No Stolen Democracy

Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s Floor Statement During Challenge to Ohio's Electoral College Votes

January, 6, 2005

Don't be confused or misled. Today's objection is not about an election result, it's about an election system that's broken and needs fixing.

Today you're hearing the facts about voter irregularities in Ohio. In 2000 you saw a similar mess in Florida. There were serious voting problems in other states - for example, New Mexico, Nevada and Florida again.

As we try to spread democracy to Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, it might be wise, first, to look in the mirror; to take a serious look at our own house; and to analyze our own democracy.

What's wrong with our democracy? What's wrong with our voting system? State-after-state, year-after-year, why do we keep on having these problems?

The fundamental reason is this: most Americans and many in this body will find it shocking and hard to believe, but we have these problems because Americans don't have the right to vote in their Constitution! In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore said in very plain language, "the INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States." You say, "Congressman, I'm a registered voter and every time there's an election I'm entitled to vote - and I vote. What do you mean I don't have a 'right to vote'?"

I mean as an American you don't have a citizenship right to vote. Voting in the United States is a "state right" not "citizenship right."

We keep on having these problems because our voting system is built on the constitutional foundation of "states' rights" - 50 states, 3,067 counties and 13,000 different election jurisdictions, ALL SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL.

If you're an ex-felon in Illinois you can register and vote. If you're an ex-felon in eleven states, mostly in the South, you're barred from voting for life. There are nearly 5 million ex-felons who have paid their debt to society but are prohibited from ever voting again - including 1.5 million African American males. But in Maine and Vermont you can vote even if you're in jail. Like I said, we have a "states rights" separate and unequal voting system.

You ask, "What's the difference between a citizenship right and a state right?"

The First Amendment contains individual citizenship rights that go with you from state to state (that is, they are the same wherever you are in the U.S.); and they are protected and enforced by the federal government. You have equal protection under the law by the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the federal government.

Therefore, as a result of the First Amendment, every American citizen has an individual right to free speech, freedom of assembly, and religious freedom (or to choose no religion at all), regardless of which state you're in - individual rights that are protected by the federal government. You don't have such a right when it comes to voting!

A state right is NOT an American citizenship right, but a right defined and protected by each state - and limited to that state. Therefore, when it comes to voting, each state, county and election jurisdiction is different.

One-hundred-and-eight of the 119 nations in the world that elect their public officials in some democratic manner have the right to vote in their Constitution - including the Afghan Constitution and the interim document in Iraq. The United States is one of the 11 that don't!

The Bible says if you build a house on sand, when it rains, the winds blow and the storms come it will not stand. Our voting system is built on the sand of "states' rights."

That's why every four years when the entire nation is focused on a presidential election, and the rain of politics, the winds of partisanship, and the storms of campaigning come, our democratic house cannot stand the unitary test of voting fairness - and it has come close to collapsing in 2000 and 2004.

The American people are gradually losing confidence in the credibility, fairness, effectiveness and efficiency of our voting system. We cannot export our current voting system or our form of democracy to other nations because our "separate and unequal" voting system, and our concept of an Electoral College, do not reflect the best of a representative democracy. We need to build our democracy and our voting system on a rock, the rock of adding a Voting Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that applies to all states and all citizens.

We need to provide the American people with a citizenship right to vote and provide Congress with the authority to craft a unitary voting system that is inclusive of all Americans and guarantees that all votes will be counted in a complete, fair and efficient manner.

It's the only foundation upon which we can build a more perfect Union.

Every two, four or six years every member of Congress wants the people in their district or state to stand up and vote for them. Today it's time for every member of Congress to stand up and vote for the right of the people to vote, and to have their vote fairly and fully counted.

Rivers Pitt Interview With John Conyers

Interview: Rep. Conyers with Will Pitt
  t r u t h o u t | Interview

  Thursday 06 January 2005

  I was able to interview Rep. John Conyers, ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, just before the Electoral hearings began.

  PITT: How are you feeling about what is happening today?

