Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org
From News4 in Jacksonville, FL…
Most of those were rejected because they lack signatures or the signatures don’t match the voter’s signature on file.
Lisa Rigg was worried her signature didn’t match and contacted the Supervisor of Elections office.
“It’s that important to me. I want my vote to absolutely count for this election. It is very important,” Rigg said.
She was right. Her absentee vote is one of those that was rejected.
“I was a little shocked,” Rigg said. “But then again, my signature does not always match, from day to day. I said, ‘What can I do to fix this? Can I come down and prove to you that I am who I am and I signed that ballot.'”
Unfortunately, the answer was no. Once a ballot is cast, it cannot be changed or replaced by a new ballot.
If the signature doesn’t match the voter is not asked to provide proof of who they are? In Washington state if our signature does not match on our absentee ballot the county contacts you and gives you the opportunity to go to the county election office and provide ID and your ballot is then accepted.
Let me guess, a Republican supervisor of elections?
…And your party is right on the envelope for all to see
So, they can just decide to disqualify ballots and offer no recourse for votes to be counted?
I think someone needs to file a lawsuit or make an FOIA request to get the counts of the spoiled ballots.
I smell a rat..
Where are those thousands of lawyers working for the DNC???
Oh yeah, I forgot: “Behind the scenes.”
Whew. I feel better now.
There are some laws that, I think, make this illegal. I’m not a lawyer and I haven’t studied the HAVA laws in depth — maybe someone here can take a look & see [I’m pulling out what jumped out at me – those who wish to examine the whole document, follow the links posted in my comment here]:
1971 Voting rights
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 20 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1971 Voting rights
(a) Race, color, or previous condition not to affect right to vote; uniform standards for voting qualifications; errors or omissions from papers; literacy tests; agreements between Attorney General and State or local authorities; definitions
(2) No person acting under color of law shall—
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW
Summary:
Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.
The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
… TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; …
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here’s the article posted at HuffPo that alerted me to the above:
Martin Markovits
– Posted October 28, 2008 –
Tipping the Scales — Up to 10,000 Registrations Deemed Incomplete in Colorado
Awesome comment Kira.
So there are like actual laws to prevent this kind of thing. That’s so cool. So much like the country I remember living in a long time ago. I’m sure you remember too. I sure miss it.
It seems like the fix is going in earlier this time, eh?
Makes sense. There is a lot more to fix this time.
What will we do this time when once again, there are massive numbers of people turned away from the polls, enough to swing the election the other way, and hold-ups that prevent hundreds of thousands of people from ever making it into the polling place.
And exit polls that say Obama won, with official results saying the opposite. I think this is what we should expect. This is all what I expect.
Oh, right, there are are all those lawyers working behind the scenes. Why do I think they are going to stay right there and do nothing, just the way that they did with Kerry?
Does it look to anyone else like there just MUST be more to the Democrats inaction than simple cluelessness and faith in the status quo? Like maybe they are scared and cowed, and they have been told that they can expect to be arrested for domestic terrorism if they do anything to cause people to question the outcome of the elections?
In physics, when you push on an object and it doesn’t move like you would expect it to, you can infer that there are forces at work that you can’t see.
It seems to me that there are unseen forces at work here. I don’t get it, but something is going on. At a minimum, I think the word has been put out to all the network journalists, about what kind of things they can say and not say, and if they say anything about having been told what they can say, it won’t be aired anyway, and their career will be over. So they play along.
Will we play along again this year, or take to the streets in protest?
I’ll be on the street corner in my town holding a sign up. Please stand with me, if it comes to that. Or at least honk in solidarity as you drive by. You’ll recognize me. I’ll be wearing orange.
I don’t understand one thing. If a vote is rejected due to a signature not matching (yes, I know some do not have consistent exact signatures) then, in my view, a ballot is not “cast,” giving the voter the right to do something to not be disenfranchised – of course no later than election day.
Also, I know many many people whose signatures are simply a flourish or some squiggly (sp?) lines. How are those signatures dealt with? It seems there is a lot of room for subjective decisions being made by a low-level worker at the Board of Elections. Oh please let Senator Obama win. The nightmare must end now. PEACE
So let me get this straight:
The ballot is valid enough to prevent you from voting again, but *not* valid enough to be counted?