posted on November 21, 2000 08:16:16 AM new
While the state law may require postmarks on all overseas ballots, the Federal law says Overseas Military Ballots do not require one. Since this was a Federal Election, Federal rules should apply.
I find it laughable that the Democratic Florida Attorney General now wants all those military ballots counted knowing full well the count has already been certified. If the State Court decides to continue the hand count and delay the State Certification, then the eligible Military Ballots without postmarks should be counted in as well.
******************
That's Flunky Gerbiltush to you!
posted on November 21, 2000 09:04:40 AM new
krs...I thought I heard Joe Lieberman himself on his talk show circuit state that Federal Law does not require postmarks. He also said they should be counted (knowing full well it was too late.)
Let me check around the AP archives.
********************
That's Flunky Gerbiltush to you!
posted on November 21, 2000 09:30:22 AM new
I meant that there's a difference between "does not require one" and Federal law saying that one is not required.
I think that Postal regulations do require one, but there are probably situational exceptions to the requirement like 'in time of war', maybe. The Imternational Mail Manual is available online but as an adobe reader it's too cumbersome for me. I'm building a rifle right now, after all.
posted on November 21, 2000 09:52:18 AM new
I can't find verification of what I'm going to say either, but what the heck.
My sister (who's much smarter than I am) and I have been discussing this. She says that she believes than in 1983, the Federal Gov't brought action against the state of Florida re Florida's requirement that military absentee ballots be postmarked, which contravened Federal code.
Under a consent decree, the state of Florida agreed not to require military absentee ballots to show a postmark, but would instead allow a mere signing and dating by the sender of the ballot, attesting that it was sent on or before election day.
That might not have been written into the Florida State Code, instead might be contained in some Administrative Code instead (which I can't find either, but I think I saw a reference to somewhere.)
This all wouldn't have caused a problem if Florida had printed new ballot material to be sent to overseas military personnel with instructions to sign and date an attestment. But, apparently, Florida never bothered to create a new form, didn't provide anyplace for military overseas personnel to sign and date, and didn't provide any information about it on the overseas balloting material they sent out.
Additionally, the story is going around that, and this is usually prefaced in the news with the word "perhaps," Katherine Harris herself sent out information to the counties directing them that overseas ballots without an acceptable postmark should be disallowed. That was "perhaps" sent out several weeks ago, before the Democratic lawyer's memo.
posted on November 21, 2000 09:57:33 AM new
njrazd, Joe Lieberman did not respond to Congressman Buyer's request to make a press release on that same subject.
My wife looked at the letters she received from me. None were post marked.
posted on November 21, 2000 09:57:43 AM new
Spin aside, there is indeed a major difference between requirement and prohibition. The relevant statutes are:
42 U.S.C.1973ff through 1973ff-6, 39 U.S.C. 3406, and 18 U.S.C. 608-609), have a look yourself njradz.
posted on November 21, 2000 10:00:22 AM new
Right, and that says "expediciously as possible" and "free of postage" but does not address a postmark.
Section 3406. Balloting materials under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act
(a) Balloting materials under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens
Absentee Voting Act (individually or in bulk) -
(1) shall be carried expeditiously and free of postage; and
(2) may be mailed at a post office established outside the
United States under section 406 of this title, unless such
mailing is prohibited by treaty or other international agreement
of the United States.
(b) As used in this section, the term ''balloting materials'' has
the meaning given that term in section 107 of the Uniformed and
Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.
Fred, your letters fall under an entirely different subsection in title 39 and are not relevant to balloting materials.
posted on November 21, 2000 10:19:14 AM new
One of us mispelled expediciously
Uaru, you make the democratic case? Republicans are arguing that the ballots should be allowed because Florida law requiring a postmark contravenes federal law. But you're right, there is no federal law TO contradict.
posted on November 21, 2000 10:34:04 AM new
Exactly right, which is why the GOP has not brought suit in this instance, but rather has relied on loud and lamenting public posturing. I am sure that some of them will snatch themselves bald long before this matter is resolved.
Here is an extremely interesting piece of FL case law, parts of it more relative than others, issue "one" particulary close to the point of discussion here, imo. Thanks for the discussion, duty calls.
posted on November 21, 2000 11:00:17 AM new
LMAO!!!
