FLORIDA DOES IT AGAIN . . .

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Orlando Sentinal

Getting ready for Bush II - the Musical.

*NOTE: This is NOT a Repost.
Parts of it have been tagged to another thread, but like
naddicott indicates - it's important enough to be a 'Stand-Alone' thread.

Anybody remember where those ballots with all the 'Dimpled Chads' were printed ?
Here's a clue - HOUSTON, TEXAS.
And why did the 'Incomplete Punches' affect 90% of the attempted votes for the Gorebot ?
Maybe the punch die didn't fully make it's cut.
Just a fact & just curious.
 

naddicott

Senior member
Jul 3, 2002
793
0
76
Also posted in the Miami Herald
July 2, 2004: Thousands of eligible voters are on felon list

More than 2,100 Florida voters -- many of them black Democrats -- could be wrongly barred from voting in November because Tallahassee elections officials included them on a list of felons potentially ineligible to vote, a Herald investigation has found.

A Florida Division of Elections database lists more than 47,000 people the department said may be ineligible to vote because of felony records. The state is directing local elections offices to check the list and scrub felons from voter rolls.

But a Herald review shows that at least 2,119 of those names -- including 547 in South Florida -- shouldn't be on the list because their rights to vote were formally restored through the state's clemency process.

That's a potentially jarring flaw, critics say, in a state that turned the 2000 presidential election to Gov. Jeb Bush's brother George on the narrowest of margins -- 537 votes.

Florida -- one of just six states that don't allow felons to vote -- has come under intense criticism over its botched attempts to purge felons since the bitterly contested 2000 presidential election, when myriad problems prompted many elections officials to ignore the purge altogether.

The new list is causing its own problems, raising more questions about the fairness and accuracy of the state's efforts to purge the voter rolls of ineligible voters.

State elections officials acknowledge there may be mistakes on the list but insist they have built in safeguards to make sure eligible voters are not removed by local election offices. They say they have warned election offices to be diligent before eliminating voters, and have flagged possible cases in which voters on the list may have regained their rights.

''We have been very clear that this database is not to be considered the final word,'' Paul Craft, chief of the division's bureau of voting systems, said Thursday. ``We have told the local supervisors they need to be very careful with it.''

INCREASES RISKS

Yet local officials, already overburdened preparing for the election, say shifting the burden to them is opening the door for major problems.

''I have never seen such an incompetent program implemented by the DOE,'' said Leon County elections chief Ion Sancho.

Sancho said his office has already found people in the state's felon voter database who have received clemency.

Miami-Dade County Elections Supervisor Constance Kaplan said she, too, intends to err on the side of voters.

''This concerns me,'' Kaplan said of The Herald's findings. ``That's why I'm not having my staff jump to start any process until we can make 100 percent sure that it is the correct person.''

Craft said his office continuously checks the database against a list of felons who have received clemency -- which includes the right to vote -- and that 10,000 felons have already been taken off the list because of the clemency match.

Craft and other elections officials on Thursday declined to discuss why The Herald found another 2,119 voters in the database who have received clemency.

''We can't speculate on the methodology you used,'' Craft said. ``It is a matter that requires further investigation.''

CLOSE SCRUTINY

Elections officials said some voters with clemency could have been left on the list because records show they registered to vote before their rights were restored.

Dawn Roberts, director of the Division of Elections, said the process used to clean the voter rolls has been ''vetted at the highest levels of the Department of Justice'' and negotiated with civil rights groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the NAACP.

Those assurances offered scant consolation to Mary Catherine Lane, 51, of Miami, who was 18 when she was arrested for robbery in 1972.

''That just makes me angry,'' Lane, a registered Democrat, said when told she was on the list.

''I got a pardon on Dec. 14, 1998, signed by Gov. Lawton Chiles and everything. And now they're doing this to me? I served every day of my sentence plus some for bad behavior,'' she said.

`DON'T LIKE IT'

Norman Carter, 45, of Fort Lauderdale, also on the list, keeps his May 20, 2003, clemency papers folded in his Bible.

''I don't appreciate it, I don't like it and I wish I knew what I could do about it,'' said Carter, a Democrat, convicted of dealing in stolen property in 1988.

