13 votes against Rice today, and its meaning for Election Reform

[Peace Patriot]

Today, 12 Democrats and 1 Independent voted against Condoleeza Rice for Secretary of State.

They are:

Boxer
Kennedy
Levin
Byrd
Kerry
Reed (RI)
Durbin
Dayton
Akaka
Bayh
Jeffords

These are the leaders of the progressive coalition who are most likely to support Election Reform discussion and potential action in the Senate, and to support Conyers' efforts to investigate the 2004 election in the House.

When the opposition to Rice developed, led by Barabara Boxer, she let it be known that she needed our support. We gave it to her. And she put together this awesome vote against Rice--a nomination that usually receives rubber stamp Senate approval.

Barbara Boxer was ALSO the leader of the January 6 rebellion against Congress accepting the Ohio Electors for Bush, after such massive repression of minority and Democratic voters in Ohio, official misconduct, and evidence of election fraud. She was also the ONLY SENATOR who voted for the Ohio challenge.

I argued strongly that we MUST support Boxer in her efforts on the Rice nomination HERE AT THE 2004 ELECTION FORUM *because* she is the key to reform. And I worked very hard on this, as did many others.

And now, we've gone from ONE VOTE on the progressive side in the Senate to THIRTEEN VOTES.

Of course, the two issues are quite different--still, these 12 (+1) votes represent a growing movement in the Democratic Party to FIGHT BACK.

Right in the midst of this battle, some folks here at the Election forum started complaining about Election Reform getting all muddied up by "other issues"--as if election reform could take place in some pristine world in which ony that issue exists.

I cannot believe the naivete of this stance. And it had a material effect on our work yesterday and today to support Boxer. Right in the middle of the Senate debate on Rice, the moderators suddenly MOVED our post, where we were reporting live on all the speeches--MANY OF WHICH, ON THE BUSHCON SIDE, REFERRED TO THE 2004 ELECTION, SAYING BUSH "WON" SO DEMOCRATS SHOULD SHUT UP ABOUT RICE--from here to "General Politics," causing much disruption, loss of participants, confusion and interruption of the reports, and loss of reports.

People who had worked on this campaign for weeks couldn't find the post. *I* couldn't find the post, and my reports of Byrd's and on BOXER'S speeches lost timeliness. Many new threads were created to respond to the Senate debate--causing a lot of confusion.

Well, that's all over now. What happened happened. But it caused me to consider quitting DU, because this is not the right way to treat activists who are DOING SOMETHING, devoting their time, organizing, and providing vital action information.

On Election Fraud and Election Reform:

I agree with all who say that this is THE ONLY ISSUE. If we don't restore our right to vote, we do not have a democracy, and we--the public, the progressives and (I believe) the majority!--will not be able to do influence policy on any other issue.

I also do not think that Congress is going to restore our right to vote. I think we have to do this state by state. The Democrats in Congress don't have the votes or the power to get this done--and they may get bushwhacked into election reform that does more harm (for instance, reducing state power over elections, which I think would be a big mistake, with fascists in control of our federal government).

We can always hope that they will be able to shame the BushCons into real reform, but that's a tenuous hope, at best.

But the Congressional progressives CAN perform the vital function of informing Americans about what happened in 2004, and educating them on the ways that BushCons are stealing their votes.

So, we cannot ignore what is going on in Congress, and we cannot fail to support the progressive coalition, ESPECIALLY when someone like Boxer asks for our help.

To repeat: I agree that restoring our right to vote is THE ONLY ISSUE. Without it, we can do nothing. But, in addition to the grass roots worked needed at the state level, a fighting spirit is also needed, at all levels.

This fight today--and getting this many votes against Rice--is an excellent sign that a fighting spirit is alive, in all of us and in some of our leaders.

[merh]

1. Election reform involves battling against the weed's agenda.

It means no "rubber stamping", nothing is to be taken for granted.

We must support those that are willing to expose the lies of this admin and stand up to them when their actions are harmful to our nation and our democracy!

Boxer's Rebellion! NEVER GIVE UP!

