On NOW at RadioFR!
Doug from Upland interviews JAYNA DAVIS discussing the OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING
Posted on 12/05/2002 4:51:52 PM PST by SolidSupplySide
Recent press releases from the Hall campaign have stated that disagreements over the ballot recount of the Senate District 16 race do not amount to stealing an election. Certainly it depends on what kinds of disagreements we are talking about. The recount process for the Senate District 16 race has been manipulated in such a way that clearly legal ballots have been combined with legitimately disputable ballots, all of them part of the 44 ballots that are now labeled "disputed.'' These have now gone on to the Senate for resolution "behind closed doors.'' The legally valid votes of approximately 34 citizens of Senate District 16 have not been counted, some of the votes for Fossel and some of the votes for Hall. The fact that these votes remain in the "disputed ballots'' box is an injustice, a violation of voter civil rights, and a warning that Maine's election recount process may need some revision.
The recount for Senate District 16 was very unusual statistically. There were 165 disputed ballots, many more than the 20 to 30 disputed ballots that typically emerge from a state senate recount. Interestingly, as the recount process went alphabetically through the towns the number of challenges increased. Having said that, it should be reasonable to assume that the voters of Bremen and Damariscotta are much better at filling out ballots than the voters of Windsor and Wiscasset. Absolutely not!
The 165 disputed ballots contained ballots that are normally not challenged in a recount. On day One of the review, 78 ballots were counted equally for Fossel and Hall (39 and 39). These had been challenged because the voter had simply marked two names in another race. Then, a set of 12 ballots (six for Hall and six for Fossel) were also counted as valid votes where the voter used red ink instead of pencil. Finally, four more ballots were counted as well, two for Fossel and two for Hall, that had a stray mark elsewhere on the ballot. These ballots, combined with other ballots already accepted in the review resulted in the tally to come out even - 51 for Fossel and 51 for Hall. Then the disagreements began. Challenged ballots of similar nature became unacceptable and were subsequently labeled as "disputed.''
The review/recount purpose is to separate ballots where voter intent is debatable. All clearly legal ballots (those showing obvious voter intent) should have been separated from the disputed group, reviewed, and accepted. That did not happen. Several bundles of legal votes were simply denied acceptance by the Hall review team. These legal ballots then were placed into the "disputed'' group.
For example, a set of 11 ballots from Windsor had been mistakenly labeled as void by the town because the voters had used blue or black ink. Ironically, this batch contained eight votes for Fossel and three votes for Hall. Remember, earlier in the recount, ballots checked in red ink had already been accepted by both teams, but the Hall team simply refused to accept the Windsor votes. Under Maine law, these are legal votes, with clear voter intent, yet they have been permanently placed in an uncounted "disputed ballots'' category. The recount process was not intended to work this way and it is unacceptable. Maine law should protect voter rights, not inhibit them.
Seven additional ballots were unacceptable by the Hall team though voter intent was clear. Instead of a checkmark in the corresponding box opposite the candidate's name, the voter circled, underlined, or placed consistent marks next to the candidates' names. These votes (six for Fossel and one for Hall) should be accepted in any reasonable recount review process, but they were not accepted in the Senate District 16 race.And, yes, there were other groups of ballots that contained valid votes in the "disputed" pile, but counting just these two types of ballots (blue or black ink and mismarked but both with clear intent), would have given Fossel a one-vote lead. If other disputed ballots had been counted, just those with obvious voter intent, the margin would have been greater. Keeping these ballots "disputed" allowed Hall to be provisionally seated.
The ballots should be opened for review. Indeed, there are likely some ballots in this group of 44 disputed ballots about which both review teams would legitimately differ on interpretation. These are the ballots that the review process should segregate, review, scrutinize, and impartially decide.
Les Fossel and the Republican Party are asking that the 44 disputed ballots opened to public view and be reviewed by an impartial third party. If the Hall recount remains ahead under these circumstances, fine. This is a serious democratic issue. Legitimate votes have been removed from a process that is supposed to safeguard our democracy, not compromise it. The ballots must speak for themselves.
Now the challenge is for Maine's Senators to do the right thing.
Why are some ballots with stray lines counted, but not all?
Something stinks.
Since ballots are secret, I suppose noone whose ballot has been rejected knows for sure that his ballot has been rejected. But the equal protection claim resides with the voter. If your ballot with a stray mark was counted, my ballot with a stray mark *MUST* be counted, too.
Lack of Cajonies, comes to mind.
Congressman Billybob
Rat Musk.
On NOW at RadioFR!
Doug from Upland interviews JAYNA DAVIS discussing the OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING
LOFL!!!
The scumbags control Maine's state Senate. They're behind closed doors. It's over.
"The right thing"....Hahahahahahaaa.....!!!
Something stinks, alright. Baldy wants his COURT at his FEET come January. ~GAG!
"Ahhh, Lady? Exactly how DO you stir the electorate?"
This is SO disgusting. And I never realized this until the mid 90's. :(
Not if it messed up his hair or anything.
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.