''I know how critical these elections have been lately,'' he said.

Of the 2,119 people who obtained clemency, 62 percent are registered Democrats, and almost half are black. Less than 20 percent are Republican. Those ratios are very close to the same in the list of 47,000 voters who the local elections officers are supposed to review and possibly purge from the registration rolls.

''It's just not right,'' said state Rep. Chris Smith, who represents and lives in a Fort Lauderdale neighborhood hit hardest by the list, the city's historic black neighborhood.

''Those who have been disenfranchised before seem to be continually disenfranchised by our archaic laws,'' Smith said.

WERE NEVER TOLD

Several of the three dozen voters on the state list interviewed by The Herald were not aware that their rights had been restored through the clemency process.

''I'm upset because I had clemency all these years and nobody told me,'' said Roger Maddox, 51, a Miami Democrat who received clemency in 1977 for a 1973 theft conviction.

''Now I'm on a purge list . . . man,'' he said.

Maddox said he intends to visit the Miami-Dade elections office to get his name removed from the list. ``Give me the number, man. This is crazy.''

Craft said it is possible that some names are incorrectly included in the database because the match was less then perfect when elections officials made their comparisons.

To identify registered voters with felony convictions, the Division of Elections compared names, birth dates, Social Security numbers and other identifying information.

Elections officials said there are 311 voters who may have clemency who were left on the list.

''But in each case the database is flagged so the supervisors of elections know there was a match of some kind,'' Craft said. ``The supervisors know automatically that those 311 potentially have clemency.''

SOME NAMES FLAGGED

County elections supervisors interviewed acknowledged that some of the names are flagged. But they wonder why it is that already overburdened elections employees should investigate facts the state has not been able to definitively answer itself.

Kay Clem, elections supervisor in Indian River County, said her staff ``is dealing with terms they've never heard of before. We need a lot more training.''

Clem said her office is hiring a private company to investigate the 365 names that appear on its list.

''This is putting us in a very precarious situation,'' Clem said.

INVESTIGATE VOTERS

All county elections supervisors are required to investigate each voter on the list, verify whether or not he or she is eligible to vote, then notify by mail suspected felons who have not had their civil rights restored.

The certified letter is supposed to name a time and place voters can appear to explain why they should remain on the rolls.

If supervisors suspect the letters were not received, they're supposed to publish at least one notice in the local newspaper.

If there's no response within 30 days, supervisors must remove the person from the rolls.

No one interviewed by The Herald -- including 53-year-old Walter Gibbons of Miami Gardens, a Vietnam veteran convicted of drug possession in 1973 -- had yet received a letter.

''I don't think it's fair that they're trying to stop me from voting, because everybody that commits a crime does not stay a criminal,'' said Gibbons, an ordained minister granted clemency in 1978. ``I had my error in life, but that was a long time ago, over 30 years now, and I'm a different person.'
(Yes, I know I posted this article in this thread, but this news does merit a new thread.)
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
This really is stunning to me. I just can't believe that a nation as wealthy and powerful as the US has such a badly broken elections system.
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
Originally posted by: DonVito
This really is stunning to me. I just can't believe that a nation as wealthy and powerful as the US has such a badly broken elections system.

Wealth and power mean nothing when certain people don't want certain people to vote.

Zephyr
 

catnap1972

Platinum Member
Aug 10, 2000
2,607
0
76
Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Wealth and power mean nothing when certain people don't want certain people to vote.

It's a shame we've had to deal with the consequences of it for the last four years...

;)
 

Crimson

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
3,809
0
0
Gee, a bunch of felons won't be allowed to vote.. my how horrible.. and some of them have had their right to vote restored, but might still be on the list. If its really that important to them, they can get it fixed. What if all these felons who aren't supposed to vote were properly removed before the 2000 election.. maybe it wouldn't have been so close.

I highly doubt most of the 2100 or so people who _MAY_ be wrongly put on this list would vote anyway.. And, these are convicted FELONS.. if they have to experience a little bit of inconvenience in being able to to vote, maybe they should have considered that before committing their CRIMES. We have less sympathy over crime victims than we do felons who _MIGHT_ not be able to vote.