  CONYERS: We have come a mighty long way. It seems to me, as we began this adventure, to make the ballot as important as it is, and that it be counted, and that it be available to every single qualified American voter, that I had always suspected that it would be hard for the United States Senate to do, again, what they did in 2000. To close down any possibility of any debate, of any investigation, of any recount, and it turns out that my hunch was correct.

  The fact of the matter is that we have everything to gain and nothing to lose by doing this. This isn't like there is a down-side to this. It is all up, because as everybody knows, all the phones are jammed, emails are coming in, faxes. People are coming in from all over. This is a test of American democracy, just as in 1878. They passed the law to deal with the presidential election of 1877. We have to, in 2005, pass some more election reform laws to deal with what happened in 2004.

  Senator Boxer, in her press conference with Rep. Tubbs-Jones today, said that she regretted not having stood up in 2000. What do you think about that?

  I'm sure that a lot of people have done some reconsideration of their silence from four years ago. It was totally uncalled for, but it was asked for by the then-candidate, Al Gore, and they went along.

  A little while ago, there were some Republican Representatives denigrating the whole process, describing this as an attempt to overthrow the election. How do you respond to that? What do you see as being the main purpose of this event today?

  Anyone opposed to us re-examining the balloting process in the state that had the most complaints and grievances and errors of any other state, they've got to have some kind of reason. This is not to change the outcome of the results. But I hasten to add that until we complete our investigation, I don't know if it will change the result or if it won't change the result.

  But that's not what I'm after. What I'm after is understanding what things were not done properly, what things were done fraudulently, what things were done unintentionally, so that we can correct it. There is an election coming up again. We thought we had taken care of this with the Help America Vote Act. It turns out that, in many instances, the provisions of the Act were misconstructed and not really followed, particularly on provisional voting ballots. Many people who voted provisionally were disqualified for reasons that are directly in conflict with the intentions of those of us who put that into law.

  So where does this go from here?

  We, here, are asking today to have a joint House/Senate committee reconsider and review all of the investigatory work that me and the members and our staff have brought together. We want to get a commitment that we are going to come out of this looking for additional election law reforms, because there are a lot of people who don't want to do that. This brings it all into focus. It tests the will of every member in the Senate and the House as to what they stand for in these elections.

  Is there anything else you'd like to add?

  I think what the American people did and are doing, in calling and letting everybody know that they are outraged, that this has to be something that somebody would study to determine whether they want to object to the Electoral College report from Ohio, has been extraordinary, and has had a huge impact. Of course, the one person not in any government position, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, deserves tremendous praise for all he has done in coordinating so many efforts here, including right up until today.

  I think a lot of people would agree that your opening of the hearing in the beginning of December, and then later in Ohio, gave people an opportunity not only to hear the evidence and grievances, but also gave people the chance to begin moving towards doing something about it. So I think a lot of people owe you a debt of gratitude, as well.

  That's very kind of you.

Congresswoman Tubbs Jones Objects to Certification of Ohio Electoral Votes

For ImmediateRelease
January 6, 2005
CONTACT: Nicole Y. Williams
(202) 225-7032

Washington, D.C. –Today, Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones, along with Senator Barbara Boxer (CA), entered a formal objection to the certification of the State of Ohio's Electoral Votes. Her prepared floor statement, in part, was as follows:

"I, Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a representative from Ohio, and Ms. Boxer, a Senator from California, object to the counting of the electoral votes of the State of Ohio on the ground that they were not, under all of the known circumstances, regularly given.

"I, thank God, that I have a Senator joining me in this objection. I appreciate Senator Boxer's willingness to listen to the plight of hundreds and even thousands of Ohio voters that for a variety of reasons were denied the right to vote. Unfortunately objecting to the electoral votes from Ohio is the only immediate avenue to bring these issues to light.

"While some have called our cause foolish I can assure you that my parents, Mary and Andrew Tubbs did not raise any fools and as a lawyer, former judge and prosecutor, I am duty bound to follow the law and apply the law to the facts as I find them.

