Replies: 42 Comments
Comment #1: alizaryn said on 4/18/05 @ 5:41pm ET...
Has anyone received any kind of reply from President Carter in regards to our concerns? I would like to hear that he is at the very least listening and taking a look at the information we have compiled.
Comment #2: Maureen Auclair said on 4/18/05 @ 6:06pm ET...
Dear Representative Conyers:
Thank you for being a REAL hero and advocate to return democracy to this country.
Velvet Revolution was circulating a petition. I suggest that you are the appropriate party to present this petition to the members of this Republican white wash panel. Of course this would be AFTER you read it into the congressional record and included the names of the signatories.
I further suggest that you and some other Democrats request a meeting with former President Carter and ask his assistance in
having groups like Black Box voting, Velvet Revolution, and yourself and other congress people, who have been involved, to appear before the panel and present their evidence.
How sad it is that we have to reach so high up into the government for a busy man, such as yourself ,to access those who should be held accountable to VOTERS directly as they are paid with TAX PAYER Dollars.
Again - Thanks for being our leader and our HERO!
Sincerely,
Maureen Auclair
Comment #3: foolme1ns said on 4/18/05 @ 6:09pm ET...
IDEAS FOR CAMPAIGN REFORM
1. Hard budgets for politicians running for office. Limit the amounts they can spend. Each campaign can spend that much and no more. At least half of their contributions must come from individuals in small amounts.
2. Any commercials put on by outside groups must have an approval message by the campaign at the end. Either the campaign approves or disapproves of the message.
3. Mandatory media time for candidates after primary season. As a public service and a cost of doing business, television and radio should have to GIVE candidates 5 minutes a day to address the American people and tell them what they plan to do if elected. It must be the candidate speaking.
4. Term limits for congress. Life time politicians only end up owing a lifetimes worth of favors.
5. Once out of office, no politician can become a lobbyist or campaign consultant for 5 years.
6. PAPER BALLOTS!!!! PAPER BALLOTS!!!! PAPER BALLOTS!!!!
Comment #4: EllenG said on 4/18/05 @ 6:31pm ET...
Actual, verifiable INDEPENDENT individuals ACTUALLY COUNTING the votes EVERYWHERE.
Comment #5: Susan said on 4/18/05 @ 6:31pm ET...
I simply CANNOT BELIEVE that someone as well-intentioned and savvy as President Carter would allow himself to be mislead regarding these electoral issues. Instead, i believe that he, polite as ever, is letting these partisans present their case. It is disturbing, though, that all focus is on the conduct of the voters (even though there is no significant evidence that voters' actions caused any voting irregularities) rather than the actual electoral system that made citizens stand in line for hours to cast (perhaps) a meaningless vote.
Don't "blue ribbon" commissions first determine WHAT THE ISSUE IS that is being addressed? Is it voter fraud or fraud on voters? Once again, we speak past each other. Where did this commission come from and who determined that this investigation was necessary?President Carter needs to request some actual evidence that voter fraud is an issue. Then he needs to move on to the anomalies of the last election cycles, especially 2004, QUICKLY.
I have faith in Rep. Conyers to inform and enlighten.
Comment #6: Todd Jones said on 4/18/05 @ 7:38pm ET...
Rep. Conyers:
Please urge Carter to resign from this travesty, as soon as possible, and make a public announcement about it.
Dems must start their own bipartisan Commission.
Comment #7: Kira said on 4/18/05 @ 7:55pm ET...
I heartily second the words of Maureen Auclair. Oh my - each day it seems to get worse and worse.
Rep. Conyers, Sir, thank you so very much for remaining active in this cause.
Comment #8: ljm said on 4/18/05 @ 7:56pm ET...
Today, a couple of guys doing work on my house talked about being anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, quoted scripture to each other, etc...Then one of them said, " the Bush people deceived us. Did you see F-9/11? They showed Congress trying to do something about the blacks not being able to vote in Florida. I think they stole the election." So, if these guys can see the facts, Baker and his pals don't want anybody else to get a chance to believe it's true, too late it seems. I'm sorry Mr. Conyers, you must have felt like you'd gone throught the looking glass.
Comment #9: Hoot said on 4/18/05 @ 8:04pm ET...
Have the RNC tactics finally reached the point where they can be prosecuted under RICO laws? All the elements of organized crime are there from money laundering (campaign contributions) through bribery (accepting them), extortion (the 'nuculer' option in the Senate) and the embezzlement of my tax dollars (controlled attendance at publicly funded events).
I say we are far beyond the need for a special prosecutor or at least an independant special investigator (Hmmm, maybe the U.S. Marshalls?) with the ability to use all the broad powers of the Patriot Act against this Terrorist organization. Franlky, I fear my government far far more than I fear any terrorist attack.