[Peace Patriot]

16. Oops! My list up there is incomplete...

Here's the full list of the Heroic 13:

Daniel Akaka D-HI
141 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]


Evan Bayh D-IN
463 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: bayh.senate.gov/WebMail1.htm

Barbara Boxer D-CA
112 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: boxer.senate.gov/contact

Robert Byrd D-WV
311 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: byrd.senate.gov/byrd_email.html

Mark Dayton D-MN
346 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: dayton.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

Richard Durbin D-IL
332 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: durbin.senate.gov/sitepages/contact.htm

Tom Harkin D-IA
731 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: harkin.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm

James Jeffords I-VT
413 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: jeffords.senate.gov/contact-form.html

Edward Kennedy D-MA
317 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: kennedy.senate.gov/contact.html

John Kerry PRESIDENT sorry...I had to do it.
304 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: kerry.senate.gov/bandwidth/contact/email.html

Frank Lautenberg D-NJ
324 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: lautenberg.senate.gov/webform.html

Carl Levin D-MI
269 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: levin.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

Jack Reed D-RI
728 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
[phone]
Web Form: reed.senate.gov/form-opinion.htm

[Raksha]

34. I agree...it starts with election reform but doesn't end there.

We're fighting for honesty, integrity and transparency in ALL phases of the political/governmental process, starting with the electoral process itself but certainly not ending there. We're also supporting those members of Congress who show their willingness to fight with and for us like the heroic 13 did today.

[Casandra]

2. One more name

Tom Harkin voted against her also... and of course Jeffords, the Independent..makes 13

[tandem5]

10. one more...

Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey

[illflem]

3. Notably absent are Hilliary and Kennedy

[Darkseid69]

6. Kennedy is in there

take a peek again

[illflem]

8. Well duh I say

as I kick my head again

[Peace Patriot]

7. Kennedy voted against Rice. He's one of the 13!

He also spoke very eloquently against her yesterday.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. Yesterday, there was 1. Today, there was 13. Tomorrow there

will be a simple majority.

[Peace Patriot]

5. My apologies to Skinner for raising this sore point again...

See Skinner's post at

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=304626

It must be difficult responding to all these different views of what the Election Forum should be. It's the nature of the beast, I think. The 2004 Election Fraud spurred many of us into action. We are concerned about many things, on many fronts. But this second fraudulent election and Election Reform are at the heart of it all.

My sole focus since 11/3 has been exposing the fraud and getting reform. I took a detour on the Rice nomination because of Boxer's plea. But the sample letter we did makes the point that an administration elected by fraudulent means should not be shoving arrogant nominations at us.

[jdog]

28. I didn't really take part in much of that forum name debate

but I really believe that all these issues come together, with election reform the umbrella. These people wouldn't have the power to be doing what they are if it wasn't for the stolen election - and it makes me SICK to see what the U.S. in doing throughout the world, the destruction and hate that's being created. It's very hard for me to separate any of these issues, even though I know my main focus has to be election fraud. I still can't sit back and let them move their agenda forward. I can't.

And this forum is so powerful. It seems like one of their main obstacles. And just when we are seeing so much progress from our efforts.

I'm ranting, because I just saw those pictures of the children of Iraq and it breaks my heart. I can sift through the different issues as their presented. If we can bring pressure to bear in many areas at once, we have to. People's lives depend on it.

[go west young man]

9. I too became confused and frustrated...

at the moving and changing round in the forum. I can see both yours and Skinners side of this issue but in the end I think its important to keep the forum the way it was and is now. I am a new Duer who joined November 3rd and its been the first place I go to when I log on. Its been fascinating these last two months seeing the info come in and this forum is the launching point for all thats happened so far with election investigating and reform. Its cool as shit. I can understand in the future for the sake of organization it may need to change but right now is too crucial a juncture for that change. I support all you guys.Skinner, Ignatzamouse,PeacePatriot, Andy,TruthisAll, and all the others here. Your doing a wonderful job bringing change to America. Working together in harmony is what its all about. Peace and Thanks.

[RaulVB]

11. Thanks for giving the context for what happened today

Today, just 13 American senators stood up to condemn the results of Rice's lies, the murder of innocents, the support for an illegal war of aggression, the massive violation of human rights on Iraq and the acceptance of torture as a "standard" when dealing with POWs taken into American custody.

Those "Democrats" who voted for Rice, should be ashamed to ask for our votes in the future.

They have refused to follow the principles that are shared by a large portion of every civilized society.

That is beyond comprehension to me and the majority of those living abroad...

[darkworkz]

12. Kick for 1 of my favorite people. Peace Patriot! ;-)

[floridadem30]

13. I was hoping to see Nelson in there but 13 is a good start. n/t

[FloridaCrat]

29. Don't hold your breath, but also don't stop calling

I've called his office to ask for him to support Sen Boxer and Congr. Tubbs Jones on 1/6 - and I don't get the impression he wants to take a stand. If it's not a solid Dem block vote, he seems to consistently be on the side of the repugs.