"It is on behalf of those millions of Americans who believe in and value our democratic process and the right to vote that I put forth this objection today. If they are willing stand at the polls for countless hours in the rain as many did in Ohio, then I can surely stand up for them here in the halls of Congress.

"This objection does not have at its root the hope or even the hint of overturning or challenging the victory of the President; but it is a necessary, timely and appropriate opportunity to review and remedy the most precious process in our democracy."

"I raise this objection neither to put the nation in the turmoil of a proposed overturned election nor to provide cannon fodder or partisan demagoguery for my fellow Republican Members of Congress.

"I raise this objection because I am convinced that we as a body must conduct a formal and legitimate debate about election irregularities. I raise this objection to debate the process and protect the integrity of the true will of the people.

"Again, I thank Senator Boxer for joining me in this objection to the counting of Ohio's electoral votes due to the considerable number of voting irregularities that transpired in my home state.

"There are serious allegations in two lawsuits pending in Ohio that debate the constitutionality of the denial of provisional ballots to voters (The Sandusky County Democratic Party v. J. Kenneth Blackwell) and Ohio's vote recount (Yost v. David Cobb, et al.). These legitimate questions brought forward by the lawsuits, which go to the core of our voting and Democratic process, should be resolved before Ohio's electoral votes are certified.

"Moreover, as you are aware, advancing legislative initiatives is more challenging when you are in the minority party in Congress. However, this challenge is multiplied when you are in the minority in the House of Representatives because of House rules, compared to Senate rules.

"Voting irregularities were an issue after the 2000 presidential election, when Democratic House initiatives relating to election reform were not considered.

"Therefore, in order to prevent our voices from being kept silent, it is imperative that we object to the counting of Ohio's electoral votes and debate the issue of Ohio's voting improprieties.

"There are just over 1 million registered voters in Cuyahoga County - which of course includes the Greater Cleveland area and the 11th Congressional District which I represent. Registration increased approximately 10 percent.

"The beauty of the 2004 election was that more people were fully prepared to exercise their right to vote - however on Election Day hundreds and even thousands of individuals went to the voting polls and were denied the opportunity to have their vote count.

"In my own county where citizen volunteers put forth a Herculean effort to register, educate, mobilize and protect the vote there were people who experienced irregularities.

"Poor and minority communities had disproportionately long waits - 4 to 5 hours waits were widespread. Election Protection Coalition testified that more than half of the complaints about long lines they received “came from Columbus and Cleveland where a huge proportion of the state’s Democratic voters live. One entire polling place in Cuyahoga County (Greater Cleveland) had to “shut down” at 9:25 a.m. on Election Day because there were no working machines.

"Cuyahoga County had an overall provisional ballot rejection rate of 32 percent. Rejection rates for provisional ballots in African American precincts/wards in Cleveland, Ohio averaged 37 percent and ranged as high as 51 percent.

"Thousands of partisan challengers - concentrated in Cuyahoga County’s minority and Democratic communities - effectively served to intimidate voters and confuse poll workers. There were both inconsistent and illegal requests for photo identification.

"There were problems with absentee ballots including incorrect information provided to voters by the Secretary of State and, consequently, the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections telling voters they could not vote in their precinct – effectively disenfranchising hundreds and more likely thousands of voters.

"This objection points out the inadequacy of a great election system which permits 50 Secretary's of State to administer a federal election and impose so many different state laws regulating the election.

"In Ohio, the Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell who served as Co-Chair of the Bush re-election campaign, issued a bizarre series of directives in the days preceding the 2004 Presidential election that created tremendous confusion among voters in Cuyahoga County and across the state of Ohio.

"For example; on September 7, 2004, Secretary Blackwell issued a directive to local boards of elections mandating rejection of voter registration forms based on their paperweight – 80lb text weight. Mr. Blackwell’s issuance of this directive – which he ultimately reversed by September 28, 2004 - resulted in serious confusion and chaos among the counties and voters.