Hoist them by thier own petards sir!
Comment #10: E. Levy said on 4/18/05 @ 8:10pm ET...
Many of us who have been working for election justice and/or election reform have collected evidence about the theft of the 2004 election and the role of voting technology in that theft. Our evidence has not gotten the attention it deserves, though much of what pertained to Ohio was included in your fine report--which also didn't get the attention it deserved.
It would be great if this Commission could be trusted to regard the evidence collected by honest Americans as important. But, alas, this Commission is such a farce that it looks to me counterproductive to "show our hand" there.
Dear Congressman Conyers, do you have any recommendations for election activists about whether or not to submit our evidence to this farce of a commission?
If you do get an opportunity to talk to President Carter, please let him know that some evidence is being withheld from the Commission because activists do not trust that it will be given fair consideration.
Thank you for your vision, dedication and perseverence.
Comment #11: Susan said on 4/18/05 @ 8:24pm ET...
This is no less bold than the thuggery in Florida in 2000. It makes one think they were VERY prepared for what happened there at that time. Mr. Baker knows only too well what he is doing to subvert democracy.
We are so far down the rabbit hole, but there is no alternative but speaking the truth.
Comment #12: Jerry buerger said on 4/18/05 @ 10:01pm ET...
When you meet with the commission members keep in mind that many of the individuals that have been before the commission that you refered to in you post are not part of the "reality based community". These types have this fantasy that says anything we do to further the conservative agenda is fair play and anything that anyone does to try to stop us is cheating. Its imperative that President Carter understands who he is dealing with. I'm sure he does. I'm sure none of us will ever forget the role Mr. Baker played in Florida. The fact that he is even on this board, much less a co-chair proves the kind of fantasy world we increasingly find our selves in.
The two most important things that should be done regarding this issue are, one, make illegal any and all activities to suppress votes for any reason and two, there must be a verfiable paper trail for every ballot cast. Suppressing votes and no paper trail have done more to dissenfranchise voters in the last three election cycles than any thing else we have ever seen.
Fight on!
Comment #13: Joseph Bua said on 4/18/05 @ 10:17pm ET...
The only way we are going to get a voter-verified paper trial is to do it ourselves, and here's how:
1) Get an Absentee Ballot
2) Fill it in.
3) Put your name, address and phone on it.
4) Take two copies for yourself.
5) Mail one to yourself pre-election day. Leave it sealed.
6) Frame one and display proudly in your living room
7) Send the original to the address provided.
Yes, I know this means I give up my secret ballot, but at this point I don't care.
I want my vote to count, and I don't care who knows who I vote for. Everyone I care about knows how I vote, anyway.
Comment #14: Kurt Milk said on 4/18/05 @ 11:12pm ET...
Thank God for you and VelvetRevolution. I heard that VR broke the story about this Commission and its members and then led the entire protest at the event with signs, puppets, demonstrators, questions etc. What would Americans do without the work of you and VR? Brad from VR said that citizens nationwide have sent thousands of letters to the the Commissioners from its website, www.velvetrevolution.us, and some of the Commissioners threatened to take legal action against VR for sending spam!!! This is crazy, a Commission that is seeking out information from the public is threatening the org that makes it easy to send them comments. And then the VR activists were denied access to the event and were accompanied by a police presence the entire day. This is really off to a bad start. And the Commission wants to improve democracy by thwarting democracy. I hope you can get Carter to lead the charge on this one.
Comment #15: Ohiodem1 said on 4/18/05 @ 11:48pm ET...
As a close-up observer of the election shenagians in Ohio, I believe the only way to clean up elections in Ohio and elsewhere is to change the Ohio Constitution in several fundamental ways.
The problem of rejected provisional ballots can be corrected by requiring the county BOE to publish the names of all rejected voters and permitting a public hearing on each and every challenge. If the voting officials must justify each voter's denial of the right to vote in a one on one public hearing with the harsh reality of press coverage, wholesale rejection of ballots will not be possible. As it is, no one who used a provisional ballot knows if their vote counted or not.
Another 90,000 Ohioans who used punch card ballots (used in 70 out of 88 counties) had their presidential votes thrown out because of Overvotes, Undervotes, or the infamous dimpled or hanging chads. Ken Blackwell predicted this number would be rejected, and it did not bother him.
A final note about the hearings. Mr. Baker was the lead attorney in Bush V Gore in Florida, and he knows how to use the judiciary to steal an election. Why doesn't the right complain about this bit of judicial activism, arguably the most activist act by any Supreme Court in our history.
Comment #16: Horkus said on 4/18/05 @ 11:53pm ET...
Keep fighting the fight, Mr. Conyers. You do what you can. I'll do what I can, as I'm sure other commenters and readers here will do too. Velvetrevolution.us will soon enact a divestiture campaign. I'll spread the word. The story of CLINT CURTIS is also spreading. They won't be able hide their scandalous ways forever.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall. Vote fraud is explosive, and they'll do everything they can to hide it. Though they won't be able to hide for long. The Mainstream Media is part and parcel in hiding this issue, but the internet is on your side.
EXIT POLLS DID NOT MATCH THE FINAL VOTE IN STATES THAT USED TOUCH SCREEN VOTING. I don't know what extra proof people want in order to know that fraud most likely occurred. I guess I'm also supposed to believe that the people and party that supported Tom DeLay wouldn't cheat when it comes to voting either.
Comment #17: G said on 4/19/05 @ 1:07am ET...
Regarding Comment #9 by Hoot, how about the following link to RICO?
http://www.screenplayexpose.com/Bushrico.htm
Comment #18: cg said on 4/19/05 @ 1:28am ET...
Thank you, Rep. Conyers.
Finally, it feels like someone is telling the truth. Keep speaking it.
Comment #19: Rob G said on 4/19/05 @ 2:26am ET...
I am thinking once again the 'nice old dems' ponied up 'nice old Carter' and of course the naturally deceitful Rethuglicans ponied up scumbag Baker. Its classic David and Goliath. Let hope David (Carter) can be the sly one and actually let Goliath (Baker et al) hang themselves with the rocks Carter has from Conyers bag!!!
Comment #20: Wilfredo S. said on 4/19/05 @ 2:30am ET...
There is much that I would like to say about the road this country has been led to by this MISadministration, but instead I would like to praise individuals such as yourself Mr. Conyers, for being a voice for Democracy.
Paper ballots= Paper trail
Comment #21: Torqued said on 4/19/05 @ 5:53am ET...
"First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me." -- Rev. Martin Niemoller, Germany, 1945
It's all about civil rights. Always has been, always will be. Stolen elections are but a very small part of the oppression. Ask any black, hispanic, or muslim... Ask yourself, are you now the next complaining victim? Yes, as am I...
Why are we complaining now when it is all our fault criminals came to power? Why are we leaning on others when only WE have the power to affect change? Why are we the summer soldier when it is our rights under attack, but the idle patriot when it is others?
Mr. Conyers is a great leader, has been in the middle of this battle for 40 years and knows all too well what lies ahead. But it is you and I that must now get this done. It is 280 million American Patriots making noise that will ultimately win this fight for freedom.
Wake up America! It's crunch time and you are it!
Comment #22: Glenn McGahee said on 4/19/05 @ 8:23am ET...
I watched the opening session on CSPAN and was upset when it was cut off during the last hour on voting security. What I did get was that the work of the committees has been delayed for 2 years after HAVA was passed, that it has not been funded adequately, but then I saw Mr. Baker's role when he mentioned that it probably wouldn't be able to meet the deadline of Jan. '06, (so nothing could be done until after the '06 Congressional elections). Thats why he is there.
Comment #23: #22 said on 4/19/05 @ 9:09am ET...
It's nice to see President Carter taking the initiative to look into this important issue.
Comment #24: Monica Smith said on 4/19/05 @ 9:45am ET...
Doesn't look like all those people who signed on to the Mantle of Lincoln Compact are keeping their word:
About AARLC
The mission and purpose of the African American Republican Leadership Council (AARLC) is to break the liberal democrat stranglehold over Black America.
AARLC labors and directs the only national campaign to raise and increase African Americans support for common sense Reaganite Republican public policies and candidates from a nominal 14 to a strategic target of 25 percent. This target is not arbitrary but empirically based as the necessary threshold of African American support needed to make the overwhelming difference in majority-minority or non-African American candidates races where the black electorate can be the deciding vote or give the edge to closely contested races for victory when they support Reaganomic public policies, challengers or incumbents.
AARLC is leading the way with the only national conservative black seminary to identify, convert, recruit, and train local, state and federal candidates to run in open seats or against democrat minorities. AARLC is the only nationwide conservative Republican organization dedicated to elect Reaganite pro-growth economic security African American Republicans to local, state and the federal government. African American Republican Leadership Council leverages and provides critical early financial support, issue advocacies, public education information and complete independent campaigns to compliment particular races.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Senate Mantle of Lincoln Compact Signatures
GOP Black Allinace Open Door Compact
I................., see the need and believe in re-igniting GOP Black America Alliance, sine qua none, in restoring the Mantle of Lincoln by engaging Black America in the completion of the conservative movement as dreamt by Ronald Reagan, and am pleased to endorse African American Republican Leadership Council "New Rules of Engagement Mission in Breaking the liberal democratic stranglehold over Black America by:
Raising African American support of common sense Republican public policies,
Delivering the Black Electorate for victory in closely contested races and
Helping elect Pro-Growth African American Republicans beginning at the local state level.
