Posts by Steven Rosenfeld

Steven Rosenfeld is a senior fellow at Alternet.org and co-author of What Happened in Ohio: A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election, with Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman (The New Press, 2006).

Election Activists Win Three Key Battles
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld on May 16, 2008 at 4:56 PM.

Voting rights activists won three big battles this week.

The Missouri state Legislature adjourned without taking up a controversial voter ID bill. The Department of Justice settled a lawsuit with Arizona that will force the state to offer welfare recipients the opportunity to register to vote. And Hans von Spakovsky, the White House's controversial nominee to the Federal Election Commission, withdrew his nomination.

The Missouri voter ID bill would have required voters show a government-issue photo ID to vote and would have required new registrants to produce proof of citizenship to complete their voter registration. Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, a Democrat, estimated more than 200,000 people could have been disenfranchised by the citizenship requirement.

The voter ID proposal, which was intended to take effect before the November election, was extremely controversial. According to voting rights activists monitoring the Missouri Legislature's final day, the criticism of the bill pressured Republican sponsors and legislative leaders to not bring up the proposal before the Missouri Legislature adjourned on Friday.

Missourians for Fair Elections reports over 4,200 calls were made to lawmakers in the past two weeks urging them to not back this legislation.

Arizona

In Arizona, which is the only state to require proof of citizenship from state residents seeking to register to vote, that requirement has lead to the rejection of 37,000 new applications since 2004, when the law took effect.

On Thursday, the U.S. Department of Justice announced it was settling a lawsuit with Arizona to bring the state into compliance with a federal law that requires certain state agencies offer public aid recipients the opportunity to register to vote.

This past January, Project Vote and Demos, two voter advocacy groups, sent a letter to Arizona Secretary of State Jan Brewer notifying her that Arizona was not in compliance with the public agency provisions of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The letter said voter registration at the state's welfare had declined 70 percent over the past 12 years.

"This agreement ends the need for litigation and means Arizona will bring voter registration to the state's low-income communities," said Michael Slater, deputy director of Project Vote.

Washington, DC

Finally, the decision by Republican lawyer Hans von Spakovsky to withdrew his name for consideration for an appointment to the Federal Election Commission was also seen as a victory for voting rights activists. He had been one of the administration's most outspoken voices to newly regulate various aspects of voting, such as more stringent voter ID laws.

Von Spakovsky had served as a FEC commissioner after a recess appointment but could not gain Senate confirmation. Before his temporary FEC post, he was a lawyer at the Justice Department where he changed its voting rights enforcement priorities from defending minority voting rights to ensuring only people with current ID and other credentials could vote.

Clinton Camp: “There Are No Rules”
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on May 7, 2008 at 9:14 AM.

Anyone who thought Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) might reconsider her presidential bid after her big loss in North Carolina and narrow victory in Indiana on Tuesday are mistaken.

In fact, in a conference call with the national media on Wednesday morning, the campaign’s top strategist, Geoff Garin, and top spokesman, Howard Wolfson, said the fight would almost surely last past the final primaries and be taken up by the Democratic National Committee’s standing committees, starting with the Rules and Bylaws Committee on May 31.

“There really are no rules,” Garin said, when asked about the seating of delegates from Michigan and Florida – two states stripped of delegates for holding early primaries – and about any scenario where the campaign is behind in the delegate count won in the primaries and caucuses, or the popular vote total. “You make a conscious decision of what is in the interest of the country.”

“The DNC will engage in an adjudicary process to seat the delegates,” Wolfson said, referring to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC), and then the Credentials Committee, which under the DNC rules hears appeals of RBC decisions.

Wolfson also said the number of delegates needed to win the nomination was not 2,025, as both the Clinton camp and campaign of Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) have said in previous conference calls with the media earlier in 2008.

“That is not the operative number,” Wolfson said. “The number is 2,209.”

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

PA: High Turnout, Some Machine Problems
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on April 22, 2008 at 1:38 PM.

