« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Cage Match: Did Griffin Try to Disenfranchise African-American Voters in 2004?
For years, Tim Griffin, the former aide to Karl Rove who’s been at the center of the U.S. attorney controversy, has been dogged by allegations that he was a part of a 2004 scheme to block African-Americans in Florida from voting.
As Greg Palast first reported for the BBC, an August, 2004 email sent to a number of Republican National Committee operatives contained a spreadsheet of the names and addresses of more than 1,800 voters in Duval County, Florida, a mostly white county that includes the city of Jacksonville. Palast reported that the addresses were located in mostly black neighborhoods, and his story, followed by others posted this year on his website and the Brad Blog, alleged that the list was compiled in order to challenge African-American voters at the polls. We sought to test that conclusion through our own analysis of the data.
The result? Our comparative analysis of the spreadsheet with Duval County voter rolls shows that most names were of African-Americans. (For more on the analysis, see below.) Such a finding, voting rights experts told me, strengthened allegations that Griffin, working for the Republican National Committee, was involved in an effort to target African-American voters. “It is difficult to explain other than an effort to target Democrats and by extension, minority voters,” Toby Moore, a former political geographer with the Justice Department, said.
Michael McDonald, an Associate Professor at George Mason University and an expert on elections statistics, said that the chance that the list is randomly so different from the population is less than 1 in 10,000. It is illegal to target voters based on their race under the Voting Rights Act. Griffin resigned earlier this month as the U.S. attorney for Little Rock after a six-month stint.
The allegations stem from two emails sent to and from Griffin in August of 2004, when he was working as the Research Director for the Republican National Committee. The subject line of the emails was “caging” and attached was a spreadsheet with the names and addresses of 1,835 voters in Duval County. A woman working for the Republican Party of Florida seems to have prepared the spreadsheet, which she sent to Griffin and other RNC researchers, as well as Brett Doster, the executive director of the Bush-Cheney Florida 2004 re-election campaign. You can see the emails here and the spreadsheet here (Excel file).
The emails came to light because they were mistakenly sent to bdoster@georgewbush.org instead of at the correct domain, georgewbush.com, which is operated by the RNC. John Wooden, who owns and operates the parody site georgewbush.org, turned over the emails to Greg Palast of the BBC. Wooden told me that no one has challenged the authenticity of the emails.
In October of that year, Palast reported that the emails contained “names and addresses of voters in predominantly black and traditionally Democrat areas of Jacksonville, Florida.” In response to Palast’s questions about the list, a spokesperson for the Florida GOP explained that it was “a listing of returned mail that came from a mailing that the Republican National Committee sent to new registrants in Duval County in Florida, encouraging newly registered Republicans, Democrats and Independents to vote Republican.”
Democrats alleged that the list was generated to challenge voters on Election Day. It was a tactic Republicans had tried before – generating such a list by sending mail stamped "do not forward" to voters. Voters might then be challenged at the polls based on their residency.
The tactic has become known as “vote caging” as a result of Palast’s story. The term “caging” is actually, as Griffin has argued in his defense, a direct marketing term that simply describes the processing of returns from a mailing. (Mal Warwick, who’s worked as a direct mail consultant since 1979, said that the term derives from old postal “cages,” the hundreds of cubby holes that fronted postal desks for sorting. Those who sorted the mail were called “cagers.”) None of the six voting rights experts consulted on this story had otherwise heard or seen the term used to describe the generation of challenge lists – though all six said that Republicans had used such a tactic repeatedly over the past twenty-five years. Such efforts, said Chandler Davidson, Professor Emeritus at Rice University and an expert on the history of voter suppression, have traditionally gone under the banner of "ballot security" initiatives.
In response to Palast’s story, the Republican spokeswoman denied in a statement that the list had been generated in order to challenge voters. But she went on to argue that Jacksonville “has been affected by massive fraud efforts this year as a result of the work of ACORN, a third party organization supporting the Kerry campaign and the Democrats.”
Joe Rich, who was chief of the voting rights section in the Civil Rights Division at the time, said that in response to Palast’s piece, a Justice Department lawyer was dispatched to speak to Republican Party officials and Florida and Duval County elections officials. An agreement resulted, Rich said, that Republicans would not challenge voters at the polls based on such a list. Rich said he didn’t recall hearing after the election that any such challenges had occurred.
In order to determine whether the “caging” list was composed disproportionately of African-Americans, TPMmuckraker compared the names with the 2007 voter rolls from Duval County. We were able to match 1,159 of the 1,835 names (see the matches here).
Here are the results:
As you can see, most of those on the list were Democrats and most of those were African-American. 57.8% of Duval County voters voted for Bush in the 2004 election. On the other hand, while the list is composed disproportionately of African-Americans, our analysis of the zip codes showed that the mailing was not sent exclusively to predominantly African-American neighborhoods.
Prof. McDonald, who noted the vanishingly low chance of these results being a random sample, observed that there might be a number of alternate explanations for the racial skew. If, for example, the list was generated in response to a mailing to new registrants as Republicans have argued, the skew might result from a disproportionate number of those new registrants being African-American Democrats. The results, he said, do not provide “a smoking gun” of a Republican attempt at voter suppression.
That said, Griffin’s defense against Palast’s allegations have tended to be off point. Speaking two weeks ago, Griffin focused on the term “caging,” saying that it’s simply a direct mail term. “I didn’t cage votes, I didn’t cage mail, I didn’t cage animals,” he added. The allegations that he was involved in voter suppression, he said, were “ridiculous” and “so untrue” that he couldn’t even respond to a question about them:
But as Greg Gordon of McClatchy reported last weekend, the Republican tactic of generating challenge lists is an old one, one they even used in 2004 in Ohio. In 1982, a federal judge in New Jersey issued a consent decree banning the targeting of racial minorities with challenge lists; Democrats have since alleged numerous times that Republicans have broken that decree. The allegation, then, is far from “ridiculous.” And Griffin still hasn't provided an explanation as to why he, then the RNC's head of opposition research, was copied on the email. If the "caging" list was really nothing more than a catalogue of returned mail, why were senior Republican officials concerning themselves with such clerical matters?
Emails released as part of the U.S. attorney firings investigation show that Griffin and Department officials remained aware of the allegations – allegations which Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) made clear would be a factor were Griffin nominated for the U.S. attorney spot.
Even with Griffin's resignation, the controversy continues. Two weeks ago, Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Ted Kennedy (D-MA) wrote the Justice Department’s inspector general and head of the Office of Professional Responsibility, the two offices conducting a wide-ranging investigation of the U.S. attorney firings and other politicization at the Department, to ask that they probe the allegations.
