18,000 Provisional Votes Await Count in N.M.

Albuquerque Journal (electronic) ^ | 11/04/2004 | Whitman

[timbuck2]

In heavily Dem precincts, the bogus votes will be counted. You can bet on it. It is not as if these states do not already have a history of fraud. Provisional ballots is just one more way of cheating. Why grant it to them? It is time for federal legislation, a national database, periodic mandatory purging of voter rolls, etc.

-T

[FrogMom]

and the rest won't break 100% for Kerry, which is what he would need.

Don't you remember the 2000 election?

Was too close to call with Bush holding a slight lead. Then two ballot boxes were "found" (two days later) under the back pews of churches, miraculously, EVERY vote in them was Dem, giving Bore the state by 547 votes.

[brooklin]

When are these provisional ballots going to become illegal? What a bunch of crap. This country really needs to take better care of it's election process.

[NewMexLurker]

Well, this is what usually happens here in New Mexico: If there are not enough Democrat votes in the first batch of manually counted ballots, another batch "turns up" somehow, and that usually does the trick. I think in 2000 the extra ballots materialized in a locked room in the county clerk's office down in Dona Ana county (or something along those lines). Bill Richardson is determined to make this state be the lonely blue island in a sea of red, just like last time. He may not be able to make that happen this time, but it won't be for lack of trying.

[timbuck2]

http://www.fec.gov/hava/law_ext.txt Amazingly, all this provisional ballot crap comes from the HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT OF 2002. What was Congress thinking? Morons. SEC. 302. <> PROVISIONAL VOTING AND VOTING INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS. (a) Provisional Voting Requirements.--If an individual declares that such individual is a registered voter in the jurisdiction in which the individual desires to vote and that the individual is eligible to vote in an election for Federal office, but the name of the individual does not appear on the official list of eligible voters for the polling place or an election official asserts that the individual is not eligible to vote, such individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot as follows: (1) <> An election official at the polling place shall notify the individual that the individual may cast a provisional ballot in that election. (2) The individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot at that polling place upon the execution of a written affirmation by the individual before an election official at the polling place stating that the individual is-- [[Page 116 STAT. 1707]] (A) a registered voter in the jurisdiction in which the individual desires to vote; and (B) eligible to vote in that election. (3) An election official at the polling place shall transmit the ballot cast by the individual or the voter information contained in the written affirmation executed by the individual under paragraph (2) to an appropriate State or local election official for prompt verification under paragraph (4). (4) If the appropriate State or local election official to whom the ballot or voter information is transmitted under paragraph (3) determines that the individual is eligible under State law to vote, the individual's provisional ballot shall be counted as a vote in that election in accordance with State law. (5)(A) At the time that an individual casts a provisional ballot, the appropriate State or local election official shall give the individual written information that states that any individual who casts a provisional ballot will be able to ascertain under the system established under subparagraph (B) whether the vote was counted, and, if the vote was not counted, the reason that the vote was not counted. (B) The appropriate State or local election official shall establish a free access system (such as a toll-free telephone number or an Internet website) that any individual who casts a provisional ballot may access to discover whether the vote of that individual was counted, and, if the vote was not counted, the reason that the vote was not counted.

[timbuck2]

Why complicate matters? Here is a law that they can pass:

Each individual voter is responsible for registering, confirming registration, showing up at the correct precinct and pulling the right lever. If a voter suspects he/she has been removed from the rolls inappropriately, said voter shall present confirmation card that arrived in mail when registration was first completed. Voter shall also present proof of current address and said address shall be in the precinct where said voter intends to vote.

Gee, that's tough. Took me 30 seconds to write and it is perfectly constitutional. Find some cajones, GOP, or prepare to become a minority party again in 2006.

-T

[rahbert]

Election are a state perogative. I suspect that it would
be impossible to force states to give up their peculier
customs and traditions.

[Bobalu]

There were people voting in Dona Ana County NM that were from El Paso TX...

