Log in

View Full Version : Dirty Tricks in Florida - Again


Golgot
10-23-04, 09:42 PM
In the 2000 election thousands of Florida voters were classed incorrectly as felons and removed from the voting rolls. The number would have been far higher if it hadn't been for various local officials checking the lists of names produced (including an original list of 8,000 names submitted from Texas, of which "almost none" turned out to be legitimate!).

These selected voters were far more likely to be black, and therefore more likely to vote Democrat. This action was instigated and overseen by Republicans Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris.

This highly suspicious ineptitude has still not been explained.

[for more details see here: http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=4718&highlight=dbt ]

Now on for the next round of highly dubious and undemocratic behaviour by the Republican incumbants in Florida...


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Fresh Republican attempts to disenfranchise black voters!

Jimmy Carter fears repeat of election fiasco in Florida
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1314205,00.html
In May, Florida's secretary of state, Glenda Hood (a Bush family partisan), distributed a secret list of 48,000 alleged former felons and instructed county election supervisors to remove them from the voter rolls. When a court ordered the list be published, it was found that more than 20,000 people on the list were black (black Floridians vote Democratic by more than nine to one) and only 61 were Hispanics (who are much more likely to vote Republican). The Miami Herald newspaper found at least 2,000 people should not have been on the list, having regained their voting rights.

In his commentary, Mr Carter called the distribution of the list a "fumbling attempt" to disenfranchise black people. It was dropped after it became public, but by then 14 counties had sent letters to the residents named, informing them they would be ineligible to vote.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Undue partisan control over electoral proceedures and yet more highly dubious activities

Something rotten in the State of Floridahttp://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=566688
The Republican Party finds itself in an unusual position in Florida: although voter registration slightly favours the Democrats, the Republicans have managed to engineer the demographics - through the gerrymandering of electoral districts - so that they have a lock on both houses of the state legislature and the Governor's office. They control almost all the machinery of government, including, in large part, the management of elections.

There have even been efforts - by the Florida legislature, and by the new Secretary of State, Glenda Hood - to make re-counts on electronic machines illegal. Only the intervention of the courts, relying on a Florida statute calling for the possibility of manual re-counts, has forestalled them - so far.

As for the hotch-potch set of voting systems in place (and the seemingly unreliable ES&S electronic voting systems), this guy seems to have it right:

The only certainty, as Congressman Wexler said, is that "both Bush and Kerry lawyers will be in several courts on election night".

The mess that is Florida nevertheless came as a profound shock to a group of international election monitors who toured the state last week. Dr Brigalia Bam, who chairs South Africa's Independent Electoral Commission, was stunned by the patchwork of jurisdictions, rules and anomalies. "Absolutely everything is a violation," she said. "All these different systems in different counties with no accountability... It's like the poorest village in Africa."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Two influential activists are being intimidated and criminally investigated by the Florida police for switching their support from Republican to Democrat

Ezzie Thomas, an activist who helps voters to use absentee ballots, and Steve Clelland, the head of the local firefighters' union have both campaigned on behalf of the Republicans, but this election they've switched allegiances.

Suddenly, their activies have led to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement conducting aggressive interviews with them and threatening legal action. And yet their activities raised no eyebrows before.

Politics and sleaze envelop Orlando
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=566037

What makes the troubles facing the two men particularly sinister is that they are declared Kerry supporters, with the power to bring in hundreds if not thousands of votes for the Democratic Party.

The Republicans have been hard put to explain what exactly the two men have done wrong.

---

The Firemen

A grand jury examining allegations concerning the firefighters' union concluded that no laws had been broken, which has not deterred the FDLE from pursuing the case.

Mayor Hood [the previous Republican Mayor] allowed the firefighters' union to spend up to $40,000 a year in city funds on political activities. In those days, the firefighters were considered allies of the Republican establishment in Orange County and had endorsed George Bush for President in 2000. But Mr Clelland and his members were deeply disappointed by the White House's failure to follow through on promises to put an extra 100,000 firefighters on American streets and update their equipment. So, in early June, they joined a statewide union vote endorsing Mr Kerry for President in 2004.