Will Thomas contributed reporting to this story, and Tanvir Vahora and Zachary Fryer-Biggs provided research.
Update: Here's a similar analysis of the "caging" data by Kos diarist drational at ePluribus Media.
Update: Do Democratic Party officials do anything similar? In response to a question about whether Dem officials (particularly opposition researchers) ever email around lists of newly registered voters who've responded to mailings, DNC spokeswoman Karen Finney said "absolutely not." Finney added:
"The list of tools that the GOP has used to try and enhance their electoral prospects at the expense of our right to vote reads like a shameful litany from past eras: restricting access to voter registration, improper attempts to purge voter lists, the use of voting machines that leave no verifiable audit trails, criminal phone jamming schemes, discriminatory voter ID laws, inconsistently administered elections, and now we find out, politicizing the Department of Justice."
Comments (70)
vibinc wrote on June 26, 2007 11:44 AM:Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AK) should be AR.
JEP wrote on June 26, 2007 11:44 AM:“It is difficult to explain other than an effort to target Democrats and by extension, minority voters,” Toby Moore, a former political geographer with the Justice Department, said.
drational wrote on June 26, 2007 11:49 AM:transpose "minority voters" and "Democrats" and it will be much more accurate...
We did a similar analysis posted at Kos and to be posted later at epluribusmedia. We got 1654 names matched, and also looked at the purged voters.
JEP wrote on June 26, 2007 11:52 AM:And like you probably did too, we found some issues with Palast's reporting.
I think the word "caging" as we are discussing is now on the Congressional Record a total of 4 times, and each time it's importance was ignored, deffered or trivialized.
But that will change soon, and the word "caging" will be repeated a thousand times in our Congressional Record, until the whole influence and intention of this un-democratic (and patently anti-Democratic) practice is uncovered and completely eliminated from the playbooks of future political campaigns..
Candyce wrote on June 26, 2007 11:53 AM:All the pieces appear to fit and certainly raise questions that need to be answered. Very nice follow-up independent investigating, team!
I have one question about the facts. I don't know in detail how email works, but wouldn't there have to be an email account for bdoster registered at georgewbush.org in order for them to mistakenly receive the emails? Otherwise, wouldn't it have bounced back to sender? Is there a bdoster email address registered at the parody site? Or does a site receive and log emails even if it is undeliverable to a specified user?
Ben Bochner wrote on June 26, 2007 11:58 AM:I don't understand the arms-length relationship between Greg Palast and Josh Marshall. Is it professional jealosy? A turf war? A mutual dislike? They would seem to be natural allies, trying to reveal the workings of corrupt government. But Josh has been slow to embrace Palast's work, leaving the impression that he's skeptical of Palast's claims. Is Palast claiming more than he can prove? Is he just connecting more dots? Robert F. Kennedy has endorsed Palast's work, but there seems to be an invisible wall holding this story back from being reported in the mainstream media. It's not clear where Josh Masrshall stands on this issue. Can somebody explain his relationship with Greg Palast?
drational wrote on June 26, 2007 11:59 AM:We did the same analysis, but also got the voter purges and ended up assigning race to 90% of the list. Similar results.
Also some bonus data about the existing reporting on 2004 caging thus far:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/26/113923/608
Will be published as well at ePluribusmedia today.
drational wrote on June 26, 2007 12:03 PM:The story has been ready for days, but vetting. alas.
I can explain why everyone in the MSM is at arms length:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/6/26/113923/608
He doesn't appear to do good research.
Jane wrote on June 26, 2007 12:04 PM:His Poster Boy for Black Voter Suppression is actually a White Republican.
So when is ACORN going to sue the RNC for slander?
Since when is registering black voters, voter fraud?
And the Rethugs wonder why they can't get the black vote?
Mrs Panstreppon wrote on June 26, 2007 12:05 PM:Thanks for the research! I've been reading widely varying assessments of Palast's claims about Griffin and vote caging and I wondered what was true and what wasn't.
I'm not sure if you looked into these questions. Were the voters on the list registered by ACORN? Were the voters on the list newly registered voters?
Besides challenging voters on Election Day, vote caging could be used to gather "evidence" against ACORN and other left-leaning organizations conducting national voter registration efforts.
Flamingo wrote on June 26, 2007 12:05 PM:Ahhh....grown-up reporting.... Thanks for doing this. Now if we can find out for sure whether those Rove emails he allegedly has really exist.
Anonymous wrote on June 26, 2007 12:06 PM:Candyce:
The parody site can have their e-mail set up as a 'catch-all' account which, as the name states, will accept any address sent to it in care of the domain name.
Anonymous wrote on June 26, 2007 12:15 PM:I think this cries out for a pro bono lawsuit against the RNC and GOP of FL (and other swing states if possible) seeking damages for their past use of these tactics and barring them from using similar tactics in the future. A huge bonus would be the ability to get discovery and get to the bottom of this matter.
I think the people on the list would have standing, so someone could bring the suit on their behalf (maybe an org. like the NAACP) and might be able to use the 1982 New Jersey consent decree banning the targeting of racial minorities with challenge lists.
cevrero wrote on June 26, 2007 12:18 PM:We live in a country where we can't even get voting right....that's absurd. Most civilized western countries have proper ID cards and registration. Here in America,....people are against having a good ID card system that would allow us to track all these problems but at the same time these people have the balls to complain that there's a problem.
JEP wrote on June 26, 2007 12:19 PM:Ben at 11:58 "I don't understand the arms-length relationship between Greg Palast and Josh Marshall."
I've noticed that Marshall/Palast perplexion before.
I would guess it is simpler than we might assume.
Basically, Greg's a gumshoe, Josh is a journalist... but they are both investigators, just at opposite ends of the detective spectrum.
They both practice each-other's specialty a little bit, but their styles focus differently. And Josh, who has a more-conservative journalistic approach, tends to be less inclined to jump aboard some of Palast's assertions without some further back-up.
The difference really is in their approach, not their message. Gregg's a bit flamboyant for some folks, I personally like his style, it reminds me of "The Black Falcon."
But Josh is, at least for me, the most reliable source of breaking, PERTINENT news on the media scene today, web based or mainstream. His news is always timely, his subject matter exactly what I want to know the truth about, and his dry snark always cuts more deeply than a superficial perusal reveals. (Sometimes subtlety says more than overt commentary, which is another major difference between them.)