I, wholeheartedly agree that increasing Black America support to at least 25 percent is reasonable and attainable in making the overwhelming difference vis-a-vis Reaganite candidates and common sense public policies.
Black America can count on my ironclad commitment and full support.
Signed by
Richard Shelby
Jeff Sessions
Ted Stevens
Frank Murkowski
John McCain
Jon Kyle
Tim Hutchinson
Ben Nighthorse Campbell
Wayne Allard
Larry E. Craig
Michael D. Crapo
Peter G. Fitzgerald
Richard C. Lugar
Charles E. Grassley
Sam Brownback
Pat Roberts
Mitch McConnell, Jr
Jim Bunning
Olympia Snowe
Susan M. Collins
Thad Cochran
Trent Lott
Chris S. "Kit" Bond
Conrad Burns
Chuck Hagel
John Ensign
Robert C. "Bob" Smith
Pete V. Domenici
Jesse A. Helms
Mike Dewine
George V. Voinovich
Don Nickles
James M. Inhofe
Gordon Smith
Arlen Specter
Rick Santorum
Lincoln D. Chafee
Strom Thurmond
Fred Thompson
William H. Frist
Phil Gramm
Kay Bailey Hutchinson
Orrin G. Hatch
Robert F. Bennett
John W. Warner
George Allen
Craig Thomas
Mike Enzi
Comment #25: Monica Smith said on 4/19/05 @ 9:46am ET...
Doesn't look like all those people who signed on to the Mantle of Lincoln Compact are keeping their word:
About AARLC
The mission and purpose of the African American Republican Leadership Council (AARLC) is to break the liberal democrat stranglehold over Black America.
AARLC labors and directs the only national campaign to raise and increase African Americans support for common sense Reaganite Republican public policies and candidates from a nominal 14 to a strategic target of 25 percent. This target is not arbitrary but empirically based as the necessary threshold of African American support needed to make the overwhelming difference in majority-minority or non-African American candidates races where the black electorate can be the deciding vote or give the edge to closely contested races for victory when they support Reaganomic public policies, challengers or incumbents.
AARLC is leading the way with the only national conservative black seminary to identify, convert, recruit, and train local, state and federal candidates to run in open seats or against democrat minorities. AARLC is the only nationwide conservative Republican organization dedicated to elect Reaganite pro-growth economic security African American Republicans to local, state and the federal government. African American Republican Leadership Council leverages and provides critical early financial support, issue advocacies, public education information and complete independent campaigns to compliment particular races.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Senate Mantle of Lincoln Compact Signatures
GOP Black Allinace Open Door Compact
I................., see the need and believe in re-igniting GOP Black America Alliance, sine qua none, in restoring the Mantle of Lincoln by engaging Black America in the completion of the conservative movement as dreamt by Ronald Reagan, and am pleased to endorse African American Republican Leadership Council "New Rules of Engagement Mission in Breaking the liberal democratic stranglehold over Black America by:
Raising African American support of common sense Republican public policies,
Delivering the Black Electorate for victory in closely contested races and
Helping elect Pro-Growth African American Republicans beginning at the local state level.
I, wholeheartedly agree that increasing Black America support to at least 25 percent is reasonable and attainable in making the overwhelming difference vis-a-vis Reaganite candidates and common sense public policies.
Black America can count on my ironclad commitment and full support.
Signed by
Richard Shelby
Jeff Sessions
Ted Stevens
Frank Murkowski
John McCain
Jon Kyle
Tim Hutchinson
Ben Nighthorse Campbell
Wayne Allard
Larry E. Craig
Michael D. Crapo
Peter G. Fitzgerald
Richard C. Lugar
Charles E. Grassley
Sam Brownback
Pat Roberts
Mitch McConnell, Jr
Jim Bunning
Olympia Snowe
Susan M. Collins
Thad Cochran
Trent Lott
Chris S. "Kit" Bond
Conrad Burns
Chuck Hagel
John Ensign
Robert C. "Bob" Smith
Pete V. Domenici
Jesse A. Helms
Mike Dewine
George V. Voinovich
Don Nickles
James M. Inhofe
Gordon Smith
Arlen Specter
Rick Santorum
Lincoln D. Chafee
Strom Thurmond
Fred Thompson
William H. Frist
Phil Gramm
Kay Bailey Hutchinson
Orrin G. Hatch
Robert F. Bennett
John W. Warner
George Allen
Craig Thomas
Mike Enzi
Comment #26: Susan said on 4/19/05 @ 12:03pm ET...
Where is the public outrage when a "commission" on voting takes testimony primarily from non-witnesses who blame the citizenry without any proof at all of voter fraud? All proof indicates numerous problems with voting mechanics and ballot access.
They seek a solution to a problem that does not exist. Where is the outrage?
Comment #27: Trish L said on 4/19/05 @ 1:21pm ET...
I am outraged. I think alot of people are outraged about this commission. I even attempted to write a letter to Carter yesterday to express my disappointment that he's even associated with this sham. But, how on earth are Americans supposed to learn that other Americans are outraged. Most don't even know about the commission!!
They control the media. They don't show protests against the war (heck, they don't even show the news about the war). So, the outrage is there, for those who are aware.
In any case...please keep fighting Mr. Conyers. You are my hero.
Comment #28: Michael J. McMaster said on 4/19/05 @ 2:48pm ET...
Dear Mr. Conyers; I watched the commission yesterday on C-Span, thank God for C-Span! I've come to 3 conclusions, 1st we need a verifiable paper trail for these computers with access to computer codes! 2nd a data base for each state with up to date registered voters on them, and cards sent to each voter in the state with name and addresses! and 3rd non-partisan election supervisors picked by the Gov. and voted on by their legislators! To try to evoked these esential items can be completed by the end of this year! Try to accomplish this much this year! Thanks for listening!
Comment #29: Ohiodem1 said on 4/19/05 @ 5:34pm ET...
Here are 3 constitutional amendments I wrote to collect comments - they are for Ohio, but can be generallized:
#1
ELECTION RULES AMENDMENT
Whereas: Late voting rules changes are confusing to election workers, designated challengers and voters.
Whereas: Changing elections rules just prior to elections can have the effect of disenfranchising voters.
Whereas: Changing rules after an election has been conducted and before Provisional and Absentee ballots can have the effect of disenfranchising voters who have cast votes in accordance with the rules in effect at the time the ballot was cast.
Therefore, by adoption of this amendment:
1. The Secretary of State is required to fix all rules related to voting, including absentee and provisional ballots at least 60 days before a primary or general election.
2. Each voting location within a county where a provisional ballot is cast is to have on hand all necessary ballots from each voting district in the county. The provisional ballot provided to the voter will match that available at the voting location assigned to the voter’s home address. Such paper ballots are to be available for download from the County Board of Elections.
3. Provisional ballots will be validated against voting books at the voters place of residence. If the voter was given authority to vote in his/her voting place, the provisional ballot will be rejected, and not counted.
4. Absentee ballots will be validated against voting books at the voters place of residence. If the voter was given authority to vote in his/her voting place, the absentee ballot will be rejected, and not counted.
5. Absentee and Provisional ballots will be validated for counting within 10 days after the primary or general election date. Absentee and Provisional ballots will be counted immediately after all ballots have been validated and the validation information has been removed to ensure secret balloting.
6. The names of provisional and absentee voters whose vote has been challenged will be published in a newspaper of record in the county in which the voter resides. The challenged voter will have a right to a hearing to determine the validity of the challenge If the challenge is decided in the favor of the voter, the ballot will be counted.
7. The Legislature is directed to enact enabling legislation intended to permit provisional balloting to take place at any polling location within the county in which the provisional voter lives.
8. The remedy for the Citizens of Ohio in the event the Secretary of State fails to promulgate rules within 60 days of an election is the forfeiture of the office of Secretary of State after a hearing by the Supreme Court of Ohio, which has original jurisdiction.
A yes vote is required for passage of the amendment.
#2
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO IMPROVE
THE OHIO ELECTIONS PROCESS
Whereas: Ohio does not have uniform voting means or standards between counties.
Whereas: Waiting in voting lines above one hour has the effect of disenfranchising voters.
Whereas: The right of the people of Ohio to a fair and impartial elections process is absolute.
Whereas: The right of the people of Ohio to a verifiable means of recounting votes is absolute.
Whereas: Voting machines with no ability to establish an audit path or accurate recount violates the right of the people of Ohio to a verifiable means of recounting votes.
Whereas: The selection of voting means has been a responsibility of County Boards of Elections.
Whereas: The adoption of uniform voting means between counties is constrained by cash resources available between counties.
Therefore, by adoption of this amendment:
1. The Secretary of State is directed to submit to the Legislature a plan for a uniform means of voting in all wards and precincts in each county of Ohio. This plan is required to provide for either paper ballots or machines with a paper or mechanical means to audit each election, and to permit a verifiable means of recounting each election. This plan is required to be submitted to the Legislature within 180 days of adoption of the amendment.
2. The legislature is directed to pass legislation enabling adoption of the plan and providing necessary funding so that it can be implemented within 180 days of adoption of the legislation.
3. The enabling legislation will provide funding necessary to implement the plan statewide.
4. The Governor is directed to sign the enabling legislation or to allow the plan to become law without signature.
5. The Supreme Court of Ohio has original jurisdiction for all actions arising from this amendment.
6. The Secretary of State is directed to ensure no voter has to wait over one hour to cast his or her vote.
7. The polls are to be open for 48 continuous hours to provide voters greater opportunity to vote, and to reduce lines. Poll workers are to be arranged for by the county board of elections, with sufficient replacements to avoid shifts longer than 16 hours. Compensation for poll workers is to be provided by the State.
A majority Yes vote is required for passage.
#3
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROHIBITING
THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND COUNTY
ELECTIONS OFFICIALS FROM ENGAGING IN
ELECTORAL POLITICS
Whereas: The Secretary of State is Ohio’s chief elections officer.
Whereas: The Chairman of each county’s Board of Elections is the chief elections officer of the county in which he or she resides.
Whereas: Acting as an official in a candidate’s or issue political campaign is or can be construed as a conflict of interest with the role of chief elections officer.
Whereas: Engaging in a political campaign can cause a loss of faith of the public in the integrity and impartiality of Ohio’s election process.
Therefore: By adoption of this Amendment, the Secretary of State in Ohio is prohibited from the following:
1. Becoming an official in an election campaign while acting as Secretary of State or Chairman of a County Elections Board. This includes issue campaigns.
2. Elections officials are prohibited from lending their name to, or appearing in political campaign advertisements of any kind in support or against any candidate or issue on any ballot in the State of Ohio.
3. The remedy to the people of Ohio for any named official in this amendment will be the immediate removal of the official from office, following a hearing by the Supreme Court of Ohio, which has original jurisdiction, and must act within 7 days of the receipt of a complaint.
4. This amendment does not prohibit named officials from running for office or supporting their own candidacy.
5. This amendment does not prohibit named officials from advocating political positions or support of candidates or positions in open forums or speeches.
A yes vote is required for adoption of this amendment.
These are a collection of random thoughts based on observations last December. Does anyone have any improvements or better ideas, I would appreciate feedback. It would be wonderful to get some of these or better ideas implemented before 2006. It takes about 200,000 signatures to get a measure on the ballot in Ohio, so this is a daunting task, but do-able.
Comment #30: crackpot press said on 4/19/05 @ 6:35pm ET...
How can two of the people on this board be on any "fair elections" board. They oversaw the two most "sketchy" elections ever in California and Florida. Please note I know that Arnold won the election fair and square. The concept of a the recall was idiocy.
Comment #31: xox said on 4/19/05 @ 7:20pm ET...
Arnold is the "acting" governor, for sure. We Californians have no idea who won that election, but we know who claimed victory. There is no paper record here for much of the voting. And since the same criminals who own our vapor voting machines have also sacked the US treasury to make a get-rich-quick war to control the world's resources, we are already in a position similar to that of a banana republic: the treasury has been sacked and our country is being driven into the ground. Better find out: how ARE your votes counted?
Comment #32: l. stueve said on 4/19/05 @ 10:01pm ET...
I think what you need to understand is that James Baker is running this dog and pony show. This was as planned as the invasion of Iraq, the 9/11 Commission (the first one) and nothing will come of this except maybe voter id cards. We need to push, just as the 9/11 widows pushed, for hearings on this panel! Jimmy Carter is one man and he is an old man. He is also a great man, but James Baker is running this show just as he ran the 2000 election fight for Bush. It is not a coincidence.
Comment #33: impactglassman said on 4/19/05 @ 10:15pm ET...
With regard to Mr. Fund's comment that Congress should allow precinct workers to determine whether a provisional ballot should count because they would know who “looks as if they belong in the neighborhood,” we have demonstrated that out here in Tucson poll workers decided to accept, and scanned into the opt-scan ballot box on Election Day, 3 dozen provisional ballots cast by individuals they may well have recognized as persons NOT from that neighborhood. We're talking a predominantly Hispanic precinct, registered 80% non-Republican, which went only 56% for Kerry -- except for the signed-and-sealed provisional ballots that went to the Recorder's Office; these went 71% for Kerry. I have informed Jimmy Carter of the details.
Comment #34: Emily said on 4/20/05 @ 2:12am ET...
Everybody should check out bradblog.com and his recent entry. If everybody here Emails this guy and your friends who are concerned about election reform we need to get him to let at least Conyers join the Carter/Baker commission!
Comment #35: Mike Shelby said on 4/20/05 @ 8:13am ET...
Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots! Paper ballots!
Please.
Comment #36: Denise Hesse said on 4/20/05 @ 2:55pm ET...
Rep Conyers- I was glad to read your blog as I thought exactly what you did while watching C-SPAN. I thought, "This is a total joke, they are acting as is the is the first time anyone has even hinted that something may be amiss!" President Carter, whom I also greatly admire made some very pointed,valid remarks, and even asked for reiteration of positions because, it seemed he couldn't believe what he was hearing. It will be interesting to see his candid response to this committee as he has never been one to keep quiet where he sees injustice. Thanks for validating my feelings. My overall feeling is that this is a dog and pony show meant to be an excuse for not moving on the bills that have been proposed and will attempt to be dragged out long enough to preempt the 2006 election and get bush out of office and another GOP operative in place before anything is even concluded. I do hope it turns out differently and I personally am working toward that goal, but events like this are still hard to swallow, and a huge waste of money on top of everything else.
Comment #37: Spencer Overton said on 4/21/05 @ 5:34pm ET...
I am a member of the Carter Baker Federal Election Reform Commission. Please note the following commentary I wrote, which appears in a recent issue of Roll Call. A shorter 650-word version published by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution is available at http://www.law.gwu.edu/news/ajc_april8.pdf
Spencer Overton
ROLL CALL, Monday April 11, 2005
THE PROBLEMS WITH REQUIRING ID AT THE POLLS
By Spencer Overton
In Congress and about a dozen states, recent debates over proposals to require photo identification at the polls have divided along partisan lines. Republicans generally support ID requirements and Democrats oppose them.
But both parties need to move beyond political posturing and empty rhetoric. Voter fraud is wrong. At the same time, however, advocates have yet to show that ID laws solve more problems than they create.
Photo ID requirements will reduce participation by legitimate voters. While more research is needed, one study by the Task Force on the Federal Election System showed that 6 percent to 10 percent of the existing American electorate lacks any form of state ID.
According to the AARP's Georgia chapter, about 36 percent of Georgians over age 75 do not have a driver's license. A 1994 Justice Department study found that blacks in Louisiana were four to five times less likely than whites to have photo IDs. In 2004, South Dakota voters in predominantly American Indian counties were two to eight times more likely to fail to bring ID to the polls than other voters.
Photo ID advocates downplay access concerns by arguing that responsible voters who bring an ID to the polls have nothing to fear and that IDs are commonly required to board airplanes, use credit cards and buy alcohol.
But while ID supporters explain how a person can protect his or her individual right to vote, they fail to address the structural impact of ID requirements.
As with recent abuses of the redistricting process, self-interested politicians can use ID laws to manipulate election results by disadvantaging political groups whose members are less likely to bring ID to the polls. Any rule that reduces participation by even 1 percent of legitimate voters can determine a close election.
Also, voting is different than boarding an airplane, using a credit card or buying alcohol. Airports and businesses demand IDs exclusively to further goals such as security and protecting minors. In contrast, some politicians benefit from ID requirements that reduce turnout in communities likely to vote against them. An individual air traveler or credit card user is inconvenienced when she forgets her ID, but with voting the harm extends past an absent-minded voter and impinges upon her political allies and a democracy that fails to reflect the will of the people.
Further, because ID proponents don't provide facts about the magnitude of fraud, they prevent us from truly assessing whether the benefits of excluding fraudulent voters outweigh the costs of excluding legitimate voters. Photo ID advocates seek support by telling a few anecdotes about fraud, some of which an ID law would not prevent, such as double voting in different states, voting by ineligible felons, or ballot-box stuffing by election workers.
Photo ID supporters fail to produce tangible data or studies that establish or estimate the percentage of fraudulent votes cast. If only 0.01 percent of votes are fraudulent, for example, adopting an ID requirement that reduces legitimate voter turnout by 5 percent hurts democracy. If their arguments are going to be persuasive, photo ID advocates need to produce better facts that, at the very least, establish that more fraudulent votes will be deterred than legitimate votes.
Photo ID supporters need to address other practical issues as well. How will state officials prevent poll workers from enforcing the law selectively? New York City doesn't even have an ID requirement, but a recent study showed that poll workers improperly asked one in six Asian American voters for ID. Also, what accommodations ensure that fewer legitimate voters are excluded? South Dakota, for example, allows voters without ID to sign an affidavit verifying their identity.
Finally, anti-fraud advocates should not burden voters without also clamping down on election administrators, who generally have greater opportunities to willfully or recklessly distort election results.
Laws should require regular and unannounced independent audits of polling places, county election boards, secretaries of state offices and private companies that provide voting machines and purge voter rolls. Unlike photo ID requirements, these anti-fraud measures pose little risk of discouraging legitimate voter participation and skewing election outcomes.
So far, politicians in both parties have debated the ID issue using shallow sound bites. We should demand better statistics about the magnitude of voter fraud and the extent to which ID requirements would reduce legitimate voter turnout. Based on those facts, we can determine whether the benefits of ID laws outweigh the costs.
__
Spencer Overton teaches at The George Washington University Law School and is currently writing a book on voting rights scheduled to be published by W.W. Norton in spring 2006.
Comment #38: Mickie Stewart said on 4/21/05 @ 7:56pm ET...
Hand-Counted Paper Ballots, just like Canada. In fact, ask them to run our election. Then we all can trust the vote again.
Comment #39: rainbow sally said on 4/27/05 @ 10:06am ET...
To Liberals -- Abortion & The Counter Offensive (five words)
The five words are: "How many murders was it?"
For two decades this country has declined into a near fascist state with the aid of brain-dead churches who have not only violated their tax exemption status by becoming political, but who have taken unfair advantage of a "point of conception" argument, one millimeter of seemingly moral ground, where no definitions shall enter.
To knock them off their tiny safe zone to a point where both poles can begin actually communicating is easy (though they generally don't communicate much after this). And it's guaranteed. I've done it numerous times and here's how/why it works.
If abortion occurred before 12 days then:
How many murders was it?
Gastrulation occurs at 12 days. That is when the cells line up in layers where one layer will become the brain and hair (I knew they were actually antennae!) another layer becomes the lungs, heart, and other organs, and the third layer becomes the skin and bones (if I recall correctly -- you can look it up on the net if you need to get technical).
When the "fetus" (sic) splits before gastrulation you always get identical twins, triplets, etc.
How many "souls" do identical twins have? (Duh.)
Therefore the "souls" are not formed or inserted or however you want to conceive of souls until some time after 12 days.
Moreover, the fetus can split AFTER 12 days. When this happens, if the split is not complete, you get siamese twins. How many souls to siamese twins have?
There are certainly problems with Clinton's bill to allow late term abortion (at 8 months), and so we see that Clinton did more damage to liberals than Limbaugh ever could have done without such a capable ally*. But regardless, the first and most important task in moving from superstition to reasoning is to DESTROY the religious argument.
Reveal it for what it is. Pure hogwash. And then we might start making sense as a nation.
How important is it that you personally get involved in making this point? We are losing, liberals. And everyone that is counting on us is losing along with us. Though it's easy to say we deserve it, they do not, so get with it. Get beyond the dominance of superstition with the logic and reasoning you pride yourself on, and move into the arena of true debate.
Again, if you are waiting for them to come to their own senses, there is NO INCENTIVE for them to do so. They are winning. We are losing and losing and losing and will continue to do so until we demonstrate that we are ready, willing, and able to win.
Hands down, any time you want it.
Think about it.
-------------
* Clinton as Limbaugh's ally. (re. "Late term abortions"). Problem: If two babies at the same stage of development were in a hospital, one was delivered prematurely or by C section and the other was aborted, this raises lots of questions about ethics that are not easily addressed by "it's my body" kinds of logic. Laws can redefine homicide as murder or as patriotism, and once established, they are the legal definitions. But this issue has more to do with honest ethics, not arbitrary rules. And even men, especially men with daughters do well to wonder about these things as they may be needed in an advisary role. It would be nice if they had some actual wisdom to offer.
Once we get past the superstitious legalism of the churches it becomes interesting to dig a bit deeper and ask "Why did the churches deliberately misrepresent this as murder?" Don't they present themselves as givers of light and truth? Why then do they engage in lies and slander?
And that's where things get really interesting.
Let that heart bleed, liberals. No stones in our chests. So go for it.
Comment #40: casino in linea said on 5/10/05 @ 4:25pm ET...
Now there is the internet. And I really appreciate people like you who take their chance in such an excellent way to give an impression on certain topics. Thanks for having me here.
casino in linea
Comment #41: Online Casino said on 5/20/05 @ 12:45pm ET...
Online Casino - www.directory-online-casino.comPlimPlamBingo
Comment #42: Online Casino said on 6/3/05 @ 6:20pm ET...
Online Casino - PlimPlamwww.directory-online-casino.comPlimPlamBingoPlemanal sex
