« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
DoJ Backed Ohio GOP Vote Challenge Effort
From McClatchy:
Four days before the 2004 election, the Justice Department’s civil rights chief sent an unusual letter to a federal judge in Ohio who was weighing whether to let Republicans challenge the credentials of 23,000 mostly African-American voters.The case was triggered by allegations that Republicans had sent a mass mailing to mostly Democratic-leaning minorities and used undeliverable letters to compile a list of voters potentially vulnerable to eligibility challenges.
In his letter to U.S. District Judge Susan Dlott of Cincinnati, Assistant Attorney General Alex Acosta argued that it would "undermine" the enforcement of state and federal election laws if citizens could not challenge voters’ credentials....
...Robert Kengle, former deputy chief of the department’s Voting Rights Section who served under Acosta, said the letter amounted to "cheerleading for the Republican defendants."
"It was doubly outrageous," he said, "because the allegation in the litigation was that these were overwhelmingly African-American voters that were on the challenge list."
As McClatchy points out, Tim Griffin, the former aide to Karl Rove who went on to become U.S. attorney for Little Rock, was accused of being involved in precisely the same sort of thing back in 2004 while working for the RNC. More on that later.
Comments (19)
Anonymous wrote on June 25, 2007 11:09 AM:Karl Rove owns a little cottage worth $44,000 in Texas. He votes from there but doesn't live there. Rove also owns 2 $1,000,000 plus homes in DC and Florida.
Someone want to send a letter to Texas marked "do not forward" and see what happens?
JEP wrote on June 25, 2007 11:13 AM:Time for some serious counter-"caging."
As in putting these anti-democracy, Republican Party imperialists in jail.
No more Mr. Nice Guy. Stick these rogues in Leavenworth long enough so NOBODY ever considers emulating them again, at any point in the future.
It seems to me that the "do not forward" envelope in and of itself constitutes obvious voter fraud. This "caging" issue, as a crime, should already be well covered on the books, all we need to do is get a DOJ that will enforce the law of the land instead of the law of the jungle.
Anonymous wrote on June 25, 2007 11:33 AM:When auditors like DoJ refuse to investigate on material issues related to voting rights, the following issue exists: Professional skepticism is in doubt.
Auditors are required to meet this standard: "due professional care is to be exercised in the planning and performance of the audit and the preparation of the report" [Generally Accepted Auditing Standards, GAAS]
What was getting in the way of DoJ exercising the "professional care" they, as auditors, would be required to meet?
drational wrote on June 25, 2007 12:41 PM:We need to pursue caging, but we need to do it with investigation based on facts.
parrot wrote on June 25, 2007 1:26 PM:there is no evidence that the 2004 caging letters were marked do not forward. In duval county, Florida, the caging list contains entries about why letters were returned. An included reason is "forward time expired, return to sender", suggesting the letters were not explicitly prevented from forwarding orders.
Regardless, if the letters targeted black addresses or the lists were otherwise acquiring blacks disproportionately, then the caging could be a violation of court ordered consent decrees.
certainly, congreesional inquiry is warranted.
As 'drational' points out, there are court ordered decrees that the DOJ seems to have ignored the existence of in its blatant partisan support of Republican defendents in Ohio...
Anonymous wrote on June 25, 2007 2:34 PM:Okay, I wasn't even going to comment on this thread, but the security code made me. It's what the Republicans have been doing to minority voters all over the country: Texas, Georgia, Arizona, Missouri, Wisconsin, Florida, Minnesota -- last week North Carolina, and this is just the latest evidence of the massive effort in Ohio in 2004.
DOJ conducted a so-called "investigation" into the Franklin County situation. There's a letter here: http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/misc/franklin_oh.pdf. Basically, the "investigation" cleared the officials, despite the horrendous lines we all remember from November 2, 2004. In the meantime, Acosta was going to court to support the efforts of Republicans to suppress the black vote.
We need him up in front of the Judiciary Committees, and we need Voting Section Chief John Tanner, whose name is all over these letters (and on the Georgia preclearance letter, too). Hans von Spakovsky and Brad Schlozman both pinned the Georgia fiasco squarely on Tanner. Tanner, interestingly enough, had a sterling civil rights record before coming back in the Bush administration as their lead toady on voting rights (see ePluribus Media's excellent story here: http://www.epluribusmedia.org/features/2007/20070505_resurrecting_jim_crow.html).
Let's see if Tanner is willing to let these folks ruin his record and his career (he's a career staffer, not a political appointee) or if he will squeal and name names. That's the $64,000 question: is Tanner willing to go down with his ship???
Oh, yeah. The security code? Screw. 'Nuff said.
modmom wrote on June 25, 2007 2:46 PM:You want evidence about caging in Ohio in '04? This is from Blackwell's own internal investigation of Lucas County BOE after the '04. This county is a Dem stronghold who had Bernadette Noe as Chair of the Lucas County BOE and Republican Party (wife of convicted money laundereer/Bush Pioneer of Coingate fame) Tom Noe. Read this:
-In late September or early October an employee of the Ohio Republican Party contacted Sam Thurber (*involved with politician wife Maggie Thurber in Noe scandal.) wanting to inspect and have copies made of all recently returned voter registrations, Ohio Republican Party offered to furnish volunteers to assist with copying postcards. No one at the Lucas County BOE can confirm that anyone was assigned to supervise Republican volunteers. On their second day of copying, a BOE employee, Jennifer Bernath, Democratic Booth Official) saw republican party volunteers peeling off the yellow return stickers applied by the post office. (Violation of RC 149.43 (B) (I) , and agruably a violation of 149.351.
