Supreme Court to Throw Another Election?-Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News-Wed-01/23/08

Supreme Court to Throw Another Election?

Posted January 22, 2008 | 05:38 PM (EST)
Amitai Etzioni
HUFFINGTON POST

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gloating about doing wrong is a higher degree of venality than just committing evil. Several Republican judges openly acknowledge that the Indiana law--and 23 others like it, enacted in other states--will hurt the Democrats, but nevertheless champion such laws. Judge Richard Posner, who wrote in the majority opinion upholding the Indiana law for the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, affirmed that "no doubt most people who don't have photo ID are low on the economic ladder and thus, if they do vote, are more likely to vote for Democratic than Republican candidates" and that "the new law injures the Democratic Party by compelling the party to devote resources to getting to the polls those of its supporters who would otherwise be discouraged by the new law from bothering to vote." Now the Republican-dominated Supreme Court seems inclined to follow suit --and rule that these laws are constitutional.

If the highest court in the land will indeed allow these discriminatory laws to stand, if it will continue to be so blatantly partisan, the people will have few choices other than impeach some of these judges or increase the number of judges on the court, as Roosevelt threatened to do, in order to add some progressive judges.

At first it may seem that the Indiana law, and others like it, are politically neutral. All these laws require is that each voter present a state issued form of ID, photo included. However, in effect these laws are about as discriminatory against the elderly, the poor, the less educated and minorities as the old literacy tests and poll tax laws. These social groups contain most of the voters who have no such ID cards and who do not have the means to go and acquire them. (For instance, consider senior citizens in nursing homes, who would have to find their birth certificates, have them validated, and present them in state offices to get their photo IDs). Indeed it is estimated that more then ten percent of Americans-- some 21 million people! - have no such IDs, and most belong to these vulnerable groups, which tend to lean toward the Democrats. Given that elections are often tight, disenfranchising more than one out of ten voters is enough to throw many elections. Given that the electoral voters of a few states, even one, can decide an election, affecting the elections in 24 states goes a long way to favor the Republicans.

Those who favor the Indiana-like voter ID laws, for instance the right wing editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, argue that electoral fraud must be prevented, and IDs are a good way to proceed. (The same ideologues go ballistic when ID cards are suggested for other purposes). However, strong data shows that there is next to no voter fraud due to misidentification--and fairly wide abuse due to ballot box stuffing, voter machine manipulation, registration list manipulation and absentee balloting.

The Supreme Court already greatly endangered its legitimacy when it in effect granted the elections to Bush over Gore. If it will turn partisan in this case, its legitimacy will be further undermined in an age when the national executive and national legislature--think Bush and Congress--are already much distrusted. It is crucial for American democracy that at least the highest court be considered fair. Hopefully the justices will see the light and reject the Indiana and other such voter ID laws. If not, as unappealing such a line of action is, the people will have to act, by either impeaching Scalia and company or adding some progressive judges to balance the court, and to set it right.

more at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/amitai-etzioni/supreme-court-to-throw-an_b_82730.html

MyrtleBeachOnline
Staff changes not expected over primary
By Mike Cherney - The Sun News
1/23/08

Three members of the Horry County Election Commission said they do not anticipate any staffing changes in the county election office after a programming error disabled voting machines during last Saturday's S.C. Republican presidential primary.

Donna Royson, the deputy director of the S.C. State Election Commission, said Tuesday the state commission will help the county determine exactly what went wrong.

Larry Leagans, Gene Sparks and Deborah Johnson, three members of the county commission, said the commission will meet after the S.C. Democratic presidential primary this Saturday to ensure that similar mistakes do not happen again.

"We're going to try to turn over every stone that needs to be turned over," Leagans said. "I don't see any kind of staffing issues. A mistake was made, and we need to find out why the mistake was made."

During the S.C. Republican primary, State Rep. Tracy Edge, a campaign official with Arizona Sen. John McCain's presidential bid, called for Sandy Martin, the county's election director, to be fired. McCain won the state and the county's votes.

Indiana Post-Tribune
Official: Voter ID law like poll tax

January 22, 2008
BY CHARLES M. BARTHOLOMEW Post-Tribune correspondent

PORTAGE -- Like the 800 other students at Portage High School, sophomore Danny Komenda watched the video of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech Monday morning.

Like many of them, he had a question relating to King's work after the follow-up presentation on civil rights and liberties in Indiana by state Rep. Greg Simms, D-Valparaiso. Komenda was concerned about his right to vote.

Komenda, who has no driver's license but wants to register to vote soon, said a teacher had told him he could get a state photo ID card without paying the usual Bureau of Motor Vehicles fee if he said he was getting it for voter registration purposes.

"I didn't know it. Why don't they let people know?" he asked Simms.

KOMU News
Voting Costs Jump
1/22/08

JEFFERSON CITY - Missouri is only two weeks away from its "Super Tuesday" primary but the federal government made it more expensive for counties to exercise their right to vote.

As Cooper County's Clerk for 22 years, Darryl Kempf has monitored more elections than he can remember, but new voting machines are increasing the price tag of this year's elections.

"There are fifteen to seventeen thousand additional costs when we set up touch screen devices," said Kempf.

In 2002 Congress passed the "Help America Vote Act" or H.A.V.A that meant paper ballot machines were banned in all federal elections. However, the electronic replacements more than triple the costs of elections in Cooper County. Prior to 2002, the cost of a presidential election in Cooper County was $3,000 for paper ballots and equipment, now that cost has soared to more than $10,000.

KOAA News
Elections workers hand count ballots in Balink's test

Mark Hanrahan
Colorado Springs
1/22/08

El Paso County Election workers, Tuesday, began the gruelling task of hand counting hundreds of ballots. The workers will count about 520 ballots, the average per voting precinct for El Paso County, from the 2006 election.

El Paso County Cleark and Recorder Bob Balink says, "This is going to take maybe two or three days for some of these hand counts to take place here." The hand count is a test of sorts and it puts man versus machine. Balink wants to know how the results will compare to results obtained from the county's voting machines.

Examiner.com

Election officials: Voting problems will not reoccur

Jan 22, 2008 2:00 AM
by Kathleen Miller, The Examiner

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - Election officials in Prince George’s and Montgomery counties say the problems that plagued the 2006 primary elections will not reoccur during next month’s balloting.

In the 2006 primary, there were problems with long lines at Prince George’s County polls, which sometimes involved voters waiting for hours to cast ballots, according to representatives from the Maryland Attorney General’s Office.

Alisha Alexander, elections administrator for Prince George’s County, said there were times in 2006 when more than 4,000 registered voters were assigned to a specific polling place. Officials have since divided locations and created new voting sites so no more than 3,000 voters go to each location.

"The population growth in Prince George’s has increased drastically and we’ve taken measures to mediate the number of registrants at each polling place," Alexander said.

Wayne Independent
Replacing Wayne County's Voting Machines Could Cost $500,000-$650,000

By Tammy Compton
Wayne Independent
Tue Jan 22, 2008

Options for replacing Wayne County’s voting machines carry a price tag of $500,000-$650,000. Of that amount, the state has promised to reimburse the County $293 thousand, the price it paid for its now decertified Advanced Voting Solutions or AVS electronic voting machines.

"We did the paper ballot in November, which we used an optic scan to read them ...to count the ballots. We are in the process of looking at a new system for the County to replace the ones by AVS. Optic scan is an option or the DREs (direct recording electronically)," explained Cindy Furman, Director of the Wayne County Bureau of Elections.

"It’s irresponsible of the state and federal government to decertify the machines," said Wayne County Commissioner Chairman Brian Smith at Tuesday’s Commissioner’s meeting. Commissioners said the optic scan is a choice that wouldn’t outdate itself as quickly as the DRE might. "The federal government is looking at changing the rules again and they’re saying that by 2012 ...we might not be able to use touch screens (like the DRE.) If they do it, obviously, we don’t want to buy another system in the future. Whatever we purchase this time, we want to be "it". We’re trying to make sure we cover everybody’s regulations and at the same time, we have to cover the handicapped accessibility rules, so that somebody who’s visually impaired or has mobility disabilities that they can use the voting system independently.

NJ.com

ACLU fights with AG over 'voters rights' cards at polls
by Al Frank/The Star-Ledger

Tuesday January 22, 2008, 5:32 PM

The state and the American Civil Liberties Union sparred before an appeals court panel today over whether representatives of the civil liberties group can stand within 100 feet of a polling place during an election and distribute "voter's rights" cards to those going inside.

With the Attorney General adamant that only news organizations taking exit polls may stand that close, the ACLU's New Jersey chapter argued its free speech rights are being violated. It asked the three Appellate Division judges for a preliminary injunction barring the state from enforcing the prohibition for the state's Feb. 5 presidential primary until a court can fully review the matter.

Judges Dorothea Wefing, Thomas Lyons and Lorraine Parker did not issue a decision and ordered attorneys to complete their written submissions by Jan. 30. During 90 minutes of arguments in Morristown, the judges questioned whether they could fashion an order specifically for the ACLU without similar treatment being sought by other nonpartisan organizations, or even groups with specific political agendas.

Post Independent
Garfield County's clerk and recorder says she needs an answer on voting machines

Little time left before upcoming elections

By Phillip Yates
Post Independent Staff
Glenwood Springs, CO Colorado
January 23, 2008

GLENWOOD SPRINGS — Colorado county clerk and recorders want an answer. And they want it soon — preferably by Feb. 1, but no later than March 1.

The clock is slowly winding down to Colorado’s Aug. 12 primaries and the November presidential election, and county clerks, including Garfield County’s Jean Alberico, still don’t know whether their voting machines will be certified in time for them to prepare for the voting.

"We really, absolutely have to know by March 1, especially if we are going to have to buy new equipment," Alberico said.

The state’s election system was thrown into chaos last month when Secretary of State Mike Coffman announced that he was decertifying three electronic voting machines across the state based on accuracy and security problems.

Opinion mixed on Cary's instant-runoff trial

The success of the instant-runoff voting experiment in Cary depends on who’s talking.
About 20 people spoke at a forum about the pilot program sponsored by the Wake County Board of Elections on Jan. 17 in Cary Town Council chambers.

Cary voters were the first in the state to test the approach, which was approved by the N.C. General Assembly in 2006. “We view instant-runoff voting as a way to increase participation,” said Cary resident Diane Haskell, president of the League of Women Voters of Wake County.

Others were not so sure.
Knightdale resident Janice Sears praised the board for its “state-of-the-art” approach to its work but also had reservations about the accuracy and openness of the count.
“And instant-runoff voting was to blame,” Sears said. “If the best board of elections in North Carolina had this much trouble counting 3,000 votes, this is too dangerous to try statewide.”

Maxwell recounted her experience with the approach as a candidate. She said having to explain a novel voting process was a distraction from discussing the issues with voters.
She also recalled “very uncomfortable” requests from both Frantz and Roseland to include in her campaign literature that she wanted voters to mark that candidate as second on their ballots.
Dennis Berwyn of Raleigh, who worked on Maxwell’s campaign, said she declined both requests.
Maxwell’s experience was a prime example of how instant-runoff voting can lead to “candidate collusion,” Berwyn said. “I don’t recall the conversation going like that,” Frantz said. “I don’t recall asking her to put anything on her campaign literature.”

... more at http://www.carynews.com/news/story/8057.html