So the democrats are now running around doing damage control blaming the republicans. Another case of republican goon tactics right? Even democratic leaders in Washington are expressing concern over this Gore fumble.
posted on November 21, 2000 11:34:54 AM new
You know, uaru, I have no party affiliation and I don't hold with the concept of respect the position regardless the person in the position.
I have a strong interest in gun issues, as it's what I do, and on that issue I'm not comfortable with the democratic course.
But I cannot be a one issue decider, and though I don't like Gore, I sure wish that the republican party could have come up with a better candidate than GW. He doesn't have a clue about what he might do as president and never gave out with a solid and supportable program. Instead he gives us trust me assurances and demonstrates almost every time he opens his mouth how ignorant he is about even fundamental federal progams. "They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some kind of federal program."—St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000; I mean, uh, get with it, stupid.
He kept saying "we've taken care of that in Texas", but it's just not true. All of the compiled statistical information makes lies of his claims. I herar that if he's not elected he's going to have to go back and figure out how to cover up Texas' new $6 million dollar deficit. No wonder he wants out.
posted on November 21, 2000 11:44:30 AM new
I've got no party affiliations either. I voted for Bush over Clinton in 92, and 4 years later in 96 I voted for Clinton over Dole, and 4 years from now I'll probably vote against Hillary more than I'll be voting for someone else.
posted on November 21, 2000 01:24:31 PM new
sgtmike brings up his recollection of
"...when the female judge asked the Bush side why they were challenging manual counts when the Texas statute allows it? The Bush attorney was immediately aware of the impropriety of the question and blew it aside"
I saw that. It was my impression that the Bush attornry was immediately aware that he couldn't answer that question without making his own client look like a hypocrite. And the way that he "blew it aside" was to blush all the way up to the top of his bald head and stammer and sputter that he had no knowledge of Texas law.
I think that lawyer of Bush's must be one of the very few people in America who has no knowledge of that particular provision of Texas law.
posted on November 21, 2000 02:02:47 PM new
My impression was that he looked exactly like a deer caught in the headlamps of a car, and he backpeddled as fast as his scurrilous little legs would allow. I bet the Supremes didn't buy it either.
posted on November 21, 2000 03:21:19 PM new
Here's that memo the Republicans are making so much hay out of. Seems pretty straightforward to me. Heven forbit Democrats should send around memos citing the law on what criteria absentee ballots must meet. I've never heard of such unfairness, such shameful tactics and dirty tricks. But at least the Gore campaign had the good sense (FINALLY) to send war hero Bob Kerrey out gunning today. He did good, real good. The memo:
-------------------------------------
Date: November 15, 2000
To: FDP Lawyer
From: Mark Herron
Subject: Overseas Absentee Ballot Review and Protest
State and Federal law provides for the counting of "absentee qualified electors overseas" ballots for 10 days after the day of the election or until November 17, 2000. Sections 101.62(7)(a), Florida Statutes defines as "absentee qualified elector overseas" to mean members of the Armed Forces while in the service, members of the merchant marine of the United States and other citizens of the United States, who are permanent residents of the states and are temporarily residing outside of the territories of the United States and the Districts of Columbia. These "absent qualified electors overseas" must also be qualified and registered as provided by law.
You are being asked to review these overseas absentee ballots to make a determination whether acceptance by the supervisor of elections and/or the county canvassing board is legal under Florida law. A challenge to these ballots must be made prior to the time that the ballot is removed from the mailing envelope. The specific statutory requirement for processing the canvass of an absentee ballot including of overseas absentee ballot, are set forth in Section 101.62(2) (c)2. Florida Statutes:
If any elector or candidate present believes that an absentee ballot is illegal due to a defect apparent on the voter's certificate, he or she may at anytime before the ballot is removed from the envelope, file with the canvassing board a protest against the canvass of the ballot specifying the precinct, the ballot, and the reason he or she believes the ballot to be illegal. A challenge based upon a defect in the voterŐs certificate may not be accepted after the ballot has been removed from the mailing envelope.
The form of the voter's certificates on the absentee ballot is set forth in section 101.64(1), Florida Statutes. By statutory provisions, only overseas absentee ballots mailed with an APO, PPO, or foreign postmark shall be considered a ballot. See Section 101.62(7)(c). Florida Statutes.
