January 28, 2005
National Review Editorial: New Election in WA

In an editorial from its Feb. 14 print edition that is posted online today here, The National Review calls for a new election for Governor in Washington State.

Rossi....argues that the vote-counting process has been so chaotic and mishandled that no one can assume the governorship except under a debilitating cloud of doubt.

He is right. The painstaking precinct-by-precinct analysis of blogger Stefan Sharkansky at soundpolitics.com shows that in King County alone, there are 3,700 unaccounted-for ballots or voters. Some precincts have more ballots than voters, for a total of 2,900 "extra" ballots. Other precincts have more voters than ballots, for a total of 800 "extra" voters. These mystery voter-less ballots and ballot-less votes obviously are enough in themselves to put Gregoire's 129-vote margin in serious doubt.

Other irregularities abound.....The trend toward litigated election results is already well underway and there seems little chance of stopping it. It may be that Rossi will hurt his political future by seeming to be a sore loser in this race. But that judgment is for him to make. If he believes the principle of upholding the integrity of Washington's election process is more important than the political risk he runs, so be it.

There is, as many have noted, something to be said for finality in an election. We agree. But the only way to get it in this case is to tighten up procedures, and vote again.

Due to what has been discovered since the hand recount went Christine Gregoire's way, Washington State is under the national microscope as a case study in botched elections and bureaucratic ineptitude. That will continue, for months. Unless. Gregoire could restore the state's integrity and her own by agreeing to a new vote, but clinging to power is clearly a higher priority.

History will not remember her kindly.

Posted by Matt Rosenberg at January 28, 2005 11:49 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Thankfully, by the standards of most people in this state, Rossi is not only NOT hurting his political career, he's pursuing what the PEOPLE want!

Posted by: Michele S on January 28, 2005 11:54 AM
2. The recent poll results indicate that Rossi is not hurting his career all that much. His remarkable ability to communicate firmness without sounding shrill or whiny is winning more favor as the revote effort progresses. Also, the incredible indifference by Auditors and SoS regarding the many uncovered illegalities and serious irregularities only serves to make Rossi's case more compelling.

Put another way, Rossi is showing by example how Republicans can simultaneously take the high road and not give in to the Democrats' fraud & lies machine. Most of the credit for that ability goes to the new alternative media: talk radio and blogs. Together, these two channels of information provide a way for Republicans to get their message to people without undue distortion by the MSM.

Posted by: iconoclast on January 28, 2005 12:26 PM
3. As egregious as it is, and as "under the microscope" as it is, Washington is not the worst example to be found. Right now that prize appears to belong to Wisconsin. Washington does however have an opportunity to be the national leader in fixing it and getting it right.

Posted by: jay bird on January 28, 2005 12:27 PM
4. It is gratifying that there is appropriate and national attention to this race. As NRO states, this is a very rare contest with such minute margins. The remedy of a re vote is not a negative precedent setting solution. Itis the obvious fair remedy and should be to any fair minded individual of any political persuasion. This whole affair has the wonderful and unintended consequence of shinning the spotlight of scrutiny on the non-eligible voters and the unfair and perhaps outright fraudulent practices that have been the defacto status quo of King County politics. The ultimate outcome of a fair and well conducted election contest by Dinno based on sound facts and statistical analysis- thanks Stephan- will go a long way to finally starting the clean up of the system and particularly King county.

Posted by: Ludwig A on January 28, 2005 12:30 PM
5. Washington State is under the national microscope as a case study in botched elections and bureaucratic ineptitude. That will continue, for months.

Months pass by quickly. Hopefully hysteria, and mob mentality will pass as well.

2008 looms in the distance.

Posted by: John on January 28, 2005 12:40 PM
6. Gregoire could restore the state's integrity and her own by agreeing to a new vote, but clinging to power is clearly a higher priority.

Nice article. However, she can't agree to a re-vote. Its not allowed under Article III section of the state constitution. Minor problem.

The closest thing she could do is resign and then run again at the next election when the legislature is elected again in 2006.

Posted by: Erik on January 28, 2005 12:41 PM
7. Anyone want to bet how soon we'll hear from Joel Connelly (who has already been taking shots at John Fund), or another columnist in the Seattle MSM, bemoaning the intrustion of national conservative media - which they probably won't describe as politely - in WA state's affairs?

I'm guessing by Monday.

Posted by: Eric on January 28, 2005 12:47 PM
8. In a criminal trial, if every single tiny detail of the procedure isn't done perfectly, the defendent walks, and the victim(s) are left holding the bag.

Whereas in a busted election, our association of great and good County Auditors seem to think that thousands of double, dead, 'enhanced', nonexistent and otherwise illegal votes - greatly exceeding the margin of plurality of Ms. Gregoire - are just too trivial to bother with, and there is no victim, and let's all go home and pretend to fix the busted procedure before some distant future election.

The criminal defendent can't be subjected to double jeopardy - that's considered unjust - so she's out of the picture. But throwing out the busted election is just the logical first step in restoring justice by immediately holding another election under the most intense scrutiny since the Enron trials. Otherwise we're all holding the bag.

Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on January 28, 2005 12:51 PM
9. Dear Insufficiently Sensitive:

Just to comment/question the above.... Since you are a trial attorney, as you say, tell me how you would fight to win something that you believed to be unjust? Do you mean to tell me that you believe Rossi truely lost this election? There is speculation and heresay that one way of counting is more accurate than the other, but putting that aside..... Rossi wins the first two counts-end of story by the law, then, also as the law stipulates.... gregoire also has a right to another count-paid for by herself/party..... she then wins the count her party pays for...
Because the margin of error is so small, the voters/ballots don't match up and many other inconsistencies.......you can honestly say-lets fold up and go home???

what kind of an attorney are you?
Or do "trial attorney's" only take the cases that are a "for sure" win???

Posted by: darcy on January 28, 2005 02:25 PM
10. I don't think Gregoire has though twice about the conditions under which she has stolen office. Remorse is not felt by theives generally. Moreoever, she believes that she is on a mission (and they call Bush too religious) to beat back the patriarchy and usher in the Age of the Matriarchy.

Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on January 28, 2005 02:48 PM
11. Erik

Excellent point. CG's hands are tied with regards to a revote and have been since she requested the hand recount. All the actors have their parts now and cannot leave the stage until the scene is done.

Posted by: iconoclast on January 28, 2005 02:55 PM
12. Darcy,

That's quite an outburst. Not being an attorney, I can't quite make sense of it all. I thought the principle was clear - that only in criminal procedings is a failed legal process unrepeatable, due to double jeopardy.

If an election process can be shown to be so badly flawed that its outcome is meaningless - as our recent Gubernatorial election was - then it should rightly be voided. And since an election process is a measurement of the opinion of every eligible voter, it should be decided by every eligible voter, and not the Legislature.

What other alternative is there to re-running the election? Only this time, enforcing the RCWs and WACs that provide for proper registration, purging corpses and felons and non-citizens from the rolls, disclosing all voter residence places, vetting ALL the provisional ballots, and maintaining such rigorous document control that in each county, votes equal voters with less than FIVE votes slop per county.

Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on January 28, 2005 03:03 PM
13. The NR folks are correct, and I'm glad they had the guts to take a stand. There's been far too much funny business going on to be ignored. The lawsuit was an unfortunate but absolutely necessary move. A re-vote is needed.

Posted by: Seth Cooper on January 28, 2005 04:23 PM
14. To any and every one:

As we infer from the polls and know from the Re-Vote petition that a large percentage - maybe even a majority - of WA state voters support a new vote, is it be safe to presume that just as many would support a statewide law requiring proof of citizenship and ID in order to vote in future elections?

I haven't read enough about election law or the process for putting forth statewide initiatives to know if this is within the scope of the power of the peoples' voice. And any such requirement - if it even passed in a statewide vote - would likely be challenged in courts, maybe even ruled "unconstitutional". But maybe we could force the issue into the light and maybe even into national debate, were it to draw the attention of the media, radio, bloggers, etc.

This is an issue that dovetails with the re-vote effort in our state, in light of all of the problems with our current system that brought us to this point.
---------------------
The Re-Vote Is Coming

Posted by: JRR on January 28, 2005 04:24 PM
15. Dear Insufficiently Sensitive:
Boy-I didnt take my meds this am and I really read your first statement out of context- WOW! I'm sorry for that. For some reason I read that you were a trial attorney. Guess I'll go take my meds now........ :)

Posted by: darcy on January 28, 2005 04:30 PM
16. is it be safe to presume that just as many would support a statewide law requiring proof of citizenship and ID in order to vote in future elections?

I think yes that that may be some registration tightening. However, state legislatures around the country are moving the other direction. Oregon, for example votes all by absentee. Washington now votes around 40 percent by absentee.

Furthermore the movement has been to make it easier to vote with less ID than before.

I think it may swing backs aways now in Washington or at least cease in the direction it has.

Posted by: Erik on January 28, 2005 05:18 PM
17. This quote, from Democrat spinster Kirstin Brost, sums up the absentee voting issue. The legislature will never act to reform absentee ballots.
---------------------
"Political people love the absentee voter," said Kirstin Brost, of the state Democratic Party in Washington state, where 54 percent of votes in 2000 were cast by absentee ballot. "They're easier to track, and if someone is absentee, I've got three weeks to get them to vote, instead of just one day." Washington state, where voters can start voting on Oct. 13, permits voters to become permanent absentee voters.
In Washington, party workers like Brost seek to "convert" voters from Election Day voters to absentee voters. Then they can easily determine from county auditors' lists which voters' ballots have been received and which voters need another phone call.
---------------------
From Philly.com, Sun, Aug. 29, 2004

Posted by: Splatter on January 28, 2005 06:23 PM
18. Are you sure that Polls Schmolls Berendt the head hackster didn't say that ? Typical Demoncat talking point - alot of fluff and little substance. I reckon that elections will tighten up from now on here. Oregon may have to experience a questionable election result before they tighten up their system, but it may happen sooner than that - I understand that alot of people there would like to see a revote here also. With that said, REVOTE or REVOLT !

Posted by: KS on January 28, 2005 10:04 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?