They ought to do a post together, crossposted to all our favorite blogs, their mutual perspective would be quite revealing. And it would get a lot of interest here on "the blogs."
And we might all stop wondering about it then.
lorelynn wrote on June 26, 2007 12:22 PM:Candyce,
If you have a domain, you can enable a catch-all, that accepts email addressed to anyone at your website. That's how this happened.
lorelynn
Rick wrote on June 26, 2007 12:23 PM:And like you probably did too, we found some issues with Palast's reporting.
That's a neat trick! Glom a personal attack onto a statistical analysis. Thus, anybody who agrees with the latter "probably" agrees with the former!
I'm impressed.
ltree wrote on June 26, 2007 12:28 PM:The other possibility is that those who voted didn't have their vote counted because it was a DRE paperless trail machine.
The problems with the voting machines have been documented. In NC hundreds of votes were just "disappeared" by faulty voting machines. Then there's the tampering issue.
If so many African Americans registered to vote it would seem a least some of them would have showed up to vote. What if most of them did and the machines were the problem?
Sienna wrote on June 26, 2007 12:33 PM:How were military bases classified in the TPM analysis? As primarily white zip codes? My understanding is that many African Americans captured in the caging lists in Florida were active duty servicepeople deployed in Iraq and thus not at their regular base addresses.
Candyce wrote on June 26, 2007 12:34 PM:Thanks, lorelynn, that's all I needed to know. I suspected there'd be something like that, but I wanted to be sure. You can see I'm server-challenged.
Sam Cohen wrote on June 26, 2007 12:35 PM:"In response to Palast’s questions about the list, a spokesperson for the Florida GOP explained that it was “a listing of returned mail that came from a mailing that the Republican National Committee sent to new registrants in Duval County in Florida, encouraging newly registered Republicans, Democrats and Independents to vote Republican.” "
How hard would it be to check the assertion that these people had recently registered? My understanding is that the voter registration information you can get in most places includes the date that people registered.
If they were the recent registrants, it doesn't decide the question (although it does make the Republican defense at least plausible). On the other hand, if they weren't recent registrants then the defense completely goes out the window.
(If someone did this analysis and I just missed it, then my apologies)
gtash wrote on June 26, 2007 12:37 PM:I don't see how Palast got anything substantially wrong here. If you are arguing what constitutes superior professioanl journalism, that's one thing. But I think Palast go the meat of the matter right and he is the one who made the public aware of "vote caging" and I don't think the MSM has anything to be proud about at this point.
drational wrote on June 26, 2007 12:39 PM:about the personal attack.
Anonymous wrote on June 26, 2007 12:40 PM:this issue is too important for mistakes in reporting.
I am attacking the reporting, not the man.
look at the link and decide for yourself whether it is ok to tout someone as black when they are white.
I don't see that Palast got anything substantially wrong here. If you are arguing about who has superior journalistic professionalism, that is one thing. But it was Palast who got to the meat of the matter and brought "vote caging" to the fore. I don't think the MSM has anything to be proud about.
casam wrote on June 26, 2007 12:41 PM:I see "irrational" is spreading his Palast hate propogando over here now. Interesting
gtash wrote on June 26, 2007 12:41 PM:I don't see that Palast got anything substantially wrong here. If you are arguing about who has superior journalistic professionalism, that is one thing. But it was Palast who got to the meat of the matter and brought "vote caging" to the fore. I don't think the MSM has anything to be proud about.
gtash wrote on June 26, 2007 12:41 PM:I don't see that Palast got anything substantially wrong here. If you are arguing about who has superior journalistic professionalism, that is one thing. But it was Palast who got to the meat of the matter and brought "vote caging" to the fore. I don't think the MSM has anything to be proud about.
gtash wrote on June 26, 2007 12:43 PM:I don't see that Palast got anything substantially wrong here. If you are arguing about who has superior journalistic professionalism, that is one thing. But it was Palast who got to the meat of the matter and brought "vote caging" to the fore. I don't think the MSM has anything to be proud about.
cervantes wrote on June 26, 2007 12:44 PM:The bit about ACORN committing voter fraud is also a lie. All that happened is that some contract workers involved in a registration drive made up some names in order to get paid. There is no evidence that Mickey Mouse or Darth Vader actually tried to vote. This wasn't voter fraud at all, it was plain old fraud, and ACORN was the victim, not the perpetrator. I think it's extremely important to keep that part of the story straight.
meep! wrote on June 26, 2007 12:45 PM:"Since when is registering black voters, voter fraud?"
Since blacks were first allowed to vote?
[Okay, not historically accurate, but I can't resist the snark ... ]
drational wrote on June 26, 2007 12:46 PM:Here is the analysis at epluribusmedia on the same subject.
http://www.epluribusmedia.org/features/2007/20070621_supressing_the_vote_2004.html
gregor wrote on June 26, 2007 1:08 PM:I remember vividly that Rhenquist ruled in a case that statistical inference alone cannot be the basis for a lawsuit against discrimination, and that the plaintiff must show an explicit intent to discriminate on the part of the defendant.
File this as one more example of Republican shenanigans assaulting the law and reason that does not cost them anything.
-ck- wrote on June 26, 2007 1:20 PM:Paul --
The caging list tactic is just the tip of the iceberg, in the ongoing GOP criminal conspiracy to supress the minority vote. The 1982 DNC v RNC consent decree also covered the GOP Ballot Security Task Force (BSTF) tactic. This is discussed in depth by Rachel E. Berry, Democratic National Committee v. Edward J. Rollins: Politics as Usual or Unusual Politics? This is excerpted and linked in my piece, The Texas Blueprint for the Stolen Election -- http://democrats.com/blueprint
The criminal conspiracy to steal the 2000 election in Florida was launched no later than the summer of 1998, with George W Bush, Karl Rove, Jeb Bush, and Tom Feeney as the principal co-conspirators.
paul lukasiak wrote on June 26, 2007 1:32 PM:One thing to keep in mind is that this is RAW data; a preliminary list.... for instance, there is no precinct information available on this spreadsheet.....
In other words, the presence of Republicans on the list is meaningless, as the list required further processing to be used for voter challenges..... In other words, these names would be broken down by precinct, and then handed to the poll watcher at the appropriate precinct where the GOP wanted to challenge/harrass voters.
eliot wrote on June 26, 2007 1:53 PM:In case anyone is interested, Jason leopold of truthout has a 15 minute interview on video with Bud Cummins up on Truthout.Cummins said he still speaks with Tim Griffin and Cummins sets the record straighjt on his investigation into missouri govm matt blunt.
