Posted February 14, 201213 yr A candidate for office needs to identify their constituent groups and speak to their concerns. To win the election, the candidate must ensure that the individuals register to vote and vote by absentee ballot or in person on election day. A group that represents some corporate special interest groups introduced legislation to make that harder for candidates who represent poor and working class Americans. These laws were not introduced because there had been voter fraud in Ohio elections and the matter needed the legislature's attention, either. There were about no reports of votes that were intentionally miscast to throw an election. The Big Money Behind State Laws http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/opinion/the-big-money-behind-state-laws.html It is no coincidence that so many state legislatures have spent the last year taking the same destructive actions: making it harder for minorities and other groups that support Democrats to vote, obstructing health care reform, weakening environmental regulations and breaking the spines of public- and private-sector unions. All of these efforts are being backed — in some cases, orchestrated — by a little-known conservative organization financed by millions of corporate dollars. The American Legislative Exchange Council was founded in 1973 by the right-wing activist Paul Weyrich; its big funders include Exxon Mobil, the Olin and Scaife* families and foundations tied to Koch Industries. Many of the largest corporations are represented on its board. ALEC has written model legislation on a host of subjects dear to corporate and conservative interests, and supporting lawmakers have introduced these bills in dozens of states. A recent study of the group’s impact in Virginia showed that more than 50 of its bills were introduced there, many practically word for word. The study, by the liberal group ProgressVA, found that ALEC had been involved in writing bills that would: = Require voters to show a form of identification. Versions of this bill passed both chambers this month. ...edit... There is nothing illegal or unethical about ALEC’s work, except that it further demonstrates the pervasive influence of corporate money and right-wing groups on the state legislative process. There is no group with any comparable influence on the left. Lawmakers who eagerly do ALEC’s bidding have much to answer for. Voters have a right to know whether the representatives they elect are actually writing the laws, or whether the job has been outsourced to big corporate interests. Governor Kasich is a former ALEC member: http://www.truth-out.org/ohio-lawmakers-introduced-33-bills-based-alec-model-legislation/1328711032 *Richard Mellon Scaife had an insane animus against President Clinton.
February 21, 201213 yr Author Posted on February 19, 2012 by Jennifer Brunner http://www.couragepac.com/backfired-4-ways-the-ohio-gop-tilts-voting-rules-but-ends-up-helping-democrats/ When it comes to gaming voting rights, the Ohio GOP has become the gang that couldn’t shoot straight. Definition: BACKFIRED 1. When a result occurs opposite to that which was planned or expected. E.g. The plot backfired. The 2000 presidential election opened the eyes of many in politics to the important lesson that voting rules matter. After that began the proverbial march to the sea of the GOP’s Sherman-like tactics to cut off or diminish the ability to vote of those most vulnerable to disenfranchisement, such as minorities, low-income Americans, single mothers and the like. In Ohio, the GOP-controlled legislature — without a fight from my predecessor, the Republican secretary of state, Ken Blackwell – began a systematic effort to tinker with Ohio’s voting rules, from requiring people to take a training session before they could register voters, to requiring naturalized citizens to show their papers at the polling place (all of which were struck down by federal courts in 2005 and 2006). Of course, the “coincidental” moves that were occurring in other states to push for voter identification continued to move forward in various waves, concomitant with nebulous hate campaigns about immigration. But, nearly every time the GOP in Ohio has succeeded in implementing an unfair “reform,” it has backfired on them. Take a look at the evidence—and rest assured, that while they are still at it, their tactics and political judgment is still backfiring. Exhibit 1: Carrot and the Stick In late 2005, the Ohio GOP was facing a statewide ballot initiative that would have created “no-fault” absentee voting, allowing any Ohio voter to vote with an absentee ballot without giving a reason. This was one of a quartet of election-related ballot initiatives that culminated with a ballot measure specifying uniform rules and formulas for redistricting congressional districts and reapportioning state legislative districts. Losing control of the line-drawing process, which they had controlled for more than two decades, was one of the GOP’s greatest fears. So they looked for ways to tell the public not to support these four ballot issues. GOP legislators tried to kill or “moot” the expansion of absentee voting by passing a law, H.B. 234, and telling the public that a constitutional amendment wasn’t needed (while it avoided the state having to pay postage on the return of the ballots). Their plan was to get a “no” vote