Days later, the FDLE, with television cameras in tow, raided City Hall, seized several computers and announced that the union and its so-called "leave bank" were being investigated. The beefy Mr Clelland said he was scared to death in his interview with the FDLE supervisor in Orlando and was told he might be slung into jail if he insisted on having his lawyer present. He duly asked Mr Egan to leave the room.

The accusation is that:

they colluded with City Hall to set up an illegal slush fund for political campaigning

---

Ezzie Thomas and the Orlando Voters' League:

Ezzie Thomas organised 270 absentee votes in the election of Buddy Dyer (one of only two prominent Democratic public officials along the I-4 corridor). Dyer replaced Hood as Mayor.

The FDLE investigation is focusing on the accusation (by Dyer's Republican opponent, Mr Mulvaney) that absentee ballots were illegally faxed in and that people had been paid for their votes.

The city attorney's office cross-checked the signatures on the absentee ballots with the original application forms and concluded they were valid. Intriguingly, the FDLE did the same thing and stated, in a letter written to the state attorney in Orlando in May, that there was "no basis to support the allegations" and that the case should be considered closed.

And yet even more intriguingly the FDLE are still pursuing their investigation, and are having trouble explaining that letter away.

As for the paying people for their votes...

Mr Thomas and his organisation, the Orlando Voters' League, have not been accused of paying for votes, but they have acknowledged paying the 37-cent postage for some people's absentee ballots. Mr Thomas, who received $10,000 from the Dyer campaign for his get-out-the-vote efforts, has also acknowledged paying his volunteers between $100 and $150 for petrol and other expenses over the campaign season.

At least the FDLE hasn't stooped so low as to trying and make that stick.

---

The question is though: on what grounds are the FDLE pursuing their criminal investigations, and threatening legal action, against these two men and their organisations? All the given charges have been discredited.

Both men feel they can't go out and campaign coz it might adversely affect any future legal action. Is this really democracy in action?

Yoda
10-23-04, 10:14 PM
I have no trouble believing that plenty of legitimate voters are turned away every election. I also believe that plenty of illegitimate voters find ways to participate (hoards of bogus voter registrations are being tossed out as we speak). Some felons vote, and some people vote more than once. It happened last election, and it'll happen this one, too, and I haven't noticed any substantial leaning between them in regards to political affiliation.

For some reason, though, turning away legitimate voters seems to spark far more outrage (and verbose threads :-p) than accepting illegitimate ones, even though it ultimately comes to the same thing when it's time to tally.

In short: my guess is that some of what you're saying is true. That does not, however, support the implication behind this thread, which is that the Republican party as a whole is (or is trying to) win elections through voter suppression.

Golgot
10-23-04, 10:48 PM
Some felons vote, and some people vote more than once. It happened last election, and it'll happen this one, too, and I haven't noticed any substantial leaning between them in regards to political affiliation.

Well, former felons can have a political leaning, in the sense that "58% of Florida's 600,000 former felons are African-Americans" [source=Jimmy Carter fears repeat of election fiasco in Florida] and black voters "vote Democrat by a nine-to-one margin" [source=Something Rotten in the State of Florida]. That's certainly a tendancy worth noting (...especially in the case of unjustified exclusions :p)

For some reason, though, turning away legitimate voters seems to spark far more outrage (and verbose threads :-p) than accepting illegitimate ones, even though it ultimately comes to the same thing when it's time to tally.

It doesn't necessarily come to the same thing tho.

There is a clear political advantage in the type of exculsion that has been pursued, whereas bogus voting gives neither side a clear advantage, as both Rep and Dem voters practice it.

That's why the outrage.

(I would've mentioned the bogus-voting trend, but there's just so much that's shoddy going on in Florida that i thought i'd limit my verbosity ;))

In short: my guess is that some of what you're saying is true. That does not, however, support the implication behind this thread, which is that the Republican party as a whole is (or is trying to) win elections through voter suppression.

Very well then: People very closely affiliated to the current Republican administration are trying to win this election for the Republicans. Does that make it sound better? ;)

I know it was quite a Republican-bashy thread, but don't let that get in the way :). I can well imagine the Dems getting up to similar tricks if they were the incumbants. The fact is tho that there are some consistancies here that are truly concerning. The continued attempts at voter exclusion being central, and the abuse of Bush/Republican incumbancy in Florida running a close second.

I don't care who's doing it at the end of the day. I just care that it's happening.