Good weather and intense interest appear to be producing a high turnout in Pennsylvania's presidential primary Tuesday. However, there were reports of long lines and delays of more than an hour before voting in African-American neighborhoods in Philadelphia as a result of voting machine failures, according to the 1-866-MY-VOTE-1 hotline.

The voter hotline taking calls from across Pennsylvania reported there were problems with electronic voting machines freezing at the start of voting, as well as people not finding their names on voter rolls at precincts, voter hotline officials said.

By midday, callers to the 1-866-MY-VOTE-1 hotline had made 850 calls, according to Harry Cook of InfoVoter Technologies, which screen the requests for help and forward callers to local election officials to help them. The calls came from 710 polling locations across the state, although most were from Philadelphia and then Pittsburgh, the two largest cities.

Of those calls, 150 people left complaints that were recorded and forwarded to local election officials. Shortly after 7 AM, when polls were slated to open, there were a handful of complaints of precincts that failed to do so. In the next few hours, there were complaints of electronic voting machine failures in several precincts leaving voters without any machines to vote on.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Surprise: Election Reforms Politicized
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on April 15, 2008 at 3:38 PM.

Two developments on Tuesday underscore how election reforms are becoming increasingly politicized in a presidential election year.

In the first instance, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Tuesday criticized the Department of Veterans Affairs for not helping wounded ex-soldiers living in VA facilities to register to vote. The new VA Secretary, General James Peake has said that voter registration is a "partisan distraction" that would detract VA staff from their mission of caring for sick ex-soldiers.

Obama called on the VA to help wounded vets register to vote and urged a full accounting of our wounded, injured and medically evacuated troops when discussing the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. While all of the Democratic presidential candidates have decried the treatment of vets from the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, only Obama has spoken on the VA's efforts to suppress the voting rights of wounded former soldiers.

"You cannot lead this country into war, and then fail to care for those who have served, and for their families," Obama said. "It starts with protecting the fundamental rights of our troops. They have fought across the world so that others have the right to vote, but here at home, the Bush Administration has refused to help wounded warriors register. There is nothing patriotic about denying wounded troops the ability to vote. It's time for the VA to do the right thing. It's time to reverse this shameful decision."

Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, which has been urging the VA to help injured vets with voter registration, praised Obama's remarks.

"Registering voters and encouraging them to participate in our democracy is a non-partisan issue – every citizen aged 18 or older should be strongly encouraged to vote, especially our service members and veterans who have defended our Constitution," he said. "Again, we urge VA to reconsider their ill-advised policy of preventing voter registration drives at VA hospitals filled with our wounded, injured, ill, and disabled veterans."

In the second instance, the Bush Administration and House Republicans led to the likely defeat of an election reform bill, HR 5036, sponsored by Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) that would have helped many counties and states buy voting machines with a paper trail before the fall presidential election. The bill, which also would pay for audits to check the accuracy of vote counts, was the first election integrity vote to come before the House in years.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Obama to Wall Street: Regulation Is Coming
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on March 27, 2008 at 9:38 AM.

Barack Obama's speech on regulating financial markets today will not get the applause of his recent speech on race relations, but it was a not a standard stump speech and squarely pointed the blame for the nation's economic woes on Wall Street's ethic of greed.

"Our free market was never meant to be a free license to take whatever you can get, however you can get it," Obama said, speaking in downtown Manhattan. "Unfortunately, instead of establishing a 21st century regulatory framework, we simply dismantled the old one - aided by a legal but corrupt bargain in which campaign money all too often shaped policy and watered down oversight. In doing so, we encouraged a winner take all, anything goes environment that helped foster devastating dislocations in our economy."

The speech was labeled by the Obama campaign as a call to regulate financial markets, but most of the underpinnings were a serious critique of the culture of campaign contributions and big-money lobbying in Congress, where big business in America - particularly the financial services sector - have convinced lawmakers to dismantle the system of checks and balances put in place after the Depression of the 1930s. The result, Obama said, was excessive greed is now hurting Wall Street as much as Main Street.

