DNC and Ohio Dem Party Websites have NO MENTION of Disenfranchisement

[Skinner]

:shrug:

WTF is taking so long? This is Florida all over again. We should have taken this to court yesterday! Do they even care?

DNC:
Web: http://www.democrats.org
Phone: [phone]
Email Form: http://www.democrats.org/contact

Ohio Democratic Party
Web: http://www.ohiodems.org
Phone: [phone] (voice)
Email: [e-mail]

[G_j]

1. I have seen numerous stories

about voter suppression/disenfranchisement here. I agree, what is going on?
I read a while back that Kerry already had his lawyers lined up.
I would think it would be better to act sooner, rather than later.
:shrug:

[Clinton Crusader]

2. I contacted the DNC

and I know many MANY Ohioans who have taken action.
:kick:

[troublemaker]

3. Cross-link with the OHIO state forum

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=172x2356

A reminder to GD:Campaign 2004 readers to check on the Ohio forum and visa versa, just so everyone can be on the same metaphorical page (if not the same literal page)

[troublemaker]

4. Background links/threads (for the day shift)

Here is the narrow situation:
New voters sent in completed registration forms that happened to be on paper lighter than 80lb weight. Solely because of their weight those completed forms were ruled to be *requests* for registration forms, and were set aside. Supposedly each of those people was then mailed a heavier weight registration form to fill out. (It is by no means clear that even that was done in all cases.) Blackwell's hope is that some who registered will not get around to registering AGAIN, and thus will not be registered to vote.

Our narrow objective:
We demand that all voter registrations in hand before the cut-off date be accepted no matter what kind of paper the forms are on. This includes all completed registration forms that were erroneously categorized as *requests* for registration forms. If a replacement is not received by the cut-off date the in-hand original registration must be treated as valid, at least in terms of the weight of the paper.


original threads (w/ background):
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=905337&mesg_id=905337

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=906005&mesg_id=906005

http://www.caseohio.org/CaseOhio/BlackwellsOhiosHarris.htm

[troublemaker]

5. additional links

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18715
http://www.mydd.com/story/2004/9/27/125755/309
http://www.legitgov.org/

[kodi]

6. you are soooooo right.

again, the dnc is operating like their adversaries are going to be fair.

if a democratic sec of state did what the gop sect of state did in ohio, they would have already shipped in another brooks brothers riot squad.

[Skinner]

7. Hmmm.

I wonder if you have an idea there.

[kodi]

16. saddle up and ride to the sound of hanging chads aflutter!

dems had better wake up and realize that the gop have used shock troops to win elections, and they will do it again.

[cmd]

8. The Ohio Dems have sued Blackwell

I just received an e-mail from Dan Trevas. Story in the Plain Dealer. I'll go there for a link.

edit: http://www.cleveland.com/politics/index.ssf?/base/ispol/1096374617149810.xml

edit: clip from story

Ohio Democrats sued Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell on Monday, saying his rules on provisional ballots make a "mockery" of federal election-reform efforts and jeopardize thousands of votes.

The lawsuit - filed in federal court the same day Blackwell rolled out a statewide voter-education campaign - seeks to block Blackwell's Sept. 16 instruction that provisional ballots will not be given to voters who appear at the wrong precinct on Election Day.


Provisional ballots are special ballots given to voters who say they are registered to vote but whose names don't appear on voter rolls on Election Day. The ballots are separated and reviewed so the registration can be confirmed.

Democratic officials say Blackwell's rule "turns on its head" a key provision of the Help America Vote Act, the 2002 law passed by Congress after the voting problems in the 2000 presidential election. HAVA encourages provisional ballots as a way to ensure voters aren't wrongly turned away at the polls because their registrations were misplaced or misfiled.

[troublemaker]

10. If you are registered can you snag the first four paragraphs for the rest

of us? Thnaks!

[cmd]

13. I just did that , it's now in my original post /t

[Skinner]

11. Oh, thank God.

Thanks for the link.

