Are Democrats paranoid, or is the GOP really blocking vote reform?
by Jeff Woods
It's driving Democrats crazy. Call them paranoid if you wish, but they're certain the GOP is up to some kind of chicanery—they just can't quite put their finger on precisely how the devilry will go down. Why else, they ask, would Republicans fight so hard to stop an obvious good-government election reform that only a year ago enjoyed broad bipartisan support?At issue is the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act. With great fanfare, Republicans and Democrats alike embraced this law in 2008 to eliminate the hazards of paperless, unverified electronic voting. Since then, its only accomplishment has been to spark a head-scratching political brawl complete with name-calling, baffling legal interpretations, accusations of Gestapo-like intimidation and demands for heads on platters.
Reform activists argue that paperless electronic voting is a virtual license to steal elections. Witness the 2000 voting fiasco in Florida, and the hours-long lines in Ohio in 2004, the miscounted ballots, the malfunctioning machines—the horror stories are many. It was enough to prod even the notoriously backward Tennessee legislature into action.
In Tennessee, 93 of 95 counties use touch-screen machines with no paper trail to verify results. The Voter Confidence Act calls for replacing these by the 2010 elections with paper ballots to be marked by voters and then read by optical scanners—a system allowing for recounts and audits of the actual tallies.
Despite the indisputable benefit of paper ballots, many election officials always have resisted the switch. Mainly, they argue 2010's too soon to make a smooth transition. When Republicans took over the legislature this year, by law they also gained control of the state's election machinery and immediately sided with county officials fighting to delay implementing the Voter Confidence Act.
Tre Hargett, the new Republican secretary of state overseeing Tennessee's elections, is getting really good at dragging his feet while denying that he's doing so. He's issued formal requests for proposals from vendors selling optical scanners. The Catch-22? The law requires machines to meet "the applicable voluntary voting systems guidelines," which Hargett interprets as 2005 federal standards. But at last report, there were no such machines yet. Isn't that a tough break?
"I really want to make this work, but I can't provide counties with equipment that doesn't exist," Hargett says.
The citizen-advocacy group Common Cause filed a lawsuit this month asking a Davidson County judge to decide whether Hargett's interpretation of the law is correct. Common Cause argues older standards satisfy the requirements.
"The secretary of state is going out of his way to twist the language of this law so it's impossible to implement," says Steven Mulroy, a Shelby County commissioner and University of Memphis law professor who is one of the lawsuit's plaintiffs. "We've got a strong case, and if we can get to court soon there's a good chance the judge will agree with us."
But the legislature is likely to render the issue moot, as the lawyers like to say, by voting in next year's session to delay implementation beyond 2010. Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, the Senate speaker and a Republican candidate for governor, has declared this to be his No. 1 priority. Such an effort narrowly failed in the Senate last session. Two Republicans were absent that day or it would have passed then.
Mulroy can't believe his ears. "Regardless of what you think about this, how could you make it your No. 1 priority to block election reform?
"The battle lines are hardened," he says. "This somehow has become a partisan thing, and that's unfortunate."
While the matter plays out, no one's pulling any punches. House Democratic leader Gary Odom called Hargett a scofflaw at a press conference, and Democratic Party chair Chip Forrester has demanded he be fired for abuse of power.
"What does it take to make these people understand we need secure and reliable elections in Tennessee now?" Forrester says. "Evidently it is going to take legal action."
Not to be outdone, Hargett sent TBI agents to the home of one reform activist to investigate a supposed terrorist threat. When the agents learned it was no threat at all but only an innocuous blog comment, they apologized, shook the activist's hand and left sheepishly.
State GOP chair Chris Devaney dismisses the Democrats' complaints as politics as usual and casts Republicans as patriotic defenders of election integrity.
Democrats see shadowy conspiracies. They are convinced Republicans have something nefarious up their sleeves for this high-stakes election, which will decide which party is allowed to gerrymander the political map for the next decade.
One theory is offered by Mary Mancini, election reform activist and co-host of the weekly Liberadio(!) show on WRVU-91.1 FM. Republicans are plotting to suppress Democratic votes, she says. How will they do that? Well, it's simple: By keeping touch-screen machines in place and putting fewer of them in Democratic precincts, they can create long lines and discourage voters. Devious, isn't it? It's also a little far-fetched, which even many Democrats concede.
"Republicans used to be all for this, and now they're all against it," Mancini insists. "I think this is all part of their voter suppression plan. It's the only thing that makes any sense."
