Posted on 10/19/2004 4:36:31 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
Federal judge says Michigan must count provisional ballots in wrong precincts
10/19/2004, 6:15 p.m. ET
By DAVID EGGERT
The Associated Press
LANSING, Mich. (AP) Michigan voters who cast ballots in the wrong polling precinct but are in the right city, township or village on Nov. 2 must have their votes for president and Congress counted, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge David Lawson nullified the state's decision to not count provisional ballots unless voters show up in the correct precinct despite objections from Republican Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land and the U.S. Justice Department.
Provisional, or backup, ballots are used when voters say they are properly registered but their names are not on the registration rolls.
"The public interest is served when citizens can look with confidence at an election process that insures that all votes cast by qualified voters are counted," Lawson wrote in his order.
The state plans to appeal to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The ruling affects only votes for federal offices and not those for ballot initiatives, state lawmakers and other elected officials.
Michigan Democrats, the NAACP and voter-rights groups sued Land and state Bureau of Elections Director Chris Thomas last month. They said Thomas's instructions to 1,500 local election clerks to not count provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct violated federal law and would disenfranchise thousands of voters.
The state should accommodate voters who mistakenly appear at the wrong polling precinct or who show up at the right place but are sent elsewhere especially those who vote toward the end of the day and cannot get to another precinct in time, the groups said.
"It's a victory for the right to vote," Michigan Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer said Tuesday.
State officials, however, said the ruling seriously disrupts election planning just two weeks before Election Day.
"This makes it very, very difficult for us," Secretary of State spokeswoman Kelly Chesney said. "This runs contrary to Michigan's law. We've operated on a precinct-based system for decades."
The state argues that the Help America Vote Act, passed by Congress in 2002, declares that provisional ballots should be counted according to state law. Michigan law does not give citizens the right to vote in a precinct where they do not live, the state says.
Election workers have been given instructions to help voters find where they are supposed to be voting if they turn up at the wrong polling places.
It is unclear how many provisional ballots could be cast on Nov. 2. But Democrats estimate that thousands of eligible voters went to the wrong polling place in 2000 because of changes in the polling location, confusion or forgetting where they were supposed to vote.
Provisional ballots are not counted on Election Day. They are reviewed within a six-day period after the election. If officials can verify that a voter is registered and has shown proper ID, the ballot is counted.
The state says allowing voters to cast ballots outside their home precinct could cause confusion and possibly encourage fraud. It also believes jurisdictions do not have the technology to separate and count votes solely for federal offices.
But Lawson, who was nominated by former President Bill Clinton, disagreed. He said the state already has a plan in place to count provisional ballots at the municipal level.
While training precinct-level officials to count the ballots is "no small task," Lawson wrote, the number of provisional ballots cast statewide should be manageable. In a separate issue, Lawson rejected challenges to rules concerning ID requirement for first-time voters who registered by mail.
Disagreements over provisional ballots also are being taken to court in other states.
An Ohio federal judge last week blocked a directive requiring poll workers to send voters to their correct precinct, ruling that Ohio voters can cast provisional ballots as long as they are in the county where they are registered. Ohio's secretary of state is appealing.
Courts in Missouri and Florida, however, upheld those states' plans to not count provisional ballots unless they are cast in the right precinct.
That's a darned good question. Because they can get away with it?
George Will said the other day that the Democrats have realized that after 20 years of trying to persuade voters that liberalism is the way to go, they have failed and SO NOW THEY USE THE COURTS.
This reason, if for no other, is reason enough to vote Bush.
It's not like there was no warning. This needs to be spread around detroit as a reminder of who screwed them.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:kVFH1v2QoMcJ:www.sharpton2004.org/index.php%3FmenuID%3DPressStory%26id%3D49+michigan+caucus+night&hl=en
What a load of RAT. I can't believe that the feds would NOT appeal. I also can't imagine the Supreme Court would be happy about taking future appeals as such, so they are likely to absolutely eviscerate the first one they see on the side of making life harder for whining voters. They tend to side with administrative decisionmaking at the local level (unlike the Florida Supreme Court and Michigan DCA, which obviously prefer to make all the decisions for their state).
Why even bother having elections!
Why not just have the DNC's attorneys fight for their candidates!
This country's ingenius designs are all but defunct if these suppressive and fascist tactics are allowed to succeed.
"At the rate we're going, elections will be useless. Heck, they're almost that already. These people don't care if they destroy our republic, as long as they're back in power."
I asked this question before on another thread, but I didn't get an answer.
At what point do these people, (demonrat~ judges, demonrat~ lawers, and those who commit OUTRIGHT voter fraud) become enemies of the state?
What can be done to STOP this before it's too late? Or is it too late?
Are the Democrats saying they're too stupid to find their proper polling places?
Okay, I understand the issue of disenfranchisement as it applies to denying anyone the right to vote based on race, religion, etc. I understand the Federal Courts being involved in those types of cases.
But the issue of voting rules and regulations is left to the individual states--am I correct? So if a person cannot vote because he feels it is an imposition to go to the correct precinct--why is that a matter for the federal courts? The reason for the rules and regulations is not to deny a certain segment of the electorate a vote--it is to insure an orderly process towards the election. The more confusion, the less reliable the system is.
Someone help me out here. Why are the federal courts involved in correct precinct issues?
It's too bad that Klintoon's judge appointments didn't get filibustered like grandma Stabenow and Levin did to Bush's nominees.
Good point. He has no jurisdiction.
This ruling should be ignored.
The Supremes ruled in 2000 on state law.
This guy is over-reaching.
Sad to say, but we should use the system Afghanistan implemented where we have our fingers marked with dye that lasts at least 48 hours. From abortion, gay marriage, attack on God, et al is the only way Liberalism can make it in our country.
is through the court system...sorry i was so mad after reading this i couldnt think straight.
How do you even GET a ballot if you are in the wrong precinct?
I'm beginning to wonder if there is going to be an election at all. They should ban both political parties.
"At what point do these people, (demonrat~ judges, demonrat~ lawers, and those who commit OUTRIGHT voter fraud) become enemies of the state?
Precisely! How long will decent, honest Americans sit back while self-serving activist judges gut our constitutional rights?" This is quickly becoming a legitimate case for anarchy.
The 'Rats and their Kangaroo judges are determined to turn us into another South American Country.
Thanks for the post Dan. STUPID PEOPLE SHOULD NOT VOTE!!!
Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett requested over 900,000 ballots even though there are scarcely 400,000 eligible voters in the city. Go figure. The dems are so shamelessly emboldened to cheat precisely because their arses are covered by dem appointees.
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.