Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

West Virginia Secretary of State Disenfranchising Thousands of Obama Voters?

Posted by Matt Stoller, Open Left at 5:00 AM on April 29, 2008.


Separate but unequal voting systems in West Virginia threaten to disenfranchise independent voters.
vote

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

I got a call today from Mark Levine, the election protection attorney for Donna Edwards and one in whom I have a good amount of trust, and he told me about a brewing problem in West Virginia which will probably end up disenfranchising thousands of Obama voters. Here's the nub of the issue. West Virginia has an open primary, which means you can vote even if you are an independent. However, if you are a Democrat or a Republican, you are automatically given a normal ballot in a primary. If you are an independent, you are pointed to a touch screen device which does not list a Presidential choice.

If you are an independent, you have the option of requesting a Democratic or Republican ballot so you can vote in the Presidential primary, but you have to request it. And unless you know to request it, you will end up with no vote in the Presidential primary. The Secretary of State has decided not to inform people of this fact, which will leave potentially thousands of voters in West Virginia who came to vote for Obama without a choice.

Independents, in other words, are being disenfranchised. There's a full press release on the flip.

eff Kisseloff is an author and journalist. His most recent book is "Generation on Fire: Voices of Protest from the 1960s" (University Press of Kentucky, 2007).

The West Virginia Secretary of State's office and county election offices in the state are refusing to tell independent ("no party choice") voters arriving to early vote at the state's 55 voting locations that they are entitled to vote in the Democratic primary, stating that they are forbidden to do so by law.

"The Obama campaign will lose thousands of votes during early voting if this situation isn't corrected quickly," Victoria Baker, a former Republican who is an Obama supporter in Huntington, WV, said Sunday. "The Secretary of State's position is not supported by the law," according to Roy D. (Don) Baker, a West Virginia lawyer familiar with the situation. "It is wrong," he said. Mr. Baker, a Democrat, is also an Obama supporter and Ms. Baker's husband

156,199 West Virginians are registered as independents eligible to vote in West Virginia's May 13 primary according to figures released over the weekend by the Secretary of State's office. That represents 13.2% of all registered voters in the state. These figures include voters who registered before last week's April 22nd registration deadline in the state. Early voting began April 23 and ends May 10.

Gregory L. Howard, Jr., the lawyer for the Secretary of State's office, said two sections of West Virginia law, Sections 3-1-35 and 3-2-31,1 mandate the office's position. The crucial provision, he said, is a sentence which says "Political parties, through the official action of their state executive committees, shall be permitted to determine whether unaffiliated voters or voters of other parties shall be allowed to vote that party's primary election ballot upon request." Howard, a Republican, is a former member of West Virginia's House of Delegates.

"If those sections are all they have to support their 'Don't tell, don't ask' policy, it's scandalous," Mark L. Levine, a voter protection lawyer from New York investigating the matter, said.

Howard's citation of the department's legal underpinning for the policy was made following the voter protection lawyer's request that the Secretary of State's office require election workers to deliver a slip of paper to each independent coming to vote which says, "If you want to vote in the Presidential Primary and are registered as an Independent ("No Party Choice"), you must ask for either a Republican or Democratic ballot. "No Party Choice" (Independent) ballots do not include a choice for President."

Levine also asked that signs with the same message be placed in the area where people come to early vote. Both requests were denied by Jason Williams, manager of the Elections Division of the Secretary of State's office, and by Howard. Williams said that this policy had long been in effect and could not be changed. He referred Levine to Howard for the policy's legal basis.

Levine made the requests late last week after learning that two West Virginians who wanted to early vote in the Democratic presidential primary voted on touch screens that listed no candidates for president since the two had registered as independents. West Virginia law permits voters who made no party choice when they registered to vote in the primary of either the Republican or Democratic party.

Howard said Friday that the two sections from the West Virginia code are the only legal basis for the Secretary of State's office's position and all that is necessary. Pressed to say what in those two sections supported the office's policy, he said that it was "two words"- the "upon request" at the end of Section 3-2-31(a) (the sentence quoted above). Howard rejected Levine's contention that nothing in either section supported the office's policy and denied his request that Ireland review the issue and change the office's position. It is not known whether Howard or Williams have apprised Ireland of that request. Ireland's 94-year-old mother died on Thursday and was buried Saturday.2

Williams said that the state's election offices had sent mailings to independent voters telling them they must ask for a party ballot if they want to vote in the presidential primary and that they also encouraged reporters to write articles to inform independent voters. He said those activities are not prohibited by the law but that giving the same information to independent voters at early voting and the polls is prohibited.

Two students at Marshall University (Huntington, WV), Matthew Smith and Tamara Chavies, voted with independent ballots at the Cabell County Courthouse in Huntington before noon Wednesday morning, the first day of early voting. Both were surprised when they learned that there was no choice for President on the ballot and that their votes had already been recorded. Voters in WV vote on touch screens and cannot tell from looking at the screen when they start voting that the presidential candidates are not listed on a subsequent screen.

"I don't understand how they can penalize you for not knowing how to vote when they don't tell you that you have to ask for a specific ballot," Smith said. "I'd hate to see my vote not counted because of a technicality."

The only race on the independent ballot was to elect two members of the Cabell County Board of Education.

Both Smith and Chavies were permitted to cast provisional ballots after they discovered their error. Each said they voted for Obama on the provisional ballot and were told that their vote might be counted. Under West Virginia law, provisional ballots are not opened on election night but can be opened and counted during a canvass of votes after May 13 if a county canvassing board determines, based on the circumstances surrounding each provisional ballot, that they should be.3 A provisional ballot cast after a voter has already cast a valid independent ballot will not be counted, voter protection lawyers say. A senior WV election official, speaking not for attribution, confirmed this.

Betty Ireland, a Republican, is West Virginia's secretary of state. She was elected in 2004 and is the first woman ever to be elected to the state's executive branch.4 She announced last July that she was not seeking re-election or running for another office in 2008 because attending to the needs of her aged parents and fulfilling her duties as Secretary of State would not allow her time to plan and run a political campaign in 2008.5 Both her parents are now deceased. Ireland pulled a major upset in 2004 election when she defeated former Secretary of State Ken Hechler and is a likely candidate for higher office.6

Levine said he had initially been told by a county elections officer on Thursday that the purpose of the policy was to prevent the SOS's office and election workers from "influencing elections." "Letting a voter know that if he wants to vote for a presidential candidate - of whatever party - is not influencing an election," Levine said. "It's the duty of the Secretary of State's office to educate voters and encourage voting, not to help disenfranchise people."

There is no Independent party as such in West Virginia. Voters are considered independents if they do not register for any of the parties listed on the state's registration form (Republican, Democrat, Mountain and "other") or if they check "No Party Choice."7 West Virginia Republicans have long permitted Independents to vote in their primaries. This is the first year that the Democratic Party has permitted it.

AlterNet is a non profit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by our writers are their own.


White House Refuses to Deny Spying on Iraqi Prime Minister
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino wants to make it clear, the White House IS NOT denying spying on Maliki.
Post by Amanda. September 5, 2008.
Fox News: 'McCain's TV Commercials Contain ... Out-Right Lies'
Wait, we're seriously talking about Fox News? The Fox News?
Post by Steve Benen. September 5, 2008.
Van Halen, Heart, Others to GOP: Stop Using Our Songs!
GOP ignores copyrights, raises ire of multiple recording artists.
Post by Dave Burdick. September 5, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
While we are agonizing over the Democratic primary
Posted by: lb on Apr 29, 2008 5:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the election is being stolen. This news about West Virginia, taken with the Supreme Court decision yesterday, makes it very clear that the Republican strategy is to disenfranchise as many voters as possible. Greg Palast was right in "Armed Madhouse". And we may not have time to respond before November.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No . . .
Posted by: Scientz on Apr 29, 2008 6:57 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . not "in other words" people are being disenfranchised.

How about we be a little disingenuous while we're at it?

