Gross violations

In my previous post I suggested that Rossi’s attorneys would attempt to convince the court to reach outside the confines of the contest statute. Indeed, the GOP petition requests relief in the form of setting aside the election, and claims the court has jurisdiction “pursuant to RCW 29A.68.011 et seq., and the court’s plenary powers,” (it’s the “plenary” part I was referring to.)

The GOP clearly relies on Foulkes v. Hays for precedence, a case in which an Adams County commissioner’s race was set aside due to ballot tampering. Ignoring the Democrat’s argument that the contest statutes do not apply to statewide offices, the Foulkes decision clearly states that the court has jurisdiction over election contests in general.

[1] Appellant’s most basic challenge is to the power of courts to inquire into the conduct of elections and order new elections to correct improprieties therein under RCW 29.04.030 .


  1. 1

    Mark spews:


    What do you think would be a fair and just resolution to this ENTIRE mess? By that I mean: the court case* ; the potential revote or installation of Brad Owen or whatever; the careers of Logan, the other elections officals statewide &/or their underlings; state & county elections policy; and anything else I didn’t think of. Obviously, the two extremes would be “business as usual” vs. “installation of Rossi as Gov. & the arrest of Logan on election fraud charges” — neither of which I see as being reasonable.

    *re: the court case, I view, for example, a GOP “loss” with a verbal thrashing of KingCo from the bench as being separate from a straight GOP “loss.”

  2. 2

    Goldy spews:

    Mark… I don’t think it was a mess. Yes, mistakes were made, and now that we know about them, some can be easily fixed. For example, provisional ballots should not just be a different color, they should include barcodes that prevent them from being scanned at the polling place. Problem fixed.

    As to illegal votes (dead people, felons, double votes) it’s not turning out to be a huge problem, but there are already reforms underway that just haven’t been implemented yet. For example, the SOS is in the process of updating its databases so that they can reconcile with the Social Security database.

    But I don’t think you’ll see the Supremes rule against the GOP and then give a verbal thrashing to King County. That’s not their job.

  3. 3

    Don spews:

    A question I haven’t heard the Repubs answer is, if a revote is held and Rossi again loses by a narrow margin, will they want a revote of the revote? Or, if Rossi wins the revote by say 100 votes, but the same problems occur in the revote (and why wouldn’t they?), then wouldn’t Gregoire be entitled to another revote? Or is a revote just a special privilege for Rossi only? How long must this go on? What level of election perfection must be achieved before everyone calls it a day and agrees upon who won?

  4. 4

    Erik spews:

    Or, if Rossi wins the revote by say 100 votes, but the same problems occur in the revote (and why wouldn’t they?),

    Yes Don, that is one of their fundemental problems. Under their theory, one could never prevail in an election unless the difference between the candidates was less than the errors, such as felons voting, double voting, clerical errors, and dead people voting.

    I suspect that with 40 percent of the 2.7 million people voting absentee, thousands of elderly people working the elections, there is going to always be at least a few thousand errors made, if there are very lucky.

    The election, statutes and Washington constitution, however, favors finality.

  5. 5

    Bob spews:

    Goldy at 2

    Provisioal votes.

    The King County Citizens Election Oversight Committee was very concerned about provisional ballots and warned the King County Council and County Elections officials last spring about likely problems that would occur in the November 2004 election.

    You state that they now can be easily cured by different colored paper. True, they could be solved by a size of paper that won’t feed through a normal reader or many other technical fixes.

    However, what is going to motivate King County now to fix the problem? …especially after the County Council thanked the Citizens Committee for their warning and this and other things and told the voters that they would follow up on these recommendations to made sure that these problems were “solved.”

    Please don’t tell me we need another Citizens Election Oversight Committee. Please don’t tell me to trust Ron Sims who has not been quoted in one newspaper article as saying there were problems under his administration and he will take personal responsibility to fix them.

    How will we really know if the problems have been fixed? Can we rely upon King County elected officials to honestly tell us when the problems are fixed, based on their past track record?

  6. 6

    Bob spews:

    Don @ 3

    Re: ReVote and ReVote and ReVote until it is done correctly.

    I don’t think it will come to that.

    If we actually get to a ReVote, which I think is a long shot, I expect that some judge is going to hold some County Officials in potential contempt and subject to fines if they don’t get stuff cleaned up prior to a Revote.

    Actually, in the whole Contested Election process, the one ray of sunshine to me is that Judges will force changes in voting procedures so they will comply with state election law that elected officials have hesitated at enacting.

  7. 7

    Erik spews:

    However, what is going to motivate King County now to fix the problem?

    Most of the errors could be reduced by the legislature:

    1) Eliminate absentee ballots

    2) Purge the voter rolls every year and require people to register again a birth certificate and piece of photo.

    3) Issue a photo ID for all voters who follow the correct procedure.

    4) Photo ID and voter card needed to vote at each election.

    5) Have voters sign a statement at the voting booth that they are only voting once and eligible to vote.

    I think that this would shake out much of the errors present. However, the legislature and each county have liked absentee ballots because they are cheaper and increase voter turnout.

    In any event, even with some strict voting standard, the errors are stil going to be in the hundreds.

  8. 8

    Mark spews:

    Goldy @ #2: “…there are already reforms underway that just haven’t been implemented yet. For example, the SOS is in the process of…”

    And I’m “in the process of” becoming a multi-billionaire. These promised reforms have been talked about and planned and been “in the process of” since 2000. Some would be ZERO COST, but still weren’t implemented (e.g. different colored paper ballots, etc.).

