Editorial roundup

Recent Wells Fargo scandal

U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has been getting a lot of notice for her tough questioning of Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf, and that’s as it should be. The mega-bank recently settled a lawsuit over its outrageous practice of opening fake accounts for real customers without their permission — and then charging the customers fees for the “service.” At a Senate hearing Tuesday, Warren branded Stumpf “gutless” for blaming the mess on employees, called on him to resign and said he should be criminally investigated.

Federal prosecutors are reportedly looking into whether Stumpf and other senior bank officials engaged in fraud by imposing impossibly steep sales quotas that they knew — or should have known —would pressure bank workers to rack up fees by any means necessary. In the meantime, though, let’s remember what landed Stumpf in the Senate hot seat and perhaps in prosecutorial sights in the first place.

It began with investigative stories by now-retired Times reporter E. Scott Reckard beginning in 2013.

It continued with a lawsuit against Wells Fargo, filed last year by Los Angeles City Atty. Mike Feuer. Feuer? Why him rather than some state attorney general? Well, why not? Los Angeles banking customers were among the perhaps 2 million people being charged for services they never sought, and Reckard’s reporting began with a story on the firing of bank employees in the L.A. region for opening fake accounts. Feuer was elected to represent the municipal entity that is the city of Los Angeles, but also to look out for the interests of its people — and despite Wells Fargo’s court pleadings to the contrary, he had the power under state unfair business practice laws to act. He acted.

Los Angeles city attorneys are sometimes belittled for operating outside their local job descriptions in search of broader glory, but they could just as easily be chided for thinking too narrowly. What’s the point of voters in the nation’s second-largest city electing a lawyer if that person can’t or won’t look out for their interests? L.A.’s city attorney represents more people than the attorneys general of nearly half the states and has the power to protect consumers. In the Wells Fargo case, Feuer wielded that power well.

The shooting of Crutcher

For the second time in less than two years, the focus of the community and the nation is on the shooting of a black man by a local white law officer.

Terence Crutcher was fatally shot Friday evening by Tulsa Police Officer Betty Shelby near 36th Street North and Lewis Avenue. Crutcher’s SUV was stalled in the street. He was unarmed, but according to police statements was refusing to obey orders from police.

These are perilous times for such a tragedy. Elsewhere, indignation sparked by deadly encounters between black men and white police has led to terrible consequences. The natural emotions of the latest shooting are magnified by that national environment.

After a Monday news conference, Tulsa Police Chief Chuck Jordan released police dash-cam and helicopter video of the shooting, calling it “very disturbing.” We agree, but otherwise do as we advise others and reserve judgment.

At the same news conference, Jordan, Mayor Dewey Bartlett, District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler, U.S. Attorney Danny Williams and City Councilor Jack Henderson had words of solace for the Crutcher family, pleas for peace and promises of justice.

The Crutcher family has understandably reacted strongly to the loss of a loved one, but also has urged that protests be peaceful.

We hope that recent history will have earned the decision-makers in this critical case — especially Kunzweiler and Williams — the time they need to do their jobs.

Kunzweiler showed his independence and his wisdom in 2014, the last time we faced the case of a white officer shooting a black man. Despite a sheriff’s office recommendation against criminal action, Kunzweiler’s office charged and convicted reserve Deputy Robert Bates of second-degree manslaughter in the shooting death of Eric Harris.

In 2012, Jordan and Bartlett responded strongly and quickly to a string of hate crime shootings targeting black Tulsans — the so-called Good Friday shootings. The police arrested Alvin Lee Watts and Jacob Carl England, who were sentenced to life without parole.

We have not forgotten that Tulsa also has some difficult history to deal with — the lawless 1921 race riot that left untold numbers of innocent black people dead.

We pray that our community’s self-interest and the memory of the recent history of reliable justice in critical situations will give officials the time they need to act fairly on the evidence and in accordance with the law. Sept. 20 The New York Times

Voter fraud in America

How does a lie come to be widely taken as the truth?

The answer is disturbingly simple: Repeat it over and over again. When faced with facts that contradict the lie, repeat it louder.

This, in a nutshell, is the story of claims of voting fraud in America — and particularly of voter impersonation fraud, the only kind that voter ID laws can possibly prevent.

Last week, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that nearly half of registered American voters believe that voter fraud occurs “somewhat” or “very” often. That astonishing number includes two-thirds of people who say they’re voting for Donald Trump and a little more than one-quarter of Hillary Clinton supporters. Another 26 percent of American voters said that fraud “rarely” occurs, but even that characterization is off the mark. Just 1 percent of respondents gave the answer that comes closest to reflecting reality: “Never.”

As study after study has shown, there is virtually no voter fraud anywhere in the country. The most comprehensive investigation to date found that out of one billion votes cast in all American elections between 2000 and 2014, there were 31 possible cases of impersonation fraud. Other violations — like absentee ballot fraud, multiple voting and registration fraud — are also exceedingly rare. So why do so many people continue to believe this falsehood?

Credit for this mass deception goes to Republican lawmakers, who have for years pushed a fake story about voter fraud, and thus the necessity of voter ID laws, in an effort to reduce voting among specific groups of Democratic-leaning voters. Those groups — mainly minorities, the poor and students — are less likely to have the required forms of identification.

Behind closed doors, some Republicans freely admit that stoking false fears of electoral fraud is part of their political strategy. In a recently disclosed email from 2011, a Republican lobbyist in Wisconsin wrote to colleagues about a very close election for a seat on the State Supreme Court. “Do we need to start messaging ‘widespread reports of election fraud’ so we are positively set up for the recount regardless of the final number?” he wrote. “I obviously think we should.”

Sometimes they acknowledge it publicly. In 2012, a former Florida Republican Party chairman, Jim Greer, told The Palm Beach Post that voter ID laws and cutbacks in early voting are “done for one reason and one reason only” — to suppress Democratic turnout. Consultants, Mr. Greer said, “never came in to see me and tell me we had a fraud issue. It’s all a marketing ploy.”

The ploy works. During the 2012 election, voter ID laws in Kansas and Tennessee reduced turnout by about 2 percent, or about 122,000 votes, according to a 2014 analysis by the Government Accountability Office. Turnout fell the most among young people, African-Americans and newly registered voters. Another study analyzing elections from 2006 through 2014 found that voting by eligible minority citizens decreased significantly in states with voter ID laws and “that the racial turnout gap doubles or triples in states” with those laws.

There are plenty of shortcomings in the American voting system, but most are a result of outdated machines, insufficient resources or human error — not intentional fraud. All of these are made only worse by shutting down polling places or eliminating early voting hours, measures frequently supported by Republican legislators.

Those efforts are especially galling in a nation where, on a good day, only 60 percent of eligible voters show up to the polls. The truth is that those who created the specter of voter fraud don’t care about the integrity of the voting system; they want to undermine the rights of legitimate voters because that helps them win elections.

The scary thing is how many Americans have bought into this charade. It shouldn’t be surprising that the Republican Party’s standard-bearer, Donald Trump, has elevated the lie about voting fraud and “rigged elections” to a centerpiece of his campaign.