Seattle Times: Scores of felons voted illegally

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002158407_felons23m.html

By Seattle Times staff

Scores of convicted felons voted illegally in the state's 2004 general election, and officials never noticed because of serious flaws in the system for tracking them, The Seattle Times has found.

The Times, reviewing felony convictions as far back as 1997, identified 129 felons in King and Pierce counties who were recorded as having voted in the Nov. 2 election. Another 23 likely voted. Several methods were used to confirm the findings.

Either the counties failed to flag or purge felons on the voter rolls as required by state law, or they allowed them to register without checking their status. Some were even mailed absentee ballots and returned them unchallenged.


The findings are almost certain to add to an already contentious debate over whether Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire's victory was legitimate.

more

I hear that all too often.

they call liberals cry babies for pursuing voter irregularities, which I've worked on myself, here in Ohio. They kept telling her to concede and that she was embarrassing herself and her party. Well, well, well, she won didn't she? And now those same shitheads are crying foul at the same time belittling Dems for investigating another election with far more evidence. non of this will matter anyway, because the margin of victory after the absentee ballots went from 4 to in the hundreds. Even if they all voted for her, she still wins. I've been looking towards the Pac NW as a Democratic refuge, I almost cried when I heard a creationist was about to take over Washington. Give em Big Sky country and let em hunt coon and take evolution out of the schools up there. They can call it Bible Land and charge admission.

Montana will be off-limits to that Jim Crow bullshit as long as I reside here.

And FYI, we went mostly Democratic in the state elections. It was the national election that we did poorly in.

If you want that kind of stuff, they already have it: Alabama.

irregularities; being against them just when it's your ox that was gored makes the entire movement look like it's not for fairness and principle, but just a blatant struggle for power.

It may be a blatant struggle for power (the "fraud committed by our side is virtuous because our side is the side of Right and Good" kind of reasoning), and there's something to be said for being honest about it. But that's not the way to gain adherents for election reform.

I want elections cleaned up and fraud prevented. Period. It's not a dem thing.

You're right. Doesn't matter who is hurt.

would this have mattered if rossi had won?? o hell no it wouldn't have! what happened to "you should concede, you should just concede," he was chanting at gregoire for 2 damn months??

The GOP has been successful in convincing the uninformed people that felons and people with low moral values vote for democrats whereas hard working people with high ethical and moral values vote republican. This could not have happened if the elected democrats had stood up rather than allow the accusations and innuendos continue unabated.

or just any minor criminal record is necessary so that they can't vote? Aren't they still considered to be citizens?

In Canada, any citizen can vote in federal elections even if they are in jail. I'm not sure if prisoners can in provincial elections or not, I think its up to the individual provinces. However, convicted criminals that are out of jail are always allowed to vote.

Shouldn't they then also be asked to look into the problem of "more votes than voters" and the other problems the Republicans mentioned? I would, personally, like to know why there were "more votes than voters".

"State Republicans filed a court case Jan. 7 arguing that the election was illegitimate and should be nullified. They have cited illegal votes by felons, as well as votes credited to dead people, errors in the handling of provisional ballots and problems reconciling differences between the number of people credited with voting and the total number of ballots cast."

that illegals and felons vote Democratic?

...In fact the two instances in which the Times has reported illegal voting, both votes were for Rossi. One was a man who cast a ballot for his dead wife. The other was in today's paper, a felon who is a registered republican.

My guess is that the republicans knew there were many who should not have voted--because they planted them. You will never see in any of the Republican charges a suggestion that those who illegally voted, voted Democrate. So...if the republicans are the ones who created the illegal voters--should they now be allowed to use them as a proof that the system requires a re-vote?

after you've done your time in prison. I wonder if this has ever been challenged as un Constitutional? I can understand losing your voting right while in Prison, but after?

If someone's out of jail, they're -former- felons.

Former felons also are discriminated against in housing, jobs etc. Makes one think there is good reason to never "being taken alive". This wonderful "Christian" country always amazes me in it's capacity to forgive (not) after full retribution has been paid.

This is something we as democrats should have on the top of our agenda, instead of "finishing the fight in Iraq". It's no surprise that we can hardly win election to dog catcher anymore. We have strayed too far from our basic beliefs and for some reason our "leaders" drink the kool aid concocted by the Nazi right wing repugs and dispensed by the MSM. It's time for "normal" everyday people to take over the party or to form a "New Democratic Freedom Party" with leftist libertarians leading the way. Pretend Democrats like Kerry and Clinton need to crawl back to their spidey holes and suck up to the repugs from there.

It is in opposition to universal human rights (universal sufferage),
and that is why the US won't ratfiy the UN declaration amongst other
reasons like that torture is illegal as well.

