Posted on 02/14/2005 4:53:23 PM PST by Josef1235
OLYMPIA, Wash. -- An effort to recall Secretary of State Sam Reed will not move forward, after a Thurston County Superior Court judge ruled Monday that allegations Reed mishandled the contested governor's race did not meet the legal threshold to put a recall before state voters.
Martin Ringhofer, a Boeing Co. employee, and Seattle resident Linda Jordan argued that mistakes made by Reed led to Democrat Christine Gregoire ultimately winning a third count and the election by 129 votes.
But Judge Chris Wickham ruled that each of the nine charges brought by Ringhofer and Jordan were either legally or factually insufficient, or both. Wickham's role was not to determine whether the evidence was true, just whether there was just cause for the recall to move forward to a signature-gathering stage.
"Despite a great deal of attention to the conduct of the 2004 election there has been no showing that the secretary of state conducted his office in bad faith or unreasonably exercised the discretion granted him by law," Wickham said. "There has been no showing of impropriety by the secretary of state."
Reed was not in court, but said later from his office that he was happy with the decision. He acknowledged the discontent that led to the court action.
"I do think that this represents the frustration that people feel, that they're unhappy with the outcome of the election, or feel that mistakes were made," Reed said. But "I took an oath of office to uphold the constitution and laws of the state of Washington. I can't invent it as I go along."
If Wickham had allowed the recall to proceed, Ringhofer and Jordan would have needed more than 600,000 voter signatures to put the issue on the ballot. The ruling can be appealed to the state Supreme Court. Ringhofer said he hadn't made a decision on whether to appeal, but was leaning toward it.
"People still feel this election certification was wrong. I don't think people feel this is a good election outcome," Ringhofer said after the ruling. "If this is not sufficient, then can you tell me if ever there is going to be sufficient cause to recall anybody?"
Wickham's decision came after nearly three hours of arguments in which Ringhofer and Jordan attempted to prove there was sufficient evidence that Reed, a Republican, was guilty of misfeasance and malfeasance for certifying the election on Dec. 30 while questions still remained over the validity of votes, and while some counties were late in certifying the results.
"This is not about us against Reed," Ringhofer said. "This about the people having a right to hold an elected officer accountable to what he is supposed to do and not supposed to do."
Ringhofer said that allegations of felons voting, allegations of votes not matching up with voters, and instances of dead voters were all the responsibility of Reed, the state's head election officer.
Ringhofer brought a stack of absentee ballots to court that he said continued to be sent to his parents as long as eight years after they died.
Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Even, representing Reed, argued that the allegations were without merit. He noted that even in the case of the absentee ballots being sent to Ringhofer's deceased parents, the responsibility was with King County election officials, not Reed.
Even said it wasn't Reed's job to go back and review the results of a contested election — he said that was something that is left to the courts.
"The secretary of state had no choice, under the constitution and statutes of the state of Washington but to do what he did," he said.
The Republican candidate for governor, Dino Rossi, has challenged the results of the election. His case is being heard by a Chelan County Superior Court judge who has already ruled that even if Republicans win that case, a new election won't be ordered.
Sound familier?
Not exactly...
Let me guess; Reed is a DemonRAT, and the judge that sided with him is also a lieberal.
Nope. Reed's a Republican, and the grounds for recall in Washington are pretty strict.
My bad. Too bad you guys have a heap of hoops to jump through, including having to deal with a judge shopped for by the guy trying to stay in office by every means necessary (in Wisconsin, all we have to do is get a quarter of those who voted in the previous governor's race to sign a petition).
Recall is a nearly useless "option" in Washington -- the bar is set way to high...essentially, do something grossly illegal and be caught on videotape doing it. I think a better effort, before attempting to recall some of our lousy politcos with the current process, would be to change the recall process.
Just FY (and everyone's) I:
State Constitution Art. I:
SECTION 33 RECALL OF ELECTIVE OFFICERS.
Every elective public officer of the state of Washington expect [except] judges of courts of record is subject to recall and discharge by the legal voters of the state, or of the political subdivision of the state, from which he was elected whenever a petition demanding his recall, reciting that such officer has committed some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violated his oath of office, stating the matters complained of, signed by the percentages of the qualified electors thereof, hereinafter provided, the percentage required to be computed from the total number of votes cast for all candidates for his said office to which he was elected at the preceding election, is filed with the officer with whom a petition for nomination, or certificate for nomination, to such office must be filed under the laws of this state, and the same officer shall call a special election as provided by the general election laws of this state, and the result determined as therein provided. [AMENDMENT 8, 1911 p 504 Section 1. Approved November, 1912.]
http://www.courts.wa.gov/education/constitution/?fa=education_constitution.display&displayid=Article-01
--
RCW 29A.56.140
Determination by superior court -- Correction of ballot synopsis.
Within fifteen days after receiving the petition, the superior court shall have conducted a hearing on and shall have determined, without cost to any party, (1) whether or not the acts stated in the charge satisfy the criteria for which a recall petition may be filed, and (2) the adequacy of the ballot synopsis. The clerk of the superior court shall notify the person subject to recall and the person demanding recall of the hearing date. Both persons may appear with counsel. The court may hear arguments as to the sufficiency of the charges and the adequacy of the ballot synopsis. The court shall not consider the truth of the charges, but only their sufficiency. An appeal of a sufficiency decision shall be filed in the supreme court as specified by RCW 29A.56.270. The superior court shall correct any ballot synopsis it deems inadequate. Any decision regarding the ballot synopsis by the superior court is final. The court shall certify and transmit the ballot synopsis to the officer subject to recall, the person demanding the recall, and either the secretary of state or the county auditor, as appropriate.
http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/index.cfm?section=29A.56.140&fuseaction=section
Stick a fork in him,he's done in the next election.
Strict isn't the word for it; impossible is more like it.
Bravo (sincerely; that was a terrific satire of the doublethink one encounters around--uh, certain places).
But in fact, Reed is a Republican, but those who want him ousted are mostly on the Right.
You're right
We were taking up more or less the nonfeasance and trying to ply that into misfeasance & malfeasance.
The Reed Recall's primary arguments were that Reed should have been tougher on the counties pre-2 November AND held back on certifying the election. Or at the very least admitted the mistake in certifying the election and told the legislature to hold their fire.
More to come later, friend :-).
Scott,
A lot hangs on the meaning of the word "sufficiency."
"The court may hear arguments as to the sufficiency of the charges..."
Do your references provide the legal meaning of this word?
Thanks for taking the time to look up the law this hearing
is based on.
PING
Sam I Am,
Certify I can,
A ballot box,
With broken locks,
And give a house,
To a louse.
Strict enough to ignore a stolen election by illegal voters?
Sounds like a rule change is in order.....
Reed is a Republican, but he is said to be a fellow traveler.
As far as I can make out, Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham was only just sworn in last Friday. Gee, that was quick work. In office just one day, and he throws out the recall petition.
Here's the pictures of his swearing in ceremony, posted today for last Friday:
http://community.theolympian.com/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album182
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