Oh yeah.. I am outraged.. this is horrible.. :roll:
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,777
6,770
126
Originally posted by: Crimson
Gee, a bunch of felons won't be allowed to vote.. my how horrible.. and some of them have had their right to vote restored, but might still be on the list. If its really that important to them, they can get it fixed. What if all these felons who aren't supposed to vote were properly removed before the 2000 election.. maybe it wouldn't have been so close.

I highly doubt most of the 2100 or so people who _MAY_ be wrongly put on this list would vote anyway.. And, these are convicted FELONS.. if they have to experience a little bit of inconvenience in being able to to vote, maybe they should have considered that before committing their CRIMES. We have less sympathy over crime victims than we do felons who _MIGHT_ not be able to vote.

Oh yeah.. I am outraged.. this is horrible.. :roll:

I highly doubt you have the mental capacity to cast an informed vote. Too bad I can't get a test in place to weed people like you off the rolls. Of what use to a democracy are people like you who have no respect for rights. You should nave been born somewhere where you have to vote and got one choice on the ballot. You're just another form of fellon. in my opinion of course. Aren't you excited about the possibility I will make the rules. You may be judgmental, but I am soooooo much better.
 

Crimson

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
3,809
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Crimson
Gee, a bunch of felons won't be allowed to vote.. my how horrible.. and some of them have had their right to vote restored, but might still be on the list. If its really that important to them, they can get it fixed. What if all these felons who aren't supposed to vote were properly removed before the 2000 election.. maybe it wouldn't have been so close.

I highly doubt most of the 2100 or so people who _MAY_ be wrongly put on this list would vote anyway.. And, these are convicted FELONS.. if they have to experience a little bit of inconvenience in being able to to vote, maybe they should have considered that before committing their CRIMES. We have less sympathy over crime victims than we do felons who _MIGHT_ not be able to vote.

Oh yeah.. I am outraged.. this is horrible.. :roll:

I highly doubt you have the mental capacity to cast an informed vote. Too bad I can't get a test in place to weed people like you off the rolls. Of what use to a democracy are people like you who have no respect for rights. You should nave been born somewhere where you have to vote and got one choice on the ballot. You're just another form of fellon. in my opinion of course. Aren't you excited about the possibility I will make the rules. You may be judgmental, but I am soooooo much better.

Do you ever offer anything productive anymore? I'll ignore your personal attacks and respond.. These are CONVICTED FELONS.. They don't have the same rights as normal citizens.. Let me rephase it so you understand:

THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS...

Understand yet? No? THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Felons don't have the same rights as you and I.. Why? Because THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS..

Maybe we should allow all felons out of prison too because THAT infringes on their rights doesn't it?
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Crim -

So then it's O.K. with you that a possible 2,100 people that MAY be ineligible to vote might,
just because of a 'Similar' name, disenfranchise a number approaching 46,000 who ARE valid voters ?

The 'List' of 48,000 names looks to be either 'In Error' or a repete of what Florida did last time.
many thousands of legal voters were purged in 'selected areas' because of last names, and any
other spelling that might be close IN SELECTED HIGH DENSITY DEMOCRATIC VOTING AREAS
just to make sure that the didn't vote - whether or not they legally could.

Then again - of that 2,100, those who have in fact paid their debt to society and have had their
voting rights legally returned, you want to keep them from voting ?
Sounds like the way that the COMMUNISTS would do it, not a Democratic society.

Crimson - that means RED, right ?
 

Helenihi

Senior member
Dec 25, 2001
379
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Crim -

So then it's O.K. with you that a possible 2,100 people that MAY be ineligible to vote might,
just because of a 'Similar' name, disenfranchise a number approaching 46,000 who ARE valid voters ?

The 'List' of 48,000 names looks to be either 'In Error' or a repete of what Florida did last time.
many thousands of legal voters were purged in 'selected areas' because of last names, and any
other spelling that might be close IN SELECTED HIGH DENSITY DEMOCRATIC VOTING AREAS
just to make sure that the didn't vote - whether or not they legally could.