In reviewing these ballots you should focus on the following:
1. Request for overseas ballots: Determine that the voter affirmatively requested an overseas ballot, and that the signature on the request for an overseas ballot matches the signature of the elector on the registration books to determine that the elector who requested the overseas ballot is the elector registered. See Section 101.62(4)(a), Florida Statutes.
2. The voter's signature: The ballot envelope must be signed by the voter. The signature of the elector as the voter's certificate should be compared with the signature of the elector of the signature on the registration books to determine that the elector who voted by ballot is the elector registered. See Section 101.68(c)x, Florida Statutes.
3. The ballot is properly witnessed: The absentee ballot envelope must be witnessed by a notary or an attesting witness over the age of eighteen years. You may note that these requirements vary from the statutory language from the Section 101.68(2)(c)1, Florida Statutes. Certain statutory requirements in that section were not proclaimed by the Justice Department pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, Sec. DE 98-13.
4. The ballot is postmarked: With respect to absentee ballots mailed by absolute qualified electors overseas only those ballots mailed with an APO, PPO, or foreign postmark shall be considered valid. See Section 101.62(7)(c), Florida Statutes. This statutory provision varies from rule 15-2.013(7), Florida Administrative Code, which provides overseas absentee ballots may be accepted if "postmarked or signed and dated no later than the date of the federal election."
5. The elector has not already voted (duplicate ballot). In some instances, an absent qualified elector overseas may have received two absentee ballots and previously submitted another ballot. No elector is entitled to vote twice. (Please insert appropriate Fl. xxx.)
To assist your review, we have attached the following:
1. A review Federal Postal regulations relating to FPO's and PPO's.
2. A protest form to be completed with respect to each absentee ballot challenged.
3. Overseas Ballot Summary of Definitions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised
Overseas Ballot Summary of Definitions
There are 3 different types of overseas ballots that are valid for return at the counties provided they are postmarked on or before November 7th.
1. Federal Write-In ballot
· Must be an overseas voter and must be eligible to vote and be registered under State law.
· Must have affirmatively requested an absentee ballot in writing and completely filled out request (including signature)
· Must comply with State laws applying to regular absentee ballots (such as registration requirements, notification requirements, etc.)
· Ballot contains only Federal races, and is considered to be a "backup" system if the regular state absentee ballot fails to arrive.
· The intent of the voter in casting the ballot should govern. In other words, minor variations in spelling candidate or party names should be disregarded in ballot counting so long as the intention of the voter can be ascertained.
· Must be postmarked as an APO, FPO, or MPO in a foreign country or at a foreign post office.
2. Florida Advance Ballot
· Sent out in advance of a regular General Election ballot with state and Federal candidates listed.
· Must be an overseas voter and must be eligible to vote and be registered under State law.
· Must comply with State laws applying to regular absentee ballots (such as registration requirements, notarization requirements, etc.)
· Must have affirmatively requested an absentee ballot in writing and completely filled out request (including signature)
· Sent prior to the second (or October) primary elections to all permanent overseas registered voters.
· Must comply with all State laws regarding signatures, witness requirements, etc.
· Must be postmarked at the APO, FPO or MPO in a foreign country or at a foreign post office.
3. Regular Overseas Ballot
· Sent after the second (or October) primary elections to all permanent overseas registered voters and voters requesting an overseas ballot from the county.
· Must be an overseas voter and must be eligible to vote and be registered under State law.
· Must comply with State laws applying to regular absentee ballots (such as registration requirements, notarization requirements, etc.)
· Must have affirmatively requested an absentee ballot in writing and completely filled out request (including signature)
· Full ballot with all candidates listed.
· Likely would take precedence over any advance or federal ballot also returned.
· Must comply with all State laws regarding signatures, witness requirements, etc.
· Ballot is designed by the county.
· Must be postmarked at an APO, FPO, or MPO in a foreign country or at a foreign post office.
Below are the definitions for points of origin and postmark that are valid for military overseas ballots:
1. APO (Army Post Office) -- A branch of the designated USPS civilian post office, which falls under the jurisdiction of the postmaster of either New York City or San Francisco, that serves either Army or Airforce personnel.