Is there a reason the tpm team isn't menmtioning these interviews? Seems strange to me.
Andrew B wrote on June 26, 2007 1:56 PM:The part of Greg Palast allegations that never made sense to me were the part about military voters. It would seem to me that if a deployed soldier showed up to vote at home, that would be a good red flag the voter might not be legit.
Barry Champlain wrote on June 26, 2007 2:13 PM:The one thing you must all remember about "widespread voter fraud", at the point of voter registration, is that if "Mickey Mouse" and "Donald Duck" are, in fact, signed-up by ACORN (or whatever) workers getting paid by the name... Mickey and Donald will NOT be showing up to vote on Election Day.
This does not exonerate ACORN (or whomever) from its laxity in monitoring its paid workers, but: [a] the "crime" extends solely to the individual committing it; [b] it has ZERO effect on the election proper; [c] there is a suspicious lack of publicity as to PRECISELY how "widespread" this non-impacting "voter fraud" is... is it 40%? 20%? 0.00001%?
It seems to me that the MSM has gleefully repeated the term "widespread voter fraud", without once having produced numbers or impact on elections. Which, of course, would put the whole damned thing to bed, instantly.
(Wonder why that is?)
[SC: "judge"; as in, "Lest ye be judged..!"]
Mr.Murder wrote on June 26, 2007 2:18 PM:The Ohio voting roll scrubbed matched a break-in at the state Democratic Party offices in a particular county... www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2004410130378
BTW, mail fraud is the easiest crime to prosecute and prove, and has the most stringent penalties for doing so.
Tom wrote on June 26, 2007 2:19 PM:eliot,
Since the Rove/Fitzgerald fiasco, Jason Leopold has no credibility whatsoever. I won't even open his articles (same with Rawstory, where Leopold previously practiced his wishful thinking.
Anonymous wrote on June 26, 2007 2:20 PM:Andrew B
When letters requiring a signature of an addressee are returned, the addressees are put on a list to challange the voter rolls, ie, if no one signed for a letter they may have died or moved and the name should be removed from the roll of eligible voters. Second, if the addressees were deployed military who sent in an asentee ballot, when the absentee allot was sent in it would be challanged because the voters name was on the original caged list.
km wrote on June 26, 2007 2:25 PM:For the sake of discussion, I'll assume there was tareting of specific people.
An interesting question then; if blacks voted Republican, would the GOP be targeting them? Obviously not.
Therefore, the question becomes whether the GOP is targeting the people based upon race, or based upon their political affilliation.
Targeting Democrats is not improperly discriminatory. The fuzziness here comes in from the fact that blacks vote so monolithically Democratic.
Mrs Panstreppon wrote on June 26, 2007 2:26 PM:Eliot,
Jason Leopold's audio interview of Bud Cummins at Truthout.org is very good. Link below.
Mr.Murder wrote on June 26, 2007 2:30 PM:The Ohio caging effort also had actual patent Nixonian break-ins abet the effort:
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2004410130378
Thieves hit Democratic Party offices; computers containing sensitive data removed
By ROBIN ERB
BLADE STAFF WRITER
Thieves shattered a side window overnight at Lucas County Democratic headquarters in Toledo, stealing computers with sensitive campaign information and triggering concern of the local party's ability to deliver crucial votes on Nov. 2.
Among the data on the stolen computer of the party's office manager were: e-mails discussing campaign strategy, candidates' schedules, financial information, and phone numbers of party members, candidates, donors, and volunteers.
Also taken were computers belonging to Lucas County Commissioner Tina Skeldon Wozniak and to a Texas attorney working with the Kerry/Edwards presidential campaign to ensure election security.
The thefts have prompted the Kerry/Edwards campaign and Democrats in Washington to offer help and have left local officials fretting about the crime's impact on the upcoming election, in which Ohio plays a high-profile role.
"This puts us behind the eight ball," party spokesman Jerry Chabler said. "This can affect our entire get-out-the-vote operation."
Ohio's Democratic Party pledged to deploy volunteers, lend computers, or "provide whatever source of assistance they need," said spokesman Dan Trevas.
The political importance of Lucas County cannot be overstated, Mr. Trevas said.
"It's a major Democratic county in a swing area, surrounded by Republican and moderates," Mr. Trevas said. "A lot of votes come out of northwest Ohio."
drational wrote on June 26, 2007 3:07 PM:re bias and intent:
wordy wrote on June 26, 2007 3:25 PM:the Consent decrees the RNC is party to in 1982 and again in 1987 require only bias, regardless of intent.
Published on October 21, 2004, Blade, The (Toledo, OH)
Police: Democratic office break-in not political
Authorities have a suspect but no charges have been filed
By CHRISTINA HALL
BLADE STAFF WRITER
Toledo police said yesterday they don't believe the break-in and theft of three computers from Lucas County Democratic headquarters last week were politically motivated.
Barry Champlain wrote on June 26, 2007 3:27 PM:"We are pretty certain it was not an 'inside job,' nor was it any outside agency trying to take the computers," said Sgt. Bob Baumgartner, a burglary detective.
He said investigators believe greed - taking the computers so they could be sold - was probably the motivation for the theft. Police have a suspect in the break-in, he said, but he declined to provide any further information and emphasized that no charges have been filed.
The case remains under investigation, and police are still trying to locate and recover the stolen computers, which contained sensitive information needed by local Democrats for federal, state, and national campaigns.
The computers were taken from party headquarters at 1817 Madison Ave. in the city's Uptown neighborhood between 11 p.m. Oct. 11 and 7 a.m. Oct. 12.
County Democrats are offering $1,000 each for the immediate return of the three computers - no questions asked. Police and party officials said getting the computers back as soon as possible remains their top concern. The computers are worth about $5,000.
The Democrats originally offered a $5,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of those responsible for the break-in.
Despite the revised "no ask, no tell" reward offer, Democratic party spokesman Jerry Chabler said he hasn't received any word about the computers' whereabouts.
He was hoping the reward may motivate whomever took the computers to simply return them.
Sergeant Baumgartner said information obtained by police has "pretty well eliminated" any rumors or speculation of possible political motivation for the theft.
He said police are pursuing the information they have received, which the sergeant said has been determined to be reliable. Investigators have received reports of similar break-ins in the downtown area with similar entry and items stolen.
Mr. Chabler confirmed he has heard the rumors and speculation that the thefts could have been politically motivated or even an "inside job."
