≡ Menu

By Wes Mader Community Columnist Oct 10, 2020

For generations, election day was like a national holiday when Americans proudly went to the polls to exercise their constitutional right. Our model was copied by other nations when their people won their freedom. Sadly (for me), election day has essentially been replaced by a vote-harvesting season, 4-8 weeks long depending upon the state, with unrestricted absentee ballots being mailed or dropped off at vote collection sites. Vote counting could extend for days or weeks after Nov. 4. With reduced capability to verify voter identity, the stage has been set for increased fraud.

While political activists who support these voting procedure changes claim voter fraud is not a threat, significant fraud has and does occur, unfortunately without prosecution. We old-timers remember the razor-close election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960. According to a Chicago Tribune report following the election, “the election of Nov. 8, 1960 was categorized by such gross and palpable fraud as to justify the conclusion that Nixon was deprived of victory”.

Numerous fraud techniques were reported. Many deceased persons interred in Illinois’ Cook County cemeteries were reported as showing up at the polls and voting. The address of an abandoned and gutted house was used as the home address for 56 different voters who were reported as casting their ballots. Allegations of fraud were so rampant in Cook County that 650 individuals were reportedly charged. Other states reported similar activities.

When irregularities become apparent, it’s generally too late to identify and discard bad votes. It’s difficult to identify a culprit who casts votes using names of the dead, and politicians on the winning side in potentially fraudulent elections aren’t often anxious to press for investigation. The election fraud charges against the 650 individuals in Cook County were dropped, with some crediting Chicago Mayor Richard Daley for making the charges go away.

For those who don’t believe voter fraud happens in Minnesota, I’ll share a personal story. In 2002 my mother was spending her last years in a highly reputable senior care facility in the Twin Cities area. At 90-plus years, dementia impacted how she viewed the world each day. She was visited regularly by members of her large extended family who found her to be quite communicative.

After voting on election day in November 2002, I visited with my mother. With tongue in cheek, I asked her if she had voted yet. When she said yes in no uncertain terms, I asked who she voted for, expecting her to simply say she didn’t remember. Instead, she replied that a very nice lady had filled out the ballot for her but she didn’t remember who she voted for. The “nice lady” was unknown to her. It’s questionable if my mother with dementia had a legal right to vote, but no one had the right to harvest her vote. This was voter fraud that wouldn’t be prosecuted. No prosecutor would want to build a case based upon testimony of a 90-plus-year-old dementia patient. It’s no secret that senior housing facilities provide fertile ground for those who harvest votes.

I predict without reservation, that if the upcoming presidential election is extremely close, the losing side will be citing voter fraud, with or without hard evidence. Unfortunately, it will be near impossible to prove or disprove, given the variety of voting methods being used. When COVID-19 CARES Act money was mailed, millions of dollars went to deceased persons. When ballots get sent to a deceased person or wrong address as most surely happens, particularly in those five states that send ballots to all registered voters, some unethical citizens will likely mail the completed ballot just as some citizens cashed the CARES checks that were mailed to deceased relatives.

Allowing ballots to be cast by various means over a period of weeks will undoubtedly create a bountiful harvest of votes, but without the means to assure legitimacy of results. If readers doubt this possibility, I would refer them to the subject of vote harvesting on the internet. There are already significant reports from multiple states about inappropriate ballot harvesting, including in Minnesota. In one report, an individual can be seen on camera boasting about how many ballots he had collected in the Twin Cities area.

If we allow this trend to continue into the future, our election process may have the same credibility that exists in socialist or third world countries like Somalia, North Korea, Iran or Cuba. Heaven forbid.

Please read more from the Prior Lake American:

By Wes Mader Community Columnist

September 19, 2020

Political correctness has never been one of my stellar attributes, so apologies to those who I offend with my words. I’m writing this column on Sept. 11, the 19th anniversary of the terrorist attacks in 2001, and I’m angry. Thousands died including hundreds of courageous and dedicated police officers, some when the World Trade Center collapsed and many later from 9/11 related illnesses. I don’t remember their names.

Here are names from more recent events; Tamarris Bohannon, Natalie Corona, Ronil Singh, Chateri Payne and Damon Gutzwiller. As their names suggest, they have diverse ethnic backgrounds, but they also have something in common. They were all good police officers who were recently gunned down in ambush-like killings, simply because they were police officers. They represent a small sampling of those recently killed in the line of duty.

Officer Tamarris Bohannon, 29 years old, left behind a wife to raise three children, all under the age of 10. Officer Natalie Corona was a 22-year-old rookie. Officer Ronil Singh, 33 years old, was allegedly killed by an illegal immigrant who was then handcuffed by Singh’s fellow officers, using the cuffs that Ronil Singh had carried. Officer Chateri Payne was a rookie cop and mother. Officer Damon Gutzwiller who at 38 years old was the most experienced of the group, was father to a young child, and husband of the expectant wife he left behind.