Senator Bill Nelson: 202-224-5274

[flyarm]

30. i wholeheartedly agree!!

from pinellas here, i called nelson about 40 times prior to jan 6th and begged him to stand and support b.boxer..nelson was a no show!
he seems * lite on dem causes!! but i will not stop calling and bugging him, and i have all on my campaign lists calling as well!!

if we all keep on him he may finally get it that he will loose our support unless he stands by the dems..not giving up here!!
fly..hi other floridians!!:hi:

[icehenge]

14. Here is the official tally on NAY votes

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00002



Want to contact them and give them a praise?
I think you should to show support :hug:


Senators that voted NAY (No) for Dr. Rice nomination of Secretary of state.

Daniel K. Akaka (D- HI) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


Evan Bayh (D- IN) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://bayh.senate.gov/LegForm.htm
[e-mail]


Boxer (D-CA)
Senator Barbara Boxer (D- CA) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://boxer.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm
[e-mail]



Robert C. Byrd (D- WV) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://byrd.senate.gov/byrd_email.html
[e-mail]



Mark Dayton (D- MN) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://dayton.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm
[e-mail]



Richard J. Durbin (D- IL) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://durbin.senate.gov/sitepages/contact.cfm
[e-mail]



Tom Harkin (D- IA) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://harkin.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm
[e-mail]



James M. Jeffords (I- VT) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://jeffords.senate.gov/contact-form.html
[e-mail]



Edward M. Kennedy (D- MA) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://kennedy.senate.gov/contact.html
[e-mail]



Kerry (D-MA)
Senator John F. Kerry (D- MA) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://kerry.senate.gov/low/contact_email.html
[e-mail]



Frank Lautenberg (D- NJ) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://lautenberg.senate.gov/webform.html
[e-mail]



Carl Levin (D- MI) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://levin.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm
[e-mail]



Jack Reed (D- RI) Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
http://reed.senate.gov/form-opinion.htm
[e-mail]


If you'd like the full mailing address of a senator visit this website.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

------------
If your not fimilar with the [e-mail]
email address these adddresses allow you to fax a
senator for free from your computer. It's free so
you only can send 6 faxes a day and a total of 20/week.
For more infomation visit www.tpc.int

[Starone]

15. Thanks! Mission Accomplished (n/t)

[icehenge]

26. kick for support of senators that were with us

Please write letters

[icehenge]

42. kick

[Pacifist Patriot]

46. Done, thanks!

[bobbieinok]

51. why not Mikulski??

[GetTheRightVote]

17. I called Tom Harkin today, glad to see my home state represented

today against Rice Bowl.

:kick:

[keepthemhonest]

18. I never would have thought so many would

actually vote against here, although my hope was that they would vote her down. Do you think there is still a chance then?

[tommcintyre]

19. So we're gonna "bloody their nose", eh?

The GOP hijackers may win many of these individual battles, but their gonna at least know they've been in a fight! And these bruises and scars will, no doubt, eventually take their toll.

Good work all!

[Bill Bored]

20. Dayton was amazing!

Heard Randi today speaking about him. He used the L-word very effectively! A good beginning!

And even the crack White house press corps brought some of this up with Shrub today. I think they used to L-word too!

[flyarm]

31. dayton was brilliant!!

i even cried when i heard him speak..to finally hear the "lie" word instead of the "misinformed " word..i was sobbing!! and cheering, and if dayton had come near me i would have mauled him with kisses and hugs!!

fly.and a special :hug: for senator dayton!! wish my dem senator had stood up and had those guts!

[Carolab]

21. THIS IS THE HEART OF THE MATTER. YOU ARE SO RIGHT.

I agree with all who say that this is THE ONLY ISSUE. If we don't restore our right to vote, we do not have a democracy, and we--the public, the progressives and (I believe) the majority!--will not be able to do influence policy on any other issue.

I also do not think that Congress is going to restore our right to vote. I think we have to do this state by state.

***********
People, we are going to have to take this in our own hands. Dayton is my senator; I have already begun to work with his office. If any of these are your senator, you should be making appointments and meeting with them directly to push reform in your own state, particularly if any of them are vulnerable in 2006 (like Dayton).

In addition, we each must meet with our state representatives so that we can make sure legislation is enacted at the state level; otherwise, the way HAVA is written, the secretaries of state have NO OVERSIGHT and can determine the hows and whys of voting in our states.

Unless/until we fix this mess, it will not matter WHAT we stand for, for WHOM we campaign or WHETHER we vote, because the system will remain RIGGED against Democrats and more and more seats will be stolen.

[BeFree]

22. Go, Carolab!

Talked to a fellow today about e-voting. He said he didn't trust the machines counting his vote...

But he grimaced when I told him the election was stolen. So, I hit a few key points. One, two, three, four...it adds up, eh?

As I walked away, he shouts "I'll sign a petition!"

One person tells one person, that person tells one person......


