Common Cause - Holding Power ResponsibleCommon Cause - Holding Power Responsible

Topics
Our Issues
Money in Politics
Election Reform
Media and Democracy
Ethics in Government
Government Accountability
Press Center
Research Center
Register to Vote

Sign Up and join the Community - click here

Research

Blaming the Messengers ...

By Murshed Zaheed
Posted on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 11:00:31 AM EST

Couple of weeks ago we told you about reports coming out of Ohio on how the Secretary of State - Kenneth  Blackwell was going after Cliff Arnebeck and couple of other attorneys, for challenging the Ohio elections results in 2004.  The story got the attention of the New York Times:
Ohio's attorney general, who represents Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell in the matter, has asked the State Supreme Court to sanction Mr. Arnebeck and the others for mounting a "frivolous" challenge. Even though their case was weak, these lawyers did a public service by raising concerns that many voters shared. The burden put on Ohio's courts by their challenge was minimal. Courts know what to do when they get a weak case: throw it out.

Imposing sanctions would be likely to deter people from raising concerns about future elections, and ultimately undermine public confidence in the electoral process. The Ohio Supreme Court should make it clear that people have the right to challenge election results without fear of retribution.

It is odd that Mr. Blackwell, of all people, is requesting sanctions. He made many bad decisions as Ohio's top elections official, including one to reject voter registrations filed on insufficiently thick paper, an order he later retracted. Mr. Blackwell and the officials responsible for the 10-hour lines have not been held accountable for putting unnecessary obstacles in the way of Ohio voters. It will be a poor reflection on our election system if the only ones punished are the lawyers who tried to point out these deficiencies.
This kind of story further underscores the urgency for election reform.  Public officials going after activists like Mr. Arnebeck, who are fighting to make sure that all registered voters are able to cast their voters in a free and fair election, sends a terrible message at a time we need to make sure all concerns of voting irregularities are addressed by those same officials, who are in charge of overseeing our electoral process. 


Tags: (all tags)


Display:

Blaming the Messengers ... :: 5 Comments

A response by one of the four Ohio attorneys

A letter to the New York Times in response to their editorial by Peter Peckarsky:

The Vote in Ohio
LTE - NY Times - Feb. 10, 2005

To the Editor:
Re "Blaming the Messengers" (editorial, Feb. 3): I write as one of the four lawyers who face sanctions for contesting the Bush-Cheney victory in Ohio. (The others are Robert Fitrakis, Susan Truitt and Clifford Arnebeck.)

Concerning our "weak" case: We filed more than 900 pages of evidence opposing sanctions sought against us because the case was "frivolous." A critical issue was large discrepancies between official results and results of exit polls directed by Warren Mitofsky, a polling expert. Our expert witness, Dr. Ron Baiman of the University of Illinois, testified that the probability that John Kerry won Ohio (and thus the presidency) was about 99 percent. In a companion case affidavit, Dr. Baiman stated that Mr. Mitofsky's Jan. 19 explanation of the exit poll results does not suffice.

George W. Bush and Richard Cheney each waived their right to cross-examine Dr. Baiman and refused to appear for depositions, thus missing a golden opportunity to explain their precise involvement in the election and to enhance our country's stature in the minds of foreign citizens who know the meaning of a large discrepancy between exit poll results and official results. The laws of statistics do not change at the United States border.

Peter Peckarsky - Columbus, Ohio, Feb. 7, 2005

Retired in Ohio

by Retired in Ohio on Fri Feb 11, 2005 at 02:18:16 PM EST


Re: A response by one of the four Ohio attorneys

Thanks for posting here Peter. Question for you ... did you guys file the evidence electronically by any chance. Would it possible to post a link to the PDF file of the complaint of your original suit.

by Anonymous Citizen on Fri Feb 11, 2005 at 06:43:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Re: A response by one of the four Ohio attorneys

Please note Mr. Peckarsky wrote the letter to the New York Times, but I posted it here.

A good place to find out more information on your request is http://www.freepress.org/index2.php. The Free Press has a series of excellent articles about the aftermath of the 2004 presidential election in Ohio.

Retired in Ohio

by Retired in Ohio on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 12:24:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Re: A response by one of the four Ohio attorneys

Thanks so much. I assume this is the specific link you were alluding to? I am still looking for PDF files of Arnrebeck's suite and this action filed by Ohio's AG.

by Anonymous Citizen on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 01:15:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Ohio 2004 illegal recount

The audacity of Secretary of State Blackwell is appalling. Those of us who volunteered in the recount know it was illegal from the start in all but a couple of counties.  We know the stories of citizens whose votes were rejected, who stood in the rain for hours, who were given provisional ballots instead of HAVA.  We also know that individual Board of Election officials, both republican & democrat, with negligence and mafeasance, let  the Secretary of State and co-Chair of  the State Bush Campaign pervert the electoral process.  How many other states didn't get the spotlight?  The system is broken.  

by Anonymous Citizen on Mon Feb 14, 2005 at 09:03:00 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account just by filling out the form below. It's quick and free.


contact us | volunteer/intern programs | employment opportunities | site map | privacy policy