There are too many fallen officers to remember names. But I will remember George Floyd who was honored with a nationally televised funeral with a 500-person guest list that included prominent politicians, celebrities and political activists. His death while in police custody was inexcusable, but it’s grossly inexcusable when thousands of citizens nationwide use Floyd’s death as an excuse to riot and plunder. It’s inexcusable for national, state or local leaders to cite “systemic racism”, as if to excuse those who burn down businesses and destroy other peoples’ lives. And it’s disappointing when political opportunists and activists, with assistance from the national news media, turn a funeral into a four-hour political rally, featuring the ever-present Al Sharpton and a recorded message from a presidential candidate. I expect some of the fallen officers were denied public funerals because of COVID-19.

It has been reported that COVID-19 is the leading cause of death in 2020 for active police officers. Social distancing doesn’t work when your job requires dealing with unruly rioting mobs, or you’re spit upon because you’re an officer in blue. “Social Justice” and “Peace” make great slogans, but justice is not served when mobs are permitted to take over the streets and intimidate judges, jurists and politicians. Peace will not be achieved when political leaders hesitate to enforce the law, or when a city’s leader orders the police to stand down while rioters burn their precinct to the ground.

Our constitution guarantees the right of protest, but it’s not peaceful protest to shout hateful slogans directed at police officers. It’s an act of hate that incites others to turn their anger into destruction. Marching on a freeway while shouting “pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon” is not peaceful protest.

If/when our nation suffers another mass attack, it won’t be political opportunists or editorial writers rushing in to save others. It will be officers in blue, the same first responders who have become the punching bags for political activists and far too often, the national news media. If it’s ever my family in peril, I hope the first one on the scene is a Prior Lake officer, sheriff’s deputy or a member of the Minnesota highway patrol.

Please read more from the Prior Lake American: Check out this link:


By Wes Mader Community      Columnist Aug 22, 2020

The term “private street” invites images of a gated community for exclusive multi-million-dollar homes. In Prior Lake it means nothing of the sort.

The approximately 1,500 homes in Prior Lake that are labeled by city hall as being on private streets are average Prior Lake homes. So what does the private-street label mean?

For decades, it has meant that the city assumes no obligation to provide street maintenance, even though the private street residents pay taxes that include dollars for street maintenance. I learned this the hard way when I purchased a home on Sycamore Trail. The street was in terrible condition, but I assured my concerned wife, that the city would take care of it within a couple of years. I was wrong. It took over 20 years before the city finally fixed the street and only then after a successful neighborhood effort to prove to city council that Sycamore was a public street. During those 20 plus years, neighbors contributed funds for a mediocre repaving job and bought bags of asphalt for filling pot holes.

The city has now introduced a new plan for residents living on private streets. It calls for private street residents to pay a surcharge on their sewer and water bill of $40 every other month. The rationale for collecting the $240 per year is to accumulate funds for the replacement of the street if/when the city has to tear it up to service underlying city water or sewer lines. So how did we get here?

While some streets like Sycamore Trail were designated private by city hall without a rational legal basis, others were created by negotiation between developers and city hall. For decades, city hall has permitted the designation of private streets, often based upon feel-good short-term considerations, without considering long-term consequences. Some developers have been adept at getting what they want from city hall in terms of deviations from land development ordinances.

In return the city was promised that residents on private streets would provide their own street maintenance, thereby eliminating city maintenance costs.

This has sort of a free lunch ring to it. Developers bottom-line profit goes up and city maintenance costs go down — until of course the street goes bad or has to be torn up to fix water or sewer line problems. That’s when the free lunch has to be paid for, by those who live on the designated private streets or by all taxpayers. By then the developer is long-gone from the scene, the residents may or may not have been accumulating funds for such an occurrence, and most assuredly some will object to spending their own funds to repair a perfectly usable street that was torn up because the city-owned a water line below that failed.

I applaud our new city manager for exposing this financial liability and I understand and respect the dilemma the council is facing. However, it seems clear that the fiscal problem was created by council decisions from the past. Given that fact, should the fiscal liability for past faulty decisions be levied against only those who live on streets designated as private? The residents who are now expected to pay the surcharge had no role in negotiations that created the current liability.

I have no doubt that each private street situation has its own unique history as I learned when I tried to unravel the mystery of how Sycamore became a private street. Consequently, a single-amount standard surcharge to all residents on streets designated as private, is in itself problematical. Let me make a glaring example.

Residents living on 160th Street (County Road 44) whose back yards face Westwood Grade School are being told they will be billed the surcharge because the city utilities to their homes are buried under Westwood Drive. They’re being told that Westwood Drive (whose purpose seems to be to service the grade school) is their private street even though they don’t use it.

While I haven’t and won’t examine the titles of these property owners to find out who owns what, I can’t think of any common sense reason why these folks should be paying a surcharge. While a city attorney might find a legal rationale, I think fairness should be the standard to go by.

A more general question: Should city hall be the collector of revenue for the purpose of maintaining privately owned property (if in fact the streets are privately owned by the residents)? This will be a debate worth watching.

Please read more at the Prior Lake American:


Wes Mader

There seems to be a misconception about President Trumps 🇺🇸 voting by mail. Even the news media is misinformed and touting President Trump is voting by mail, part truth, part false.

It’s unfortunate, the media is conveying to voters, it’s safe for President Trump to mail in his ballot, but unsafe for the every day citizen.

