I live in California, but have been following with interest and outrage the events which have transpired in Wisconsin over these last several weeks. My visceral reaction to the roller coaster that we all rode on the night of April 5th was one of tempered joy with an undercurrent of disquiet. The main reason for this was tracking the inexplicable Waukesha precinct count reporting on the AP stream and the very long delay from the county clerk office in reporting their numbers. Something just didn't look or smell right. I've been a campaign consultant for almost 20 years for candidates throughout the country and this "hop-scotchy" vote reporting did not feel right, especially given the stakes and the history of all the shenanigans in Ohio and elsewhere. Then I started to look in to the county and its elected Clerk and the bells started clanging very loud indeed. But what could she actually DO and still get away with any mischief given Wisconsin law I wondered.
I am still wondering. Perhaps counsel who read this site could help me understand.
I revisited comments on election night I had written to be sure I wasn't making this up in my backstory of that tumultuous night
Sure hope there are election defense monitors (9+ / 0-)
in Waukesha. This shit looks really sketchy, both the raw numbers and the delays. SNIFF SNIFF Eww! just stepped in Rove's shit trail . . . . leading to Waukesha.
In 2008 there were 263,445 registered voters. You do the math. Something is possible funny here. They claim to be updating on the county site every 30 minutes . . .
http://www.waukeshacounty.gov/....
by RvgAqs on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 08:30:14 PM PDT
Something wrong is Wauk 119 in and no ## change (0+ / 0-)
on the totals votes for each from the previous report W T F??? Something is very wrong there.
by RvgAqs on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 08:49:16 PM PDT
Waukesha not in is not good. They are delaying (7+ / 0-)
the hard count. This is questionable - again.
by RvgAqs on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 09:20:58 PM PDT
Problem is that very sketchy delay in Waukesha nt. (0+ / 0-)
by RvgAqs on Tue Apr 05, 2011 at 09:36:58 PM PDT
So for at least an hour the count from Waukesha was not tracking at all as reported by AP and the county updates. The first question I have about the reporting requirements on election night is whether in fact there is a unified reporting requirement under Wisconsin election law at all for election results. I have searched and cannot find it.
Next we come to the recordation and preservation of the actual votes themselves.
7.23(1)(g)
(g) Detachable recording units and compartments for use with tabulating equipment for an electronic voting system may be cleared or erased 14 days after any primary and 21 days after any other election. Before clearing or erasing the units or compartments, a municipal clerk shall transfer the data contained in the units or compartments to a disk or other recording medium which may be erased or destroyed 22 months after the election to which the data relates. The requirement to transfer data does not apply to units or compartments for use with tabulating equipment for an electronic voting system that was approved for use prior to January 1, 2009, and that is not used in a federal election.
Were any of the machines used in Waukesha county put in use prior to January1, 2009? If so, does this mean that "Kathy" could have by now trashed the backup in accordance with this provision, or am I interpreting that incorrectly?
If so there is this little gem (I suggest a memory flashback to the "mystery" counts in Ohio in 2004 as a reminder of why this is germane):
7.25(1)
(1) The municipal clerk of each municipality in which voting machines are used is responsible for the proper ballot being placed on each machine, the sample ballots, setting, adjusting, and putting the machine in order to use in voting when delivered to the ward. For the purpose of labeling, setting, adjusting and putting the voting machines in order, one or more competent voting machine custodians may be employed.
7.25(4)
(4) When a voting machine is properly prepared for an election and delivered to the election ward, it shall be locked and sealed against any movement and the governing body or board of election commissioners shall provide proper protection to prevent tampering with the machines. The custodians preparing the machines shall deliver the keys for the machines to the municipal clerk or executive director of the board of election commissioners together with a written report of each machine's condition.
So, that means that in any ward or precinct in Waukesha they could have employed a "custodian" to calibrate the machines "properly", yes?
