voters picked him.

Mike Pence and Kris Kobach are assisting him in an attempt to gather it.

This demand should never have been made.

No state should agree to comply with it, but many are doing just that, oaths to uphold the entire U.S. Constitution be damned.

This is an Orwellian demand, and a fascist one.

It is intrusive surveillance – there is the Orwellian element – and fascist in wanting to police us.

What, after all, would be Trump’s response to voters who demonstrate a history of not wanting him, his policies, or anything else to do with him?

What would he want to do next? Nothing that respects liberty or independence, that’s for sure.

This demand for voter data is no secret. It’s all over what he persists in calling “fake” news.

Trump says states are ‘trying to hide’ things from his voter fraud commission. Here’s what they actually say.

This article from The Washington Post includes a graphic that shows how states are responding to this demand:

Take a good look and see what your state intends to do – or not do.

This is the sentence in the article that interests me:

“A number of states said they would only provide limited, publicly available information, as required by state law.”

What, in particular, does each state law require?

I decided to check the law for my own state, Connecticut.

The Connecticut General Statutes underwent some changes that became effective as of July 1, 2013. Under CGA 143 §9-19k, we are to have an online registration system. It to be shared with another state or with the federal government ONLY for the purpose of preventing any voter from holding multiple registrations. It is not to be shared to reveal how any voter voted in any election:

Sec. 11. (NEW) (Effective July 1, 2013) (a) The Secretary of the State may enter into an agreement to share information or data with any other state in order to maintain the state-wide centralized voter registration system established pursuant to section 9-50b of the general statutes. If an agency of this state, another state or the federal government provides the Secretary with information or data to be used to maintain such system, the Secretary shall not use such information or data for any purpose except to maintain such system and shall ensure that such information or data is held confidential if such information or data, while in the possession of such other agency or state or federal government, as applicable, was required to be held confidential, except as provided for in subsection (b) of this section.
(b) The Secretary of the State may provide such information or data to a nonpartisan third-party vendor for the purpose of maintaining the state-wide centralized voter registration system established pursuant to section 9-50b of the general statutes, provided such vendor’s activities are performed under the supervision of the Secretary and such vendor has entered into an agreement to protect the confidentiality of such information or data.

I found a couple of other articles online that discussed this situation: one by the Associated Press, which stated that Connecticut’s Secretary of State will comply with the law of this state, and another by Fox News Politics (I am – happily – not related to that entity in any way.) This other story stated that Connecticut would not comply with the demand to release voter data. Actually, I rather enjoyed that headline.

Here are the headlines and links to the full articles:

Connecticut to Share Information With Voter Fraud Commission

Really? What information will that be, the discerning reader might ask? Is it the information that Trump, Pence, and Kobach seek, or just other data that won’t reveal what they’re after? A careful perusal of the statutes and the article suggests that it won’t. Insert pleased grin here.

Dem state officials refusing to cooperate with Trump voter fraud probe

Here is the paragraph from the Fox News Politics article about Connecticut:

Connecticut Secretary of the State Denise Merrill said in a statement that her office would provide such information “in the spirit of transparency.” But, suggesting some of the requested data would not be sharable under state law, she said she would ensure “the privacy of voters is honored by withholding protected data.” Merrill also voiced concern that state officials “have not been told precisely what the Commission is looking for.”

The writer clearly wishes that all data sought will be willingly turned over to the Orwellian fascists who seek it, because he continues:

Virginia and California were more brazen in their response. 

The upshot of all of this is that with the combined total of refusals to comply with this brazen (that’s where the adjective actually belongs!) demand, it won’t be possible for Trump, Pence, Kobach, and their team to assemble the big picture that they seek to create.

Take that and tweet something your attorneys will regret, Herr #Pumpkingropenfuhrer.

After looking at all this, I decided to write a letter to Connecticut’s Secretary of State, Denise Merrill.

What I wanted to do was to state my position on the matter.

This is the website for that office:

When I called the office, all I got was a machine that wasted my time on hold for a while, making me think I would actually get to speak to a human being to leave my message, playing an announcement to that effect 3 times before bumping me to voice mail. I left a message telling Ms. Merrill that she has my consent to release nothing, plus a complaint at not getting a human being on the phone.

This is my letter to Ms. Merrill:

Stephanie C. Fox, J.D.



July 3, 2017


Ms. Denise Merrill

Connecticut Secretary of State

Office of the Secretary of the State

State of Connecticut

30 Trinity Street

Hartford, Connecticut 06106

Telephone: (860) 509-6200




Re: Voter Data Request Should Be Denied.

Dear Secretary Merrill:

The purpose of this letter is to tell you that I want NONE of my voting history data shared with Donald Trump, nor with his Orwellian and fascist voter data collection commission. None of this is anyone else’s business, and as such, any request or demand for it is an assault on our democracy.

After a review of various articles on the matter, plus a look at the Connecticut General Statutes, I am relieved to see that you have refused to share it. Maintaining an online voter registration system and database to ensure that no one votes more than once in any one election is reasonable.

A post about this matter, appearing on my website’s blog, shall include this letter.

Thank you.


Stephanie C. Fox, J.D.

UPDATE! On Friday, July 7, 2017, this was sent to me at 8:06 p.m. to me from Connecticut Secretary of State Denise Merrill:

New Image.TIF
Denise W. Merrill
Secretary of the State

Thank you so much for contacting me about the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity and its request of information from my office, specifically the state’s voter registration list. As I have said before, I am skeptical about the Commission’s purpose, especially since it is led by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who has been cited by the courts for disenfranchising eligible voters.

I will not be providing any information about Connecticut residents to the Commission at this time.  Instead, I have responded to the Commission with a series of questions related to transparency of their work, the process for public comment, and how voters’ personal information will be protected.  I also asked the Commission to inform me how they intend to use states’ voter registration lists. 

In Connecticut and every other state, the list of who is a registered voter is publicly available information and there are many good reasons for that policy.  But in this day and age, many people are uncomfortable with how that information may be amplified by the internet or might make us vulnerable to certain kinds of malicious activities.  It is possible that our state’s Freedom of Information laws will ultimately compel me to share the voter list with Commission.  However, under no circumstances would your social security number or driver’s license number ever be shared. 

Our democracy works best when more people participate, that’s why my goal has always been to make it as easy as possible for an eligible voter to register and cast their ballot.  Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.  I hope you will continue to do so in the future.


Denise W. Merrill
Secretary of the State Office

At least our state isn’t cooperating with this exercise in betrayal of democracy.

Nonetheless, we are watching our democracy commit suicide.

A treasonous interloper who ought to be, in his own word, unpresidented, benefitted by election fraud that was committed both from within and without, and he can’t emotionally move on from any of it. Because of that, it is entirely possible that nothing matters, and nothing may be done to stop it. The law is being ignored by those who have benefitted from this treason, committed by many individuals, and by this attack on our democracy and election system, because doing so continues to benefit them.

The moment the law is respected again – IF that were to happen – a lot of them would be prosecuted. But the chances of respect for the law are grim.

Our democracy is being eroded in increments, so that we can see quite a lot of it crumble, with many details shown.

It’s like watching a car crash in slow motion, and we get to see each shard of glass smash and fly, and each bit of flesh, bone, and blood pulverized as the vehicle impacts the immovable yet avoidable object ahead.

Unhappy Independence Day to all.

One could also say Happy 4th of July at family gatherings, just to avoid political discussions, and ignore the meaning behind the holiday.

I don’t want to do that, though.

We ought to be thinking of how most of the signers of the Declaration of Independence lost their property, livelihoods, and lives during the Revolution.

But no…we must think of how democracy is committing suicide, as predicted by John Adams.





Leave a Reply