Recently, TV news reported that President Trump voted by mail dropping his ballot in at the mail box! It’s unfortunate they aren’t explaining the ballot is an “absentee ballot” President Trump requested. He can track his ballot to confirm it’s been received and counted on Election Day.

On April 1, 2020 BIPARTISAN POLICY CENTER wrote the article below, which offers clarification on “The Difference between Absentee Voting and Voting-by-Mail”

Voting in the Time of Corona: The Difference between Absentee Voting and Voting-by-Mail

Absentee Voting refers to when a voter requests a ballot and, if eligible, is subsequently sent one via mail or email. Traditionally, voters are required to provide an “excuse” to qualify for absentee voting. Traditionally, voters are required to provide an “excuse” to qualify for absentee voting, usually pertaining to why they cannot be in a polling place in-person on Election Day. All states allow for some form of absentee voting, 17 of which still require an excuse. However, recent reforms have expanded the availability of absentee voting as a convenience option. By the end of 2019, 33 states and the District of Columbia have “no-excuse absentee voting,” in which any voter may apply for an absentee ballot without providing a justification.

However, even no-excuse absentee voting differs from strict vote-by-mail.

Vote-by-Mail (VBM) is the process of sending every registered voter a ballot without a request. While by-mail voting is the default practice in Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah, VBM states generally keep some polling places or vote centers open for those who either cannot or prefer not to vote by mail. In addition to the five VBM states, 21 additional states use vote-by-mail for a selection of smaller races.

Take a look at the below graphic for a full picture of which states allow vote-by-mail, absentee, and no-excuse absentee voting:

Vote-by-Mail and Absentee Voting in the U.S.

See link below for map.

Why does the difference matter?

As election policy has grown more complex over time, the terminology surrounding absentee and vote-by-mail has begun to blur. Some states refer to absentee voting by its categorical designation as “vote-by-mail,” while others abide by a stricter delineation between absentee and by-mail voting. These policy differences were relevant before COVID-19, but are even more important to consider now.

Nuanced language aside, the essential takeaway here is not grammatical, but substantive: states with only absentee voting in place will face additional hurdles to the implementation of vote-by-mail that traditionally VBM states will not.

States without extensive vote-by-mail infrastructure already in place are not well-equipped for an immediate transition to all vote-by-mail due to the coronavirus. According to a BPC review of federal data on voting by mail and absentee voting, 34 states had fewer than 15% of their ballots cast by mail during the 2018 federal election.

Facilitating a well-orchestrated vote-by-mail election is the equivalent of a logistical nightmare. And with a global pandemic sweeping the country, this logistical nightmare can only get worse.

States should keep in mind the following concerns when switching to an all-mail election:

1. Confusion to Voters. A pandemic may not be the easiest time to teach voters a new voting method. When changing policies, states should continue to monitor public perception and ensure that any changes to elections are communicated quickly, clearly, and concisely. Specific areas of confusion may include: whether voters have to request a mailed ballot and pay for postage, whether voters can trust the postal service to deliver their ballots in a timely manner, and, if not, whether drop boxes are available as an alternative to mail. Additionally, with black voters’ absentee ballots rejected at a far higher rate than white voters, administrators should take additional safeguards to protect the votes of black Americans, or risk undermining the election’s legitimacy.

2. Challenges to Election Administration. Not only will election administrators have to account for all the above points of confusion to voters, they will have to run an election, too. A successful transition to vote-by-mail would require major technology and staff upgrades, managing resources split between in-person and mail voting, adjusted ballot return deadlines, pre-paid postage, and realistic ballot processing expectations.

3. Challenges to VBM as COVID-19 Worsens. Vote-by-mail’s Achilles’ heel is the postal service. The Washington Post reports that the long-understaffed U.S. Postal Service is beginning to reach a breaking point as the coronavirus continues to spread. To be fully prepared for a vote-by-mail election, states must develop a backup plan, such as ballot drop-boxes, in case the Postal Service is interrupted or unreliable.

These things take time and money. While the additional $400 million in emergency elections grants Congress passed as part of the CARES Act will help states’ temporary transition to vote-by-mail, it’s not enough. Running this year’s elections will be challenging, but not as challenging as they could be without considering the whole package of reforms needed for vote-by-mail to succeed.

The move towards vote-by-mail in the face of COVID-19 is a necessary one, especially for primary elections being conducted over the next few months. However, we must remember that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to election administration. Policy changes which fail to reflect states’ existing election statutory infrastructure (namely, vote-by-mail versus absentee) will fall short of their intended results.

With new and pressing challenges arriving constantly, it is easy to forget how much influence the past still has on the present. Coronavirus-related election reform will not succeed if it does not account for the existing state of policy and resource allocation.


Here’s everything you need to know ahead of Tuesday’s critical primaries:

It’s not too late to register to vote!



Minnesota Secretary Of State – Register To Vote

Polls will be open from 7am to 8pm



Absentee ballots must be postmarked by Tuesday


Minnesota Secretary Of State – Find County Election Office


Need to confirm that your submitted ballot was counted?



Thank you,