SOURCE: SOS Investigation, pgs 18-19
http://www.solarbus.org/election/docs/lucas.pdf
modmom wrote on June 25, 2007 2:57 PM:Check out these Voter Suppression Flyers as well (1st one says Lake County (Ohio) BOE):
http://www.solarbus.org/stealyourelection/voter-suppression-flyers.html
drational wrote on June 25, 2007 3:12 PM:the copying of registrations likely added to lists of voters for challenge at the polls, and was bad, but is not caging.
caging involved mailing letters to registered voters and putting their name on a list if returned. they caged voters in ohio, but they did not challenge these caged voters at the polls.
why?
because the new jersey district court supervising the consent decrees forbid it. this order was stayed on the afternoon of election day, but no one was challenged at the polls in ohio or florida based on caging lists.
caging in 2004 is not an example of how 2004 was stolen, but in contrast, the litigation that prvented caging list use was a victory against voter suppression.
sc soap; clean up the reporting on caging
theswan wrote on June 25, 2007 3:15 PM:The cat seems to be out of the bag. Two stolen elections and going for a third. America is acting like a third world country hijacked by a bunch of black gold thugs. Where is the outrage?
tekel wrote on June 25, 2007 3:50 PM:modmom: "Jennifer Bernath, Democratic Booth Official) saw republican party volunteers peeling off the yellow return stickers applied by the post office. (Violation of RC 149.43 (B) (I) , and agruably a violation of 149.351.
SOURCE: SOS Investigation, pgs 18-19"
Scott L wrote on June 25, 2007 3:51 PM:I wonder if Jesus told them to do it.
This crap has been going for a long time. Nixon would be proud. The American Banana Republic is alive and well.
Scott L wrote on June 25, 2007 3:53 PM:Richard Nixon would be proud. Welcome to the American Banana Republic.
anon wrote on June 25, 2007 4:40 PM:...Stick these rogues in Leavenworth...
It's a nice fantasy but, come on, how? Who's going to prosecute them? And, if I've been following this closely, what they've done, for the most part, is kinda illegal but generally not presecuted. If we had a new justice department, top to bottom, maybe but given the DoJ we have, I can't see it happening. I can see a few people getting suspended sentences and, perhaps, fines just so the DoJ can say they done something but real indictments, no. I'm not saying it's they things should be but, for now, it's the way they are. The best the Dems can do with this stuff, given what we know now, is to keep investigating and hope for the best at the ballot box.
JMOHR wrote on June 25, 2007 6:45 PM:I remember reading the transcripts from some of the hearings in which voters did contest the challenges. There were three significant items that jumped to the fore:
1. The Republican party would have donors swear out affidavits in support of the challenge. None of the donors had personal knowledge. They were given a list by a party official and asked to help by signing the afidavit./
2. Every challenge contested went in favor of the challenged voter.
3. The judges ruling in favor of the voters unanimously noted that the challenges were based upon weak if not non-existent evidence. They also noted that many voters who had jobs and other commitments were going to lose
Jane wrote on June 25, 2007 7:57 PM:JMOHR at 6:45 pm.
Can you get copies of these affidavits? If so, cross it with the bar list and take the results to your state Attorney Grievance committee for filing false affidavits.
Jane wrote on June 25, 2007 9:33 PM:http://www.abanet.org/cpr/regulation/scpd/disciplinary.html is the web site for finding the grievance board for attorneys. This is tedious but if enough people impose a cost for this type of misbehavior, it might have some erosive effect.
aterrificjob wrote on June 26, 2007 9:18 AM:Hi gang,
drational wrote on June 26, 2007 10:50 AM:Voter registration and voting arrangements are the responsibility of States - to wit, the Secretary of State of each state. So what if the Repugs cage voters - so what if the RNC gets mail returned because Ms. X is not at that address? The RNC is not responsible. Could the State honor a voter's explanation even if the RNC claims that voter is not allowed to vote? As far as I can see, YES. So the RNC don't have direct power. What's my point? I am not entirely sure, but citizens have control at a State level.
aterrificjob-
Voter rolls are controlled by the state. But RNC having lists prepared for ballot challenges is bad. The reason Judge Debevoise rule Ohio caging was a violation of the 1982 and 1987 consent decrees is:
1. RNC was involved in their collection and plans for use
2. challenges based on caging are not legitimate reasons to disenfranchise- there are many reasons why mail can be returned
3. the challenge plan was concentrated in black precincts= racially biased
challenges slow down the polls because in ohio, they require filling out a 10U form. long lines discourage voters. long lines in black precincts due to challenges based on caging lists are nefarious.
sorta like a poll tax. whites can get caged, just like they can be poor, but blacks get caged more frequently.
get it?