"The core of our economic success is the fundamental truth that each American does better when all Americans do better; that the well being of American business, its capital markets, and the American people are aligned," Obama said. "I think all of us here today would acknowledge that we've lost that sense of shared prosperity."

"This loss has not happened by accident," he said, continuing. "It's because of decisions made in boardrooms, on trading floors and in Washington. Under Republican and Democratic Administrations, we failed to guard against practices that all too often rewarded financial manipulation instead of productivity and sound business practices. We let the special interests put their thumbs on the economic scales. The result has been a distorted market that creates bubbles instead of steady, sustainable growth; a market that favors Wall Street over Main Street, but ends up hurting both."

Obama proposed a series of remedies, which he said would face stiff opposition in Congress by members beholden to big money. After summarizing his prior proposals to deal with the mortgage crisis, he outlined his reforms for Wall Street.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Did Rush Limbaugh Really Influence Hillary's Vote?
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on March 7, 2008 at 4:16 PM.

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh is influential. He is the nation's most important radio host, according to Talkers magazine. And he's a great showman, urging Republicans to cross party lines and vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) in the Democratic Primary in Texas and Ohio. It's classic political talk radio.

"I want Hillary to stay in this, Laura," Rush told Laura Ingraham on Feb. 29, near the start of his Hillary crusade. "This is too good a soap opera. We need Barack Obama bloodied up politically, and it's obvious that the Republicans are not going to do it and don't have the stomach for it, as you probably know."

And on Wednesday, the day after the Texas Primary, there was this exchange on Fox News, where Clinton was the guest and was asked if she owed Limbaugh a thank you for a primary victory.

HILLARY: Be careful what you wish for, Rush.

WOMAN: Is that it?

HILLARY: I think that's it.

Later that day, Limbaugh played that mesmerizing exchange on his show and then said, "How do you interpret this, folks? She could have said thank you. She could have said thank you! In fact, I was expecting in her victory speech last night, to be thanked.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Hillary Wins Close Race in Texas, Rhode Island and Ohio, Obama Wins Vermont
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on March 4, 2008 at 3:11 PM.

RI (98% reporting) Clinton 58, Obama 40

TX PRIMARY (99% reporting) Clinton 51, Obama 48

TEXAS CAUCUS (5% reporting) Obama 52, Clinton 48

OH (92% reporting) Clinton 54, Obama 44

VT (93% reporting) Obama 60, Clinton 38

****

Updates from Open Left:

Texas margin stagnant: I've noticed that Clinton's lead in Texas has been stuck at in the 50,000s for a loooong time. Obama doesn't seem to be making up any ground, but he isn't losing any ground, either. Also, this will be the ultimate test of the caucus vs. primary difference between the two candidates.

****

Maybe Clinton can win the Texas primary: Austin and Dallas have reported a majority of their precincts now, and yet Clinton's lead continues to slowly eek forward. Maybe she can win the primary popular vote after all.

****

Most cities yet to report: CNN has some great maps of Ohio and Texas that show which counties have yet to report. Generally speaking, the major cities are the places with the most outstanding votes. Cayuhuga (Cleveland) and Hamilton (Cincinnati) have 0% reporting. Dallas (where Obama lead by 30%) is at 4% reporting, Houston (where Obama leads by 24%) is at 1% reporting, and Austin (where Obama leads by 30%) is at 9% reporting. Obama also holds large leads in the counties directly surrounding those cities, and those counties have also reported few votes so far. Clinton is up by 9% in San Antonio, which is at 3% reporting.

Overall, I think Clinton looks set to win Ohio, while Obama looks set to win Texas.

****

RI (98% reporting) Clinton 58, Obama 40

TX PRIMARY (66% reporting) Clinton 50, Obama 48

TEXAS CAUCUS (5% reporting) Obama 56, Clinton 44

OH (82% reporting) Clinton 56, Obama 42

VT (83% reporting) Obama 60, Clinton 38

Bush to endorse McCain at the White House. Read about it here.