I heard from a friend who saw someone they know from El Paso that she thought they were being PAID to cast votes here for Kerry :-(

This 'friend' asker her not to say anything to anyone about it..

[jess35]

I'd say more than half will be invalidated. The people who filed still have to present valid identification per HAVA.

[rahbert]

Bush is now 1806 behind as of about 10 minutes ago.

http://65.160.159.96/County0.htm

[Libertina]

You seem to poo-poo these things in a very cavalier way. It makes me wonder why... America had BETTER wake up and make changes or it will be as timbuck2 forsees. We have been lucky so far, but it is evident we will not always be so. We have already suffered stolen seat - remember the vote for a dead man last cycle? And for a dead man's widow? Certain democrats have shown themselves to be open to using fraud to win elections and scheme with the media. Our country is lagging behind other nations in guaranteeing clean elections. Each stolen fraudulent vote is one disenfranchised American CITIZEN! We must address this ASAP.

[jess35]

Absentee....provisional...?

Ouch. Taos county ran 74% to Kerry. I'm moving there next year...I can tell my opinion's gonna make me real popular.

[CedarDave]

The latest totals from the ABQ Journal's website (updated as of a few minutes ago at 5:04 p.m.) has President Bush up by only 8,200 votes, down from 11,000 earlier today. He's leaking votes and we need more information on what's going on here. I just posted a lengthy list of questions on the NM FR board that I hope someone can answer about the process.

[rahbert]

My home in Santa Fe is surrounded by Kerryites
with long faces ;-).

[rahbert]

NM Sec of State web site now has Bush trailing by only 1476.

[CedarDave]

Don't believe the SOS numbers -- they show 45,000 less total B+K votes than the ABQ Journal/AP site:

http://network.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2004/general/by_county/pres/NM.html?SITE=NMALJELN&SECTION=POLITICS

[HitmanLV]

They do need to get on the ball about this.

[ican'tbelieveit]

Secretary of State: Kerry now leads N.M.

Last Update: 11/04/2004 5:12:57 PM
By: Todd Dukart

The already close presidential race in New Mexico just got much closer, with unofficial results putting Democrat John Kerry ahead of President George W. Bush by 1,476 votes.

The New Mexico Secretary of State’s website says Kerry is now leading the president 344,846 votes to 343,370. That’s just two tenths of a percentage point.

However, results reported by The Associated Press show Bush in the lead by just over 8,000 votes. The AP’s results are showing a higher total number of votes than the Secretary of State’s.

NBC and Eyewitness News 4 have not yet declared a winner in New Mexico’s election.

It’s not clear how many more ballots need to be counted, but it appears the number of ballots is in the thousands.

Stay tuned to Eyewitness News 4 and KOBTV.com for the latest information on this developing story.

http://www.kob.com/index.cfm?viewer=storyviewer&id=14749&cat=HOME.

[kabar]

13,000 of the 18,000 PVs are in Bernalillo County, which went 128,531 (51%) for Kerry and 119,161 (48%) for Bush. I don't know how much of the approximately 3,000 drop in the Bush lead is attibutable to the count of provisional votes, but I would find it hard to believe that such a lead could be over come, especially where most of them are in a county that went 50-50.

[CedarDave]

Yep. The SOS site shows a lower number total number of total voters (704,491) vs. the Journals total of 732,714 for just Bush+Kerry. One of two things is happening: 1) The SOS office (in Santa Fe) is slower putting in results and has entered a bunch of Northern NM numbers, 2) King Bill has ordered the good Kerry numbers entered first so this evening's news can highlight the fact that Kerry has pulled ahead, or 3) King BIll is manufacturing numbers somehow.

From reading notes on the NM FR board and from private FReep mail, some of our FReepers are keeping an eye on the county clerks offices and the state Pubbies are probably keeping individual totals so that they can check the SOS key entry figures. That way they can go back later to the SOS and politely say "you made a clerical error in your data entry" (when they really want to say "your AFL-CIO union employee clerk entered the wrong numbers on purpose"). That's what I'm hoping, at least.