"My objection points to the need to implement across this nation standards that apply to all states. We need to enact legislation that will:

* Allow all voters to vote early - so that obligations of employment and family will not interfere with the ability to cast a vote.
* Establish a national holiday - Election Day to bring attention to the importance of the vote.
* Require those who work in the voting booth to be fairly compensated, adequately educated and sufficiently supported such that the job importance will be elevated.
* That will provide equipment - whether it is the traditional punch card or the more modern electronic machines that are properly calibrated, fully tested for accuracy and provide a paper trial to ensure a verifiable audit of every vote.

"What happened in Ohio may well have been repeated in counties across this country. Yet that is no excuse for us to push the irregularities behind us and go on with the business of the day. These incidents are a call for us to clean up, clear up and implement policies and procedures that will protect each citizen's precious right to vote.

"If in fact we see it is our obligation to secure democracy around the world to monitor and oversee free and fair elections in other countries surely we must ensure, protect and guarantee the right to vote right here at home."

(Source.)

Senator Barrbara Boxer's Letter to Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jone

U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) sent the following letter
to Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones on January 5, 2005:

January 5, 2005

The Honorable Stephanie Tubbs Jones
1009 Longworth H.O.B.
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Representative Tubbs Jones:

I am in receipt of your letter that spelled out concerns about the election irregularities in Ohio during the November 2004 election.

The fact that you are from Ohio and that you are a former judge gives great weight and much credibility to the points you cited and to your plea that these issues be addressed by the Congress.

I was particularly moved by your point that it is virtually impossible to get official House consideration of the whole issue of election reform, including these irregularities.

I have concluded that objecting to the electoral votes from Ohio is the only immediate way to bring these issues to light by allowing you to have a two-hour debate to let the American people know the facts surrounding Ohio’s election.

I will therefore join you in your objection to the certification of Ohio’s electoral votes. Attached is my signature on a copy of your written objection.

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

Statement by U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer on Her Objection to the Certification of Ohio’s Electoral Votes

For Immediate Release:
January 6, 2004

For most of us in the Senate and the House, we have spent our lives fighting for things we believe in – always fighting to make our nation better.

We have fought for social justice. We have fought for economic justice. We have fought for environmental justice. We have fought for criminal justice.

Now we must add a new fight – the fight for electoral justice.

Every citizen of this country who is registered to vote should be guaranteed that their vote matters, that their vote is counted, and that in the voting booth of their community, their vote has as much weight as the vote of any Senator, any Congressperson, any President, any cabinet member, or any CEO of any Fortune 500 Corporation.

I am sure that every one of my colleagues – Democrat, Republican, and Independent – agrees with that statement. That in the voting booth, every one is equal.

So now it seems to me that under the Constitution of the United States, which guarantees the right to vote, we must ask:

Why did voters in Ohio wait hours in the rain to vote? Why were voters at Kenyan College, for example, made to wait in line until nearly 4 a.m. to vote because there were only two machines for 1300 voters?

Why did poor and predominantly African-American communities have disproportionately long waits?

Why in Franklin County did election officials only use 2,798 machines when they said they needed 5,000? Why did they hold back 68 machines in warehouses? Why were 42 of those machines in predominantly African-American districts?

Why did, in Columbus area alone, an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 voters leave polling places, out of frustration, without having voted? How many more never bothered to vote after they heard about this?

Why is it when 638 people voted at a precinct in Franklin County, a voting machine awarded 4,258 extra votes to George Bush. Thankfully, they fixed it – but how many other votes did the computers get wrong?

Why did Franklin County officials reduce the number of electronic voting machines in downtown precincts, while adding them in the suburbs? This also led to long lines.

In Cleveland, why were there thousands of provisional ballots disqualified after poll workers gave faulty instructions to voters?

Because of this, and voting irregularities in so many other places, I am joining with Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones to cast the light of truth on a flawed system which must be fixed now.

