Here is the text of SB 6134 , one of the bills co-sponsored by Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles (D-Seattle/Jim Wells County). This is one of the most reprehensible pro-fraud "election reform" proposals I've seen in the last year, as it would effectively criminalize the filing of voter registration challenges:
The canvassing board may issue notice of a class 1 civil infraction under chapter 7.80 RCW to any person challenging the registration of another if the canvassing board determines that the challenger: (1) Failed to exercise reasonable diligence in determining the accuracy of the allegations on which the challenge is based; (2) failed to base the challenge on his or her personal knowledge; (3) who in issuing the challenge, primarily considered the voter's political belief, political activity, or any characteristic protected by the law against discrimination under chapter 49.60 RCW; or (4) issued a challenge in bad faith or in an effort to intimidate, harass, or otherwise deter a properly registered voter from voting.All of those criteria are vague and subjective and could easily be abused by a partisan canvassing board to intimidate citizens from bringing forward legitimate challenges and thereby creating a safe harbor for fraudulent registrations.
The bill has five other co-sponsors, all Democrats, most from safe Seattle-area districts. The one co-sponsor who could find himself in trouble over this is Sen. Brian Weinstein. Weinstein's 41st district (Mercer Island/Bellevue), is a swing district that Weinstein won by less than 2,500 votes last year, and which Dino Rossi won by about 1,000 votes and David Irons lost by only 165 votes. 41st district Republicans would do well to remind their neighbors that Sen. Weinstein is patron of election fraud. The poetic justice scenario -- I don't advocate illegal activity, but if a disgusted citizen wanted to engage in civil disobedience and make a point, he/she could discreetly register to vote under a fictional name at 8135 W Mercer Way, Mercer Island. Amazingly, any citizen who sought to protect Sen. Weinstein from being disenfranchised by a fraudulent voter at his own address would be constrained by all four provisions of Weinstein's bill.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 30, 2005 11:54 AM | Email ThisMs. Kohl-Welles, why is this so impossible for you to understand. My understanding is that there are still hundreds if not over a thousand of illegally registered voters in Sotelo's challenge. They haven't all been reviewed yet. (someone correct me if I'm wrong)
Will you answer the question - who is the lawbreaker in this case?
Say I challenge a registration that I have 'personal knowledge' (whatever that is) is improper, and I have the evidence to prove it (1 & 2). What if the voter I challenged is a black liberal swedish activist? Maybe that was my 'primary consideration', maybe not. Without being able to read my mind, you'll never know. But the challenged party can claim that was my primary consideration, and then I'd have to prove a negative to get out of a fine.
Also, if a conservative challenges a bunch of undeniably fraudulent registrations, and it so happens those registrations were filed by a bunch of liberal activists, they can all claim protection under 3 & 4 simply by pointing out the lack of challenges to fraudulently registered conservative activists (even if there weren't any there to challenge).
What an obvious attempt stifle any effort to clean up the voter rolls.
It's in bad faith, and an effort to intimidate, harrass and deter properly registered voters from blowing the whistle on voter fraud.
Posted by: starboardhelm on December 30, 2005 01:04 PMThe chances of the voters in the 36th Legislative District turning Jeanne Kohl-Welles out of office are about as great as the chances of you and Stefan flapping your arms and flying to the moon.
The 36th not only is the most and best-organized Democratic District in the state, it has the highest voter turnout, and in the 2004 House races, produced the two highest raw vote totals in the state for its two House members.
As for Weinstein, one look at the voting trends in the 41st District and anyone can see that this District is trending Democratic more and more with every election. Weinstein isn't up for re-election till 2008 anyway.
But those are just facts, which I admit have very little power against people's will to delude themselves.
Posted by: Ivan on December 30, 2005 01:10 PMDo you understand?
Posted by: dan on December 30, 2005 01:57 PMOf course, an individual like yourself, who is a thug, a bully, and not a good neighbor, would love to see this legislation enacted.
Just one more tool for the entrenched machine to use to intimidate the opposition.
Posted by: ewaggin on December 30, 2005 01:58 PMHappy New Year, even to morons.
Posted by: Ivan on December 30, 2005 02:09 PMBut although state laws define "residence" as where the voter "physically resides and maintains his or her abode," it does not spell out what constitutes a complete residence address for entry on an application, Logan said.
If a voter writes down a U.S. post-office box as a residence address, the registration will not be processed by King County, Logan said. In that case, it's impossible to assign the voter to a precinct and thus determine for which local candidates the voter is eligible to vote.
But if the voter provides an ordinary street address -- such as 123 First Ave., Seattle -- that application will be accepted and the voter registered, Logan said; it's immaterial at that point if that is the address of a private mailbox, or even of a neighbor's house.
Should another registered voter in King County challenge the validity of that registration, the challenge will be reviewed -- by the Canvassing Board if the challenge is filed less than 30 days before an election, and otherwise by the elections director alone.
But there's no requirement that Logan undertake address reviews on his own initiative, elections officials at the state level and in other counties agree.