Oh yeah, almost forgot. He said no one has said anything about the election. I told him someone had: "On Jan.6, they had a discussion in Congress, but you didn't hear about it on the news, did ya?"

[Peace Patriot]

23. Carolab, what do you think of this?

I have been struggling with this issue of state vs. federal election reform. I so distrust the BushCons in Congress that I fear they will make things worse, if the issue gets opened up there, and Democrats will be unable to stop really bad "reform" (not enough votes, not enough power). The Democrats record on this is not inspiring, to say the least.

So...should we fear a "poison pill" sort of bill, say, that mandates MORE electronic voting, and takes power away from the states that want to resist it, and from the public?

I began to fear this when Jesse Jackson began speaking about a Consitutional amendment. I thought, right. That'll never happen, but Dems can pat themselves on the back for trying. Or, the BushCons may actually go along with it, but provide NO ENFORCEMENT. Ha, ha on us!

Or...then I began to think...

I won't tell you all of what I thought--of the mischief they could do. Basically, I think we might want to back states rights on this matter. But we also don't want things like Ohio happening. Even though much of that was a Voting Rights Act matter--a problem of NO ENFORCEMENT--I'm sure the impetus in Congress, among the Dems, will be to address abuses like that, to try to write another law about, that will likely take more state power away.

Yikes, it's such a tangle. And in and around this tangle are mucho dollar bills--$3.5 billion from HAVA, and god knows how much Diebold spent wining and dining.

What is the answer here?

Also, see this thread about BushCon attacks on one of our few good Secretaries of State, Kevin Shelley (Calif.). See, I think the BushCons know reform movements are coming, in the one place we can get something done, the states. And they are already trying to head it off.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x302899

I feel like there needs to be a big convention somewhere, where all the voting groups get together, and figure out how to do this. arnheim, here at DU, is working on a web site that pulls info and activism together.

Here is one of his posts:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x303180

I want election reform most fervently. It is the ONLY issue, in my view. But I don't want fraudulent election reform, like we got last time. How do we avoid it?

[Carolab]

24. My fiance and I were discussing this just this morning.

He feels that we MUST make this a local issue. Look what happened with HAVA! That was a Federal law and it is all messed up. It even passed the power to the secretaries of state. We need to take this to our state representatives and work through them to ensure legislation is there to guarantee our voting rights are NOT overrun by secretaries of state. We need to meet with them, educate them and insist they help to insure a uniform standard.

As I see the problem right now, without the "smoking gun" which Conyers and the lawsuits are trying to uncover, how can we make a strong enough case for reform at the Federal level that everyone, including Republicans, will HAVE to agree to? Also, since there is so little understanding of the magnitude and nature of the multitude of voting problems at the Federal level, even among Democrats, it seems that having our Federal reps try to write sweeping legislation that will "cure the ills" across the states--even if the Republicans WERE to vote for it--is a dangerous proposition.

I think our primary focus right now should be forming a solid, national coalition of these reform groups. A group has been working to have all the election investigative and reform groups come together in a large United coalition similar to United for Peace and Justice. It is happening quite quickly. It will be called USE- United For Secure Elections; they do not have their own website yet, and are working off www.votersunite.org!

It seems that there is another large coalition of citizens activist groups forming called the IPPN. They are trying to merge these two groups and will be giving us further reports. If it all works out then the operating principles will be very close to the UFPJ, where every group has their autonomy but also acts in cooperation too!

One of the major goals of this United For Secure Elections is the continued investigations of the fraud, further legal actions and election reform. They are trying to hammer out a unified voting system for all federal elections. This is a difficult task, everyone has very strong opinions about this.

What many are leaning towards is Paper Ballots and Hand Counts at the precinct level as recommended by Lynn Landes and the National Ballot Integrity Project.

This national group should come up with the recommendations that we can agree on for our states. Then we need to have local chapters of this consortium take these recommendations to our state representatives and get them to back them with legislation.

Meanwhile, we should continue to educate our Senators and our congresspeople, because they need to amend HAVA so that it presents uniform Federal guidelines that will not RESTRICT our efforts at the state level and will allow us to work with our individual states and secretaries of states to enact legislative reforms.

There are so many bills pending in various state legislatures and even in the U.S. Congress, and none of them seem to go anywhere...I wonder WHY there are so many bills? Obviously, because the Republicans keep blocking them. There needs to be ONE set of voting reforms agreed to that can set the "national agenda"--such as insisting that each state provide paper ballots and that they must be hand counted. I think there should also be guidelines as to the number of machines per voter and that the votes should be hand-counted at the precinct level, publicly witnessed and the results--number of voters per candidate--publicly posted for all to see, as well as the central tallies.