Piddzilla
10-24-04, 05:26 AM
In short: my guess is that some of what you're saying is true. That does not, however, support the implication behind this thread, which is that the Republican party as a whole is (or is trying to) win elections through voter suppression.

That's strange. Because if what Golgot is saying is true, that is exactly what I would say they were trying to do. If not I would like to se what the Republican party as a whole is doing to get rid of those groups in their party engaging in such activities.

Yoda
10-24-04, 12:51 PM
Pid: we're talking about organizations with hundreds of thousands of people, many of them volunteers this time of year, though. These are the same kinds of problems that face every organization of a significant size, and their only options are to a) decry it when it's found (which they do), or b) not exist.

Gol: yes, a disproportionate number of African-Americans are former felons, but that can't really be chalked up to a political maneuver. Denying felons the right to vote is not an American-bred practice; according to Cecil Adams (who writes "The Straight Dope," a column centered around debunking myths and researching difficult questions) it goes back to "ancient Rome and Greece" and says that "this practice is laced throughout the common law that serves as the basis for U.S. law."

The Supreme Court heard arguments on the matter in 1974, and ruled that it was not unconstitutional to have voting restrictions on felons. It remains a states rights issue; only a fraction of the states disallow the practice outright...most others have more lenient restrictions, or even temporary ones. Some even allow felons to vote from prison!

Now, like I said, there's no doubt this is going to exclude more blacks than it is other races, and there's no doubt that blacks are more likely to vote Democratic. However, it's quite a stretch to imply that this was engineered given its historical precedent, and the fact that the regulations have been in place for some time now.

Golgot
10-25-04, 07:34 PM
Gol: yes, a disproportionate number of African-Americans are former felons, but that can't really be chalked up to a political maneuver.

Sure. But I wasn't saying that :). (I mentioned the stats to point out that there was one discernible trend within the amorphous groups you mentioned)

All i was saying was that:

-Writing up felon lists that are highly innacurate and prohibit thousands of entitled voters from voting is shocking (especially two elections on the trot!)

-The fact that blacks make up the majority percentage of felons in Florida (and elsewhere - which we can discuss below), and their strong voting tendencies, make these unforgiveable errors more likely to be politically motivated/deliberate.

Denying felons the right to vote is not an American-bred practice... However, it's quite a stretch to imply that this was engineered given its historical precedent, and the fact that the regulations have been in place for some time now.

I really wasn't suggesting that. Just that the prevention of thousands of genuine ('disproportionately' black) voters from voting was probably engineered.

I think preventing serious felons from voting is totally justifiable.

The race issue is as tangled and ugly as it always is however. The argument that states like Florida instigated tough felony-disenfranchisement laws as a way maintaining racial control after the disabandonment of slavery seems totally plausible. It's sad that the influence of that original intention is still felt.

Golgot
10-31-04, 08:04 PM
Amongst apparent attempts to influence voting in Florida, 'address switching' seems to be an emerging issue. Here's a dubious list that has been drawn up by Republicans in a position to influence the election...

Voters claim abuse of electoral rolls
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1340170,00.html
[Newsnight has recieved] two leaked emails, prepared for the executive director of the Bush campaign in Florida and the campaign's national research director in Washington DC, containing a 15-page list. The list contains 1,886 names and addresses of voters in predominantly black and traditionally Democratic areas of Jacksonville, Florida [and y'all remember the traditional voting preferences of afro-american voters yeah?].

An elections supervisor in Tallahassee [Ion Sancho], when shown the list, told Newsnight: 'The only possible reason why they would keep such a thing is to challenge voters on election day.'

These emails were leaked to [the highly rigorous] Newsnight [a BBC stalwart of the highest order :)]. There is no use for this list other than making voting difficult for legitimate voters [or impossible, when used in conjuction with already dubious 'black-heavy' felony lists]

When asked by Newsnight for an explanation of the list, Republican spokespeople claimed that the list merely records returned mail from either fundraising solicitations or newly registered voters to verify addresses for purposes of campaign literature.

Republican state campaign spokeswoman, Mindy Tucker Fletcher, stated the list was not put together 'in order to create' a challenge list, but refused to say it would not be used in that manner.