Still, there's one sure way for Republicans to silence their critics: Switch to paper ballots. "Prove me wrong," Mancini says. "Prove me paranoid. I'd love it."
Comments (4)
Showing 1-4 of 4
oh my not a partacinship(sorry about the spelling) sounds so familar don't it? Now i see it as far and a sound, wise remody. But the other one doesn't. so i guess it tit for tat or a true bi way but no biggie won't listen so middle shouldn't either and well no more voter fraud don't you think? also i think copies should be given out to everuy voter so just in case they will have an actual way to recount if nessisary lol we the ppl are the ones who actually can refuse all the bills and inact are own because of our TRUE bill of rights ;)
like
dislike
am so sorry bout spelling and have a word 2 things keyboard and hands are probmatic ummm and lol sometimes my mouth lol =) ty for understanding
Thanks, Jeff, for staying on top of this story. It was only a matter of time before Hargett and other members of the TN/RICO (oops, TN/GOP) ended up in court for disrespecting the law and subverting the consent of the governed. Hopefully it will not be the last. Every Tennessee voter owes Common Cause a debt for suing Secretary of State Tre Hargett and his co-conspirators to require them to respect the law. This lawsuit is overdue and it is greatly appreciated. Despite his recent 1984-ish protestations, Hargett has steadfastly opposed the implementation of the TN Voter Confidence Act (TVCA). He trotted out one bogus excuse after another to get the Legislature to delay implementing the election reforms mandated by this law. Then, when the legislature kept the reforms on-track for 2010, Hargett invented one last excuse after the legislature adjourned -- that the TVCA requires voting machines certified to 2005 federal standards. (Jeff, as you so aptly point out, no such machines now exist. How VERY convenient for 2010 election fraud-enablers.) The Common Cause lawsuit makes clear that the TVCA does not require "2005 standards," and that there are optical scan machines used in almost all other states which meet Tennessee's new standards -- standards which must be upheld if we are to have safer and more trustworthy elections. Despite Hargett's failure to unearth a single legitimate excuse for disrespecting the law, he has continued to do just that. This tortured game to keep our elections unsafe and fraud-friendly by the increasingly worrisome and irrational hard-right-wing faction that has captured the TN/GOP must end. It is unfortunate that a lawsuit is necessary to make Hargett comply with the TVCA. But let's hope that -- in a courtroom real soon -- Hargett can finally be brought to understand what the rule of law requires. Everyone else -- the legislature, the Governor, the people, the media (oh well, Jeff, you and a small handful of other for-real Fourth Estaters) -- has tried so far to explain that to him, and failed. Tennesseans must do whatever it takes to protect our franchise. (Just ask the ghosts of the Battle of Athens.) My thanks again to Common Cause -- they speak for everyone who wants to use our lawful institutions to save our democracy, while we still can.
You indicate that maldistribution of voting equipment is unlikely. Yet this is precisely what happened in both Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 where African-American precincts were inadequately resourced. So it is not far fetched at all. If the computer scientist critics of the Diebold and other machines are correct, it is relatively simple to change the results of elections in seconds on these systems. Some dismiss these critics as mere hackers. But they just happen to be computer science faculty from some of our most prestigious universities including the professors who have the National Science Foundation grant for studying electronic voting. Mr. Hargett obviously must be more capable of assessing security risks in computer systems than these troublesome academics who do it for their careers. I agree with Mr. Ellis that all voters in Tennessee should support Common Cause in their lawsuit and overall effort to get our Secretary of State to follow the law. I believe the motivations behind Hargett's actions deserve analysis. Why is this a partisan issue? Shouldn’t both parties want honest elections? Why is Hargett determined to use machines that represent a real security threat? Maybe these machines do provide the Republicans with an advantage? Maybe their surprise victory in the 2008 elections wasn't a surprise to them? WE ALL NEED TO PUSH FOR VERIFIABLE, RECOUNTABLE BALLOTS NOW!! WE ALL SHOULD CONTACT LEGISLATORS, INVOLVE OUR FRIENDS, POST ON BLOGS, WRITE LETTERS. I believe the SOS is acting based on a silly squabble over semantics in the bill. Given the potential seriousness of the security risks the machines pose, why keep them for any more elections? Even if you agree that the law is ambiguous, why would our SOS choose the interpretation that prevents implementing the law now as expressed by the will of the legislature? Why is blocking this bill the Lt. Governor's number one priority? Republicans should stop hiding behind phony excuses and explain their preference for flawed machines.