We also need to ensure we protect voters rights through the ability to sue not only at the state level but Federal level, since * wants only the DOJ to decide whether or not a case is heard. Obviously, we have a Voting Rights Act and a Civil Rights Act, but as it stands right now it's up to Ashcroft whether or not those cases are even heard. I read that since Ashcroft was put in charge of the DOJ and the Voting Section put under Federalist Society member Hans von Spakovsky, the DOJ has heard a RECORD LOW number of voting rights abuse cases.

Here's the thread about the national voting consortium effort:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=300059

[marions ghost]

25. KICK

thank you carolab and peace patriot for discussing these issues about state and federal strategies--it's confusing and hard to translate for the layperson, but critical to get a handle on if we are to lobby and work for changes.

[FloridaCrat]

27. I haven't seen this anywhere - has anyone heard of fraud with Absentee

ballots? In the interim, until there is a satisfactory overhaul of HAVA, there is a way now, people can have paper ballots and get them counted - through absentee ballots. In preparation for the next election, we should do massive voter education and registration drives to assist registered voters with requests for absentee ballots. Oregon already does voting by mail. In other states, this could be done by voter initiative. These are paper ballots and while the machines still do count them, the ballots are available for audit purposes.

This wouldn't alleviate the fraud associated with tabulators or AP feeds on election night, but at least there would be a way to prove through paper trail.

[flyarm]

32. we really pushed absentee ballots here

in pinellas county fla. we did a big drive for it, but it is important to tell people to copy their absentee ballots after completing and keep the copies, 3 copies is best. i worked the kerry campaign and i worked the data bases for absentee ballots, and we copied all of them we took in and distributed. and before election we called all the people we gave absentee ballots to to make sure they mailed them in or we asked if we could pick them up and hand delivered them , we did alot of picking them up and delivering them to soe office. and for the couple of weeks before the election we had a bank of people calling the people who we sent absentee ballots to or had soe send ballots to from requests, but we built a huge data base on them.
but i said it on the phones at least a thousand times, to please make copies of the absentee ballot before putting into the envelope.
this way after election each person can call soe office and ask if their vote was counted.if the answer is no..you have proof that your vote should have counted.
fly

[Carolab]

33. I just read something a couple of weeks ago on this board.

About a guy who admitted being hired by the Republicans in Florida for absentee ballot fraud.

He said he also did it in past years for Democrats.

Apparently, there is quite a market for absentee ballot fraud.

[Skeeno]

35. Taking local control of election reforms...something you can do...

Here goes post number 1 for a new DU'er...

I believe that you, Carolab and Peace Patriot, have hit upon something important here. It seems very unlikely that any measure of federal reform of the election process will end with a system of integrity.

I believe it is in our best interest(those who believe that election reform trumps all other issues) to seize control of the process at the state level. This can be done, as some have noted, by contacting state representatives and lobbying for reform through legislative mandate. This is good. We should all be doing this. Unfortunately, twenty of our states have both houses of their legislatures that are controlled by the Republicans. This will undoubtedly create significant difficulties in bringing change about in this way, in these states. Here is an idea, though. In 11 (AK,AZ,FL,ID,MI,MO,ND,OH,SD,UT,WA) of the 20 states where the Republicans control both houses, initiatives are allowed. In case you don't remember this from government class, an initiative is a process whereby citizens collect a quota of signatures on petitions and are able to place proposed legislation and\or constitutional amendments on the ballot for the electorate to approve or not. For those of us who live in states that allow initiatives this is second nature, but remember that not all states allow them and, no there is not a national initiative process. Ultimately, no matter how much of a red state that you may live in, it doesn't matter. If you can get enough signatures and make a good enough case to the voters you can make a law. Even in a red state, who is likely to vote against a more trustworthy election process?

Anyway, to achieve change on a nationwide level, through state-by-state action, a fair amount of coordination would be required, which is something touched on earlier in the thread with the link to www.votersunite.org
Here is another- http://www.ballotintegrity.org/index.html

One problem that these sites seem to share, though, is that they do not have enough "foot soldiers." Although contributing to the dialogue is valuable, this is not enough. Reform will not happen unless the vast numbers of disaffected citizens in our country can be organized and motivated toward a common cause...a single point of coalescence. Many seem to get mad because organizations like the Democratic Party or MoveOn are doing little. I would suggest that because this issue trumps all others, a dedicated, coordinated effort is needed, one that is distinct from, but associated with these overarching national concerns. Aside from serving as a philosophical beacon and a virtual meeting place, this organization could provide legal guidance, strategic planning and financial support to state-based groups which form the grassroots. The caring and energetic folks in each state would work the grassroots in the collection and filing of signatures. The initiative would then need to be promoted. This is where the national group would work closely with the local volunteers in getting out the vote. Responsibilities for resources, logistical support, planning and overall coordination would be shared between the local feet-on-the-street and the national group. If this sounds a lot like what you went through in the last election, you are right. It is about knocking on doors, making phone calls, handing out fliers, registering voters, getting signatures, encouraging and influencing those around you.