Our democracy is the centerpiece of who we are as a nation. And it is the fondest hope of all Americans that we can help bring democracy to every corner of the world.

As we try to do that, and as we are shedding the blood of our military to this end, we must realize that we lose so much credibility when our own electoral system needs so much improvement.

Yet, in the past four years, this Congress has not done everything it should to give confidence to all of our people their votes matter.

After passing the Help America Vote Act, nothing more was done.
A year ago, Senators Graham, Clinton and I introduced legislation that would have required that electronic voting systems provide a paper record to verify a vote. That paper trail would be stored in a secure ballot box and invaluable in case of a recount.

There is no reason why the Senate should not have taken up and passed that bill. At the very least, a hearing should have been held. But it never happened.

Before I close, I want to thank my colleague from the House, Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones.

Her letter to me asking for my intervention was substantive and compelling.

As I wrote to her, I was particularly moved by her point that it is virtually impossible to get official House consideration of the whole issue of election reform, including these irregularities.

The Congresswoman has tremendous respect in her state of Ohio, which is at the center of this fight.

Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones was a judge for 10 years. She was a prosecutor for 8 years. She was inducted into the Women’s Hall of Fame in 2002.

I am proud to stand with her in filing this objection.

###

Conyers Report: What Went Wrong in Ohio

  Preserving Democracy:
  What Went Wrong in Ohio
  Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff

  Wednesday 05 January 2005

  Executive Summary

  Representative John Conyers, Jr., the Ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, asked the Democratic staff to conduct an investigation into irregularities reported in the Ohio presidential election and to prepare a Status Report concerning the same prior to the Joint Meeting of Congress scheduled for January 6, 2005, to receive and consider the votes of the electoral college for president. The following Report includes a brief chronology of the events; summarizes the relevant background law; provides detailed findings (including factual findings and legal analysis); and describes various recommendations for acting on this Report going forward.

  We have found numerous, serious election irregularities in the Ohio presidential election, which resulted in a significant disenfranchisement of voters. Cumulatively, these irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousand of votes and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards.

  This report, therefore, makes three recommendations: (1) consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution concerning the counting of electoral votes by Congress and Federal law implementing these requirements, there are ample grounds for challenging the electors from the State of Ohio; (2) Congress should engage in further hearings into the widespread irregularities reported in Ohio; we believe the problems are serious enough to warrant the appointment of a joint select Committee of the House and Senate to investigate and report back to the Members; and (3) Congress needs to enact election reform to restore our people's trust in our democracy. These changes should include putting in place more specific federal protections for federal elections, particularly in the areas of audit capability for electronic voting machines and casting and counting of provisional ballots, as well as other needed changes to federal and state election laws.

  With regards to our factual finding, in brief, we find that there were massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio. In many cases these irregularities were caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio.

  First, in the run up to election day, the following actions by Mr. Blackwell, the Republican Party and election officials disenfranchised hundreds of thousands of Ohio citizens, predominantly minority and Democratic voters:

• The misallocation of voting machines led to unprecedented long lines that disenfranchised scores, if not hundreds of thousands, of predominantly minority and Democratic voters. This was illustrated by the fact that the Washington Post reported that in Franklin County, "27 of the 30 wards with the most machines per registered voter showed majorities for Bush. At the other end of the spectrum, six of the seven wards with the fewest machines delivered large margins for Kerry." (See Powell and Slevin, supra). Among other things, the conscious failure to provide sufficient voting machinery violates the Ohio Revised Code which requires the Boards of Elections to "provide adequate facilities at each polling place for conducting the election."
• Mr. Blackwell's decision to restrict provisional ballots resulted in the disenfranchisement of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of voters, again predominantly minority and Democratic voters. Mr. Blackwell's decision departed from past Ohio law on provisional ballots, and there is no evidence that a broader construction would have led to any significant disruption at the polling places, and did not do so in other states.
• Mr. Blackwell's widely reviled decision to reject voter registration applications based on paper weight may have resulted in thousands of new voters not being registered in time for the 2004 election.
• The Ohio Republican Party's decision to engage in preelection "caging" tactics, selectively targeting 35,000 predominantly minority voters for intimidation had a negative impact on voter turnout. The Third Circuit found these activities to be illegal and in direct violation of consent decrees barring the Republican Party from targeting minority voters for poll challenges.
• The Ohio Republican Party's decision to utilize thousands of partisan challengers concentrated in minority and Democratic areas likely disenfranchised tens of thousands of legal voters, who were not only intimidated, but became discouraged by the long lines. Shockingly, these disruptions were publicly predicted and acknowledged by Republican officials: Mark Weaver, a lawyer for the Ohio Republican Party, admitted the challenges "can't help but create chaos, longer lines and frustration."
• Mr. Blackwell's decision to prevent voters who requested absentee ballots but did not receive them on a timely basis from being able to receive provisional ballots 6 likely disenfranchised thousands, if not tens of thousands, of voters, particularly seniors. A federal court found Mr. Blackwell's order to be illegal and in violation of HAVA.

  Second, on election day, there were numerous unexplained anomalies and irregularities involving hundreds of thousands of votes that have yet to be accounted for:

• There were widespread instances of intimidation and misinformation in violation of the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1968, Equal Protection, Due Process and the Ohio right to vote. Mr. Blackwell's apparent failure to institute a single investigation into these many serious allegations represents a violation of his statutory duty under Ohio law to investigate election irregularities.
• We learned of improper purging and other registration errors by election officials that likely disenfranchised tens of thousands of voters statewide. The Greater Cleveland Voter Registration Coalition projects that in Cuyahoga County alone over 10,000 Ohio citizens lost their right to vote as a result of official registration errors.
• There were 93,000 spoiled ballots where no vote was cast for president, the vast majority of which have yet to be inspected. The problem was particularly acute in two precincts in Montgomery County which had an undervote rate of over 25% each - accounting for nearly 6,000 voters who stood in line to vote, but purportedly declined to vote for president.
• There were numerous, significant unexplained irregularities in other counties throughout the state: (i) in Mahoning county at least 25 electronic machines transferred an unknown number of Kerry votes to the Bush column; (ii) Warren County locked out public observers from vote counting citing an FBI warning about a potential terrorist threat, yet the FBI states that it issued no such warning; (iii) the voting records of Perry county show significantly more votes than voters in some precincts, significantly less ballots than voters in other precincts, and voters casting more than one ballot; (iv) in Butler county a down ballot and underfunded Democratic State Supreme Court candidate implausibly received more votes than the best funded Democratic Presidential candidate in history; (v) in Cuyahoga county, poll worker error may have led to little known thirdparty candidates receiving twenty times more votes than such candidates had ever received in otherwise reliably Democratic leaning areas; (vi) in Miami county, voter turnout was an improbable and highly suspect 98.55 percent, and after 100 percent of the precincts were reported, an additional 19,000 extra votes were recorded for President Bush.

  Third, in the post-election period we learned of numerous irregularities in tallying provisional ballots and conducting and completing the recount that disenfanchised thousands of voters and call the entire recount procedure into question (as of this date the recount is still not complete):

• Mr. Blackwell's failure to articulate clear and consistent standards for the counting of provisional ballots resulted in the loss of thousands of predominantly minority votes. In Cuyahoga County alone, the lack of guidance and the ultimate narrow and arbitrary review standards significantly contributed to the fact that 8,099 out of 24,472 provisional ballots were ruled invalid, the highest proportion in the state.
• Mr. Blackwell's failure to issue specific standards for the recount contributed to a lack of uniformity in violation of both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clauses. We found innumerable irregularities in the recount in violation of Ohio law, including (i) counties which did not randomly select the precinct samples; (ii) counties which did not conduct a full hand court after the 3% hand and machine counts did not match; (iii) counties which allowed for irregular marking of ballots and failed to secure and store ballots and machinery; and (iv) counties which prevented witnesses for candidates from observing the various aspects of the recount.
• The voting computer company Triad has essentially admitted that it engaged in a course of behavior during the recount in numerous counties to provide "cheat sheets" to those counting the ballots. The cheat sheets informed election officials how many votes they should find for each candidate, and how many over and under votes they should calculate to match the machine count. In that way, they could avoid doing a full county-wide hand recount mandated by state law.

 

---

  Download Full PDF Document
  Size: 3.22 MB
  102 Pages

"Not Registered," Yet Registered

"Not Registered," Yet Registered

Franklin County Ohio voters whose provisional  ballots were categorized Code 200 - Not Registered (No Vote) in the 2004 General Election, yet who are listed in the BOE database:

http://my.core.com/~rhh/index.htm

(This information was sent to me anonymously, and the website is not identified with a particular individual or insitution. Given the importance of this list I am publishing it now. I hope the whoever did this work will support it with their name or organization. --BG)

UPDATE: The researcher is Richard Hermann. About his work he writes:

I found the provisional ballot rejection information in a pdf file available for download on the Franklin County Board of Elections web site [www.franklincountyohio.gov/boe/content/1104_provisional.pdf ], and I simply looked up each name of those who lost their vote due to not being registered.  This search capability is available on the same site [www.franklincountyohio.gov/boe/apps/voter/voterSearch.asp ]. The unknown factor is if these people actually registered before the deadline for this election.

Recent Ohio News Items

NBC4i.com reports: "Passionate Voters Chose To Challenge Election Results"
Bush Moves to Dismiss Ohio Election Contest Suit
"Re-Vote Ohio", Important Article by Ted Glick on Z-Net
Moritz College of Law Conducting Study of 2004 Ohio Election, Requesting Information

(via OhioElection Fraud.)

Video Clip of Jan 3 Ohio Rally

Featured Video Rally Challenging Ohio Vote Held

(Source.)

John Bonifaz Remarks At Fanueil Hall Rally

IMPORTANT DOCUMENT: This is a marvelously clear statement as to why Ohio's Electors are illegitimate and their electoral votes should be contested. --BG

The following are the remarks of John Bonifaz, delivered at the Fanueil Hall Rally on the night of Monday, January 3rd:

January 3, 2005

STATEMENT OF JOHN C. BONIFAZ
BEFORE THE RALLY FOR THE REPUBLIC, FANEUIL HALL, BOSTON
General Counsel for the National Voting Rights Institute
Co-counsel for presidential candidates David Cobb and Michael Badnarik in their suit for a legally appropriate recount of all of the votes cast for President in Ohio in the 2004 election

Four years ago last month, the United States Supreme Court stopped the vote counting in the State of Florida and, for the first time, selected the president of the United States. It marked a dark moment in our nation’s history.

Since that time, people throughout this country committed to the vision of democracy pledged to never let it happen again – never again would we allow an individual to assume the power of the presidency without the proper counting of all the votes. We are here tonight because we are dangerously close to allowing it to happen again. We are here tonight because we refuse to be silent.

On December 13, 2004, in the state capitol of Ohio, we witnessed a crime – a crime against democracy, a crime against the right to vote, a crime against our Constitution. On that day, Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell presided over a meeting over a group of individuals who claimed to have won the right to serve as presidential electors for the State of Ohio in the Electoral College. Mr. Blackwell and that group gathered while a recount began of the votes cast in Ohio for President of the United States.

Mr. Blackwell has done everything in his power to push through a slate of electors based on an untested, initial count. In enacting its recount law, the Ohio legislature ensured that a proper counting of all the votes could include a recount. As candidates for the office of President of the United States, David Cobb and Michael Badnarik exercised their right under the law and sought a recount.

Mr. Blackwell had no right to convene a meeting of the Electoral College in Ohio while a recount was underway. And individuals who ran as candidates for presidential electors had no right to cast votes in the Electoral College in Ohio while a recount was underway.

The meeting of the Electoral College in Ohio on December 13 was illegitimate. It was in violation of the United States Constitution. It marked an utter contempt for the promise of democracy and for the rule of law.

We refuse to be silent in the face of this crime.

While Mr. Blackwell presided over this illegitimate gathering in Columbus, he also ignored his responsibility to ensure that the recount would be conducted in accordance with uniform standards as required by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. On December 7, we sent a detailed letter to Mr. Blackwell, on behalf of our clients, outlining a series of key issues that needed to be resolved prior to the start of the recount in order meet the requirement on consistent standards throughout the state for conducting the recount. Mr. Blackwell has yet to respond to the letter.

On December 13 and the days thereafter, the recount began in each of the 88 counties in Ohio. With hundreds of observers on the ground at each county board of elections office, we now know that this recount was not meaningful.

Under Secretary Blackwell’s own guidelines for conducting a recount, each county board of elections must randomly select three percent of the total vote in that county and count that three percent by hand. If the three percent hand-count does not match the initial machine count conducted after the election, the board must then proceed to a full hand count of all of the votes in that county.

Of the 88 counties in Ohio, only one conducted a full hand count of the votes in that county. The vast majority of county boards of elections did everything they could to avoid a full hand count. Many did not select on a random basis the three percent to be hand-counted. Some counties altered ballots in order to get the three percent hand count to match the machine count. Others suspended the recount when the three percent hand count did not match the machine count. One summoned the Triad company to bring a new machine to the board prior to resuming the recount. Another simply refused to conduct a full hand count. And in one county -- Hocking County, a technician from the Triad company visited the board of elections office prior to the start of the recount and tampered with the central tabulator machine; he advised board of elections officials on how to post a “cheat sheet” on the wall so that the three percent hand count would match the machine count.

In light of this evidence from Hocking County, Congressman John Conyers, Jr. has asked the FBI to investigate the potential tampering of voting machines prior to the start of the recount. The Triad company provides the voting machines for 41 of the 88 counties in Ohio. We have filed a motion before the federal district court in Columbus seeking a court order preserving all ballots and election machinery in Ohio, as is required by federal law for 22 months after a federal election. We have also filed a motion for expedited discovery to investigate further the Triad company’s potential tampering and destruction of voting materials in the 2004 election.

County boards of elections in Ohio not only applied inconsistent standards to avoid a full hand count of all the votes. They also applied inconsistent standards on which votes to count.

Some counties allowed observers to view rejected provisional ballots. Others did not. Some counties allowed observers to view rejected ballots based on alleged undervotes or overvotes. Others did not. Some counties allowed observers to view rejected absentee ballots. Others did not.

This was not a meaningful recount. It was not conducted in accordance with uniform standards throughout the state. It was not conducted in accordance with the equal protection and due process guarantees under the US Constitution.

We demand a new recount. Last Thursday, on behalf of our clients, presidential candidates David Cobb and Michael Badnarik, we filed papers before the federal district court in Columbus documenting the inconsistent standards applied during the recount in Ohio. We requested that the court enjoin Secretary Blackwell from formally declaring the final results of the presidential election in Ohio until a new recount is completed in accordance with uniform standards throughout the state. On December 10, this same court stated that, upon a showing of a violation in the conduct of the recount, it would consider a request for ordering a new recount. That request has now been made and is pending before the court.

There has yet to be a proper counting of all of the votes cast for President in Ohio in the 2004 election. Until a full and meaningful recount has been completed – as required by state and federal law, it is premature for the United States Congress to count the Electoral College votes from Ohio. In a democracy, votes must count and every citizen’s vote must be counted.

The nation is at a crossroads. We can stand by while our democracy erodes around us. Or we can stand up and fight. For the dignity of our nation and ourselves, and for the memory of those who have struggled before us, we must choose to fight. Count every vote.

For more information on the legal work to defend the recount, visit www.defendtherecount.org

(via Ohio Election Fraud)