on the first issue, and they assumed the other three would fail in tandem. It worked. All four issues were defeated at the ballot. But state law now allowed anyone to vote an absentee ballot without stating a reason. Traditionally, on Election Night, absentee ballots are counted first (because they’re already at the board of elections when the polls close). From the political side, we call a heavy emphasis on absentee or early voting “banking” your votes before Election Day. Before the advent of no-fault absentee voting, traditional absentee ballots tended to be voted more heavily by Republicans. But no more. No-fault absentee voting created a way for grassroots organizers (many of whom are Democratic) to reach out to segments of their constituency that traditionally had difficulties getting to the polls. By 2008, especially with the strategic use of early voting by the Obama presidential campaign, “no-fault” absentee voting became a strong tool for banking Democratic votes. Republican plans to retain power by changing the voting rules backfired. Exhibit 2: Kill the Messenger In mid-2008, the Ohio GOP decided that Ohio’s secretary of state (me) was issuing too many directives to Ohio’s 88 county boards of elections. Unlike in some states, Ohio’s secretary of state is required (and local boards of elections are required to follow) directives that are issued to interpret and apply the maze of state and federal election laws. The Ohio Senate (sort of) negotiated with me about the fact that it would, in the middle of the presidential election year, pass a law requiring advance posting of directives for public comment in order for the directives to become “permanent” directives. I shuffled along with it like a prisoner who was already handcuffed. They apparently thought this would give them more control over the process. Before the bill took effect on September 12, 2008, my staff and I posted the last of nearly all the directives needed for a smooth 2008 general election, just before midnight on September 11, 2008. The last directive posted declared a long list of directives in place for the 2008 election to be “permanent” directives. The tide had already gone out on their attempt to wade into the province of the executive branch. The GOP decried the number of directives issued by the secretary of state’s office. The boards of elections, however, for the first time, had uniform poll worker training standards and rules throughout the state, tools such as poll worker reference “flip charts,” rules for observers at polling places, rules for backup paper ballots in the event of electronic machine failure, guidelines for determining the minimum number of voting machines for a polling place, polling place arrangement guidelines and rules for posting precinct results and transporting ballots and voting machines, all well in advance of the 2008 general election. Contrary to the GOP’s intention, we were helping local election officials. This “election roadmap” later became the basis of a legal settlement with the League of Women Voters that I settled after inheriting it from my predecessor, Ken Blackwell. The roadmap was written into a six-year federal consent decree that remains in place today for Ohio’s upcoming presidential election. You could call that a soft backfire, since it operated for the greater good. Exhibit 3: Force-Feeding In late summer of 2008, the Ohio GOP-controlled legislature hatched another plan to tinker with the absentee balloting process. It forced $3 million on the Ohio secretary of state’s office in an attempt to require the statewide distribution of absentee ballot applications to all Ohio registered voters. With the advent of no-fault absentee voting, many large, urban counties (which traditionally lean Democratic) had routinely since 2006 been mailing unsolicited absentee ballot applications to their voters as a way to alleviate long lines on Election Day. But the less-populated counties, more largely rural and Republican, did not have the same level of local financial support—or the perceived need—to do the same unsolicited absentee ballot applications. Some boards even stated that they recognized that “many” organizations (in reality, the Ohio GOP) generally mailed applications to their constituency, and a mailing from the board would be duplicative, expensive and even confusing. The GOP-controlled legislature still believed it knew better. At a time when government revenues were about to begin a steep decline, in late summer 2008, they appropriated the money without conferring with the Secretary of State on how much was needed to get the job done. If all of the state’s boards mailed ballot applications to all of Ohio’s voters, the counties would be left holding part of the tab—which could have been a sizable cost. But the GOP had inadvertently included language to let counties opt-out, and some small counties did. The large counties, however, took their chances and mailed the absentee ballot applications. The result for the 2008 presidential election was that the large counties did what they usually did, this time at state expense, thanks to the Ohio GOP, and the legislature’s ill-advised experiment — you guessed it — backfired. Exhibit 4: Rig the Game Even though the 2008 presidential election in Ohio was generally smooth, I knew that Ohio’s election processes, a mishmash of federal and “fixative” state overlays, could work better—for voters, poll workers and election officials. The day after that election, I informed tired reporters that the secretary of state’s office would convene a statewide summit, moderated by Larry Norden of New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, to reach consensus across a broad spectrum of political and philosophical beliefs about what was right with and what could be improved in Ohio’s election process. It eventually resulted in bipartisan legislation that the Republican-controlled Senate refused to approve before it adjourned at the end of the 2010 session. The bill died. The bill was resurrected in part but severely mutated in the Ohio legislature’s next session in 2011—the current election cycle—in the form of H.B. 194. As with the aftermath of Ohio’s disastrous 2004 presidential election, voting rights advocates sprang up against H.B. 194, seemingly out of Ohio’s cornfields and urban alleys. Hence, Fair Elections Ohio (FEO) formed as a strong coalition of voting rights advocacy, labor, political and religious organizations to fight voter suppression in Ohio. With the help of President Obama’s campaign organization, Organizing for America, FEO successfully stopped the law from taking effect with a statewide referendum petition that has qualified for the ballot this fall. With nearly 500,000 signatures collected for the effort, Ohio voters this fall have a chance to decide if they want H.B. 194 to become law; that is, if they want to make it harder to vote in Ohio and harder for their votes to be counted. My educated guess is that they will not. Can you see the backfire coming? Here are a few things that H.B. 194 would do if permitted to become law: Reduce by mail absentee voting to three weeks from five weeks and reduce in-person absentee voting to two weeks. Ban in-person absentee voting on Sundays and Saturday afternoons. Ban in-person early voting during the last weekend before the election. Make it more difficult for the boards of elections to open extra offices in the community to make it more convenient to vote early. Stop local Election Boards from sending absentee ballot applications unsolicited to all voters. Stop local Elections Boards from paying postage on return absentee ballot requests or on the return of absentee ballots. Impose technical reasons not to count votes. Order a minimum voting precinct size in cities and villages only. Prohibit someone with no ID from having their ballot counted. Eliminate the 10-day period after the election to provide missing ID. Strike down disclosure rules for corporations participating in campaigns. Now the GOP has realized that a referendum on voting rights on the presidential election ballot in Ohio this fall just might bring out voters who would be harmed by the voting law changes (who generally don’t vote as conservatives). The GOP legislature appears to have been first prompted on this slight problem by the Republican secretary of state who asked for repeal of H.B. 194 after the referendum issue was certified for the ballot, to “avoid confusion” about voting rules this fall. That was the proverbial rope that loosed the anvil that fell on the heads of Ohio GOP legislators, who upon coming to, have slowly realized that, once again, their attempts to toy with voting rules — you guessed it—backfired. As I write this, the President of the Ohio Senate is offering a “peace pipe” to state Senate Democrats, who have already asked for a moratorium on any new voting laws before the general election this year. Legislative Republicans say they want to work with the legislature’s Democratic members to adopt new voting rules for the fall. But these Republicans remain splintered about whether they can even repeal H.B. 194 and about which voting law changes they want before this November’s election, while the Republican secretary of state says no more changes before the fall election. They are stuck in another mess of their own making. We at Fair Elections Ohio are watching with interest and have the backing of the Obama campaign to circulate another referendum petition if the Ohio GOP tries again to change voting laws before the general election. We’re adamant about protecting Ohio voting rights and are making a two-pronged argument: 1) it’s too late to change the voting rules (especially for absentee and provisional voting) before the general election; and 2) the right of referendum is a specific, state constitutional right reserved to the people of Ohio. In other words, repealing H.B. 194 and passing new parts of it is nothing more than a GOP sleight of hand, and Fair Elections Ohio remains ready to go to court to defend the right to a citizen referendum. Our referendum petition cannot be struck from the ballot. Nor do we intend to withdraw it. The issue is exactly where it needs to be—in the hands of the voters. Perhaps the Ohio GOP would be best advised to put its efforts into winning an election than changing its rules. If the Ohio GOP attempts to exercise further political damage control by changing Ohio’s voting laws and circumventing the H.B. 194 referendum, the evidence points overwhelmingly to—you guessed—another big backfire! ... Jennifer Brunner was Ohio’s 52nd Secretary of State and the first woman to serve in that capacity. Brunner is a co-chair of Fair Elections Ohio and founder of Courage PAC.
February 23, 201213 yr ALEC is becoming a focus of Occupy. Occupy Dayton is going to have a protest on this on 29 Feb.
April 17, 201213 yr Author Pressured by watchdog groups, civil rights organizations and a growing national movement for accountable lawmaking, the American Legislative Exchange Council announced Tuesday that it was disbanding the task force that has been responsible for advancing controversial Voter ID and “Stand Your Ground” laws. ALEC, the shadowy corporate-funded proponent of so-called “model legislation” for passage by pliant state legislatures, announced that it would disband its “Public Safety and Elections” task force. The task force has been the prime vehicle for proposing and advancing what critics describe as voter-suppression and anti-democratic initiatives—not just restrictive Voter ID laws but also plans to limit the ability of citizens to petition for referendums and constitutional changes that favor workers and communities. ... The decision to disband the task force appears to get ALEC out of the business of promoting Voter ID and “Stand Your Ground” laws. That’s a dramatic turn of events, with significant implications for state-based struggles over voting rights an elections, as well as criminal justice policy. But it does not mean that ALEC will stop promoting one-size-fits-all “model legislation” at the state level. Indeed, the disbanding of the “Public Safety and Elections” task force looks in every sense to be a desperate attempt to slow an exodus of high-profile corporations from the group’s membership roll. http://www.thenation.com/blog/167425/alec-disbands-task-force-responsible-voter-id-stand-your-ground-laws?rel=emailNation
November 6, 201212 yr School levy left off Butler County ballot School levy was left off of the ballot and they are getting paper ballots instead... Do you think this will affect the results? I'm sure if the votes are close there will be lawsuits
November 6, 201212 yr So people being given paper ballots for the school levy and still voting electronic for everything else? That's not what I would recommend, to put it mildly. The electronic machines at that location should be shut down until the reason for the discrepancy can be determined. Probably BOE error in not including that precinct in the school district, but nothing should be assumed, because it could also indicate systemic malfunction. The polling location should already have full-election paper ballots on hand for disability purposes. Just use those.
November 6, 201212 yr From the quote above by Jennifer Bruner, some very valid points. One of which I'll never get over: "Prohibit someone with no ID from having their ballot counted." I'll never be convinced that someone should be allowed to vote without a form of govt issued photo ID. In this day & age, there's simply no reason for it. If you are a legal citizen, you should have it. If you don't, go get it.
November 6, 201212 yr ^Agreed. I am all for photo IDs to be the only accepted form of identification during voting. I am against changing the rules the year of a major election. Pass a law next year that says: starting on January 1, 2016, any citizen who wishes to vote must bring a government issued ID to their polling location. Then allot money to provide free government issued IDs for every Ohio citizen and create a program that actively targets low-income residents, homeless shelters, and other agencies to ensure that almost everyone is given access to this information and free identification.
November 6, 201212 yr When I was denied a drivers licens due to poor vision I was told that getting a state ID involved stating that I would not apply for a drivers license. I was told that overriding that decision was a PITA. Due to the rapid pace of technology a legally blind person's ability to see sometime in the future is greater every year. It might sound easy to pinks but if you are holding out on hope you might not want to get a state ID. Of course I'm talking about a part of the scumbag 47%. Getting a state ID is not just a matter of "getting one". If what I was told was not true then the Ohio BMV owes me & probably a lot of people an apology.
October 1, 201311 yr Voter watchdog group: Blogger cast ballot illegally in Cincinnati's mayoral primary http://www.wcpo.com/news/political/local-politics/voter-watchdog-group-blogger-cast-ballot-illegally-in-cincinnatis-mayoral-primary
October 1, 201311 yr This situation is so stupid. Look at the actual law: voting requires 30 days of residency prior to the election. I don't know quite how they establish residency, but Randy was here a ton in August and September right before the election. The complaint has nothing but tweets from Chicago, and none of his activity in Cincinnati in August. Look at how the tweets all stop in July, except for one or two more when he ran back up to actually switch over his apartment.
October 1, 201311 yr It appears this complaint was filed by a dinosaur that doesn't understand how easy it is to rebuild someones steps based on modern communication methods. Give it up already.
October 1, 201311 yr So what town you put on your Facebook page counts as evidence now? What if you put "Parts Unknown" like the Ultimate Warrior?
October 1, 201311 yr ^If Randy Simes is ordered to travel across the Pacific to speak his piece at the Hamilton County Board of Elections, he should come in character as Psy. A scene just like this on the 900 block of Broadway:
October 1, 201311 yr When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. – P.J. O'Rourke.
October 1, 201311 yr If that's what they're basing their 'case' on, someone better hide the UO in Greece thread! Look! He's not even American!! And he rolls his jeans! That s@#! ain't right!!!
October 1, 201311 yr This situation is so stupid. Look at the actual law: voting requires 30 days of residency prior to the election. I don't know quite how they establish residency, but Randy was here a ton in August and September right before the election. The complaint has nothing but tweets from Chicago, and none of his activity in Cincinnati in August. Look at how the tweets all stop in July, except for one or two more when he ran back up to actually switch over his apartment. You have to life here for the 30 consecutive days immediately preceding the election. The complaint establishes that was the case, and what you just said further establishes it. Obviously there was probably no ill-intent on his part, but the law is pretty clear and it spells it out on the form. Hopefully the BoE realizes it was a simple mistake.
October 1, 201311 yr ^ What does that mean, though? Sleeping in Cincinnati 30 consecutive nights? Staying within municipal boundaries for 30 days and nights? Are you allowed to go on vacation? Seems rather vague.
October 1, 201311 yr Here's the easy answer: does he have an Illinois or an Ohio driver's license/ID card?
October 1, 201311 yr I'm thinking if he registered to vote in Ohio, he probably got an Ohio DL at the same time. Just guessing, but I myself would do that. Switching voter registration and not the license seems like playing with fire in the age of Big Data. We've even moved beyond big data, though, where now we have right wing ground troops looking to disqualify anyone from voting who might be voting liberal, using their Twitter "proof", lol. Who needs the NSA?
October 1, 201311 yr but it's a politic pot shot. he supports the streetcar, he supports Qualls. Looks what kind of voters she attracts, blah, blah, blah,
October 1, 201311 yr some of this personal stuff should probably not be discussed publicly Agreed. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
October 1, 201311 yr Author OVIP is the Tea Party http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/09/17/13920011-tea-party-backed-group-challenging-voters-in-ohio?lite
October 1, 201311 yr If the report linked above is correct, the rule requires "primary residence." This is not the same as "bona fide residence." To be a bona fide resident, you can't have dual residency. But having more than one residence is fully contemplated by the term "primary residence." So.... I would be of the opinion that so long as Cincy was Randy's "fixed" residence (i.e. a place he always intended to return, no matter where work or other obligations took him and no matter how long) then he is eligible to cast a vote as a Cincy elector. I believe Ohio law draws the line at 4 years of continuous absence. If you move out of Ohio and are gone for four consecutive years, regardless of any intention of returning home, you have lost your Ohio residence.
October 1, 201311 yr If the report linked above is correct, the rule requires "primary residence." This is not the same as "bona fide residence." To be a bona fide resident, you can't have dual residency. But having more than one residence is fully contemplated by the term "primary residence." So.... I would be of the opinion that so long as Cincy was Randy's "fixed" residence (i.e. a place he always intended to return, no matter where work or other obligations took him and no matter how long) then he is eligible to cast a vote as a Cincy elector. I believe Ohio law draws the line at 4 years of continuous absence. If you move out of Ohio and are gone for four consecutive years, regardless of any intention of returning home, you have lost your Ohio residence. Yeah, but according to the complaint he registered to vote in Chicago in 2009 and voted there in 2012. He also contributed to Qualls two weeks before he registered here and listed his Chicago address as his residence. It's pretty clear he was considering Chicago his primary residence until he shipped to off to Korea, including the fact he flew direct from O'hare to Seoul. These Tea Party clowns did a good job trawling his online presence and it looks like he wasn't particularly cautious with what he put out there. Let that be a lesson to us all.