This is maybe a direction worth heading in a time when a good direction is not apparent. It is how we can succeed. It is something you can do...



If you want learn more about initiatives go here: http://www.iandrinstitute.org /

[FloridaCrat]

36. Hi Skeeno - Welcome to DU! :-) :-)

In Florida, we have a repug dominated legislature and repug governor. At the state level they do nothing but fight everything related to betterment of the people, including election reform. Congr. Wexler sued FLA in state court before the 2004 election wanting a paper audit requirement to evote machines. Jubbie fought it and won. The judge was satisfied that there had been an election in 2002 using these machines. There was no "need" to paper audit the 2002 election, because no suits were brought...(our State Dem leadership in the party leaves a lot to be desired too) unbelievable...

So, the people in Florida have learned that in order to get things done, we have to pass amendments to the state constitution - we passed an amendment to the Florida Constitution to require reduced class size. It was passed overwhelmingly the first time - around 70% in favor. And the audacity of jebbie to challenge the will of the people - he had a question on this years' ballot, asking for the people to revoke the class size initiative, since it cost money. Yeah, well duh. It's not a matter of it costing money, it's a matter of not giving wealthy people huge tax refunds and re-prioritizing where you spend the money you have. He didn't win that one.


I think, an amendment to the state constitution is what we need to do in Florida, since that is the only way the electorate can enforce it's will.

The problem is one of timing. Assuming that we are wildly successful and get this voter initiative on the ballot, we're talking 2006, at the earliest. I don't want deja vu in 2006 - where there are questions about evoting machine fraud.

So, I think we need a 2-pronged approach - one that tackles the state constitution and until the constitution is fixed, we perfect, as much as possible, the current system of Absentee Ballots.

One of my to-do's is to look into the 2004 election and see where the fraud might have happened with AB's in Florida. I feel like this is something that may pay off, without requiring cooperation from any of the repugs in power.

[Skeeno]

40. Hey there FloridaCrat! Thanks for the welcome!

Unfortunately, Floridians are only allowed initiatives which propose a constitutional amendment. In this, your state is an odd-ball in relation to the other states which allow initiatives. Most others allow for proposing of statutes. This can take the form of either directly placing the proposed statute, in its legal language, before the voters for approval and subsequent insertion into the state's structure of law. I believe there is also the ability in many states, for citizens to generate an initiative which calls for a special election. In which case, two initiatives would be in order, one for creating a special election and the other to propose statutory language.

It sounds like you are on the right track, FloridaCrat. Good Luck!

Anyone else interested in real change and not just talking about it?

[Peace Patriot]

52. FloridaCrat: Here are two must-read studies for you...

IGNATZMOUSE: North Carolina had 30% absentee ballots. Election results showed SIX PERCENT more votes for Bush in electronic voting than in absentee ballots.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x45003

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/12/233831/06

-------

UC BERKELEY: Their tops stats team looked at FLA, paper vs. electronic, and found 130,000 to 260,000 PHANTOM VOTES FOR BUSH in FLA's three main Dem counties (Miama, Dade, Palm Beach.

Dr. Michael Haut & UC Berkeley stats team: http://ucdata.berkeley.edu

------

And here's my standard list of election fraud studies:

The following experts examine the '04 Exit Polls, and basically conclude that there are astonomical odds against Bush winning:

Dr. Steven Freeman 1st study: http://www.truthout.org/unexplainedexitpoll.pdf
(also at: http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/11/Expldiscrpv00oPt1.pdf)
Dr. Steven Freeman 2nd study: http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm
Dr. Ron Baiman: http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/997
Dr. Webb Mealy: http://www.selftest.net/redshift.htm
Jonathan Simon:http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00142.htm

Johns Hopkins report on unreliability of electronic voting:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00196.htm#5

Ohio vote suppression: http://www.bpac.info

TruthIsAll: "To believe Bush won, you have to believe…"

Part 1
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1316010

Part 2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1358806

Part 3
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x197878

[newyawker99]

54. Hi Skeeno!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Emit]

37. Kick n/t

[NationalEnquirer]