"There's nothing in state law that says (elections officials) must investigate any questionable registration," said Sheryl Moss, who trains county elections officials for Secretary of State Sam Reed, a Republican who is the state's chief elections officer.
end of PI quote
I am with you in saying that people don't reside in mailboxes, but I can't say that King County elections must (or even are allowed to) investigate people turning in private mail box addresses on their registration. so it appears that you didn't understand dan, the voter registration is accepted untill challenged.
Posted by: Patrick on December 30, 2005 02:16 PMLiberals and Democrats long ago said to hell with America. She is not worth a single drop of a patriot’s blood cowardly turning another appointed government group into a unchecked tyranny hell bent only on defending the collective.
Bridges made a virtual unreachable standard and the R's try to get close and this goose stepper turns another unelected administratively created group into a lack of due process hammer upon the lawful for the benefit of the lawless.
I guess only in America can the lawmakers willfully try and create lawlessness and punish the lawful.
They envision us in the cells with the sheeple licking their boots.
There is some fine filth over here.
Hardly worthy of living in a civilized society she invokes the most dangerous of reactions to lawbreaking, the defense of it. Eat your own harvest of bitterness someday Ms. Wells....remember it is you that are trying to defend the lawless...when will they turn on you?
Anyone worthy of freedom would gladly welcome a challenge of their ballot to make foolish those that challenge. The mere process is already tough enough to limit the challenges.
Instead we have pre-school politics of self esteem protection. What next counselors to help the lawless with their feelings?
Next year laws against blogs that dare point out the lawlessness! Canvassing boards shall have the power to issue fines to individuals and groups that ‘harass’ elections offices by showing their record is not quite as good as a bank!
Who in the hell can believe this? Can’t you just see the columnists at the occasionally read newspapers and little loiyers in their big cars just a flutter at the thought of this?!?! Oh ya baby! Strange what they find pornographic and what they lust for.
Simple the challenged needs to show where they live and it is not in an aluminum shoe box …or a field in Maltby and completely swing a county to communism.
Dean Logan IS counting the people who live in mailboxes!! Regardless of what the PI says!!!
Wake up!!
Posted by: dan on December 30, 2005 02:21 PMNothing more nothing less.
The dem machine must be feeling some heat if they think it necessary to write legislation to protect their malfeasance.
No proposals for clean and fair elections from the dems, only fraud protection and the most fraud ridden method of voting (mail ballots) as solutions.
The Democrats are afraid of free, and fair elections.
Posted by: JCM on December 30, 2005 02:56 PMThis is a local battle. We have to win it by convincing a majority of voters in Washington State that the state Democrat party is corrupt. We might actually need to convince a substantial majority to compensate for likely fraudulent election practices. Still, that is our battle to fight and win.
Do not be discouraged. Get involved. See if you can't convince a neighbor or two to get involved on the right side, as well.
Posted by: huckleberry on December 30, 2005 05:52 PMFraud, corruption and oppression are coming in like a flood here in Washington...and our Liberal Democratic state lawmakers are enabling it all with strategic bills, propsals, etc.. to make it "lawful"....
I think we are beyond a "Broken Arrow" here.....
Posted by: Deborah on December 30, 2005 09:03 PMIf you knew nearly as much about the law as you think you do, you would know that your hyperbolic claim that this would "criminalize" voter challenges is just that.
"The canvassing board may issue notice of a class 1 civil infraction under chapter 7.80 RCW . . . "
A civil infraction is not a crime. It's just that, a CIVIL infraction! In essence, she's proposing that if the Republican jackasses again file eleventh-hour voter challenges intending to suppress turnout for Ron Sims (didn't work - he still won by a very comfortable margin), then they can be given what amounts to a parking ticket.
Face it, your 15 minutes are up. They expired when Judge Bridges said "dismissed with prejudice."
Posted by: Critical THINKER on December 31, 2005 03:21 AMInsightful.
A clear thinker can only conclude by your comments loose and sloppy oversight of the process of voting is a good thing.
And, conversely, anyone who is concerned with the integrity of the counting system is a jackass.
Apparently voting and the counting are just pesky inconveniences for the left.
Puts you in the same elite intellectual powerhouse circle of "critical thinkers" with Gregoire, Murray, Cantwell and Mc Dermott. And, when judged by their performance, not their mindless verbal diaherra which is devoid of fact, logic and history, the performance of, and results produced by, those 4 is so pathetic it is laughable.
CT, maybe you shuld change your handle to Incapable of Critical Thinking. That would be an act of critical and clear thinking.
Posted by: THS on December 31, 2005 10:55 AMRegistering to vote should be more difficult than to rent a video at Blockbuster Video - but there is no way that it current is. It was more difficult to register to vote in Iraq where the elections were more legitimate than in King County. You can twist it, change the topic, lie by omission and use the left-wing MSM as a shield, but eventually the truth will come out and faster now, with the blogosphere out there. So remember, if you Democrats and leftists keep persisting in aiding and harboring corruption in future elections, it will eventually catch up with you - it's your choice and noone elses ! Either play by the rules or choose your poison. Happy new year !
Posted by: KS on December 31, 2005 12:00 PM