October 1, 201311 yr >Yeah, but according to the complaint he registered to vote in Chicago in 2009 This is inaccurate and probably purposefully inaccurate so as to hit that 4-year mark. He moved to Chicago in early 2012.
October 1, 201311 yr Seems to me that simply registering to vote in Cincinnati more than 30 days before the election was a strong signal of intent that Randy was shifting his primary residence. Given his life circumstances, it certainly makes sense. He has to be registered somewhere, and has the right to vote as an American citizen. With his ties to Chicago evaporating, Cincinnati makes more sense. “At the time of casting my ballot, I was in transition from the United States to the Republic of Korea for a two-year work contract,” Simes said. “As a result, I had no typical residence as understood by most people." You can't move from A to B and just decide that you want to register to vote in C, even if B is overseas or you otherwise have ties to C. Democracy doesn't work if people are just allowed to register whether they want. Under Federal law, if he's an ex-pat he can vote in Federal races, but not for local races (unless local law allows). And that makes sense, if he's living in Korea why should he have a vote in Cincinnati? He doesn't live here, he's not taxed here, therefore he has no say in elections here. When/if he moves back he can register and have a say. From Ohio Secretary of State website: Who qualifies as an overseas voter? A U.S. citizen living outside the U.S. is eligible to vote in the Ohio precinct in which the voter resided immediately before leaving the U.S. if the voter was, or could have been registered to vote in Ohio while residing there, or currently is eligible under Ohio law to vote in Ohio. A U.S. citizen who was born outside the U.S. is deemed to have a voting residence in Ohio at the place in the Ohio precinct where the person's parent or guardian continuously resided for at least 30 days immediately before leaving the United States.
October 1, 201311 yr He did move here in August and establish residency. I'm not sure why this is such a source of confusion. What's more, there was no fraudulent intent, and so if he is found to be in violation of the residency requirement, he certainly does not deserve any serious punishment, if any.
October 1, 201311 yr And this (using public information): Via http://www.chicagoelections.com/voterinfo.php RANDY ALLEN SIMES (address removed) Chicago 60657 Ward 44 & Precinct 21 Active (in good standing) Polling Station JOHN MERLO LIBRARY-AUDITORIUM 644 W BELMONT AV -- Via http://boe.hamilton-co.org/register-to-vote-and-update-registration/am-i-registered.aspx Yes, You're Registered. First Name: RANDY ALLEN Last Name: SIMES Address: (address removed) 45202 Precinct Name: CINCINNATI 6-C Polling Location: MAIN PUBLIC LIBRARY Polling Entrance: WALNUT ST ENT ATRIUM Polling Address: 800 VINE ST view on map Polling City: CINCINNATI OH 45202 Congress: 1ST CONGRESSIONAL DIST. Senate: ST. SENATE SE09 House: 32ND HOUSE DIST School: CINTI CITY SCH DIST 3101 Municipal: MUNICIPAL CT. DIST. 1 -- If Randy did move in August, for as brief as that was, he never informed Cook County of his move.
October 1, 201311 yr He did move here in August and establish residency. I'm not sure why this is such a source of confusion. What's more, there was no fraudulent intent, and so if he is found to be in violation of the residency requirement, he certainly does not deserve any serious punishment, if any. Probably because he himself said he had NO residency. You can't say he had no residency at that time because he was in between permanent dwellings, then come back and say oops, what he meant was he residing in Cincinnati at a friend's condo. A condo at which he never paid rent, never had a lease, never signed up for utilities, is not listed on the intercom, is not listed on on the deed, and at which he doesn't have any stuff (I'm guessing because he had his furniture and belongings shipped to Korea, per the complaint). If that is all correct, then it sure doesn't sound like residency.
October 1, 201311 yr ^The problem with that logic is that homeless people can list shelters as their permanent address. Some list theirs as the Hamilton County Courthouse. They don't pay rent, pay utilities, have a lease, be listed on an intercom, or deed, or have any belongings at these places, yet homeless people are still eligible to vote. I'm not going to pretend to be a constitutional scholar, but those items should not have any bearing on "permanent residence" if they do not apply to everyone. The way I see it, requiring you to pay for something in order to prove residency would be considered a poll tax. You can't force people to own things to allow them to vote. I'm not saying he registered 100% within the law or that he registered illegally because I'm not a lawyer, but listing those things as evidence that isn't his permanent residence is silly.