38. I am going to disagree.

And maybe you all will hate me or whatever.
I think that for ANY of this to come to pass (election reform), we are going to HAVE to get some Repukes on our side.
There are plenty of moderate and even liberal Republicans.
If we simply say that opposing any Republican agenda works for election reform, this doesn't make sense.
I think we have to make this a non-partisan issue.
If Boxer wants my support, she has it, but I think the issues should be separate.
I am changing my mind here I guess, but thats my right as a self-thinking Democrat, right?
I wont complain about it, this may be my last post on the subject.
We may be shooting ourselves in the foot if we continue simply opposing Repukes AS AN EXTENSION OF ELECTION REFORM.
It will turn off and away the support of those we need.
Heck, EVEN MY REPUKE BROTHER supports election reform.
But we are deluding ourselves into thinking that ANY form of opposition the the Repugs is somehow getting us closer to election reform.

[Skeeno]

41. Here is a "Repuke" who is right there with you, NationalEnquirer!

I am a Republican and I generally agree with the notion that you will have more success with a bi\non-partisan effort. However, as I stated in another post, the state initiative process, in the hands of a motivated, organized and energetic grassroots effort, renders buy-in on the part of legislators, republican or not, unnecessary.

Your words bely a naivete about the state of the Republican party. Your "repuke" brother and I are not an anomaly. There are far more moderate and reasonable Republicans that have been alienated from their party than you would imagine. The dazed and confused state that many democrats have faced since the election is not unique to your party. It is common to read many posts on this and other like-minded forums where the writer is casting about for where to most effectively direct their efforts. This is also not unique to your party. It is a phenomenon of the many disaffected Republicans in the post-election electorate. In my case, I will likely change party affiliations and work toward change on a state level. I have no confidence in the fed, at the moment.

Although the stolen election does not show such, there are many moderate Republicans and even true conservatives that believe an election process with integrity is our highest priority and that we do not have that integrity now. This is not a cause looking for a constituency, but a constituency looking for a well intentioned, structured and organized cause. The support of the people is there for the asking. The right coordinated effort just has to ask.

[NationalEnquirer]

43. My brother is no moderate...

But I know what you mean.
Most republicans I know actually are pretty moderate, and they roll their eyes when a Republican whacko starts talking.
I think even alot of the right-wingers are interested in election reform, of course because they think its the DEMOCRATS who cheat.
I say, hey, if they are for Election Reform, welcome aboard!
As for party affiliation, I registered democrat back in high school, but I changed to independant during college.
I have never changed back and probably won't.
Its just a principal thing for me, sometimes I roll my eyes at what some democrats do and say.

[Skeeno]

48. Caution: A Republican Tale....

My father's family has been active in Republican politics since the 30's. I have an old photo which was taken at former Nevada Senator Paul Laxalt's house near Lake Tahoe. The photo is of my grandparents sitting next to the Reagans at a heavy timber picnic table. Reagan is carving a heart, which says "Ronnie Loves Nancy" into the table. My grandmother ran Paul Laxalt's office here in Reno as well as playing key roles in his campaigns. Both of my parents took her example to heart in their civic involvement, working precincts on campaigns and at the polls for years and years. My brothers and I grew up with these examples. While we have not been as politically active within our party as my parents or grandparents, we are also not politically asleep either. Without exception, the folks in my family have all maintained our party affiliation, although mostly now just to vote in the primaries against the whack-jobs from the fringes that have systematically seized the better part of our state political structure over the last 25 years. Anyway, the point of my story, provided you still have control of your gag reflex, is that ALL of my immediate family and most of my extended family (DU translation: many "Repukes") voted for Kerry. The problem we all face is that we are stuck between the fascist\automaton\theocratic Republican rock and the disorganized, disillusioned and reeling Democratic hard place. I worked for the Dems in the last election, but have decided that I don't trust our election process and will put most of my spare energies toward reform. A change of my party affiliation can wait, for now.

[Emit]

49. Good for you, Skeeno...

for weeding out those "whack-jobs from the fringes" and for breaking party lines to work for the Dems! I don't think you are alone. I met a lot of Repubs while working for the Dems this past election who were putting a lot of effort toward defeating Bush & Co.

[FloridaCrat]

44. Skeeno and NEnquirer - Do you think there's value in calling senators

to ask them to vote against Condi and the torturing liar Gonzalez and the rest of the Bush agenda that is being forced down our throats? These are actions being taken everyday by "grass roots" people, mostly dems, as far as I can tell.

I'm also curious about what you're changing your party affiliation to, if you don't mind my asking. I'm thinking about switching mine also, to maximize the effect of it. I'm registered Dem, but am thinking about switching to Repub

:puke:

so that maybe my vote will have an affect in the primaries. Then I think that it won't matter either, cause there's election crap going on even amongst the repubs. Look at what was done to John McCain and the far-behind in the CA race, Schwarzenegger, "winning". It's like the party bosses, with megabucks from crazy Scaife and others, decide who they want for the positions and that's how it ends up. Or is it the big industrial/war machine that's pulling the levers? We're all little ants in the charade played by the big guys.