    “I don’t think you’ll see the Supremes rule against the GOP and then give a verbal thrashing to King County. That’s not their job.”

    It is not unheard of for a judicial opinion to acknowledge the legitimacy of the complaint, but rule that some other factor prevents the court from acting on the petitioners request.

  9. 9

    Goldy spews:

    (Hey… I love this new “Goldy @ 2″ thing… very useful.)

    Bob @ 5

    Do you think King County Elections actually wants to be raked over the coals for improperly scanned provisional ballots? And do you think this was limited to King County? There is already legislation being proposed to require different color ballots, and I assume some sort of technical fix will be included in any election reform package. But regardless, KC would be absolutely stupid not to deal with this.

    Mark @ 8

    You miss the point. The Feds only recently allowed access to the Social Security database, and the SOS is in the process of implementing it. Database development takes time, and I believe this was scheduled to be in place for the 2006 election. So… they were aware of the problem, and are in the process of taking steps to fix it. But it doesn’t happen overnight.

  10. 10

    Jim King spews:

    Goldy- nice stringing together of non-sequiters. but of such only faulty analysis is made. The leap from the federal courts needing constitutional violations to void an election to the supposition that such is required of the state courts is particularly egregious. But take it and run with it- just don’t ever expect to pass a bar exam (or a logic test)…

  11. 11

    Mark spews:

    Goldy @ 9

    Did you read the bipartisan report from January 2003? Those things involve the existing data and existing WA databases (felons, etc.). Regardless of whether you think his conclusions are earth-shattering, you gotta admit that Sharkansky has done a heck of a lot, with only personal resources and in a short period of time. The only two obvious potential reasons the state couldn’t do it would be that either there isn’t a data geek in state government as bright as Shark or there are political reasons they’re dragging their heels (or in pol-speak: “de-prioritizing”).

    As for King County being stupid not to deal with it… They already WERE stupid. They were warned by the SOS that there were problems and they made promises of fixes that they didn’t keep.

  12. 12

    G Davis spews:

    How can KC fix the state election system?

    The database issue is statewide. KC can’t act independently there.

    The different color/size paper they could have done. Would KC taking those measures fix where the other counties made their mistakes?

    Are there conflicting state statutes that would keep any county from making their own fixes?

    How do you fix the touch screen counties that have no tracking method for a vote this close?

  13. 13

    Bob spews:

    Goldy @9

    “But regardless, KC would be absolutely stupid not to deal with this.”

    I would have thought the same about the problems with the voter roles indentified by King TV in 1998. The problems with late send out of absentee ballots in 2002 that resulted in a big blow up and D. Logan being brought in to solve things in 2003. I would have thought that they would have been stupid to not deal with problems identified in early 2004 by the County Council appointed Citizens Election Oversight Committee.

    My conclusion, especially since Ron Sims hasn’t gone out on point is yes, they are stupid enough not to deal with the problems, even though most of them involve violations of state or federal election laws.

    Record mine as a “vote of no confidence.”

  14. 14

    HowCanYouBeProudtobeAnASS spews:

    Since joining the fray here the last month or so I had come to the conclusion that Seattle/King County/Washington liberals and conservatives would NEVER be of like mind about anything. I still doubt that there will be much common ground. However, I am very impressed and very much in agreement with the thoughtful and practical suggestions I’ve read to prevent more chaos in future elections.

    And hopefully the first of those future elections will be the REVOTE! ;-)

  15. 15

    John spews:

    They were warned by the SOS that there were problems and they made promises of fixes that they didn’t keep.

    Kind of reminds you of No Child Left Behind – an unfunded mandate perhaps?

    In the earlier thread I drew an analogy with the Seattle elementary schools and their drinking water problems. The problem was mandated to be fixed around ’89 and the funding petered out due to levies not passing. So it didn’t get fixed. It came up on the parents’ radar recently and now the school district can’t allocate money fast enough. However allocate doesn’t mean implement and implementation might not happen if the public takes their eye off the ball.

    Let’s not be so quick to shout fraud or no confidence before all the facts are in – that’s the (u)SP way.

  16. 16



    The question arising from Article III, Section 4 of the State Constitution doesn’t involve gross violations. It pertains to subject jurisdiction of any court to resolve election contests involving state executive officers. The argument proposed by the WSDCC is that Article III, Section 4 grants exclusive authority to resolve such contests to the legislature, and that the legislature cannot delegate that authority to the courts via statue.

    The only case that the WSRP can cite to counter this argument is Becker v. Pierce County, a 1992 case involving the election of the State Auditor. In that case, the challenge was dismissed, but dismissed on grounds other than the WSDCC’s proposed reading of Article III, Section 4.

    The WSRP’s argument is that the State Supreme Court, by hearing and dismissing Becker’s complaint, implicitly accepted subject matter jurisdiction over election contests of executive officers. It’s worth noting that this isn’t about a situation involving obiter dicta. The question of subject jurisdiction is not even broached in Becker v. Pierce County, let alone decided by a direct ruling of the Court.

    You can find Becker v. Pierce County .

