HorsesAss.Org

Dino Rossi, the GOP, BIAW, and right-wing blogs and talk radio have been urging Rossi supporters to contact their legislators and urge them to vote against certifying Christine Gregoire’s gubernatorial election. Even Tim Eyman has gotten into the act, emailing the 3,600 names on his list.

Well, two can play at that game… indeed, two must. Too often the voice of the many is drowned out by the voice of the loud.

So please call the Legislative Hotline (1.800.562.6000 ) and contact your legislators, and urge them to follow the rule of law and certify this election.

Be polite, but firm. Make it clear that Gregoire won this election according to the rules in place, and that the proper forum to address any claims of fraud or irregularities is a court of law… not the legislature, and not the court of public opinion.

And make it absolutely clear to Democrats in swing districts that this is a battle between two political parties, and if there was ever a time for party unity, it is now. If they do the right thing and certify this election as the law prescribes, they will have your support. But if they give in to threats coming from the GOP’s well-orchestrated PR campaign and break ranks with their party, let them know that angry Republicans will be the least of their worries.

Once again, Republican Secretary of State Sam Reed has proven himself a man above the partisan rancor. While his party is busy tearing down the public’s faith in our electoral system, Reed is working to build it up.

While insisting that he has seen no evidence of wrongdoing, Reed unveiled today an election reform package aimed at addressing some of the problems uncovered in the Nov. 2 election. Proposed reforms include:

Share:

• Facebook
• Reddit
• LinkedIn
• Email
• Print

In my previous post I debunked Dino Rossi’s shameful lies about disenfranchised military voters. In King County — the focus of an intense Rossi/BIAW/GOP propaganda campaign to undermine public faith in the electoral process — military ballots not only went out on time, but over 83% were returned by the deadline… a rate equal to the turnout of all registered voters.

In this post I will expose the mock outrage over the “discrepancy” between the number of voters credited with voting, and the number of ballots cast. Ready? They’re not intended to reconcile.

For those actually interested in the truth, King County Director of Elections Dean Logan has posted a document explaining what this voter list really is:

Historically, the number of votes cast and the number of voters credited with voting does not typically balance.

State election laws address ballot security and accountability on the front end of the elections process

Share:

• Facebook
• Reddit
• LinkedIn
• Email
• Print

King County Elections has issued a couple of FAQs answering questions that have been raised about its handling of the Nov. 2 election and the subsequent recounts. The first regards Military and Overseas Ballots:

King County Elections began mailing oversea and military ballots for the General Election on Oct.1, 2004. These were from an absentee category referred to as “submarine” or “special absentee ballots” for voters who may not be able to receive a regular absentee ballot within the timeframe necessary to participate in the election. The bulk of the military and overseas ballots were mailed on Oct.6 with some mailings in between these two dates and subsequent mailings as further requests were received.

246 ballots went out on Oct. 1, the bulk were mailed by Oct. 6, and an additional 3055 went out on Oct. 10. KC issued 15,289 military and overseas ballots in all, and of these, 12,694 were received back… exactly matching King County’s overall 83% turnout rate.

In addition to regular absentee ballots available to military personnel, King County also provided ballots via fax or email to those who contacted the office that they had not received their regular ballot by election day. Several hundred of these were issued. In addition…

The Federal Voting Assistance Program, a program of the United States Department of Defense monitors services for military and overseas voters. Under federal law, a federal write-in ballot is also available from armed services voting assistance officers to allow service members the opportunity to cast a ballot for federal office. These ballots are accepted and counted even if the service member is not listed as a registered voter in the jurisdiction where they indicate their residence.

1,342 Federal Write-in ballots received, and 1,081 validated and counted.

As to the oft raised question of military and overseas ballots that were received too late to be counted, King County reports a grand total of… sixteen.

The Washington State GOP is now running a deceptive and dishonest radio ad, featuring a wounded marine who did not receive his ballot on time. While this is regrettable, and both parties should work together to assure that military ballots are mailed out even sooner, it is despicable to attempt to turn this into a partisan issue, when all the facts indicate that King County conscientiously issued military ballots in a timely manner, and in full accordance with federal law.

Dino Rossi’s PR henchmen continue to cynically impugn Christine Gregoire’s patriotism, but as part of a legal contest of this election, military ballots are clearly a non-issue.

Coming soon, much ado over voter lists…

I point you all to Floyd McKay’s dispassioned and well-reasoned guest column in today’s Seattle Times: “The election played out the way state law intended.”

For a winning candidate to go through three counts and then agree to another election would defy all the laws of politics (and reason). For a candidate losing the third count to call for such an election is

Share:

• Facebook
• Reddit
• LinkedIn
• Email
• Print

Well, you can’t get much more unsound than Republican nutcase Will Baker… which I suppose explains why (un)Sound Politics is plugging his website as part of their scholarly research into voting irregularities.

In case you forgot, Will Baker, a self-described “International Man of Diplomacy”, was the Republican candidate for State Auditor this past November. He’s also a roadside flower salesman, former exotic dancer, and devout conspiracy theorist who’s been booked into Pierce County Jail 19 times for harassing public officials. The state GOP was surprised to learn he’d only just been released from a six month jail sentence for “disturbing an official city meeting” at the time they filed him for the ballot.

“We are stuck with him,” said Republican Party Chairman Chris Vance. “It’s somewhat embarrassing. We should have been more thorough in checking him out.”

Oops.

But then, Vance is well known for his less-than-thorough vetting process. You know, like that big show he put on, demanding that canvassing boards count all those absentee and provisional ballots… that were already counted.

And here’s the funny thing. Despite the party’s well publicized attempt to “unfile” him, 841,772 loyal Republicans actually voted for this lunatic! Either Brian Sonntag has really pissed off the Republican electorate, or… well… you come to your own conclusion.

For nearly a week the the right-wing blogs have cast an OCD-like focus on the “shocking” discrepancy in King County’s election returns. The data shows 3,539 more ballots counted than people voting, supposedly proving KC Elections is grossly incompetent — if not totally corrupt. This, we are told (again, and again, and again,) is the “smoking gun” that will force the courts to call for a new election.

Stefan at (un)Sound Politics has delved into these numbers with his usual reckless abandon (you know… for reason, logic, or fairness,) despite the fact that the Secretary of State, county auditors, and state statute all confirm that these returns are “unofficial”, and that discrepancies such as these are common.

How common? Well according to an AP report by Rebecca Cook, state Republicans are claiming at least four “Rossi-supporting counties have similar shortfalls.”

Snohomish County has 1,738 fewer voters on its list than certified votes; Pierce County has 1,640; Clark County has 1,018; and Kitsap County has 484.

Huh.

So I did some number crunching, and I think you’ll find it curious to see how these discrepancies compare as a percentage of total votes cast per county. (For a lark, I have also included the voting margins.)

County		Discrepancy	Rossi	Gregoire
Clark		.59%		53%	45%
Snohomish	.58%		50%	48%
Pierce		.52%		51%	47%
Kitsap		.41%		49%	48%
King		.39%		40%	58%

Now if I were as statistically devious as some bloggers I know, I might point out an interesting pattern emerging: that the relative discrepancy rate is nearly proportionate to Dino Rossi’s margin of victory. But what should be plainly clear to even the most partisan observer is that despite the unrelenting attacks on the integrity and competence of their election officials, King County has by far the lowest discrepancy rate of any of the counties surveyed.

Are the results preliminary? Absolutely. Are discrepancies of this magnitude uncommon? Apparently not.

The discrepancy is “definitely, absolutely normal,” said Pierce County Auditor Pat McCarthy. She said the list of names may not include voters who have moved in the two months since the election and whose names have been “cleaned” from the rolls, and it may not include voters who were previously categorized as “inactive.”

Indeed, Clark County Auditor Greg Kimsey — a Republican — expects only about half of the vote-to-voter discrepancy to be accounted for in the final returns… but he has no plans to try to account for the extra votes:

“It would be a huge task,” Kimsey said. “You are looking through 121,679 absentee ballots, affidavit envelopes and through poll books where 50,598 voters cast their ballots.

“The controls that are in place in the election process ensure that only registered voters are going to receive a ballot. While I understand the concern that comes from seeing two different numbers, the controls are at the front end.”

As of this writing, our friends at (un)Sound Politics (and their emissaries commenting here) have yet to focus on discrepancies outside of King County. Perhaps they haven’t yet decided what to do with the rhetorical dilemma this information presents them. They could follow Chris Vance’s ill-advised legal strategy and attempt to call into question the integrity of results statewide. Problem is, the law doesn’t actually require the counties to reconcile the voter lists with the number of votes counted.

Or they could continue their Ukrainian-themed festival of Democrat-bashing propaganda, in a desperate attempt to prove to themselves — if not the public or the courts — that a corrupt and incompetent King County stole this election.

I’m guessing they’ll try a little of both. But whatever they do, it’s quickly becoming apparent that yet another one of their smoking guns… shoots blanks.

Writing in The Seattle Times, David Postman reports that state Republicans’ newest whipping boy may be fellow Republican, Secretary of State Sam Reed. The anger at Reed extends well beyond the right-wing blogs and conservative talk radio. Even one of his closest advisors wrote: “I am one of those who has no intentions of supporting you in the future.” [Republican Reed faces GOP wrath over recount decisions]

Reed says that he understands that many in his party thought he should use his position to “weigh the scales” on behalf of Dino Rossi, but that it just would not have been proper.

“There are some people who have been dismayed that I wasn’t a Katherine Harris who took the position, ‘I’m a Republican, and by God that comes first.’ “

Ain’t that the truth.

Even his predecessor, Ralph Munro — who earlier floated the idea of a new election but has since seemed to back away — described Reed as fair and honest, pointing out that he had a duty to follow the Constitution and the law. But that hasn’t stopped his fellow Republicans from turning on one of the party’s highest ranking state officials. Given the chance to defend Reed, GOPolitburo Chair Chris Vance could only muster a “No comment.”

Still, Reed does have some support, and not just from Democrats, pleasantly surprised at how nonpartisan he was in executing his office. Clark County Auditor Greg Kimsey pointed out:

“Unfortunately some people cannot separate the conduct of a fair and accurate election process as set forth in law from their disappointment with the outcome.”

Personally, I empathize with Republicans disappointed over the outcome of this election; it must be especially painful to have come so close.

But how R’s react to this disappointment from here on out, will do much to shape public perception of this election, and the players involved. Many hardcore Republicans seem to believe that a strident, combative stance will only strengthen their future political prospects. But even as Rossi’s carefully tailored image as a mild-mannered moderate slowly unravels to reveal the right-wing partisan he has always been, Reed’s street cred with the voting public has become firmly established. During the campaign, Rossi talked a lot about being a different kind of politician, but during the recount, Reed walked the walk.

It is ironic that the one Republican who is sure to come out of this election controversy a winner, is the one the Republican leadership currently loves to hate.

As the thousand monkeys on the right-wing blogs tirelessly type away in hope of accidentally writing Hamlet — or better yet, the final chapter of Christine Gregoire’s political career — we have been treated to snippet after snippet of half-coherent conspiracy theories regarding alleged misdeeds at King County Elections.

The 10,000 ballot underestimate during the first count, the provisional ballot affidavits, “changing the rules” to count 735 misfiled ballots, disenfranchised military voters, partisan canvassing decisions, lax security, enhanced and duplicated ballots, improper voter registrations… it is all intended to crush the integrity of the electoral system under the combined weight of the various allegations.

Now perhaps the unSound sycophants find it convincing, but as legal evidence in an election contest… it’s all load of monkey poop. Not a single one of these so-called-scandals provides legal grounds for overturning this election. And no court is going to set aside the results simply because the election was chaotic, or imperfect, or close.

But the monkeys keep on typing, and the latest “smoking turd” to roll off their Smith-Coronas is the supposedly shocking discrepancy between the number of people who voted, and the number of ballots counted in King County. County officials and the Secretary of State have all said that these returns are preliminary and unofficial. But how could King County possibly certify the results, the monkey’s angrily demand, based on unofficial returns?

Hmmm. How about RCW 29A.60.190, which is plainly titled “Certification of election results — Unofficial returns”…?

So how long do the counties have before submitting the final returns? Well, I’m not exactly sure, but according to RCW 29A.60.230 it seems a final report on absentee ballots is not due until March 31st. So personally, I’m just going to remain patient and wait for the final numbers before I start worrying about the typing monkeys.

Oh… and one other thought. It’s not at all clear to me, that even if King County fails to reconcile all the discrepancies in its returns, that this would provide grounds for an election contest either:

RCW 29A.60.130
Certificate not withheld for informality in returns.

No certificate shall be withheld on account of any defect or informality in the returns of any election, if it can with reasonable certainty be ascertained from such return what office is intended, and who is entitled to such certificate, nor shall any commission be withheld by the governor on account of any defect or informality of any return made to the office of the secretary of state.

I think the key words here are “reasonable certainty”, a phrase repeated in RCW 29A.60.200. But, the usual caveat: much to my mother’s chagrin, I am not an attorney. I’m not entirely sure what to make of this statute… but hell if I’m going to trust a bunch of typing monkeys.

I can predict the future. I see… (un)Sound Politics trashing Mark Trahant’s column in Sunday’s Seattle P-I.: “Rossi should take a cue from Gore.” (Unless of course, they read my prediction first, and don’t trash it just to spite me. So come on Stefan, I dare you to prove me wrong by proving me right. Or prove me right by proving me wrong. Whatever.)

Anyway…

This was an election that raised more questions than answers. Voters were split, roughly 50-50, and the conclusion was not at all satisfying. The division was so bad that the very process of elections and how we count votes became its own legitimate political issue.

Al Gore conceded anyway.

Ouch.

The point is, we’ve just been through a damn close election, and while those of you on the losing side may believe it was a load shit… shit happens. Trahant takes a historical perspective, pointing out that we had extremely close and contentious presidential elections in 1800, 1824 and 1960 (not to mention 1876), and in each case the loser managed to accept the results without a demanding a revote.

U.S. elections are not perfect and there’s no guarantee a new election would be any more satisfying than the November race.

Of course Dino Rossi supporters ardently believe a new election would be more satisfying — they’ve spent so much time and energy impugning Christine Gregoire and the Democratic party, they’re just oozing cockiness that Rossi would win in a cakewalk, if not a land slide. But as Trahant points out, he’ll have that chance… in 2008.

Ultimately, the question of legitimacy will not be answered by Rossi, a court or even a new election. It will be something that must be earned by Gregoire. It will be determined by how well she leads and governs the state.

If she’s effective, it will be tough for any Republican (Rossi included) to win office four years from now. And if she fails, Rossi or another Republican ought to win easily.

Republicans can rest assured that our state Constitution does indeed allow for a new election… every four years. But for now, it’s time for our new governor to get on with the job of governing. And it’s time for loudmouthed know-it-alls like me to get on with badgering her and the Legislature to do the right thing on tax restructuring, education, election reform and a host of other important issues. Speaking of which…

One way to improve access for military voters is to move the primary election back, allowing more time for ballots to be printed and mailed.

I couldn’t agree more. Oh wait… I already did.

Even as citizens from across Washington state joined together to celebrate the inauguration of 2005, former GOP gubernatorial hopeful Dino Rossi refused to concede the changing of the calendar, claiming that “unexplained irregularities” required an entirely new year.

Citing information first posted to the OCD support group blog, Sound Politics, Mr. Rossi pointed to data that showed the number of days in 2005 do not reconcile with the number of days in 2004. In a hastily called, and somewhat incoherent New Year’s Eve press conference, Mr. Rossi angrily slurred “Democrats say they want to count all the days. Well I’ve counted the days, and they just don’t add up. This Gregoirian calendar will not stand!”

Democratic spokesperson Kirsten Brost attributed the one day discrepancy to a “leap year,” but the conservative blogs were abuzz with rumors of this “mystery day.” Sound Politics had originally charged that 2005 had as many as 42 fewer days, but quickly revised the posting after admitting they were working from a preliminary calendar, and had not yet accounted for all the Jewish holidays.

Calling the calendar “a total mess,” Mr. Rossi sent a letter to Governor-elect Christine Gregoire, asking her to join him in demanding that 2005 be set aside, and that the state skip immediately to 2006, or preferably… 2008.

“Voters have lost faith in the integrity of the calendar,” wrote Mr. Rossi. “It is time to start fresh, with a happy new year.”

I thought I’d provide a link to George Howland’s column in the current Seattle Weekly: “The Republicans Blow It“.

While I personally hold a slightly less cynical view of this election, I thought Howland hit the nail on the head in comparing the strategies that ultimately shaped Christine Gregoire’s victory in the hand recount:

This turnaround wasn’t happenstance. The Democrats played a brilliant endgame, aggressively hunting for votes that had been incorrectly disqualified, while the GOP focused on trying to ferret out fraud that wasn’t evident.

As it so happens, these competing strategies were clearly represented in the blog wars over this election. I embraced the “count every vote” mantra early on, not only because I genuinely believed it the right thing to do, but out of confidence that if we counted every ballot cast by a legally registered voter, Gregoire would surely come out ahead. Meanwhile, our friends over at (un)Sound Politics callously dismissed voters with poorly marked ballots or illegible signatures as unworthy of the franchise… and have instead focused their prodigious efforts on unsound allegations of fraud, corruption and gross incompetence. As Howland points out, these two very different approaches stem from longstanding philosophical differences.

For decades, Democratic electioneering philosophy has been turnout

Share:

• Facebook
• Reddit
• LinkedIn
• Email
• Print

The other day I conducted an informal poll of a dozen of the most respected political reporters and columnists in the state. I asked them via email, whether they thought Dino Rossi would eventually contest the election or concede.

The results were informative:

Concede:			1
Contest:			2
On vacation:			4
Declined to participate:	2
Totally ignored me:		3

I think what we learn most from this poll is that journalists have a better benefits package than I do, with a full one third of those surveyed on vacation, while I’m left blogging in the Seattle rain. What we learn about this election is virtually nil.

The same can be said of those stupid, lame-ass internet polls that some people like to point to as valid indicators of public opinion… unless of course they don’t like the results, in which case they’re just stupid, lame-ass internet polls. My personal “favorite” at the moment is The Seattle Times poll that asks “Should we vote again?” I am particularly amused by the ironic result… a 50-50 tie.

Considering the public’s lack of trust in these stupid, lame-ass internet polls, and the extraordinary closeness of the Times survey, I am sending a letter to the Times editorial board asking them to agree to a new poll on the subject. And to give you the opportunity to show your support for a new poll, I have updated my own stupid, lame-ass internet poll to ask the all important question: “Should the Seattle Times conduct a new poll on whether we should vote again?”

FYI… just sent this to my press list:

Contact: David Goldstein
HorsesAss.Org
david@horsesass.org
206-774-6790

TO MY FRIENDS IN THE MEDIA:

CalTech/MIT studies confirm accuracy of hand recounts

In asking for a new election, Dino Rossi continues to make the unscientific charge that hand recounts are less accurate than machine counts. However, there happens to be quite a bit of research on this topic by the CalTech/MIT Voter Technology Project. [http://www.vote.caltech.edu/]

Of particularly relevance is the published study “Using Recounts to Measure the Accuracy of Vote Tabulations: Evidence from New Hampshire Elections 1946-2002.” [http://www.vote.caltech.edu/Reports/vtp_WP10.pdf] In this study the authors assert:

“Tabulations may change from the initial count to the recount for a variety of reasons: ballots may be mishandled; machines may have difficulty reading markings; people and machines may make tabulation errors. Because recounts are used to certify the vote, greater effort is taken to arrive at the most accurate accounting of the ballots cast. The initial count of ballots, then is treated as a preliminary count, and the recount as the official.”

In measuring tabulation error rates, the CalTech/MIT investigators clearly start from the assumption that recounts are more accurate because greater care is taken in arriving at the result. The study concludes that recounts should be mandatory whenever the margin of victory falls within 0.5%.

But Mr. Rossi has attacked the integrity of hand counts in particular. The researchers at CalTech/MIT speak directly to that issue in a paper titled “Residual Votes Attributable to Technology: An Assessment of the Reliability of Existing Voting Technology.” [http://www.vote.caltech.edu/Reports/vtp_WP1.pdf]

The “residual voting rate” is considered the primary metric for measuring the relative performance of voting technologies. According to CalTech/MIT:

“Similar jurisdictions using different technologies ought to have the same residual vote rate, on average. By this metric, hand-counted paper ballots and optically scanned ballots have shown the better overall performance than punch cards, lever machines, and electronic voting machines.”

The study finds that punch cards and electronic voting machines have a residual voting rate for president of about 3 percent of all ballots cast, whereas paper and optically scanned ballots produce rates of only 2 percent… “a statistically significant difference of fully one percent.” Indeed, when comparing jurisdictions that have switched from one voting technology to the other, the researchers conclude:

“Paper might even be an improvement over lever machines and scanners.”

The scientific literature clearly supports the notion that hand counts are accurate, and that recounts are more accurate than the initial, preliminary count. For Mr. Rossi to continue to insist that the first count was the most accurate, not only flies in the face of science, but of the clear intent of the governing statutes. It should be remembered that as a state senator, Mr. Rossi voted for an overhaul of RCW Title 29A, that reaffirmed the primacy of hand recounts in determining the outcome of our elections.

I encourage you all to go to the source material and evaluate the research for yourself. I believe you will agree that it is one thing to make specific allegations of fraud and error, and quite another to impugn the integrity our voting system in general.

###

Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed today officially certified Democrat Christine Gregoire as governor-elect, declaring her the winner of the closest gubernatorial election in state history. While historical records are incomplete, it is likely the closest gubernatorial race percentage wise, in the nation’s history.

While Republican Dino Rossi continues to call for a new election, claiming the results of a hand recount cannot be trusted, Reed — a two-term Republican — continued to defend the integrity of the electoral process.

“I do not feel like this has been a botched election,” Reed told a news conference. But he said that because it was so close, any error discovered took on great significance.

“I saw serious mistakes being made. I saw them being corrected,” Reed said. “That’s part of the process. The system itself has worked well.”

“Nothing that I have been informed about rises to the level of fraud,” Reed said. “There have been human errors. There have been mistakes. At this time there is nothing that appears fraudulent.”

While Reed defends the integrity of the election, Rossi’s proxies on the right-wing blogs continue to slog innuendo on top of conjecture on top of downright lies, in a concerted effort to undermine public confidence. The accusation du jour is that a “very prominent” King County Democrat is fraudulently registered at an illegal address. I can only assume that the villain’s identity is being withheld as an attempt at political extortion.

I don’t need to provide a link to the blackmailers… you know who I’m talking about.