October 1, 201311 yr ^The problem with that logic is that homeless people can list shelters as their permanent address. Some list theirs as the Hamilton County Courthouse. They don't pay rent, pay utilities, have a lease, be listed on an intercom, or deed, or have any belongings at these places, yet homeless people are still eligible to vote. I'm not going to pretend to be a constitutional scholar, but those items should not have any bearing on "permanent residence" if they do not apply to everyone. The way I see it, requiring you to pay for something in order to prove residency would be considered a poll tax. You can't force people to own things to allow them to vote. I'm not saying he registered 100% within the law or that he registered illegally because I'm not a lawyer, but listing those things as evidence that isn't his permanent residence is silly. My point is this: at every other place he has ever had residence at least some of those factors would apply, they don't apply here, ergo he's not a resident. Homeless people are a special case and they have a special rule to deal with their situation.
October 1, 201311 yr He did move here in August and establish residency. I'm not sure why this is such a source of confusion. What's more, there was no fraudulent intent, and so if he is found to be in violation of the residency requirement, he certainly does not deserve any serious punishment, if any. Probably because he himself said he had NO residency. You can't say he had no residency at that time because he was in between permanent dwellings, then come back and say oops, what he meant was he residing in Cincinnati at a friend's condo. A condo at which he never paid rent, never had a lease, never signed up for utilities, is not listed on the intercom, is not listed on on the deed, and at which he doesn't have any stuff (I'm guessing because he had his furniture and belongings shipped to Korea, per the complaint). If that is all correct, then it sure doesn't sound like residency. Are you a lawyer?
October 1, 201311 yr If Randy did move in August, for as brief as that was, he never informed Cook County of his move. Seriously? If I moved, I highly doubt that I would remember (or even take the time if I did remember) to notify the county board of elections.
October 1, 201311 yr If Randy did move in August, for as brief as that was, he never informed Cook County of his move. Seriously? If I moved, I highly doubt that I would remember (or even take the time if I did remember) to notify the county board of elections. Agreed. It shouldn't be an issue so long as you don't vote in both places, which obviously would be a serious offense. Edited to respect privacy
October 1, 201311 yr Weird. I informed my last two regions of my move. But I suppose it's not a major issue unless you voted in two places, or if you have the situation that Randy is in.
October 1, 201311 yr I was just looking at a Hamilton county list dated back to May & there's a Randy there. What these boards post online isn't going to be the most up to date list. I don't think I told Clark County that I left but I registered in Hamilton pretty quick. Think I voted the first November I was here. GOK what I was voting on...
October 1, 201311 yr Weird. I informed my last two regions of my move. But I suppose it's not a major issue unless you voted in two places, or if you have the situation that Randy is in. I see what you did there ;)
October 1, 201311 yr Is the burden of proof of residency on the voter or on the BoE? Randy is not being accused of stealing a ballot. Certainly, if I received an absentee ballot in the mail, or was handed one in person at the BoE, I would assume that I was able to vote.
October 14, 201311 yr Via twitter...BoE voted 3-1 in Randy's favor. The only question now is if he sues COAST and/or WCPO.com for defamation.
October 14, 201311 yr Wouldn't defending against that just be an opportunity for BOAST lawyers to pay themselves more?
October 14, 201311 yr The Board of Elections knew that this was politically motivated. All four members of the board (2 Republicans, 2 Dems) were very critical of the "Voter Integrity Project" and their attempt to target one individual. I mean, they basically stalked Randy; they put together a calendar of his whereabouts based on his tweets, Facebook posts, and FourSquare checkins. During the hearing, it seemed like all four Board Members were going to vote in Randy's favor. It actually ended up being 3-1, but I think it was for purely political reasons. Alex Triantafilou (who also serves as Chairman of the Hamilton County Republic Party) probably didn't want to be on record voting in favor of Randy, although he was extremely critical of the Voter [suppression] Project's tactics during the hearing.
October 15, 201311 yr here's some more detail http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2013/10/in-a-case-reeking-of-politics.html Travis explaining FourSquare would have been hilarious.