Funnily, they disenfranchise those who know the most about how to fix
the correctional system, so that systemic problems never get fixed.

Its really pathetic.

I'm glad those ones in the article got their votes counted... its the
least that could happen consider the hundreds of thousands who are
screwed by the system.

Felon disenfranchisement was origianlly part of Jim Crow and was meant to curtail African American voting rights.

...however this is Washington State, which is as far north of the Mason-Dixon line as you can get, so :shrug:

... are 1st and 2nd generation transplants from Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia during WW2 (Manhattan Project) and Cold War days. Not only those directly relocated to work at Hanford, but their families, friends and neighbors, many of whom were attracted by the massive irrigation projects undertaken by the Army Corps of Engineers as well as the Grand Coulee Dam Project and the Columbia River Power projects. The 'cultural' heritage of Eastern Washington is very heavily influenced by Jim Crow politics.

The majority of states that ban felon voting are in the south. In Ohio felons are only banned from voting while currently serving a felony sentence. However testers discovered the majority of counties in Ohio giving erroneous information to callers who inquireed about felon voting rights. In exchange for dropping a lawsuit, Ohio agreed to notify former felons of their voting rights by letter then reneged (Jim Petro)

BTW Ohio's felon voting system costs nothing to administer. Florida spent $3 million preventing felons form voting.

Edited to add: In my GOTV efforts in Ohio I ran into lots of felons who thought they were not allowed to vote.

It came from English common law. Written in response to fears that felons could change the laws to benefit criminal activity and trigger a degeneration in law and order.

Gyre

Felony crimes prevent people from voting in the U.S. Constitution. It was a punishment for committing crime. Now, its a tool to deny people the right to vote. I hope that one day, I live long enough to see a country which abandons the "War on Drugs" and does away with clauses such as this in the Constitution. I can only hope that I'm still alive in four years.

These laws are enacted at the state-level, and they vary from state to state. There is no Constitutional requirement of any kind that a state prohibit felons from voting (in fact, I could make a pretty decent argument that the 14th Amendment actually prohibits such disenfranchisement, at least as it is now practiced).


MDN

What do they always use to justify this ruling? I was under the impression that a clause was in the Constitution to enact such a thing. Again, this must be that old interpretation thing. I don't know then.

I don't know why I thought it was in the constitution too. Either allow them to vote in every state or disallow them to vote in every state.

...cooked up for Florida.

vote in my opinion.

... dumbass whiny slimeball hypocritical Repukes throw a fit over the idea that felons might *gasp* vote but never say a word about the fact that 6 convicted Iran-Contra felons are serving under His Holiness Lord and Master Planetary Chimperor.

so, commit crimes of treason, perjury, arms sales to the enemy, influence peddling, racketeering, etc. and you might lose your vote but you will be handed a cushy public-service position by the "moral values" party.

could you please elaborate on who the Iran-Contra felons are and what jobs they have in government now? Thanks.

"Iran Contra Pardons Saved Poppy Bush"

http://pearly-abraham.tripod.com/htmls/iran-contra3.html

also:

Iran-contra affair

A number of criminal convictions resulted, including those of McFarlane, North, and Poindexter, but North's and Poindexter's were vacated on appeal because of immunity agreements with the Senate concerning their testimony. Former State Dept. and CIA officials pleaded guilty in 1991 to withholding information about the contra aid from Congress, and Caspar Weinberger, defense secretary under Reagan, was charged (1992) with the same offense. In 1992 then-president Bush pardoned Weinberger and other officials who had been indicted or convicted for withholding information on or obstructing investigation of the affair. The Iran-contra affair raised serious questions about the nature and scope of congressional oversight of foreign affairs and the limits of the executive branch.

http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/history/A0825447.html

It was a shameful period in US history, and one that would come back to bite the Democrats on their collective butts...

"Scores" could = as few as 40 people.

What's the big damned deal?

Headlines for The Backside Of The Bell Curve?

can we trade?

...voting software and assume high-ranking executive positions... felons with multiple convictions in e-fraud.

I say, if felons are allowed at Diebold, then felons are allowed to vote!

Why are we more concerned with some people who are petty criminals and not the Felon-In-Chief in the White House?

but in WA, they're blaming King County for not doing the job of purging voters lists.

In WA, they're not blaming the Republican Secretary of Sate for making sure the sate lists were free of inelligible voters.

Why is this our focus, rather than making sure that our elections are free and fair?

This obsession with finding reasons why citizens must be barred from the voting booth: where does it come from, and what does it really say about a society that advertises itself as "democratic"?

A vestige of Religion/Monarchy/Warrior castes.