Then we come to the canvass fiasco with Grandma Kitzinger. While initially my gut reaction was to say "Oh of course she chose and 80 year old Grandma who didn't know squat about computers and rolled her", that may not be the case. Oh don't get me wrong she got rolled alright, but the choice part seems to have been predetermined. According to WI law:
7.60(2)
(2) County board of canvassers. The county clerk and 2 qualified electors of the county appointed by the clerk constitute the county board of canvassers. The members of the board of canvassers shall serve for 2-year terms commencing on January 1 of each odd-numbered year, except that any member who is appointed to fill a permanent vacancy shall serve for the unexpired term of the original appointee. One member of the board of canvassers shall belong to a political party other than the clerk's . . . If lists of candidates for the county board of canvassers are submitted to the county clerk by political party county committees, the lists shall consist of at least 3 names and the clerk shall choose the board members from the lists
So if I interpret this correctly, Mrs. Kitzinger was already on the Board, not just targeted the day the canvass commenced as an individual. Is that correct? Or was she one of 3 names on the list "Kathy" could have chosen from? And she chose her of course.
There is another disturbing and seemingly obvious "oops" on the part of the Waukesha County Dems given the stakes in this election and the history of "Kathy" if what I have read so far is true. It appears Mrs. Kitzinger was all alone in this. If my interpretation is incorrect, then I hereby apologise for drawing incorrect conclusions:
1) Where was the Chair of the Waukesha Dem Party while this Canvass was going on?
2) Did Mrs. Kitzinger notify him of the late start and ask for direction? Was any offered?
3) Were there any election defense monitors in the room when it began, if not why not?
4) Was anybody present with a video camera or still camera, if not why not?
The law is clear here:
7.60(4)(d)
(d) Each statement and determination issued under pars. (a) and (b) shall be certified as correct and attested to by each canvasser's signature.
So it appears that Mrs. Kitzinger must have signed off on the canvass and is now having "buyer's remorse", but her signature makes that irrelevant legally if not politically, except there is a possible out:
7.60(5)(b)
(b) If the board of canvassers becomes aware of a material mistake in the canvass of an election for state or national office or a statewide or technical college district referendum prior to the close of business on the day the government accountability board receives returns from the last county board of canvassers with respect to that canvass, the board of canvassers may petition the government accountability board to reopen and correct the canvass. The government accountability board shall direct the canvass to be reopened and corrected if it determines that the public interest so requires. If the government accountability board directs the canvass to be reopened, the board of canvassers shall reconvene and transmit a certified corrected copy of the canvass statement to the government accountability board or secretary of the technical college district board.
BUT this reads if the "Board of Canvassers" meaning it would require, presumably, a majority finding by the Board. While the GAB continues its fig leaf investigation, this may be a way to exert pressure, no?
As to the canvass itself there should have been ample opportunity for election defense monitors to be present and observe what was going on:
7.41(2)
(2) The chief inspector or municipal clerk may restrict the location of any individual exercising the right under sub. (1) to certain areas within a polling place, the clerk's office, or alternate site under s. 6.855. The chief inspector or municipal clerk shall clearly designate such an area as an observation area. Designated observation areas shall be so positioned to permit any authorized individual to readily observe all public aspects of the voting process.
Did this occur or was Mrs. Kitzinger left out there on her own? Was anyone else there? According to the GAB, video and still cameras are allowed during the canvass count. Were there any restrictions placed on access, which were permitted but may be excessive, questionable and actionable as a violation under:
7.41(5)
(5) The board may promulgate rules that are consistent with the requirements of sub. (2) regarding the proper conduct of individuals exercising the right under sub. (1), including the interaction of those individuals with inspectors and other election officials.
I don't know how this all turns out, but for those Badgers reading this I will close with a story. My father was born and raised in Park Falls, WI., graduated from Med School at Madison and has exactly one share of Green Bay Packers stock and is now retired and living in the Bay Area here in California. He is 80 years old.
When he read about what was going on with the magic 7500 votes, he called me up and was ready to get us on the next plane to Waukesha and rip "Kathy" to shreds. My father has been a lifelong Republican. Your battle is nationwide. We will win - if not this battle - then the larger one in the court of public opinion. We are all with you. Stay strong and diligent. We are with you.