-AH via CNN

8:09 PST

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Clinton Camp Predicts Victories, Throws Mud in Morning Spin Call
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on March 3, 2008 at 12:06 PM.

It may be inside ball, but a good slice of the national media listens to the daily conference call by the Clinton and Obama campaigns. On Monday, a day before the March 4 nominating contests in four states, including Texas and Ohio, the Clinton campaign's top spokesman went beyond predicting "success" in Texas and Ohio on Tuesday. They went after Obama's credibility.

They attacked Obama on NAFTA, saying he told Ohio voters he would revise the trade agreement in a state with a struggling economy while his top economic advisor told Canadian officials to ignore the remarks. (The Obama campaign denies that.) They listed numerous questions they would like to see Obama answer about a Chicago businessman, Tony Rezko, whose corruption trial starts today.

They also suggested if Clinton wins the popular vote in Texas Primary -- but not the party's caucuses that begin after the polls close and are attended by fewer people -- that the Clinton camp would call that a "success," even if Obama ended up with more delegates in Texas. They said November's election was a vote, not a caucus meeting.

"If the popular vote is not the same as the caucuses, it questions the viability of the nominee," said Clinton Spokesman Howard Wolfson.

The Clinton staffers said they expected their campaign to continue, possibly all the way to the Democratic Convention, where super delegates (elected Democrats and top party officials) would weigh in. They said a dozen states had yet to vote and needed to be heard, saying they have now defined the big issues in the Democratic nominating contest: who is best prepared to be commander in chief, and who would be the best steward of the economy.

And they said they would fight to seat the Florida delegation, even though that state was stripped of delegates by the Democratic National Committee after holding an early, unapproved primary. The candidates all pledged not to campaign in Florida, but unions backing Clinton worked for her there, where she won that state. They rejected a suggestion today by the Florida governor that his state hold another primary.

"Our position is 1.7 million Floridians had they say," Wolfson said.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Washington GOP Caucus: Why Recount the Votes?
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet on February 11, 2008 at 3:13 PM.

There's a developing thread of more than curious reports on various blogs that Washington state's GOP party chairman has been less than inclined to finish counting the votes in the state's presidential caucus on Saturday.

Josh Marshall of TalkingPointsMemo notes that the man running the state's presidential caucus, Luke Esser, all-but declared John McCain as the winner with 13 percent of the vote uncounted. The hitch: Mike Huckabee was trailing McCain by a little more than 1 percentage point.

But that was this weekend. On Monday, state GOP chair Luke Esser said he was trying harder to get close to counting 100 percent of the votes, although it was an effort - despite protests from candidate Mike Huckabee who compared the episode to the old Soviet Union.

Then the story gets spicier. TPM's Paul Kiel was the lucky recipient of an e-mail that quoted Esser as a hyperventilating college student, when he encouraged outright voter suppression of less-than-human Democrats. Among the more quotable part of TPM's post was student Esser's rant on the eve of the 1986 midterm election:

"Years of interminable welfare checks and free government services have made these modern-day sloths even more lazy. They will vote on election day, if it isn't much of a bother. But even the slightest inconvenience can keep them from the polling place."

"And since, he wrote, "[m]any of the most successful anti-deadbeat voter techniques (poll taxes, sound beatings, etc.) that conservatives have used in the past have been outlawed by busybody judges," he was organizing a "Rain Dance" for conservatives that night."

A complete posting of Esser's collegiate statement was also found on horsesass.org.

While many people may find the Washington state caucus drama entertaining or eyebrow-raising or loathsome or sadly predictable, Democrats have had their own problems with running caucuses this winter.

In Nevada, Democratic state party workers were turning away low-income workers at special at-large casino caucus sites because they didn't have specific work shifts that day - disenfranchising voters while possibly helping the Clinton campaign. And Clinton volunteers were told to lock caucus doors a half-hour early, another innocent mistake no doubt.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »