Protest sign from Katy, 05/31/11
Joanne Kloppenburg has formally conceded to David Prosser and said she will not be pursuing judicial review of the recount results due to a high bar set by Wisconsin law. Kloppenburg would have had to catch election rigging actions red-handed to succeed in a challenge of the recount. Or as a judge might say, to succeed in challenging the recount results, Joanne Kloppenburg would have to supply clear evidence of election “connivance, fraud, or undue influence”.
Ms. Kloppenburg does call for an independent investigation of Wisconsin’s electoral process due to the irregularities discovered in the process of the recount. Ms. Kloppenburg has submitted a letter to the G.A.B. which summarizes anomolies, irregularities and “in some cases the unexplained mysteries uncovered in this recount”. G.A.B. had certified the win for Prosser last week, despite not having recount notes from Waukesha County.
More on the mysteries of the recount – words from Joanne Kloppenburg’s speech today:
“Over the course of their work, voters were found to be miscounted in every county in the State. Over 150 ballot bags containing tens of thousands of votes were found open, unsealed, or torn. Waukesha County had twice as many torn, open, or unsealed bags as every other county in the state combined. In many cases, municipal clerks in Waukesha testified the bags weren’t torn when they left cities, towns, and villages so the security breaches occurred sometime when the bags were in Waukesha County’s custody. Most every county and most ever reporting unit statewide had discrepancies in reconciling poll books in which the number of voters and the number of absentee voters is recorded. In several counties, including Dane, Milwaukee, Marquette and Jackson, missing or uncounted ballots were found in unexpected places during the recount, such as a clerk’s office or left in machines”
To explain why despite this evidence, she is not pursuing court action, Ms. Kloppenburg said:
“Wisconsin courts have held that absent connivance, fraud, or undue influence, substantial compliance with the statutory voting procedures is sufficient…the defects or irregularities in the sealing and securing of the ballot bags, as documented in the recount minutes, would not be sufficient to meet the threshold set by law.”
My personal note: in these close elections, “substantial compliance” is not sufficient to ensure the integrity of the vote and I do agree that there is enough in the recount record to justify an independent investigation.
The presser reporters were crammed in a little room in the Hovde Building in Madison, Wisconsin and both the formal media and non-formal media were welcomed. The press did not act like pack animals on this occasion. (I sometimes bristle a little at the attack-mode questions employed at these things–maybe because I am not a reporter or maybe because I try to be civil – I’m not sure which.)
Then David Prosser delivered a conference of sorts that was private. I found this out by going to the 6th floor office where it was held and being told to leave. I had entered a private office. I saw other welcomed members of the press inside.
The guy who pushed me out looked a helluva lot like Eric Cantor, the Rep. from Virginia and Majority Leader of the U.S. Congress. (Was I hallucinating? Do we have a local Wisconsin Eric Cantor look-alike?)
I am unable to upload my video as I am moving on to a G.A.B. protest but I will upload to youtube this afternoon.
Recent Comments