Then again - of that 2,100, those who have in fact paid their debt to society and have had their
voting rights legally returned, you want to keep them from voting ?
Sounds like the way that the COMMUNISTS would do it, not a Democratic society.

Crimson - that means RED, right ?

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? 46,000 people are not going to have their vote taken away wrongly. At the most, 2100 people would, the rest on the list are supposed to be there. But they've already pointed out the problem to the local election districts, who are going to verify the lists before they disqualify anyone. Plus they've got a theory as to why those people are on there, which means they could possibly figure out a better solution in the months to go before the election.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Crimson
Gee, a bunch of felons won't be allowed to vote.. my how horrible.. and some of them have had their right to vote restored, but might still be on the list. If its really that important to them, they can get it fixed. What if all these felons who aren't supposed to vote were properly removed before the 2000 election.. maybe it wouldn't have been so close.

I highly doubt most of the 2100 or so people who _MAY_ be wrongly put on this list would vote anyway.. And, these are convicted FELONS.. if they have to experience a little bit of inconvenience in being able to to vote, maybe they should have considered that before committing their CRIMES. We have less sympathy over crime victims than we do felons who _MIGHT_ not be able to vote.

Oh yeah.. I am outraged.. this is horrible.. :roll:

It seems to me both are victims. One is a victim of criminal activity and the other the victim of bureaucratic incompetence.
Restoration of rights for felons is a fundamental right in most states after the 'debt to society' has been paid. It is not the debt to the victim(s) nor is the felon charged by the victim. The felon is charged by the State and tried in a Court by the State. And, it is the State that restores both freedom and rights to the Felon.
Whether or not they exercise this or those rights is for them to decide but, it is for the State to insure those rights are available to be exercised. Sorta just like driver licenses.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Helenihi
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Crim -

So then it's O.K. with you that a possible 2,100 people that MAY be ineligible to vote might,
just because of a 'Similar' name, disenfranchise a number approaching 46,000 who ARE valid voters ?

The 'List' of 48,000 names looks to be either 'In Error' or a repete of what Florida did last time.
many thousands of legal voters were purged in 'selected areas' because of last names, and any
other spelling that might be close IN SELECTED HIGH DENSITY DEMOCRATIC VOTING AREAS
just to make sure that the didn't vote - whether or not they legally could.

Then again - of that 2,100, those who have in fact paid their debt to society and have had their
voting rights legally returned, you want to keep them from voting ?
Sounds like the way that the COMMUNISTS would do it, not a Democratic society.

Crimson - that means RED, right ?

Do you have any idea what you're talking about? 46,000 people are not going to have their vote taken away wrongly. At the most, 2100 people would, the rest on the list are supposed to be there. But they've already pointed out the problem to the local election districts, who are going to verify the lists before they disqualify anyone. Plus they've got a theory as to why those people are on there, which means they could possibly figure out a better solution in the months to go before the election.

I think you'd be interested in looking up the US Commission on Civil Rights hearings regarding the 2000 election in Florida. You'll find all manner of means and methods used to deny voting rights to folks. Ironic that it occurred in heavily democratic areas. For instance; the changing of polling places with out notice, closure of the polls before the folks got off work to vote, setting up of road blocs in direct violation of standing law on that issue, absence of supervisory personnel to answer questions regarding folks who registered but were not on the 'list', failure of poll workers to provide provisional ballots to voters who could show proof of registration among others.
Read carefully the testimony of Bush and Harris under oath on these matters. As you know, Harris as Sec State of Florida at the time was the one in charge of Voting matters..
Maybe just the executive summary provided by the Commission would suffice.

http://www.usccr.gov/">Just click on 2000 election and follow the link to 'voting irregularities in Florida's 2000 election'</a>[/L]

"Disenfranchised voters are individuals who are entitled to vote, want to vote, or attempt to vote, but who are deprived from either voting or having their votes counted. The most dramatic undercount in the Florida election was the uncast ballots of countless eligible voters who were wrongfully turned away from the polls. Statistical data, reinforced by credible anecdotal evidence, point to the widespread denial of voting rights. It is impossible to determine the extent of the disenfranchisement or to provide an adequate remedy to the persons whose voices were silenced by injustice, ineptitude, and inefficiency. However, careful analysis and some reasonable projections illustrate what happened in Florida.