He said he hopes the latest report from investigators quells any such rumors and "brings the case to a speedy conclusion."
He said the party was able to recover most of the financial records and other data from backup sources and from people who have been coming forward with information - including those who were in leadership positions before Mr. Chabler and his faction of the party took control last spring.
E-mail information on the computers has not been retrieved, Mr. Chabler said.
Tom at 2:19:
Isn't it a bit of a stretch to think that Jason Leopold just pulled a story out of his butt, when it came to the "indictment" of Karl Rove?
Anyone with a smidgin of hope for remaining a credible journalist for very long is not about to print a story which is that explosive, based only on rumor and conjecture. It's a slam dunk, therefore, that Leopold did NOT.
Here is a scenario to consider, and then I will support it with background:
The "Sealed vs. Sealed" indictment was, in fact, of Karl Rove, as assessed by the grand jury. But as Fitzgerald made clear numerous times, Scooter Libby "kicked sand" in the face of the investigation, and there was just no way, in Fitz' mind, that he could get a conviction of Rove, based on what he had to work with. Now, stay with me here; this gets good...
Karl Rove personally orchestrated the leak of what was in that "Sealed vs. Sealed" indictment.
Rove knew that due to the stonewalling, Fitz was unable to make much more than a case for perjury with Libby (and a good one; he got HOW many counts of guilty?). Again, Fitz made that clear... and very likely, he angrily told Rove and his lawyers the same, before he told the public.
So Rove discloses to a non-MSM muckraker (via, I have no clue whom) the information that he indeed's the one "indicted". He leaves out the part about Fitz declining to continue (Fitz is such a straight arrow that he's not about to say publicly, "Oh, yeah, Rove's the guy in the sealed indictment").
NOW THINK: where have we seen this before?
1. "Fortunate Son" by the late J.H. Hatfield.
In the run-up to the 2000 elections, author Hatfield wrote a tell-all book on W. As it was going to print, a "source" showed up and gave Hatfield damning evidence of Bush's longtime cocaine use/collision with the law. Hatfield ended up including the information in an appendix to his already-written book.
But before St. Martin's Press could publish "Fortunate Son", a "scandal" broke in the MSM about author Hatfield's criminal past and attempted murder charges. St. Martin's panicked and pulled the book, actually BURNING ALL COPIES ("THX 1138"-- fact or fiction?).
A small publishing house, Soft Skull Press, picked up the book and published it, to a radically smaller audience than it would have had with St. Martin's. But the damage to Hatfield was done, and (allegedly), he "committed suicide" shortly therafter.
The head of Soft Skull subsequently revealed that the "source" who busted W to Jim Hatfield was none other than a nationally-obscure figure (at the time) named Karl Rove.
To my knowledge, this never made the papers.
2. Dan Rather and "kerning".
To this day, it is an accepted fact that the documents used to prove that Shrub AWOL'ed on his TANG duties were fake. THIS FORGERY HAS, IN FACT, NEVER BEEN PROVEN. Only that the docs were not authenticated beyond a shodow of a doubt; enough to get Rather and producer Mary Mapes fired, and the MSM conveniently declaring it a non-story.
And to this day, it is also widely believed that Rove pulled another "Hatfield". Dumped the story in CBS' lap with one hand; raised a red flag over one unprovable document with the other; caused the entire story to go away.
Since the time in Texas when Karl Rove electronically bugged his own candidate and called a press conference about it, to deflect attention from his candidate's lousy debate performances, Karl Rove has been the textbook for the underhanded political fraud known smirkingly since the days of Donald Segretti and company as the "ratfuck".
Back to Tom at 2:19: oh, Karl Rove was indicted, all right. Leopold was probably was shown a photocopy of the indictment, even. The part about Fitz declining to unseal it? They left that out.
We all make mistakes. Leopold's was not printing false information. It was not being ready for a Rovian ratfuck. His bad.
xargaw wrote on June 26, 2007 3:43 PM:Tom, it is my understanding that there is still an indictment "under seal" in the CIA leak case. Am I wrong about this. I read about it a couple of times after Libby was convicted.
eliot wrote on June 26, 2007 3:44 PM:Tom
eliot wrote on June 26, 2007 3:51 PM:You're an idiot. This is a VIDEO REPORT! Cummins is doing the speaking. What a closed minded imbecile you are.
Hey Tom
DO you read the WaPo? Do you read the NYT?
Both papers said, quoting anonymous sources, that Iraq had WMD's and was a threat. We now have 3,500 dead US soldiers. I hope you stopped reading those papers and for that matter every other news outlet that reported BS for the first five years of Bush's time in office.
yet you will kill off a news outlet for reporting that Rove was indicted? Great logic Tom. Clearly, Rove is incapable of setting people up or wiggling his way out of anything. You're obviously a genius Tom.
Tom wrote on June 26, 2007 5:02 PM:eliot and etal,
Very mature to call me names.
Hey, I think dick, bushie, rover, rummy, condi, colon and all the rest should be in Guantanamo.
But I was a working journalist for nearly 30 years and no credible journalist would make the mistakes that Leopold made. I loved his writing and I desperately wanted it to be true, but for whatever reason he got it very very very wrong and made himself (and the cause of justice) a laughingstock.
(My own personal conspiracy theory is that Fitzgerald kept his job by not indicting Rover.)
I will not read anyone who is that big a liar or a fool -- just as I will not read Novakula or Will or Broder.
And, yes, I know full well that the Washington Post and the New York Times basically act as mouthpieces for the bushie administration.
Come on, folks, don't go flaming until you know what someone is saying.
Barry Champlain wrote on June 26, 2007 5:33 PM:I repeat, Tom: Leopold did everything RIGHT, with ONE sole exception:
He assumed he was playing by a normal, sane and fair set of rules. He did not count on getting punked by Rove, who already knew what Leopold did not: the sealed indictment (REAL!) was staying sealed. Leopold misunderestimated him.
That doesn't mean that there's not a sealed indictment, with Karl's name on it, as we speak. And now, of course, the Beltway pundits get to go: "SEE?!? Karl is INNOCENT! HUZZAH!!"
You're enabling them, pal. What part of all this confuses you?