  17. 18

    Mark spews:

    John @ 15,

    Many of the directives were either zero-/low-cost (ballot color, etc.) or procedural (don’t “enhance” the original ballot, etc.). And as to things like cleaning databases, I restate my argument that if one guy (Sharkansky) with limited resources can pull it off all on his own, there is no reason a massive county with 1/3 of the state’s population can’t pull it off when they’ve been slapped on the wrist about it more than once already.

    I’m not saying fraud. I am saying “malfeasance” (Webster’s definitions) as I’ve said many times before.

  18. 19

    Don spews:

    Erik @ 7

    This happens to be GOP Sen. Pam Roach’s proposed bill. I’m always impressed by how hard Republicans work to make voting more difficult for minorities, disabled people, and others who tend to vote for Democrats.

    Jim King @ 10

    Is it fair to ask if your knowledge of bar exams is based on personal experience?

    Bob @ 13

    Washington’s gubernatorial election is rapidly slipping into the realm of mythology. Listening to what Rossi supporters say in venues like John Carlson’s radio talk show, it’s clear they believe stuff that isn’t true, and which is becoming more untrue with each retelling, as each peson adds his own embellishments.

    Let’s take, for example, King County’s military/overseas vote. A good starting point for this discussion, sadly neglected, is facts. King County mailed all of the absentee ballots in the category that includes military and overseas voters — 15,289 to be exact — on or before the October 8 deadline. Voters returned 12,694 of them, of which 12,474 were validated and counted. In addition, King County received 1,342 Federal Write In Ballots from military/overseas voters, of which 1,081 were validated and counted. The total number of military/overseas ballots that weren’t counted because they arrived too late is 16. We probably can safely assume not all of those 16 were military votes, and not all of them were Rossi votes. So where are all the military votes that didn’t count because King County mailed their ballots late — when the facts show King County mailed 0 military ballots late and only 16 of more than 14,000 weren’t counted because of returning late? I see maybe 3 or 4 votes Rossi didn’t get because of military ballots arriving late, and we can’t rule out procrastination by the voters as the cause. So I’m getting very discouraged by constantly hearing about “military votes that weren’t counted” or worse, “the military votes weren’t counted” (implying none of the military votes were considered).

    I see the same blatant disregard for facts with the so-called “dead” votes. The Seattle Times turned up 8 “dead voters” in King County. However, the county elections department says it has matching signatures for 4 of these. There’s a real simple explanation: Mistaken identity, especially when John Doe Sr. and John Doe Jr. live at the same address. Any fool poring over election records hoping to find “dead” voters could get confused, ya think? Of the other 4 “dead” votes in King County, 2 are under investigation, and 2 individuals confessed to voting their deceased spouses’ ballots in addition to their own. One of those said he used his late wife’s ballot to vote for Rossi. The other didn’t say, but even if she voted her late husband’s ballot for Gregoire, between those two it’s a wash for Rossi at worst, and if she voted that ballot for Rossi then Gregoire should be up by 131, not 129. So please, Rossi fans, ratchet down the screaming about “dead voters in King County” because the facts are not on your side.

    In fact, the screech volume as a whole should be turned down until the court gets a chance to separate fact from fiction. I have a feeling when that day comes, the facts aren’t going to be very helpful to Rossi, but hey at least he’s a Republican judge in a Republican county to consider his case, thanks to his team’s creative judge-shopping.

  19. 20

    Don spews:

    Correction of type — last sentence should read “hey at least he’s got a Republican judge … “

  20. 22

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Dead Voters by themselves obviously wouldn’t change the result of the election. No one is intimating it except you!
    However, it is a “red flag” that there were database management problems further exemplified by other illegal votes (felons, voting more than once, out-of-state residents voting out-of-state and in Washington etc.). Further internal control and management problems were exemplified by illegal enhancements of ballots, directly feeding provisional ballots without signatures and failure to provide a list of voters that matches the total ballots counted.

    Sorry Don, the Court will look at all these issues and more ALL LUMPED TOGETHER. You & I can debate each item seperately for grins. But in the end it will be the entirety of whatever the Court deems illegal or neglect, errors. omissions etc.

    The Dem lawyers are very nervous. You can tell by the tone of the interrogatories they have just sent out. Have you seen the interrogatories yet Don or Goldy??? If they were so confident, why would they even bother, hmmm?

  21. 23

    Bob spews:

    Don @ 19

    I agree that discovery in the contested election case will document much and that it, when presented to a judge during a fact finding mode, will do much to docment things.

    However, let me talk about late ballots, since you seem to want to talk about it. One of the people in the small office of 4 people I work in was calling and calling and calling King County prior to the November election as to where the heck his absentee ballot was. He got an absentee ballot sent to his house that was for a person who did not live there, wasn’t even close to his name, and wasn’t the name of a previous house resident. His absentee ballot never showed up. He ended up as a King County provisional voter. I have some really good first hand insights in to late ballots from him. I don’t know your sources of information.

    In 2002/2003 hell broke loose in King County over late sent ballots. That is why D. Logan was brought in. In 2004 there were statements by King County officials that the problems had been solved. The problem wasn’t solved in regards to the King County voter I work with! The County officials lied in saying the problems had been solved. My friend relied upon their statements, and request an absentee ballot.

    We can also discuss my youngest son, who voted in King County at the polls. He tells me he voted for Rossi. According to the Seattle Times version of the King County voting records, he didn’t vote. That is odd?