Labor is always trying to circumvent these three.
The best it can do is veto one allowing the other
two to come to the fore.

What was the sentence? Sent to jail and lose your right to vote.

What about Amendment XV:

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Did I get "servitude" right?

Or the Declaration of Independence
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

What is Liberty without the right to vote?


In Germany you have in jail the right to vote. Just for some capital crimes (preparation of an aggressive war, high treason, interference or fraud of vote, but not for murderer or even sexual abuse of children) someone can lose his rights for 2 to 5 years. If your sentence is less than a year you are even able to be elected.

in Florida.

you will find irregularities. They are desperate crybabies.

This is a statistical problem that illustrates the difference between accuracy and precision. Accuracy means whether you've taken an overall valid measurement; precision means how finely you can describe that measurement.

An election is like a deli scale that weighs the electoral opinion of the voters. Although it can be accurate, it cannot be perfectly precise. For example, imagine going to the deli and trying to buy 1.2679 pounds of sliced cheese. The deli scale doesn't measure that precisely, so no matter how honest the deli worker is, or how well-calibrated the scale is, you will not be able to get closer than a few hundredths of a pound.

An election, if run honestly, can provide a good (i.e., "accurate") gauge of public preference, but only to the closest few thousand voters or so (the actual margin of error number can be calculated rather simply using standard statistical techniques). Despite romantic notions to the contrary, there is no single exact number of votes because there is no way to eliminate all subjective and random errors. The best that can be done is to minimize them.

Of course, if there is intentional fraud, then the statistical analysis is rather beside the point. However, in any close election, I've noticed that both sides reflexively accuse the other of fraud. Fraud happens more than some people think, and less than other people think. Frankly, neither side has a spotless record. I do not see evidence of wholesale fraud in the Washington election. In other words, it looks to be a statistically valid measurement. A few misplaced ballots here or dead people casting absentee ballots there really don't mean much. That stuff happens in *every* election.

Bottom line is: if the repukes didn't want to lose the election, then they shouldn't have let it get so close. Just like in a basketball game, if the score is tied with 9 seconds left on the clock, then you already put your team at risk of losing earlier in the game by not sewing it up when you had the chance. Can you really tell which is the better team from the way they play the last 9 seconds? No, at that level of "precision" the final result will be due more to random factors.

The repukes need to shut the fuck up and move on. They're complaining that they only got 1.2678 pounds of cheese, when it's a mathematical fact that the "scale" doesn't measure that finely. Elections that end with vote differences smaller than the margin of error are statistical ties. No one "won," but someone has to prevail, and at the end of the day, Gregoire has more votes. I haven't heard of a better way to settle it than that. Gregoire is the legitimate winner.

Does anyone give a rat's ass about that? Don't even talk to me about legitimacy...

a repub who had been voting and buying guns illegally for years!

two thousand more votes than they have registered voters? Imagine that.

I must have a glitch somewhere in my "Fair and Balanced" meter.

and not mentioned anything about, how Republicans stoled Snohomish county election. Snohomish county was only county, voting machines were NOT certified before the general election and find out, all the touch screen machines were pre-programed! Gezzzzzzzzzzz, wonder why Rossi is NOT screaming about this.

So what? We really need to either allow all of them to vote everywhere or outlaw it everywhere. The law is a mess.

conversation? Couldn't be bothered to run an article then, could they?

Time to outsource to voting rolls purge to Accenture, like Florida did. No matter than MOST of those purged should not have been, it's all in keeping with the neocon agenda of shoring up "their" side and disenfranchising our side.

from Wa. State, but so many of them not translating into Gregoire votes? Is Dino Rossi that popular among moderate Democrats and Republicans who voted Kerry?

I was getting fired up, then I read it. Most of the questions asked here would be answered.

The felons they quote voted republican.

The felons have unpaid fines or restitution due which keeps them off the the voting rolls. Once paid, then restored.

The dead votes were republican.

Tahiti, those areas do vote rep, and heavy delays in chemdemil on cleanup sites around the country has hanford getting their cut, but for how long with big bucks going to Iraq. West coast has heavy job losses pulled more dem. votes. Locke had some plans that tried to keep jobs in the state but outsourcing and illegals are setting the work changes and cost in state for food stamps, welfare, etc.
Mixed bag of Rossi/Gregoire pro/con. I did polls in the area.

"Christian" radio stations are pushing listeners to write letters to the editor to challenge the election for a revote. Didn't think Rossi was a christian soldier? Letters are there everyday. Good puppy press. Most papers here supported Kerry. Mixed on other reps.

My feelings, if they can find a judge in their pocket, maybe they'll get lucky. I see them pulling a CA change out down the road.