Voters who can't take the time to be informed don't really deserve the right to vote. You have to fill out a "skill testing question" to win a McDonald's prize, so this is of the least concern.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No . . . Posted by: mindtrvlr
The two-party system is a travesty!
Posted by: ikonoklast on Apr 29, 2008 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I prefer to make my own decisions about the issues, not follow a party line crafted by people who really have no interest in my well-being. We need to eviscerate both of the major parties, before we die in their political stranglehold. We need to move past the idea that everything is a duality, an either/or situation. We need viable 3rd, 4th, and 5th parties. We need candidates with no party affiliation to be viable, too.

We need open primaries, badly. It's ridiculous that a registered Democrat can't cross the aisle and vote for a Republican, or vice versa. It's even more ridiculous that a Green, Libertarian, or independent can't vote for whomever they choose.

People need to wake up and realize that voting restrictions like these are the antithesis of democracy. They only serve to preserve the power structure of the majority parties--to the detriment of their constituents. Every voter should be an independent. Every voter should be informed and capable of making decisions in his or her best interest, without the obfuscation of the issues or the misguided loyalty that political parties work so hard to create.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Meh, while I agree ideologically with Scientz ^...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Apr 29, 2008 7:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...my respect for our constitutional republic nullifies his/her "dummies shouldn't vote" argument. While you do bear some blame if you walk in to a precinct planning to vote for a candidate you don't see on the ballot and don't ask "wtf?", that's not the point of universal suffrage.

Information that you should be able to obtain a ballot should be overtly advertised. On the other hand, these are primary "games" played by parties, not federal elections. The parties play loose and fast and make on-the-spot calls, and the states tend to follow.

Still, you want to see folks informed, and you want to see folks get the information they need to make the decisions they feel best for our republic. Shame on WV for circumventing that tenet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yeah . . . Posted by: Scientz
The Headline?
Posted by: photony on Apr 29, 2008 8:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although I agree with the tenor of the article, I'm having a bit of trouble with the assumption that only Obama's potential voters will be disenfranchised.

Are we to believe that Indies, unaffiliated, etc., voters would not choose any other candidate?

There seems to be a trend among Obama supporters that they are they "victims" of every slight thrown at anyone.

This discrimination strikes at everyone. Please treat it that way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A West Virginian speaks
Posted by: jcutler9 on Apr 30, 2008 6:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Primaries in West Virginia:

From a West Virginian, a Democrat and a pollworker:

National Primaries were established for the purpose of allowing registered party members to choose the candidate whom they want to see run against the candidate of the opposing party. Persons register for a given party because their basic political philosophy is most closely aligned with that party’s stated philosophy. Come the general election, they may be disenchanted with the party’s candidate and choose to vote for the candidate of the other party. But the primary gives them the chance to choose the candidate with whom they most closely identify and whom they consider to be most electable.

Independents proudly hold themselves above the fray, choosing in their lofty idealism not to stoop so low as to identify with any given party. Therefore, they have no right to choose who should be the candidate for any given party. Those independents who tend to lean more right or left politically could really skew the choice of candidates by voting en masse for the candidate most reflecting their politics even when that candidate might least reflect the politics of the given party. But of course independents have the right to change their registration at any time.

As to allowing cross-over voting between parties in the primary, this is likely to cause even more mischief, as when (in states which allowed it) during recent primaries members of one party were urged to vote for the candidate of the opposing party who was considered, erroneously or not, to be least electable. And some even changed party, temporarily, in order to wreak such mischief.

Here in West Virginia until this year only Republicans allowed Independents to vote their ticket in the primaries. Of course, pollworkers could not tell the Independents this, could not offer them a Republican ballot, or they would be seen to be partisan. (Independent ticket included only school board candidates.) This year Democrats are also allowing Independents to vote their tickets, but the old rules apply. The Independents have to request the ballot of their choice. There have been news releases and articles about this, and in my county of Hampshire, the Democratic party has placed paid advertisements in the local newspaper making sure that Independents know the new policy.

If voters are not informed because they cannot even be troubled to read the local newspaper, or attend political meetings, meet the candidate rallies, etc., then how can they complain?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm working for the Dems in Huntington WV
Posted by: kww355 on Apr 30, 2008 7:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We're all trying hard to get the word out. Hopefully, the county Democratic committee will run an ad in the newspaper.

As for not reading the ballot before voting, they are voting on touch screen and you can't read the whole thing before you vote.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]