[spotbird]

23. The suit deals with a different, but important, issue.

The paper weight isn't covered in it.

[troublemaker]

14. Thanks for the text. This article is about a different ruling, though.

The provisional ballot/polling place issue is a whole different thing from the 80lb paper controversy. This suit is not about the paper weight issue, so we need to keep pushing.

[gasperc]

17. mockery? it violates an act of Congress

as posted by Atrios and dailykos and I suspect on a post here.

Kerry and Edwards should talk about this everyday in simple terms, citing the act of congress guaranteeing voting writes :


excerpt of 1971 voting rights act
(B)
deny the right of any individual to vote in any election because of an error or omission on any record or paper relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting, if such error or omission is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under State law to vote in such election.



enough said!!!!!

[ohioan]

22. HAVA doesn't just "encourage" provisional balloting - it requires

that it be permitted in exactly the kind of cases that Blackwell is attempting to forbit it.

"If an individual declares that such individual is a registered voter in the jurisdiction in which the individual desires to vote and that the individual is eligible to vote in an election for Federal office, but the name of the individual does not appear on the official list of eligible voters for the polling place or an election official asserts that the individual is not eligible to vote, such individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot as follows:
(1) An election official at the polling place shall notify the individual that the individual may cast a provisional ballot in that election.
(2) The individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot at that polling placeupon the execution of a written affirmation by the individual before an election official at the polling place stating that the individual is--
(A) a registered voter in the jurisdiction in which the individual desires to vote; and
(B) eligible to vote in that election.

The Help America Vote Law does NOT say, "the individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot UNLESS THE SECRETARY OF STATE SAYS OTHERWISE."

[ohioan]

9. OHIOANS:Contact Cinti Enquirer and demand they correct misleading

headline in today's paper:

Ballot access goes to court: Democrats want location rules relaxed http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/09/28/loc_loc1abushpvote.html

Please email/call Cincinnati Enquirer and remind them that Democrats are NOT trying to "relax" location rules. To the contrary, the Democrats are demanding that the Republican Secretary of State COMPLY WITH FEDERAL LAW!!!

J. Kenneth Blackwell issued a directive to county boards instructing them to deny provisional ballots to voters who come to the wrong polling place, telling them to instead send such voters to the correct polling location. Because poor people who are more likely to vote Democratic tend to move more often, this directive will certainly disproportionately affect Democratic voters.

Blackwell's directive is in direct violation of federal law, which requires that such voters be allowed to cast a provisional vote:

42 U.S.C. § 15482. Provisional voting and voting information requirements

(a) Provisional voting requirements. If an individual declares that such individual is a registered voter in the jurisdiction in which the individual desires to vote and that the individual is eligible to vote in an election for Federal office, but the name of the individual does not appear on the official list of eligible voters for the polling place or an election official asserts that the individual is not eligible to vote, such individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot as follows:
(1) An election official at the polling place shall notify the individual that the individual may cast a provisional ballot in that election.
(2) The individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot at that polling place upon the execution of a written affirmation by the individual before an election official at the polling place stating that the individual is--
(A) a registered voter in the jurisdiction in which the individual desires to vote; and
(B) eligible to vote in that election.
(3) An election official at the polling place shall transmit the ballot cast by the individual or the voter information contained in the written affirmation executed by the individual under paragraph (2) to an appropriate State or local election official for prompt verification under paragraph (4).
(4) If the appropriate State or local election official to whom the ballot or voter information is transmitted under paragraph (3) determines that the individual is eligible under State law to vote, the individual's provisional ballot shall be counted as a vote in that election in accordance with State law.
(5) (A) At the time that an individual casts a provisional ballot, the appropriate State or local election official shall give the individual written information that states that any individual who casts a provisional ballot will be able to ascertain under the system established under subparagraph (B) whether the vote was counted, and, if the vote was not counted, the reason that the vote was not counted.
(B) The appropriate State or local election official shall establish a free access system (such as a toll-free telephone number or an Internet website) that any individual who casts a provisional ballot may access to discover whether the vote of that individual was counted, and, if the vote was not counted, the reason that the vote was not counted.

CONTACT THE ENQUIRER AND LET THEM KNOW THAT THEIR BIASED COVERAGE OF THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE WILL NOT BE TOLERATED!!!!

http://www.cincinnati.com/helpdesk/feedback/
http://www.enquirer.com/editor/letters.html
[e-mail] (reporter)

While it won't hurt to contact the reporter who wrote the story, he did not write the headline, so it's more important to contact the editors about this.

[troublemaker]

12. This lawsuit concerns a different Blackwell stunt

We still don't have any court action on the paper-weight ruling as far as I know. (Is there one?)

[cmd]

15. You are right. I don't know what I was thinking when I posted

I just e-mailed Trevas for an answer. I'll get back to you when I hear something.

[ohioan]

18. Right - but so far, he hasn't had much success with the registration

gambit. Local boards of elections are saying they'll continue to accept non-card-stock registrations, despite what Blackwell says.

But this other issue - regarding provisional voting - could actually be more dangerous. Unlike the registration issue, it's not prospective and is much harder to correct in advance. Instead, if he's not given a clear legal smackdown long before election day, Blackwell's directive could wreak havoc on election day, when it will be too late to remedy it. If local precinct workers think they're not supposed to allow provisional voting but must instead send voters to a different polling place, there is a high likelihood that those voters will end up not voting at all. And they'll just slip through the cracks and we'll never even know it.

This is a really important issue, but, fortunately, the Ohio Democratic Party is on top of it.

[mzmolly]

20. Great work!

WELCOME TO DU! :toast:

[ohioan]

21. Thanks!

[newyawker99]

24. Hi ohioan!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[mzmolly]

19. Sometimes I wonder man ...

"Do they even care" ? Beats the hell outta me.

[spotbird]

25. It is strange.

Maybe they aren't doing anything about it becasue they don't think it's a problem?

[ohioan]

26. To clarify the two issues -

Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell has recently taken two actions that are highly problematic. One deals with provisional voting, the other with the validity of registrations. Here's a brief breakdown of what each involves and their current status:

1. Provisional Voting Directive

What Blackwell did: Earlier this month, Blackwell issued a directive to the all County Boards of Elections, instructing them to deny provisional ballots to voters who are attempting to vote in the wrong polling place. Blackwell's directive denies a provisional ballot to eligible voters who attempt to vote in the "wrong" precinct, even when, through no fault of their own, their name has been erroneously deleted from the precinct's registration list. According to Blackwell's directive, provisional ballots will be issued only to voters who, after giving their address, appear to be in the correct precinct but don't show up in registration rolls. Any other voter who does not show up on the rolls would be denied a provisional ballot but would instead be sent to what precinct workers believe to be the correct polling place.

What it means: This directive is in direct violation of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 which, among other things REQUIRES that voters who attempt to vote but are not on the voting rolls at a particular precinct be permitted to cast a provisional ballot.

This could result in tens of thousands of Ohio voters being denied a vote on Election Day. Because Ohio congressional districts shifted after the 2000 census, many precincts and polling places have moved, making it much more likely that voters will end up going to the wrong location. Also, it is likely that many of the 700,000 of newly registered Ohio voters - the majority of them Democrats - will be confused about which precinct they're in. Nearly 100,000 provisional ballots were cast in the last presidential election.

Current Status: Yesterday, the Ohio Democratic Party and Sandusky Democratic Party filed suit in federal district court in Toledo, Ohio seeking a preliminary injunction compelling Blackwell to issue and count provisional ballots in accordance with HAVA. The case has been assigned to Judge James G. Carr, widely seen as a fair judge.

2. Registration Paper Order

What Blackwell did Blackwell has ordered County Boards of Election to accept only those voter registration cards printed on thick, 80-pound stock paper. This is wreaking havoc on local boards, who are already desperately trying to keep up with the avalanche of new voter registrations.

What it means: The vast majority of registrations are apparently being done on card stock. Thus, even if the County Boards follow Blackwell's ruling, the result would probably be the disenfranchisement of several hundred voters. While this is still unacceptable, this is not nearly as serious a violation as the provisional voting order.

Current Status Fortunately, so far, it appears that local boards are simply ignoring Blackwell's order and are accepting otherwise valid voter registrations, even if not printed on card stock paper.

I hope this is helpful.

[spotbird]

27. The original article said a few hundred in Montgomery County alone

would be kicked out. That would mean many times that number state wide, wouldn't it? Why would things be different in Dayton than Cincinnati?

Also, why reject a single one?

on edit:

Has anyone surveyed the counties to determine compliance with the edict? Have voting rights groups been given a list of the rejected registrations for follow-up?

This order has no sound policy foundation. It was adopted to limit the number of new voters, if it wasn't going to have the desired impact it wouldn't have been adopted.

[ohioan]

28. No one is saying that it's ok to reject any registration

However, in the scheme of things, the provisional voting issue is much, much more serious.

[spotbird]

29. It may be, but your assumption that the only registrations disqualified

are the few hundred in Dayton may not be valid. Hamilton is a much larger county and I'd bet the farm that they are tossing the registrations there, that alone could add up to thousands. Then think of growing rural counties like Claremont.

Remember the policy was adopted to limit the number of new voters, it must have some success. Certainly some of the folks who are sent the new registration form in time won't get it back. There is no way to know the scope of the problem as thing stand now. Is there?

Assuming the provisional issue is serious, how many voters will be affected by the elimination? This is not an either/or proposition. Both are serious issues and need to be addressed.

[ohioan]

30. You're right - a few hundred is likely too low - more like a few thousand

at most.

I'm not downplaying this move by Blackwell, only trying to get everyone to keep it in perspective.

The provisional ballot issue is MUCH MUCH more serious and likely to result in far worse consequences than the registration paper issue. Even if the counties were to follow Blackwell's directive on the paper, they can still take steps to ensure that voters get registered in time. On the other hand, the provisional ballot directive, if not tossed out soon, will result in enormous confusion and problems on Election Day and cause tens of thousands of Ohio voters to be disenfranchised.

[spotbird]

31. Actually the point of the original story is that the counties

won't be able to take the necessary steps in time. A few thousand votes seems like a big deal to me. Florida wasn't the only state with a small margin in 2000.

The provisional issue does sound like a big deal also. As I said, this isn't an either or proposition. Truth be told it sounds like there isn't anyone in Ohio who has a clue as to how much of an impact either of these problems is, it is all gut impressions.

[cmd]

32. From the Ohio Democratic party

I just received this e-mail



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



September 28, 2004





Statement from Ohio Democratic Party Chair Dennis L. White

Regarding 80-Pound Voter Registration Card Directive



All or part of the following statement can be attributed to Dennis L. White, Ohio Democratic Party Chair.



“I am shocked and appalled by the latest directive from Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell that calls for the disregarding any voter registration form not filed on 80-pound weight paper. This is an antiquated rule and an unnecessary barrier to voter registration efforts going on in Ohio.



“If any Ohio citizens has information indicating a voter registration application has been denied because of inadequate paper weight, please notify the Ohio Democratic Party immediately. We stand ready to take whatever action is necessary to ensure that voter registration applications correctly completed by eligible voters are accepted.



“Please call Dan Trevas at [phone] or email [e-mail] if your applications have been denied.



-30-

[Skinner]

33. Thanks.

:thumbsup:

[spotbird]

34. But they have the directive, and the admission from

Montgomery County. How are they going to find a voter? Unless your a blogger there is no way that you'd even know this is has happened.

Also, no one will be denied, they will be sent an application which they can send back in. This is bullshit.

[troublemaker]

36. .

[genius]

35. They were warned about Florida in advance and did nothing

[ArnoldLayne]

37. I was wondering that myself

they better get their head out of their ass now before it's to late.:wtf: