Cat's Out of The Bag in Uptown (081799)
Cat's Out of The Bag in Uptown (081799)
Cat's Out of The Bag in Uptown (081799)
Chicago Sun‐Times – August 17, 1999
Author: Raymond R. Coffey
Emily C. Wright, Pippi L. Wright and Koko Z. Wright all received in the mail last week voter
registration cards in Precinct 26 of the 46th Ward.
So? So, even in Chicago it might come as at least a mild surprise that Emily, Pippi and Koko are
cats, pets of Joann Wright, who is a community activist and foe of veteran Ald. Helen Shiller in
Uptown.
Wright and a group of other Shiller critics are pursuing extensive vote fraud allegations against
Shiller's political organization in connection with last spring's elections in which the alderman
won re‐election.
Wright filed applications from her address for the cats – making up birth dates and Social
Security numbers for them – under the federal Motor Voter law that allows registration by
mail.
She did so to test the potential for "fraud and corruption" in Chicago's election processes. And
when she received the cats' cards, Wright promptly returned them to the Board of Elections.
Preemptively, lest she be charged with vote fraud, Wright sent with the cards a letter to board
executive director Lance Gough asserting her intent only to test the system and declaring that
she never intended to use the cards.
That she could receive them in the first place, with no evidence of the cats' ID or any check of
the purported Social Security numbers, Wright wrote, was both "frightening" and "dangerous"
to the proper workings of the registration and voting procedures.
Under the law, Wright said, a person carrying a cat's registration and a false ID, or no ID, could
vote by bringing two friends to the polling place to sign affidavits testifying to the voter's
identity.
Such affidavits "are filled out with abandon" on Election Day, she wrote, and "lots of people
bring two witnesses with them to vouch for their identity. This then creates fraud and again
corrupts the election process."
Two other serious problems, she wrote, are "the way absentee ballots are handled and the way
the homeless are permitted to register at shelters (as many places as they want) and vote more
than once."
Her aim in registering her cats, Wright wrote, was to show the board "and everyone else how
shaky our election system is" and that "it needs a major overhaul."
Tom Leach, spokesman for the Board of Elections, dismissed Wright's cat registrations as a
"cheap trick that doesn't prove a darn thing."
He said including a Social Security number on a registration application is optional. Voters
voting for the first time on a by‐mail card are required to show up in person, Leach said, and
polling place judges would require and compare signatures from the voter and any witnesses
to his or her voting.
"There isn't any fraud‐proof system" anywhere, he said, but the safeguard in these situations is
that any false affidavits or phony voter IDs make the violators subject to prosecution.
Meantime, Robert Brooke, who recently canvassed Precinct 35 in the 46th Ward and found
more than a third of the registered voters there do not live at the addresses listed on the
current voter rolls, has completed canvasses in Precincts 16 and 32.
Brooke, who is active in the group alleging fraud in last spring's elections, was turned away by
management at several scattered‐site housing projects and a few other properties.
But of the buildings where he was allowed to check registrations, Brooke found that in Precinct
16, 228 voters were listed as having moved, a building at 4729 N. Beacon with 33 registered
voters was found to be vacant now, and two voters were registered at a "no such address."
In Precinct 32, the picture was much the same: 270 registered voters have moved, five were
registered at "no such address," two at a strip mall and one in a Truman College driveway.
Uptown has a lot of transient residents. But Brooke's numbers do leave obvious room for
wondering just when all these registered voters moved on.