    Did my son and my co-worker loose rights or were they damaged? Did they rely upon King County officials who said election problems identified by many had all been fixed? Should the elected officials have made such statements if they weren’t absolutely certain they true? Did those election officials have an obligation to fix the problems that had been pointed out to them? Did they have an obligation to the voters? Should ordinary citizens be able to rely upon statements that things are fixed by such official? Was there a loss of rights or damages?

    There was fraud. There was fraud. There was fraud.

    It is not the Chicago-kind of election fraud, but it is still fraud.

  22. 24

    paul daniel spews:

    You guys are all sweatin’ it big time. The law clearly states that the Republicans only need to show enough error or uncertainty regarding votes as to call into question the election results. It’s not a matter of whether there are enough felon voters or dead voters etc. The simple fact is that ALL of these together are more than enough to call into question QUEEN CHRISINE’S 129 vote margin of victory. Also note that over 400 felons voted in King County compared with less than 100 in the rest of the state. What an indictment of the KC elctoral system.

    Keep sweatn’ it.

    paul daniel

  23. 25

    John spews:

    According to the Seattle Times version of the King County voting records, he didn’t vote. That is odd?

    Bob – not at all. Stefan Sharkansky claimed that the Seattle Times database was broken. You might check over at and see if you get a different result.

  24. 26

    Dave spews:

    Paul, none of us are sweating at all. The election is over and there will be no revote. Most Washingtonians have moved way past this already, with only Republicans who had personal financial interest built up in Rossi (the BIAW for example) and knee-jerk partisans still calling foul. All this legal stuff is facinating, it just appears to be headed towards a dead end for the GOP. But hey, maybe Rossi can find work with his old buddy Tim Eyeman selling “stupid initiatives.”

  25. 28

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Once again my little pinheaded Lefty Pals–
    The vast majority of Washington voter DO NOT appreciate the gross neglect and incompetence shown in KingCo. Nor do they appreciate Logan, Huennekens and the Democratic Party establishment blowing off all the things that have been documented. You folks are writing yourown epitath which reads”

  26. 29

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Get used to hearing those words.
    They will be used against every single Democratic Legislative candidate who runs the next 4 years. The e-mails they sent before certifying will be ripe for harvest and used against them. Now matter how much you “spin”, you will not escape your own choice of trying to minimize gross incompetence.
    Remember, there are a dozen or more Dems in the House/Senate that are from Districts that Rossi carried. Are they vulnerable?? DUHHH!

  27. 30

    DCF spews:

    Mr. Cynical, I thought you were gone?

    I gave the SOS’s office my fix for our election process back in December of 2000, when they asked for ideas to fix the mess then. I said that each ballot needed to have a duplicate that the voter retained, and each ballot needed a random number fixed to it in order to let the voter go on line to see that their vote had been counted and counted properly. The SOS said this would eliminate voter anonymity–I say BS! So I agree with those of you that say our state government officials really don’t want to get off their duffs and fix anything–and until I see it I won’t believe that they have fixed anything. There has been a bill introduced in the Legislature that will require a voter to show picture ID when then vote–if that passes it will be a baby step in the right direction–but many more steps are needed, before I’ll waste my time voting again!

  28. 31

    John spews:

    The vast majority of Washington voter DO NOT appreciate the gross neglect and incompetence shown in KingCo.

    This is translated as resentment which your side is unfortunately very skilled at exploiting because winning means everything to them. You’re a numbers man cynical. Put a number to the “gross neglect and incompetence”. What is it? Less than 1/2 of one percent? How does it compare to every other county?

    there are a dozen or more Dems in the House/Senate that are from Districts that Rossi carried.

    Thanks for the tip Cynical. Dems have to educate the voters in those districts about the Rovian tactics of the Rossi noise machine or they will suffer for it.

  29. 32

    Bob spews:

    John @ 25

    Thanks for you suggestion to check Sound Politics voter list.

    I did. He is not listed in that data base, which I assume means that King County assumes he didn’t vote. My youngest son tells me he did vote. I have asked him to contact authorities, but he has told me no, he doesn’t want to get involved and no amount of coaching seems to have had any effect.

    So I find still find it odd, want to thank you for the suggestion.

    Since I don’t live in King County and know two people (a co-worker and my youngest son) who have “strange” King County election stories, I suspect that many other people either know or “know someone who knows” of a voter with a personal story about a voting problem.

    That is why I think that the polling data indicates so many have no faith that Chris G. had the most number of votes when the counting was done.

    Right now I do not have confidence in the election system, because of first person reason provided to me by people I know. That is really bad. My youngest son and I had dinner on Friday and he joked about asking Jimmy Carter and representatives from various African Nations to come supervise future King County elections. How sad.

    No matter what political orientation we have, we should all be pushing to make huge changes and voting out any and all officials with any responsibility for this mess.

  30. 33

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    I’ll put a number to the “gross neglect & incompetence in KingCo”
    The number is easily > 129!

    And John, you can try to spin the R’s legitimate efforts to get to the bottom of election gross incompetence and neglect as “Rovian”. Good luck with that.

    We, on the other hand, will continue to quote your Queen Bee, Gregoire, who said, “this election is a model for the rest of the nation, and the world at large.” It’s on tape John-boy.
    So is Berendt’s crying episode where he brings in those provisional ballot affadavits your Leftist-activist pals rounded up in the name of making sure “every ballot is counted”.
    Your problem John is your Party bosses failed to include the key word that most Washingtonians demand to hear…..legitimate.
    The Republicans want to make sure every “legitimate ballot was counted”. You will lose this argument, no matter how hard you try. The Dems were trying to ram thru “illegitimate ballots” and wanted us all to just “accept it and move on”.
    Good luck john-boy!!!

  31. 34

    Chuck spews:

    A question I haven’t heard the Repubs answer is, if a revote is held and Rossi again loses by a narrow margin, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    In a runoff election that wouldnt happen, besides King County would have to be mor accountable so we would probably have a voter for evey vote at that point.

  32. 35

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Yup, I’m back. Just needed a break and have been spending lots of time rounding up more info to help squash the Gregoire Regime.
    These Leftist pinheads sit around all day in “Validation Groups” or “Support Groups” blathering about the law while others are digging deep into the bowels of who actually voted and how did we get more votes than voters. I figure by stirring the pot every once in awhile, it will make their little pinheads swirl in fantasies that they will prevail in the long-run.
    Keep your eye on what is happening in Wisconsin and what the Move-On.Org crowd did in late-registering thousands of non-Wisconsin residents. I have family in Wisconsin and folks are appalled and outraged. The Dems are in HUGE trouble there and will be in equally as huge trouble here.

  33. 36

    Goldy spews:

    Bob @ 32

    Think about it man. If your son went to the polls in King County, filled out a ballot, and fed it into the scanner… HIS VOTE COUNTED!

    Now perhaps, he signed the wrong line in the poll book. Or perhaps there was a database entry error when the contents of the poll books were used to update the database. But that has nothing to do with the ballot he fed into the machine. Once it’s in the machine, it’s just another secret ballot, totally dissociated from your son.

    This is something the county auditors have tried to explain again and again about the so-called discrepancy between the voter list and the number of ballots cast. The security is on the front end. His name had to have been in the poll book before they gave him the ballot. The fact that he is not on the voter list represents an error in the voter list, but does not mean there was a voterless ballot.

    The Snark also likes to make a point about precincts where there are more voters than ballots. Well you know what, a few years back, at my polling place, I saw somebody sign in, get their ballot, then realize they were late for something and had to rush out. The poll workers told her she could fill out the ballot when she had the chance and come back before the polls closed to scan it in.

    Is it so odd that ballots sometimes walk out of polling places?

    You guys are just so willing to jump to assumptions. And as to the Snark’s list… personally, I don’t have any confidence that he knows what the fuck he’s doing. I mean it’s really funny… you immediately dis any interpretation by the people who actually run elections, and you dis the Seattle Times, but some guy with a blog is now an elections expert?

    Us bloggers are a bunch of propagandists! Think critically.

  34. 37

    KingCoBureaucrat spews:

    It’s sure fun to talk about these dark deeds being committed by big bad King County. The fact of the matter is that is such acts were deliberately committed, there would be evidence. “Strange” election stories are fun. Facts are too boring. If there were facts, there are many ways to surface them. Midnight calls to reporters voice mail, documents handed to interested parties. I know that these things are done. I myself have outed a questionable activity.

  35. 38

    Goldy spews:

    Rick @ 16

    I haven’t addressed the Dems argument that the court does not have jurisidiction over statewide races. Personally, I’d rather see this decided in court, because that will do more to clear up public distrust in the system than a political decision in the Legislature.

    But I am familiar with Becker v. County of Pierce, and have been saving it for my final blog on this subject. There’s an interesting part of the decision that contradicts Foulkes v. Hays.

  36. 39

    Goldy spews:

    The law clearly states that the Republicans only need to show enough error or uncertainty regarding votes as to call into question the election results.

    Paul… really? Exactly which section of the statute clearly states this, because I seem to have missed it? Or perhaps you are relying on GOP press releases for your expert legal analysis?

  37. 40

    John spews:


    First don’t call me boy.

    Next I admire your deliberate myopia. It helps when you’re making a mountain out of molehill and it helps when you’re trying to fool people into seeing anything but the big picture.

    Next if you’re so confident you have a case against, call the FBI. But you better make sure you get the right FBI agent like Karl Rove did in Texas. For the details read “Bush’s Brain”. If you really want to win I’m confident by the bravado you’ve displayed here and at (u)SP you will consult the Rove playbook. We’ll be watching. And I’m sure you’ll be boasting about it on-line.

    I noticed your loathsome comment at (u)SP. Something about “STUPID HIPPIES” or “LOW-LIFE”. Are these your code-words for people you don’t like or don’t look like you or don’t live the way you do? And Yes, how dare they register americans to vote for Democrats!

    Go for it Cynical. Find a few students who didn’t quite have state residency and wanted to participate in our democracy. Someone who was deeply troubled by George Bushs’ reckless policies. Make an “example” out of them. Like Karl Rove would. Focus like a laserbeam on and ignore College Republicans with posters of Donald Segretti on their walls who bilked seniors out of their life savings. Report back on your triumphs IN CAPS.

    I’m done talking to you for good.

  38. 41

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Now John-boy…let’s not be so negative!
    You will find out in Wisconsin that it wasn’t “a few students who didn’t quite have state residency and wanted to participate in our democracy”. It was an orchestrated effort to circumvent Wisconsin State Election laws!!! KNEW Wisconsin was going to be close for Kerry. So they did something about it all right.

    As far as “Stupid Hippies” go, they are actually quite idealistic, but very naive. I’ve had plenty of experience with the “Utopian-Marxist Hippies” who truly believe you can regulate heaven on earth. They always fail because, thru their actions. create massive real estate inflation which few can afford. Except john-boy, for the “Pretend Hippies” or “Hippie-crites”.
    Those folks have plenty of time and moey they didn’t earn to try and stop other folks from making a living. They go to the mailbox every month and have been pampered there whole life. They are literally ashamed of their heritage but unwilling to let go of the pursestrings. Are you a pretend-Hippy john-boy??
    Trustfunders are oh so serious about changing our society and lean far-left. Is that you john-boy?

  39. 42


    Goldy @ 38

    First, to pick a nit, the language of the Constitution refers to elections of state executives. I suppose one might consider this synonymous with state-wide elections, but sticking with the language of the law isn’t a bad idea.

    Second, while I might prefer a judicial resolution of the problem, I don’t see how that can happen without gutting the language of the Constitution. That kind of precident, even if it produces an outcome I might value, leaves me feeling too uncomfortable to adopt an “ends justifies the means” attitude.

    To Mr. Cynical @ anywhere in this or any other thread: cynical sniping of a personal nature might well be fun, but your engagement in such activity means only one thing–that you can’t win the debate on its merits. So, by all means, keep up with the “john-boy” empty rhetoric. Our society needs people like you to keep marginalizing yourselves like this–though I have to say that people who behave the way you do are the most compelling argument in favor of gun control. Better to have you shooting off your mouth than shooting off anything of a more lethal nature.

  40. 43

    Don spews:

    Where to start? Where to start? Oh heck, I’ll take ‘em in numerical order.

    Cyn at 22

    It’s now “database management errors”? Geez, I’m out of the loop: I hadn’t heard this spin as of yesterday, not even on Carlson’s show, whose rationale for why we need a revote changes as frequently as Dubya’s justification for the Iraq war.

    Bob @ 23 & 32

    Let’s stick with the statutory definition of “fraud” please, because that’s the only one that matters in court. A big frustration in arguing with Republicans is they keep changing the definitions of words when the facts are not going well for them. Yes, I know there was a snafu by King County in mailing absentee ballots to LOCAL voters, so let’s fix it before the next election. But if your son went to a poll and voted as you say, why do you think his vote wasn’t counted?

    Paul @ 24

    Go read the statute. If you still don’t understand what it says, hire a lawyer to explain it to you.

    Dave @ 26

    The lawsuit is costing the GOPers plenty of wampum, but it’s bringing in donations hand-over-fist and keeping their base fired up to take on Cantwell in ’06, which is why they’re doing it. How often does a party get media exposure like this? Almost never. So milk that cow for all she’s worth, baby!

    Cynical @ 28 & 29

    I spent enough time around Logan and Huennekens during the recounts to realize they’re both calm and rational men able to discern between allegation and fact. (Note, for an example of an “allegation,” see Cynical @ 33, first sentence.) By the way, a “documented” allegation is … an allegation. Documentation is not the same thing as verification. For a long time, it was documented by religious authorities and others that the Earth is flat. Oh, and how many seats did your side lose in the Legislature last fall? See you guys again in ’06, we’re looking forward to it.

    DCF @ 30

    Please feel free to not vote, if it makes you happy. But don’t expect Democrats to support your picture ID idea. Not having a photo ID is not a good enough reason to take away someone’s right to vote.

    Chuck @ 34

    How do you know? Got a crystal ball?

    Chuck @ 34 & Cynical @ 35

    There are no phantom votes in King County. None! For every counted vote there exists a paper ballot submitted by a human who signed either a ballot envelope or a poll book. The Republican fishing expedition is looking at a list that wasn’t designed to show who voted, and doesn’t. Don’t blame this piece of idiocy on county officials. Here’s another reason why the number of voters doesn’t match the number of votes: Military voters don’t have to be registered. All they have to do is get a Federal Write In Ballot from their unit’s Voting Assistance Officer and send it to their home of record, and it will be counted. Washington bends over backwards for military voters. It’s easier for military personnel to vote in Washington than in any other state. Bet you didn’t know that, huh?

    Goldy @ 36 & 38

    You expect them to THINK? Dream on. I, too, want this settled in court, so they’ll shut up.

    KingCoBureaucrat @ 37

    Keep up the good work! Whistleblowers are a pillar of our democracy.

  41. 45

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    If you believe Logan & Huennekens are rational men, then why didn’t they ask their bosses at KingCo for the resources necessary to comply with the Election Laws?? That doesn’t seem very rational to me that they wouldn’t. Have you seen some of the e-mails they sent complaining about lacking resources? Yet they never requested them or made their bosses aware of the fact that they couldn’t comply with Election Laws or things they KNEW were not fixed from prior elections.
    Rational?? My Ass!!

  42. 46

    paul daniel spews:

    “When the reception of illegal votes is alleged as a cause of contest, it is sufficient to state generally that illegal votes were cast, that if given to the person whose election is contested in specific precincts will, if taken from that person, reduce the number of the persons legal votes below the number of legal votes given to some other person for the same office.”

    RCW 29A.68.020

    An illegal vote is “A vote cast by a person disqualified under Article VI, section 3 of the state Constitution.(This article forbids, among other things, voting by felons.)”

    How about 400 plus felons voting in King County 10 times more than in the rest of the state combined! No wonder the Democrats in KC like to make it so easy to vote. They need every vote they can get.It doesn’t bother them one damn bit when felons vote!

    This certainly calls into question Queen Christine’s 129 vote margin of victory.

    paul daniel

  43. 47

    Don spews:

    Cyn @ 45

    I haven’t read those e-mails or reviewed the departmental budget (requested versus approved), so I can’t answer your questions. But I have a question for you: If you want a gold-plater election system, are you willing to pay taxes for it?

    Paul @ 46

    First a housekeeping matter: When citing a statute, it’s good form to cite it correctly, so others can find it.

    RCW 29A.68.090 (not RCW 29A.68.90) sets forth pleading requirements, and does not go to the substance of what must be proven at trial. The latter is found in RCW 29A.68.100 and RCW 29A.68.110, as follows:

    RCW 29A.68.100
    Illegal votes — List required for testimony.
    No testimony may be received as to any illegal votes unless the party contesting the election delivers to the opposite party, at least three days before trial, a written list of the number of illegal votes and by whom given, that the contesting party intends to prove at the trial. No testimony may be received as to any illegal votes, except as to such as are specified in the list.

    RCW 29A.68.110
    Illegal votes — Number of votes affected — Enough to change result.
    No election may be set aside on account of illegal votes, unless it appears that an amount of illegal votes has been given to the person whose right is being contested, that, if taken from that person, would reduce the number of the person’s legal votes below the number of votes given to some other person for the same office, after deducting therefrom the illegal votes that may be shown to have been given to the other person.

    Strictly speaking, RCW 29A.68.100 is, like RCW 29A.68.090, a procedural requirement; but as a practical matter, the procedural requirement can’t be satisfied if the complainant’s case lacks substance. In other words, the Republicans have to name each illegal voter, show who they voted for, and that deducting the illegal votes for all the candidates will change the election outcome. I’ll leave it to you to figure the odds. Please keep in mind that before you can get a felon to testify who he voted for, you first have to get him to waive his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, after advising him that admitting he voted will be confessing a crime.

  44. 48

    Don spews:

    Paul @ 46 (continued)

    Dean Logan said in a Jan. 23 press release, “King County takes seriously any attempts to violate state election law. We encourage any individual or organization with information regarding illegal … voting to turn that information over to law enforcement for review and investigation.”

    Would you kindly send Mr. Logan your list of 400 King County felons, or alternatively, send it to county prosecutor Norm Maleng. Anticipating you will promptly do so, let me be the first to say that your civic efforts are appreciated.

  45. 49

    paul daniel spews:

    Don @ 48

    King Count is not going to prosecute these people, you know that. Of course I don’t have the list, I’m not personally going through these voting rolls and comparing them to the list of convicted felons. There are people who are though. Gee wiz the Seattle P.I. found 129 in just a few weeks of research.

    RCW 29A 68.110(It think that’s the right #!) says “No election may be set aside on account of illegal votes, unless it APPEARS that an amount of illegal vates has been given to the person whose right is being contested….

    hmmm, “appears.” I wonder how the dictionary defines that? Now I’m not a lawyer and you may be, I don’t know, but Rossi’s got some good ones working for him and I think King County is giving them a lot of amunition to build a case. And whether you like him or not Slade Gorton is no idiot. He certainly knows the law and he believes Rossi has a reasonable chance of prevailing in this case to get the election thrown out. Mabye the odds are against him but it’s no slam dunk.

    Try this, if the situation were reversed and Rossi were in office under the exact same circumstances, could YOU make the case for your candidate before the state supreme Court? Why not play devils advicate give it a good go?

    paul daniel

  46. 50

    Don spews:

    Paul @ 49

    Can you at least provide a source for the “400 felons” info?

    Being a lawyer, I know better than to try to guess how the judge will interpret “appears,” so I’ll just kick back and watch the show as it unfolds in Wenatchee. It’s probably a legal term of art, in which case all personal opinions of its vernacular meaning are irrelevant.* (*Expect similar gobbledy-gook from the lawyers involved in the case.)

    As for Slade Gorton, he’s a lawyer all right, but he’s also a loyal Republican, and I think you’re you’re seeing more of the team player than the lawyer in this instance; in any case, he’s not the judge or even a lawyer in the case, so who cares what he says.

  47. 51

    paul daniel spews:

    Don @ 50

    The WA St. Rebublicans claim on their wesite to have confirmed 424 felons voting in KC and 65 elswhere. Obviously they’re going to have to support that declaration in court. If they can all bets are off. If they can’t it’s pretty stupid of them to be putting it on their webstite. It’s all about proof right?

    We’ll see.

    However, if that number does hold up and the proportion is that much higher in KC than elsewhere it would weem to present a serious problem, at least for the integrity of the KC system at a minimum.

    paul daniel


    How about making the case for the oppositon? Could you do it? All politics aside, seriously, if it were Gregoire in Rossi’s shoes and you were her attourny, what kind of odds would you give her?


  48. 52

    Don spews:

    paul @ 51

    Thanks for sourcing your info, Paul. WA GOP did their own research, which could spell trouble for the data quality if they used volunteers to do the records searches and list compilations. Don’t be surprised if the numbers get revised. Their list may include cases of mistaken identity, felons whose voting rights were restored, and other errors. And don’t forget that it’s not enough to show ineligible felons voted; the Pubs have to prove who they voted for. Their prospects are not hopeless, but they have to climb a steep hill. They may not get past the jurisdiction issue, although I think the judge will give them that one, if he wants to keep his job. (He has to run for re-election in a county that votes 2-to-1 Republican.)

    I don’t think Gregoire would have contested the election if she lost the hand recount, but to answer your question, her obvious strategy would be to contest it in the Legislature. The obvious place for her to look for irregularities is the counties where Rossi did best. In percentage terms, King County is not the county that added the most votes to its totals during the recounts; Adams County is, which is also the county where Rossi got the highest percentage of votes. I’m not saying there were irregularities in Adams County — that hasn’t been investigated. It stands to reason, though, that if you go looking for irregularities in Gregoire counties, the irregularities you come up with will tend to help Rossi, whereas if you look for irregularities in Rossi counties, they will tend to help Gregoire. One of the things that hasn’t been discussed much is to what extent King County’s mistakes would be offset by mistakes in Rossi-leaning counties. There is not a single county that didn’t change its vote totals as a result of the recounts, so we know counting errors occurred in all of the counties. It’s logical to expect that the kinds of irregularities being unearthed in King County occurred elsewhere, too, so I would be sending the Democratic legions out to find them if I had to represent Gregoire in an election contest.

    I think it bears mention that, in the pending election contest lawsuit, the Republicans are represented by Davis Wright Tremaine and the Democrats are represented by Perkins Coie, the two largest and most prestigious law firms in the Pacific Northwest — so this lawsuit is going to be fought by top-drawer legal talent on both sides, and it’s going to be interesting to see how they frame the issues and argue the case.

  49. 53

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Don said “so I would be sending the Democratic legions out to find them if I represneted Gregoire” referring to irregularities outside of KingCo.
    Don–I have been wondering how it could possibly be that the R’s have found so many irregularities in KingCo and the Democrats have found absolutely ZERO! Or at least reported 0 to date.
    Defies logic, doesn’t it??
    Could it be the Dems are concerned that if they do identify errors in other Counties, it may further Rossi’s case?
    Help me Don–How could the Dems not have found any irregularities??? EXPLAIN PLEASE!

  50. 54



    I’m not sure what would defy logic about a group not finding any irregularities when they have no incentive to go looking for them. But one can certainly find irregularities in counties that favored Rossi. For example, a single precinct in Skagit County managed to lose a whopping 47 ballots between the machine count and the hand recount. Curiosly enough, this was in a Mt. Vernon precinct that happend to favor Christine Gregoire. It would be hard to contend that this would futher Rossi’s case.

  51. 55

    John spews:

    One of the things that hasn’t been discussed much is to what extent King County’s mistakes would be offset by mistakes in Rossi-leaning counties. There is not a single county that didn’t change its vote totals as a result of the recounts, so we know counting errors occurred in all of the counties.

    Thank God someone has brought this up! Thank you Don!

  52. 56

    DCF spews:

    Cynical @ 35, guess this just proves that we can’t believe a word you post! I thought we were rid of you, after all that’s what you said.

    Don @ 43 Here’s the bill–SB 5499, sponsored by eleven Senators, all Democrats. If you look at New Section – Sec. 10, you will see the ID provision. Now wouldn’t it be nice to have the picture of the voter on the Voter Registration Card–after all COSTCO seems to be able to put pictures on their cards in a cheap and convenient manner–why can’t the state. Guess I don’t understand your statement, “Please feel free to not vote, if it makes you happy. But don’t expect Democrats to support your picture ID idea. Not having a photo ID is not a good enough reason to take away someone’s right to vote.” Maybe you can explain that to me. You see us Demos are for the rights of people of all persuasions, even if they are Regressive Repubs! Where do you think SS, minimum hourly wage, the 40 hour work week, and the right to choose come from? THE DEMOCRATS! BTW the program concerning election reform will be on rebroadcast on KCTS Connects today @ 12:00 noon.

  53. 57

    John spews:

    I’m not sure what would defy logic about a group not finding any irregularities when they have no incentive to go looking for them.

    Rick, they may have no incentive like you say or they may have indeed found irregularities in the Rossi-favoring counties. They just aren’t shooting off their mouths about it or leaking it to the press or right-wing blogs. I hope they’re quietly gathering solid evidence to present it where it counts – to the judge.

  54. 58

    Don spews:

    Goldy, re spelling of “precedents”: You didn’t really need to fix it. We all knew what you meant. (wink)

  55. 59

    Don spews:

    Cyn @ 53 – one of the many reasons we’re Democrats is so we don’t have to do the idiot things Republicans do — like filing a lawsuit, then looking for something to complain about, then looking for evidence to back up the complaint. Or, to put it another way, just because someone else goes looking for a banana peel to fall on doesn’t mean we have to.

    DCF @ 56 – fooled me — that sure looked like Roach’s laundry list. Since when do Democrats support throwing people out of polling places for not having a photo ID on their person? I’d better have a talk with somebody over in Berendt’s shop. Those senators need to get with the program.

  56. 60

    Brad spews:

    dems are opposed to photo id because it would prevent or restrict illegal voting.
    Your comments on fixing the system and letting the fraud stand are laughable. You don’t want to fix anything.

    Y’all have been caught. It remains to be seen just how big a heist this was and how many elections have been stolen.

    Interesting that the machine has fought and resisted the search for the truth.
    Well you will have to sell your goods above ground now, We are on to y’all.