2. FPO (Fleet Post Office) -- A branch of the designated USPS civilian post office, which falls under the jurisdiction of the postmaster of either New York City or San Francisco, that serves Coast Guard, Navy, or Marine Corps personnel.
3. MPO (Military Post Office) -- A branch of a U.S. civil post office, operated by the Army, Navy, Airforce, or Marine Corps to serve military personnel overseas or aboard ships.
4. Military Post Office Cancellation -- A postmark that contains the post office name, state, ZIP Cope, and month, day, and year that the mail xxx was cancelled.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protest of Overseas Absentee Ballot
As provided in Section 101.68(2)(c)(2), Florida Statutes. I, as an elector in __________ County, Florida, hereby protest against the canvass of the overseas absentee ballot described below:
posted on November 21, 2000 03:25:48 PM newI saw that. It was my impression that the Bush attornry was immediately aware that he couldn't answer that question without making his own client look like a hypocrite. And the way that he "blew it aside" was to blush all the way up to the top of his bald head and stammer and sputter that he had no knowledge of Texas law.
And come perilously close to perjuring himself because the very next question was: "You didn't research it?" He tried to sidestep that one, too, and was a little less successful, especially since the Justice came back about 2 or 3 more times with that very direct, yes or no question. I don't remember, exactly, how he finally did get out of it, but it may have been some other Justice coming to his aid by asking some other question, not wishing to waste any more of the Court's time with such nonsense.
Virtually everything that poor slob said got torn apart by the Court for the poppycock it really was. I loved it.
posted on November 21, 2000 03:35:55 PM new
That judge's partisan slip was showing. Why would you ask any questions about Texas State law? Each state has it's own set of laws developed by their individual legislations in accordance with local circumstances. If the Bush Attorney was not from Texas, he would not be required to know the Texas Statutes. The judges are supposed to be reviewing the information and making their decisions based on FLORIDA law, not anywhere else. Any laws anywhere else in the country are not applicable and should have no bearing on their final decision.
Edited to add that I understand Texas ballots are filled out with a pencil mark rather than a punch hole. Any handcounts done in Texas would not be subject to the objectivity of pregnant chads.
*****************
That's Flunky Gerbiltush to you!
[ edited by njrazd on Nov 21, 2000 04:07 PM ]
posted on November 21, 2000 03:38:10 PM new"Heven forbit Democrats should send around memos citing the law on what criteria absentee ballots must meet."
Yeah, I don't see how one could think that the democrats were arming (as one news source put it) their workers with a means of challenging votes from overseas.
I loved this part:
"As provided in Section 101.68(2)(c)(2), Florida Statutes. I, as an elector in __________ County, Florida, hereby protest against the canvass of the overseas absentee ballot described below:"
It would have been one thing for the state to have sent out such a memo, but the democratic party sending it out to its own members only smells. Sorry, I guess I'm a hopeless cynic on the intentions I read in this.
posted on November 21, 2000 04:00:12 PM new
Yes, uaru, you are hypercritical. It looks to me as a simple way to keep everyone informed and on the same page. It is unfortunate that the commissioner of elections or whatever the darling M.Harris is called did not send the memo to all interested partisans, but perhaps she WAS operating under a motivated directive or simply realized that to expect any republican representative to be able to read it would be asking too much.
posted on November 21, 2000 04:27:07 PM new
Hi njrazd
Why would you ask any questions about Texas State law?
I think it was a fair question given that the attorney (representing Bush) made it a focal point of their argument that hand-counts were *not* reliable. They reiterated this over, and over. Yet Bush approves of them in his own state? The court had a right to question that argument given the apparent double standard.
posted on November 21, 2000 04:35:06 PM new
julesy...as my addendum mentioned, a hand count in Texas may be more reliable due to the ballot marking vs the punch holes. It would certainly be easier for them to be read and less subjective.
In order to compare correctly, you would have to go to another state that uses the punch ballots like California and see what their standards are.
******************
That's Flunky Gerbiltush to you!
posted on November 21, 2000 04:41:16 PM new
njrazd --
They intimated, though, that it was less reliable in Florida because of the *biases* of the people counting the ballots.
Biases exist in people in all states, even Texas. If Bush wants to suggest that those biases will affect how those ballots will be hand-counted in Florida, then doesn't the same go for Texas?