The Observer has found that many people are soldiers sent overseas. Republicans acknowledge the list was created by compiling lists of voters whose addresses have changed whose only use, say critics, would be to challenge voters on election day on the basis that their voting address is not valid. But this 'caging' method captures those whose addresses have changed because they have been sent to Iraq or other places. The list includes homeless shelter residents, casting doubt on suggestions the list was created from fundraising solicitations for the Bush-Cheney campaign.

We should learn after the election whether voters have been blocked because of spurious address changes. But by that time, it will almost certainly be too late to do anything about it, (if the last election's treatment of disenfranchised voters is anything to go by).

Yoda
10-31-04, 08:41 PM
I think it's pretty clear that, nationwide, tens of thousands of legit voters will be stopped from voting, and perhaps just as many illegitimate votes will be counted.

At this point, there's simply way too many unknowns, and way, way, WAY too much anecdotal evidence all over the map to declare voter fraud anything but a wash. I see nothing comprehensive enough to declare that there is any truly pervasive, disproportionate fraud in either direction.

People are getting worked up about this, which is fine, but I think they're doing so mainly out of a lack of perspective. Does anyone really believe this kind of thing doesn't happen in every single election involving millions of people in every major power in the world? Because it clearly does; it simply doesn't matter, because elections of this size are rarely swung by fraud at the margins.

r3port3r66
10-31-04, 09:25 PM
Question: What is an illegitamate voter?

Yoda
10-31-04, 09:28 PM
Someone who has voted already, is a convicted felon and trying to vote in a state which does not allow it (be it permanently or temporarily...the laws vary significantly), is not properly registered, isn't eligible at all (we've all heard reports of people using names off of tombstones and the like), etc. Things like that.

For whatever reason, people get more worked up over legit votes being turned away than illegitimate votes being let through. Perhaps they think of it as if it were the court system (innocent until proven guilty), but in the case of vote-tallying, every illegitimate vote that is counted offsets a legitimate one, so the two are equally unjust.

r3port3r66
10-31-04, 09:34 PM
Not sure, but it seems to me that being an illegitamate voter would be harder to accomplish than say a legitimate voter bending the rules in their favor or abusing the system--it just seems easier to do.

Godsend
10-31-04, 10:09 PM
Oh those sly republicans. What will they attempt next? Going after Nader?!

Can prisoners, from within jail, vote? I mean say they're getting out in 6 months...do they have the right to vote. What about those getting out in like 10 years, can they?

Golgot
11-01-04, 10:24 AM
At this point, there's simply way too many unknowns

Well, there are some big knowns [the attempted voter blocking in Florida which the Reps tried to keep secret but were forced to drop when put under scrutiny, for example]. But this is a major the problem, you're right. By the time you know something's happened, it seems to be too late to do anything about it (tho lord knows the partisan-employed lawyers are lining up to try this time ;)).

Elections of this size are rarely swung by fraud at the margins.

I disagree. Strongly. Florida. 2000. The flawed list of felons drawn up by DBT under the directions of the highly partisan Katherine Harris had a major influence on Florida in 2000. No one can prove that all of the thousands of legitimate voters apparently disenfranchised by that list would have voted mainly in favour of the Dems/against the Reps (even tho that's what the demographics suggest). Because now it's too late. They didn't get the chance to vote. And in a swing state which won the election, and won it by a few hundred votes, that's a very-deliberate-looking piece of voter disenfranchisment that affected the election result in a major way.

I see nothing comprehensive enough to declare that there is any truly pervasive, disproportionate fraud in either direction.

I've tried to look at all fraud issues being raised, and be as dispassionate and objective about this as possible, but it still seems that Republicans are either clearly perpetrating or set to benefit from more dubious scams than the Dems when it comes to Florida. All the other apparent scams i've read about in other states don't seem to come close to the combined dubiousness going on on Jeb's watch.

For whatever reason, people get more worked up over legit votes being turned away than illegitimate votes being let through.

Here's a good reason to distinguish between the two: Vote-blocking is an 'easier' way for the local incumbent politicians to influence the result of the vote. (NB it's been used to gain a political advantage in the past, has been attempted already this time around, and seems certain to be used successfully again [with a potentially huge/disproportionate effect on the national result]).

Besides, it can be done under a veneer of legality. Organising partisan-directed illegal voting would be a far more fraught technique than reducing the ability of partisan areas and individuals to vote.

Don't you think?