The disenfranchisement of Florida?s voters fell most harshly on the shoulders of black voters. The magnitude of the impact can be seen from any of several perspectives: ... "
 

wiin

Senior member
Oct 28, 1999
937
0
76
Wealth and power mean nothing when certain people don't want certain people to vote


yeah, like when the democrats tried to exclude the votes of military voters.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,777
6,770
126
Originally posted by: Crimson
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Crimson
Gee, a bunch of felons won't be allowed to vote.. my how horrible.. and some of them have had their right to vote restored, but might still be on the list. If its really that important to them, they can get it fixed. What if all these felons who aren't supposed to vote were properly removed before the 2000 election.. maybe it wouldn't have been so close.

I highly doubt most of the 2100 or so people who _MAY_ be wrongly put on this list would vote anyway.. And, these are convicted FELONS.. if they have to experience a little bit of inconvenience in being able to to vote, maybe they should have considered that before committing their CRIMES. We have less sympathy over crime victims than we do felons who _MIGHT_ not be able to vote.

Oh yeah.. I am outraged.. this is horrible.. :roll:

I highly doubt you have the mental capacity to cast an informed vote. Too bad I can't get a test in place to weed people like you off the rolls. Of what use to a democracy are people like you who have no respect for rights. You should nave been born somewhere where you have to vote and got one choice on the ballot. You're just another form of fellon. in my opinion of course. Aren't you excited about the possibility I will make the rules. You may be judgmental, but I am soooooo much better.

Do you ever offer anything productive anymore? I'll ignore your personal attacks and respond.. These are CONVICTED FELONS.. They don't have the same rights as normal citizens.. Let me rephase it so you understand:

THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS... THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS...

Understand yet? No? THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Felons don't have the same rights as you and I.. Why? Because THEY ARE CONVICTED FELONS..

Maybe we should allow all felons out of prison too because THAT infringes on their rights doesn't it?

Silly wabbit, that was not a personal attack. That was a very (potentially productive) reflection back at you of your attitude toward conficted felons. The thing about convicted felons who have served their time is that they have paid their debt in full. You want to tar and feather them forever and condemn them in your heart. Who was it that Jesus was crucified with. When you pay your debts you owe no more. My personal attack on you was a reflection of how absurd you are to continue to demand from those who have paid. You must feel very small to have so little charity. You don't forgive others and let things pass, you will never forgive yourself your own sins. And: YOU ARE A SINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PRAY THAT GOD ISN'T LIKE YOU!!!!!!
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
Originally posted by: wiin
Wealth and power mean nothing when certain people don't want certain people to vote


yeah, like when the democrats tried to exclude the votes of military voters.

Because the votes were illegally submitted too late???? More US election ineptitudes.

I guess excluding the Neggers because they have similar names to felons is OK, but excluding late votes from the military is treasonous?

Zephyr
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Zephyr106
Originally posted by: wiin
Wealth and power mean nothing when certain people don't want certain people to vote


yeah, like when the democrats tried to exclude the votes of military voters.

Because the votes were illegally submitted too late???? More US election ineptitudes.

I guess excluding the Neggers because they have similar names to felons is OK, but excluding late votes from the military is treasonous?

Zephyr

All votes should be counted. Each person who was eligible to vote and wishing to cast a vote should be included. If there is a snafu of some sort it should not preclude the vote from counting. Florida law stated (at the time) "the intention of the voter" could be used to determine the vote.
The USSC found the 14 th Amendment and 'Equal' were violated by multi methods of counting (in part).
But, it was up to the local districts to determine this under Florida law.
If Florida could not provide for ALL the cast votes to be determined then the Florida slate of electors should have been rejected.
No one would have won and the House would have selected the President. Since Bush won more states He'd for sure been chosen and no change in the VP cuz the Senate votes by individual (House by state) and there were more Republicans than Democrats in the Senate..
That is what should have occurred... no change but, the process would have been a lot cleaner.