Sam Reed is just beginning a segment on the John Carlson Show at this moment, 4:03pm
should be interesting.
KVI 570.
Highlights from the discussion:
* His office wasn't required to post translations of election documents in Chinese and Korean, he just thought it was a good idea.
* Carlson asks: how many non-citizens are registered to vote in Washington?
- Reed: we have no idea. On rare occasions they have discovered and prosecuted non-citizen voters. Gave examples of Canadians and British individuals. Acknowledges that WA state does not require proof of citizenship at time of registration.
* Reed has asked INS for list of registered aliens for his office to check against. Acknowledges that it won't prevent illegal immigrants from registering and voting.
* Carlson proposes that Reed use the Mexican Matricula Consular database.
- Reed says its an excellent idea and promises to act on it, acknowledging that it depends on Mexican cooperation. Also volunteers to seek similar data from other country's consulates.
* Reed was also asked to explain his quote in the Seattle Times on Sunday that
In Washington, Secretary of State Reed said, the simplest way to fix confusion over tracking felons would be to automatically restore voting rights when people are released from prison, regardless of whether they've paid all their court debts.Reed said he was quoted out of context. He did answer the reporter's question that it would be "simpler" to let felons vote as soon as they're released from prison. But he never meant to imply that it would be a good idea, which he says it is not.
* Finally, Reed indicated that he thinks its reasonable (or that he doesn't think its unreasonable -- I forget which) to require proof of citizenship for voter registration.
Overall, not a bad interview. However the fact that he voluntary published election information in a foreign language without being required to do so is not to his credit.
Heh. Carlson is now asking for my help to get behind and publicize his proposal for the Secretary of State to check the state voter database against the Matricula Consular list. You've got it, John. I think it's a great idea and I support it wholeheartedly!
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 27, 2005 04:04 PM | Email ThisAnd no drivers licenses for illegals!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sam Reed's standard answer is "we have no idea" or "everything is rosy".
Posted by: Norm on January 27, 2005 04:13 PMWe need not only a ReVote, but a Regret Vote.
Don’t get me going on not needing to understand English for American politics again…
I’m so embarrassed about Washington State right now. My dad in Detroit is making fun of me now – and he’s in Detroit!
Sam Reed is the most honorable person in this whole process....he did what was right instead of what was wanted by his party.
What a shame to see him take abuse and attacks for doing his job honorably.
Posted by: jim on January 27, 2005 04:25 PMThere was overwhelming evidence already before the certification that the entire election, re-count, and re-recount (paid for my the Democrats) process had serious issues. There is no way Sam Reed should have certified anything until further investigation.
But I'm not without compassion. Poor SoS Reed is a lone guppie Republican in an ocean of Democratic sharks - I guess he has to think about himself too, not just about the public that elected him to office - at least we Think he was really elected- I mean, maybe he really wasn’t… what do we know anymore… he was, after all, elected by a mere 51.4%. Did anyone even recount his votes?
A lot of the items we are talking about were addressed in these provisions.
Of course the Demoncrats don't care about the law even if enacted.
.....and why not, there are no prosecutions for anything in the voting process!!!!!!!!!!!
The biggest thing about Sam reed is that he did not implement the Federal law that the legislature passed in 2003. He was too BUSY!!!!!
The slings and arrows you shoot at an honest man shine light on what's wrong with our system. If one puts the law above the party, they are considered ill-suited for their role.
The funniest part is if Rossi had won after the final recount, you undoubteldy would be cheering Sam Reed's good decision making and upholding the law.
Don't worry, jim's serious...
Now, to business: Matricula Consular list. I am guessing this is the database of Mexican Nationals known to work/reside in the US? They don't give that out to just anybody, but the SoS may be able to make a deal with the Consular that the SoS Office will not make anything public from it, oh yeah, that negates it's effect...BTW, they did that thingy with the WA Voter Database to the P-I...
I think we should wait before we declare victory...
Posted by: smegma on January 27, 2005 05:18 PMThe "elections documents" Stefan referred to were press releases and other documents that were translated by an automated computer program.
Also, the democrats haven't yet paid for the re-recount. They deposited the money to pay for the hand recount. They get a refund if the recount reverses the outcome of the election, leaving the taxpayers paying for it. At this point in time, Reed has refused to return their money, pending the court challenge to the election. The dems are suing him to get the money back.
Posted by: north clark county on January 27, 2005 05:22 PMI had forgotten about the $$$. I wonder what the outcome will be with CG sitting in the G mansion for the time being? My guess is that she gets it back since the hand recount put her in there...but you may be right. Washington may be spared the cost.
Posted by: smegma on January 27, 2005 05:33 PMSam Reed is gutless. I think he's just playing lip-service to John Carlson's suggestion for the Matricula Consular list - a new term to me. Or he'll say it can't be made public, he couldn't get it, etc., ad nauseum.
Thank God for Stefan and this blog - the only ray of sunshine in this dark hole.
Posted by: CP on January 27, 2005 07:27 PMSo if the situation were to be reversed (Chrissy won election, machine recount, and lost hand recount after thousands of ballots were illegally changed, thousands of ballots could not be matched to voters, thousands of voters had their ballots lost, hundreds of provisional votes had been illegally fed into voting machines, etc., etc.) you would be counseling Democrats to "just move on"?
Not bloody likely.
Posted by: iconoclast on January 27, 2005 07:29 PMI admit it. My position is based on the result of the election being in favor of the candidate I want.
Will you admit that your position is based on the result of the election being against the candidate you wanted?
CP....that cracks me up. It's the RNC that is efficient getting talking points (as our senators, representatives, blogs, and right wing radio all get daily updates...out foxed showed the documents!)
Posted by: jim on January 27, 2005 08:44 PMWhat have we come to in this state?...a long way from where we have been. I'm old enough to remember fair and honest elections and people who believed in following the election laws, including SOS's & auditors.
God help us when we give up honesty & integrity for the result we want.
Posted by: Susu on January 27, 2005 09:42 PMI'd settle for competent.
Posted by: South County on January 28, 2005 12:13 AMTrue that Reed is holding the Democrat’s funds for the re-count pending the court outcome – he has to, and I agree he should get points for that. The adage “possession is 9/10 the law” most definitely applies to money, and people get kind of weird when it comes to money.
But some people here have a point about going after Reed being a waste of time and effort, and off course from the main goal of making this election correct, fair, and right.
Someone up there a ways mentioned that maybe we wouldn’t be so gung-ho about all this had Rossi won. Frankly, maybe not. If the same candidate won the first, second and thirds counts, people probably wouldn’t think much about it. But winning the first and second count, but losing the Democratic-sponsored count with questionable newly found votes was enough to raise anyone’s brows.
Either way, when it’s as close as it was, maybe a run-off of sorts should be in order as standard practice.
My confidence in our leaders to run the State, help make immigrants an integrated part of the State & Country, and deliver on their promises is rapidly crumbling. Gregiore lost her credibility in my eyes: promising things that have been directly negated, for example the Alaskan Viaduct. Patty Murray has been working for years on funding for that project, but admits that there’s no way we will get that funding for a while – so why is Gregoire running around promising this?
And why isn’t this huge concern for immigrants’ understanding of current events not continuing After the election? Consistently helping them understand things and/or learn English would have helped with not having incorrectly translated documents released in the first place.