Rasul wrote on June 26, 2007 5:39 PM:Few comments....first, ACORN has registered more new voters in the last 4 to 6 years (at least 2 million) than any other organization, thus they have become a target. Second, as an earlier post noted, ACORN was a victim of some of its canvassing staff submitting inaccurate registrations. But, important to note, this was less the 1% of voter registrations that it received and in most states, it was mandatory under law for the organization to turn all voter registration cards in, whether they are complete, incomplete, falling apart or suspicious. As a result, ACORN submitted cards and noted to local boards of elections that they found some that didn't seem right and aided those boards in their investigations of individual former employees. Finally, in terms of caging, this is an old school tactic that the Republicans have been using around the country, including Ohio in 2004, before the election. In 04 Republicans used "pre-challenges", letters sent out by the Republican party demanding that voters contact them in order to prove they are real voter only a week before the election. This mailing from the party was targeted to low to moderate income, mostly minority communities that simply did not return mail to the republican party. As a result of this "no return letter" the Republican Party attempted to disqualify voters, purging part of the roles, I believe the Ohio number was 32,000+ voters statewide. These voters were overwhelmingly in low to moderate income and minority communities.... ACORN played a role halting this by issuing a report using census tract data as well as working to getting plaintiffs to for both local and federal cases. An ACORN member was the lead plaintiff in a federal case out of New Jersey around how caging was illegal. If you call ACORN's national office they could give even more info on this.
Pro Bushit Troll wrote on June 26, 2007 6:00 PM:Nice work. I would like to say I am shocked by the arrogance of these assholes but I'm not- anyone with one eye opened saw them for the fascists that they are. They hate all who do not blindly follow them.
Tom wrote on June 26, 2007 6:06 PM:Barry,
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but in 30 years I never published a word under my byline that I hadn't verified with three independent sources. That used to be the rule of journalism.
I agree with you in that I believe the bushies were behind the Fortunate Son and Rather episodes. But, again, the authors of those stories allowed themselves to get 'punked' as you put it. They allowed basically factual stories to be killed and buried by not crossing all their t's and dotting all their i's. Who does that make the enablers?
Otherwise, it's just opinion, which is what Leopold deals in (check his background). And as they say, opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. Journalism deals in facts.
That's what I admire so much about the gang at TPM, they do their homework. And when they make the occasional misstep, as we all do, they immediately correct themselves. I feel I can trust them.
'Nuff of that!
Rick B wrote on June 26, 2007 6:43 PM:Cevrero,
Your commment "Most civilized western countries have proper ID cards and registration. Here in America,....people are against having a good ID card system " overlooks the obvious.
These problems would not be necessary for the Republicans to create if they had a really reliable national ID card system. They could monitor and control each of us directely instead to the kind of indirect and mostly illegal manipulations the Repubs are practicing. If you don't think the Republicans would use that system to create a(n) more authoritarian government Then you are an ignorant fool.
Don't give the government tools to make control of individuals easier if you don't want them to use them. On you, not for you.
JNagarya wrote on June 26, 2007 7:43 PM:Since when is registering black voters, voter fraud?
Posted by: Jane
Date: June 26, 2007 12:04 PM
Since registering black voters.
Griffin, Schlozman, and von Sakovsky are to-the-core "old school" segregationists and white supremacists. "Original intent" had long been code-speak for the pre-Civil War Constitution.
JNagarya wrote on June 26, 2007 7:51 PM:We live in a country where we can't even get voting right....that's absurd. Most civilized western countries have proper ID cards and registration. Here in America,....people are against having a good ID card system that would allow us to track all these problems but at the same time these people have the balls to complain that there's a problem.
Posted by: cevrero
Date: June 26, 2007 12:18 PM
And here in America persons such as you reveal such an ignorance of history that you actually believe the proposals made, and which you repeat, are something new. The ID efforts -- initiated by the RNC, not voters or voting rights groups, which automatically renders the efforts suspect -- have repeatedly been held to be unconstitutional for very good reason: their purpose is to prevent voting by minoritiies.
Were poll taxes and literacy tests not already held to be unconstitutional, you'd be repeating the RNC's talking points in defense of them.
Continue being a Republican, supporting that party of racism, or get an education in the history.
Mrs Panstreppon wrote on June 26, 2007 7:52 PM:Tom@June 26, 2007 - Even if you don't have regard for Jason Leopold, his interviews with David Iglesias, John McKay and Bud Cummins are definitely worth watching - link below.
JNagarya wrote on June 26, 2007 7:58 PM:I see "irrational" is spreading his Palast hate propogando over here now. Interesting
Posted by: casam
Date: June 26, 2007 12:41 PM
The above is foolish nonsense. Apparently you can't handle the fact that Palast is not perfect.
And where does the foolish "fan" nonsense come from, when the issues are politics and law, not personalities?
Johnsnottoodistracted wrote on June 26, 2007 8:15 PM:With all the tricks used over the years you wonder who ever really won what election.And who really voted for who.
The O racle wrote on June 26, 2007 8:53 PM:But the bigger question is: how did the losers convince anybody they won?
Losers are losers.They stand out in a crowd no matter how you dress them.
Losers who cheat to win become lifetime addicts to deception.
The results? Well folks......
The "culture of corruption" Republicans pulled this anti-democracy "caging" stunt before the 2004 election. They must have pulled the same stunt before, in 2002, 2000, and who knows how far back.
And I'm certain they're planning on a similar "caging" stunt before the 2008 elections, with Karl Rove coordinating this corrupt effort in selected voting venues.
Which means, Karl Rove's pre-election travels before the 2008 election must be scrutinized closely. Maybe a tracker should be placed around his ankle.
Last year, a short news article stated that Karl Rove made a swing through the Mid-West, visiting Ohio along the way, just before the November election, with no mention of where he went inside Ohio or who he visited, shortly after which Rove (and Dick "less" Cheney) pronounced that "culure of corruption" Republicans would retain control of Congress, for certain, 100 percent absolutely sure, Rove promised, he'd seen the math.
So, what "caging" schemes (as well as other schemes) was Rove coordinating during his travels last year?
What a sad, pathetic, little creature.
PurpleAvenger wrote on June 26, 2007 9:24 PM:"So, what "caging" schemes (as well as other schemes) was Rove coordinating during his travels last year?"
Posted by: The O racle
--------------------------------
Wisconsin, 2004. and 2006. One of the closest of the swing states. I'd very much like to know just whose sticky fingers were on the tricks the Repubs pulled here. Remember - the Wisconsin Repubs had sent Rove their complaints about alleged Wisconsin voter fraud after the 2004 elections.
It's important to know that elections here are run by municipalities, not counties; the city of Milwaukee is the only majority-minority city in the state; and actions targetting the city are well-known code for targetting voters of color (esp African-American voters). And - surprise! - the only city the Repubs have made noises questioning the integrity of the process is, Milwaukee.