[Skeeno]

50. Yes, Yes, Yes there is value in...

... those grass roots efforts. Although the more strident among us might suggest otherwise, not every progressive\dem\non-republican\human can or will devote all of their efforts toward election reform. Nor would we be wise to ignore the fox while we are so focused on building a new hen-house. Vigilance will save our democratic republic. I say Hooray! for anyone who puts forth effort to rid us of The Scourge. Personally, I get pissed off that we have unprincipled malcontents like Gonzalez even considered, but ultimately, without a legitimate election we can't get rid of the people that put forth dirtbags like that.

As for party affiliation, I am only still a Republican because the I've-got-a-close-personal-relationship-with-Jesus-do-you?-crowd have been coming on strong. I can't help myself...I just have to vote against them at every chance, so I take my meager pot-shots at them in the primary. My only saving grace is that I volunteered for the dems on the last election. Anyway, I'll probably end up a Democrat someday unless all of the Republicans are sucked up in the rapture. I'm too attached to primary elections and besides, third party affiliation seems almost ghettoized.

I am more interested in being involved in state politics at the moment, because I feel that there is a much better chance at change than on the national level. Not that I think this is so, but if we're all just a bunch of Illuminati pawns, my bet for our survival is certainly on local governance.

[texpatriot2004]

39. I would like to send these 13 thank you notes. n/t

[Pacifist Patriot]

45. Easy enough. senate.gov and go to their web forms.

Type up a little blurb, copy and paste and you should be done in twenty minutes. :)

Or better yet, check out #14 above.

[garybeck]

47. How could Leahy vote to confirm Rice?

I'm becoming more and more disappointed with Senator Leahy and I think it's about time I give him another call.

Now that other senators are finally willing to vote their conscience, what's up with the others?

-Gary

[Peace Patriot]

53. Thanks to Skeeno, NationalEnquirer and others for this...

...discussion on Republican attitudes. As their discussion shows, we really, really, really need to make a distinction between Republicans and what I call "BushCons." We often refer to Republicans here at DU as "Repukes." I think those who use the term (sometimes I do, sometimes I don't, mostly I don't) are trying to express their extreme revulsion at BUSH & CO. But we seldom acknowledge that BushCons are fascists who have TAKEN OVER the Republican Party.

I remember a Cliff Arnebeck interview, around the time he filed the lawsuit, in which he spoke of Republican precincts in So. Ohio where Republican votes for Kerry had been changed to Bush, and that this kind of fraud was likely to be widespread because no one would normally give it a second look. (Note: Arnebeck himself is a Republican!)

Wouldn't it be ironical of the bulk of the election fraud had been perpetrated against REPUBLICANS who were repudiating Bush?

I have personal experience of quite a few Republicans who hate Bush and voted for Kerry. And I've heard and read NUMEROUS stories of the same--so many that I believe it to be a significant phenomenon.

I've always been a Democrat (Democratic family tradition), but I did know some Republicans in my youth. I gained an impression of Republican Party members as upright, fair, honest, and, on some issues, way ahead of the Democrats. In California (where I was raised), it was the REPUBLICANS who were the environmentalists! (In fact, that's why it took ME so long to become an environmentalist myself--I really didn't understand the issue until much later, because it was way low on the CA Democratic agenda throughout my youth.)

The Republican Party produced people like Earl Warren--Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who ended segregation in public schools, and presided over many a citizen rights decision.

Of course, the CA Republican Party also produced Nixon--a McCarthyite--but even Nixon had quite moderate and civic-minded views on many issues, including the environment. (He signed the EPA into law.)

I've sometimes thought that the War Party--that is, the war profiteer Dems and Repubs--used Watergate to get rid of Nixon because, a) he was actually trying to end the Vietnam War at the time, and resisted using nukes to win it; b) his trip to China, trying to open up trade with an arch-enemy communist state; and c) his trip to Soviet Russia--the 1st US president ever to visit that country. (I think this NOW. I was all for impeaching him THEN.)

Anyway, my point is: BushCons vs. Republicans. We shouldn't presume that all Republicans are "Repukes" (that is, BushCons).

We are ALL--ALL!-- at the mercy of the Political Establishment, which is so compromised by the corruption of the military-industrial complex that they cannot NOT do war! They CANNOT achieve world peace! It's not even on their agenda. Their pockets are padded with war!

And guess who warned us against THAT????