Here the Repubs sent postcards and claimed they were returned undeliverable from addresses that allegedly didn't exist. Never mind things like . .. typos in data entry, failure to include apartment numbers, and more. (As a side note, since state law allows voters to register on election day - even if there had been problems with the prior address, the exercise seems mostly designed to have harassed and intimidated Milwaukee voters, or at a minimum slow the process down and make lines much longer . .. just like in Ohio.)
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4196/is_20061027/ai_n16814757
2006 - " City officials reviewed the list and found that some discrepancies resulted from street names, such as where N. 91st St. is Swan Road and where a street was renamed Mother Daniels Way. In other cases, the list included people legitimately registered to vote at the Veterans Affairs hospital.
The city took another 50 random addresses and compared them to original voting cards, finding that some were cases in which digits in the address had been transposed that is, they are accurate on the registration card, but were not typed into the system properly. . . "
and in 2004 . . .
"Two years ago, the Republican Party formally challenged 5,619 addresses it said were bad, but its challenge was rejected 3-0 by the city Election Commission, with even the GOP appointee saying officials didn't have enough evidence to strike the names. . . .
On the eve of the election, the party using postal address software expanded its list to about 37,000 challenged addresses. In some cases, the discrepancy was omitting apartment numbers, although the building and voter existed. . . ."
eliot wrote on June 26, 2007 10:17 PM:Tom
eliot wrote on June 26, 2007 10:26 PM:You are typical of the self righteous individuals who are so quick to judge. I am curious, where did you spend 30 years as a journalist? My guess is some really small town paper where you never ever had to worry about writing a story and had to deal with the possibility of a backlash. And since you claim to be a reporter I imagine you would be smart enough to gather your own facts before coming to a conclusion. Sadly, in this regard you just contradicted yourself. Basically what I hear you saying is that journalists aren't human and therefore not allowed to make mistakes. But Tom everyone does. And as Mrs Panstreppon said the interviews, which are on video for crying out loud, are worth watching. I find it hysterical that you would single out a reporter for making a laughingstock out of justice. In this regard you are not a very good reporter. Certainly not one who claims to have 30 years experience. You choose to ignore the truth to justify your own misguided conclusions and rationale. How sad for you.
Lastly, Tom, don't assume I am not aware of leopolds background. I am fully aware. I bought his book. And maybe its the fact that I have a son who struggled with drug addiction and the fact that leopold was so brutally honest about what made him tick that, like my own son, I am willing to accept that people are much more complex and that passing judgement is a waste of time.
Even if leopold got the rove story completely wrong he did enough groundbreaking work on the calif energy crisis (which left my mother without a monthly income because they stopped paying her pg&e dividend) and on enron to keep me reading him for a long time.
Same goes for Isikoff (who got many many stories wrong). And mike barnicle, and mitch albom, etc etc
eliot wrote on June 26, 2007 10:28 PM:Lastly, Tom, don't assume I am not aware of leopolds background. I am fully aware. I bought his book. And maybe its the fact that I have a son who struggled with drug addiction and the fact that leopold was so brutally honest about what made him tick that, like my own son, I am willing to accept that people are much more complex and that passing judgement is a waste of time.
Even if leopold got the rove story completely wrong he did enough groundbreaking work on the calif energy crisis (which left my mother without a monthly income because they stopped paying her pg&e dividend) and on enron to keep me reading him for a long time.
Same goes for Isikoff (who got many many stories wrong). And mike barnicle, and mitch albom, etc etc
Arne Langsetmo wrote on June 26, 2007 10:58 PM:Gregor:
I remember vividly that Rhenquist ruled in a case that statistical inference alone cannot be the basis for a lawsuit against discrimination, and that the plaintiff must show an explicit intent to discriminate on the part of the defendant.
Ummm, unless the plaintiff's name is "Dubya". Then you don't even have to show any evidence (fortunately, because the case involves action that will take place in the future and there's thus no factua; record to even look at), much less invidious intent.
Cheers,
Brew City Brawler wrote on June 26, 2007 11:08 PM:The WI GOP pulled a similar stunt in Milwaukee in 2004:
GOP fails to get 5,619 names removed from voting lists
City commission says party didn't prove case; challenges could move to polling places
By GREG J. BOROWSKI
gborowski@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Oct. 28, 2004
Although the state Republican Party failed Thursday in its effort to have 5,619 names and addresses removed from Milwaukee voting lists, the GOP plans to challenge anyone who tries to vote from the disputed addresses Tuesday.
Polling-place challenges could bring a high level of emotion to an issue that was argued Thursday in largely dry legal terms, with the city Election Commission unanimously deciding the GOP had not sufficiently proved its case to have the names removed.
Nevertheless, the city moved Thursday to take its own steps to flag problematic addresses so poll workers could make their own challenges. Mayor Tom Barrett suggested that all voters bring identification with them to alleviate potential problems.
Republicans filed a challenge of 5,619 names at 4:57 p.m. Wednesday, three minutes before the legal deadline. The party identified the addresses as vacant after using a computer to compare 386,527 names on city registration lists against a U.S. Postal Service database of all known street addresses in the city.
Of the 5,619 addresses listed, the party submitted 34 photos of cases where an address didn't exist, was a vacant lot, or - in one case - a gyro stand. In nine of those cases, the GOP said voting records showed someone was listed as having voted from that address in recent elections.
The commission, though, tossed out the entire challenge, with Republican appointee Edward Schultz joining two Democrats in saying the case wasn't strong enough.
Victoria Toliver, a Democratic appointee on the panel, was critical of the late filing by the GOP and noted that none of the people whose registrations were challenged could be asked to appear.
"We can't rush to disenfranchise a voter without hearing from the person," Toliver said.
Commission chairman Allen Campos, another Democratic appointee, also voted to deny the challenge.
A Journal Sentinel review Thursday of many of the names and addresses confirmed some of the problems cited by the GOP, as well as uncovered additional missing addresses. Some cited by the GOP may be explained by clerical errors, however.
Republicans indicated that they would appeal to the state Elections Board today.
After the commission meeting, both parties returned to their roles in the ever-intensifying voter fraud vs. voter intimidation debate that has played out across the country.
Such matters are being fought in Wisconsin and other battleground states, such as Ohio, where Republicans challenged 35,000 voters.
Polls here show President Bush and Democrat John Kerry in a tight race, one that could ultimately be decided on who best gets supporters to the polls.
Problems identified
"This is a black eye on the city of Milwaukee and the state of Wisconsin," GOP Chairman Rick Graber said. "These 5,600 addresses could be used to allow fraudulent voting. Whether it's deliberate or not, something's wrong when you have people from addresses that don't exist."
He spoke at a news conference in front of a billboard located where the address 4309 N. Teutonia Ave. - included on the voting rolls - would be, if it existed.
"Someone voted from that billboard twice," Graber said, citing the February and April elections of this year.
The party has not said how many of the 5,619 addresses it found showed any voting history. Their checks on the 34 dated to September 2000.
George Twigg, spokesman for the Kerry campaign, said poll watchers are prepared for challenges from Republicans, who say their volunteers will be armed with lists of the questionable addresses.
"I think most people will be able to vote easily," Twigg said. "We hope for the best. But we are prepared for the worst."
Left undetermined Thursday: How many of the challenged addresses are actually non-existent and how many represent clerical errors, now-demolished buildings or attempts to vote fraudulently.
Donald Daugherty, the attorney for the Republicans, noted that if any valid voters are removed from the list, they can simply reregister on the spot on election day. Matt O'Neill, representing the Kerry campaign, argued that registrations should not be deleted without allowing the person named to contest it.
To remove the names, Republicans had to prove their case - that the addresses do not exist - beyond a reasonable doubt, the same standard used in criminal trials.
The GOP acknowledged, however, that it had checked only a few dozen addresses in person and no one who took the photos was offered as a witness to describe, under oath, the process used. O'Neill argued that amounted to hearsay evidence, which would not be allowed in court.
Indeed, the person who officially filed the complaint, Andrew Narrai, said he had done none of the legwork himself and knew nothing about the effort until Wednesday when he filled in for his wife as the official complainant.
O'Neill said Narrai had been "dragged in here (Wednesday) afternoon and told, 'We need a warm body to make a challenge, and you're the guy.' "
To be considered, the complaint had to be filed by a Milwaukee resident who is eligible to vote. Narrai, 38, is the display advertising director for the Journal Sentinel.
James Konowalski, who did the analysis for the GOP, said he had done similar comparisons for Racine, Appleton, Madison and Green Bay. Republicans have not filed similar challenges in those cities.
He said he completed the list of 5,619 addresses on Oct. 10 or 11, at least 16 days before it was filed. The GOP said it used that time to find the 34 addresses it cited.
At one point, he seemed to undercut the party's case when he said he had stopped at three addresses himself, two of which did not exist - 2020 N. 1st St. and 2437 N. Cramer St. But he said that the third, 6337 N. 77th St., may or may not exist. He said he found a vacant apartment building at the corner of the block that was missing the fourth digit of its address. It read only: 633.
O'Neill argued that the building could exist and therefore the GOP sample could be off by 33%. Toliver, the commission member, went further in her motion to deny the appeal, saying the testimony proved only "one of the three (Konowalski checked) was valid."
On Thursday afternoon, a Journal Sentinel check found the building in question now has a complete address posted: 6333, not the 6337 on the list. It is a four-unit apartment building being renovated.
It is unclear how the four units had previously been addressed, whether by separate street numbers, as a duplex would be, or apartment numbers (ie. 1 to 4). Neighboring four-unit buildings, all vacant, show large gaps between addresses on the buildings: 6309 to 6323 to 6333.
On Thursday, Barrett repeated his pledge that city workers would conduct a clean and fair election.
He acknowledged that some non-existent addresses are on the rolls, saying a list that large will have some problems.
The 5,619 addresses cited by the GOP represent about 1.5% of the 386,527 registrants, a number that now may be more than 400,000 based on the 20,000 new registrants officials cited this week.
Kevin Kennedy, executive director of the state Elections Board, said he could not find any clear direction in state law on what to do if a potential voter's address doesn't exist, or exactly who is responsible for policing those addresses.
Wisconsin courts have broadly interpreted state law, allowing someone to even list a homeless shelter where they were fed but did not sleep as a valid address for voting purposes, Kennedy added. He has the authority to rule on the matter, in consultation with the board chairman, or the full board could meet on it.
Problems found
The Journal Sentinel on Thursday reviewed some of the questionable addresses cited by Republicans to determine the validity of their complaint.
Of the 34 properties that the GOP highlighted in its complaint, the newspaper could not locate 26 addresses or the voters' names associated with those addresses. The other eight instances appear to be typographical errors in which the voters' addresses were incorrectly listed on the voter registration rolls.
The newspaper also attempted to locate 74 other addresses among the 5,600 listed in the GOP complaint and determined that 68 of them didn't exist.
Among the discrepancies that were confirmed:
Lucretia Ann Griffin is listed as a registered voter at 1700 W. Hampton Ave. on the city's voter rolls. The GOP says that address doesn't exist and a check of the city assessor's property database also shows no such address.
But some of the addresses labeled by the Republicans as bad addresses appear to be typographical errors:
The Republicans said the voting address listed for Victor Moy at 8183 W. Thurston Ave. does not exist. City assessor records confirm there is no such address but also show that the Moy family lives at 8153 W. Thurston Ave.
Other discrepancies were difficult to explain.
For example, Louis O'Neal III is registered to vote at 7329 W. Herbert Ave., but assessor records show no such address.
But O'Neal's father, Louis O'Neal Jr., said his son has lived his entire life with him at a home in the 4500 block of N. 45th St. He said his son is 18, and he doesn't know whether he has registered to vote.
Officials said there are many possible reasons for non-existent addresses, including cases where now-demolished buildings once stood or basic data entry problems.
That could be cases where a "W." for west should really be "E." for east. Or cases where numbers are transposed. Given how frequently people move from place to place, there may never be a point where the list is 100% accurate.
Tom Kertscher, Steven Potter, Tom Held, Bruce Murphy and Steven Walters, all of the Journal Sentinel staff, contributed to this report.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=270603&format=print
Ken Hirsch wrote on June 27, 2007 9:30 AM:I don't see any key to the caging list data:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/duvall-matching/?resultpage=1&
What do codes in the columns "Race" and "04 Election" mean? I can guess Y and N, but E? Is A an Absentee ballot? What is the source of the "Race" data?
JEP wrote on June 27, 2007 10:16 AM:Cevrero;
If they want me to have an ID card, they will have to pry it into my cold, dead hands...
But, feel free to take one if they offer it, it is certainly your right to make that decision.
Just don't require it of me...
Evan wrote on June 27, 2007 7:56 PM:The postal equipment refered to in the article is called a case, not a cage. The employees who cased mail into the case are called clerks, not casers or cagers.