The Voting News Daily: AZ ballot case goes to court, Sequoia sells voter reg source code, Aspen ballot battle cont’d, TX paper ballot movement

Sequoia sells voter reg. source code. In Iowa, 50 counties will begin using electronic poll books. Pima county Arizona Ballot Case Back in Court Friday Aug. 28. The push for voter ID continues in Mississippi. An Aspen official says the city can’t turn ballots over for independent audit because ballots are only anonymous when locked up. (Huh?). Paper ballot movement in Texas? A Gregg County TX commissioner and local leaders of the 2 major pol. parties want a paper backup to the voting machines.
The Democracy Restoration act would restore voting rights to Americans who have served prison sentences but now live and work in the community. Would no excuse absentee voting increase turnout in Michigan? Benton County WA reported very low turnout even with all mail in voting. A WVa paper says keep state’s touchscreens but try to make them more secure. New Registration cards tell Frederick MD voters wrong place to go. Women got the right to vote 89 years ago. Roadblocks to the Ballot Box by Sen Edward Kennedy R.I.P.

AK. Arkansas Green Party Files Lawsuit to Be Restored to the Ballot
August 27th, 2009 http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/08/27/arkansas-green-party-files-lawsuit-to-be-restored-to-the-ballot/

AZ. Pima county RTA Ballot Case Back in Court Friday, Aug. 28, 2:30pm
http://votingnews.blogspot.com/2009/08/pima-county-rta-ballot-case-back-in.html

CO. City responds to ballot issue (Aspen official says ballots aren’t secret if seen)
…State laws that prohibit the release of ballots seek to guarantee that no one can discern anyone else’s ballot after they have been cast. This preserves the anonymity of the ballots. The city clerk is legally bound to keep all election materials securely locked until they are destroyed or a court orders otherwise.
http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20090827/LETTER/908269987/1020

CO. Take this poll: Release the Ballots? Non Aspen voters and Aspen voters please (link fixed)
http://survey.constantcontact.com/survey/a07e2kap53yfyq64eyv/a007fywibi05/questions

HI. Hawaii elections office to pay bills first, leave 4 key positions unfilled
HONOLULU — Caught in a financial squeeze by the state’s budget shortfall, the Hawaii Office of Elections has decided to pay its utility and other overhead costs for the rest of the fiscal year instead of filling four key positions as the 2010 elections approach. The positions, which include a supervisor to oversee the preparation and transportation of ballots, will go vacant until at least early next year, when the Legislature reconvenes
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090820/BREAKING01/90820013/Hawaii+elections+office+to+pay+bills+first++leave+4+key+positions+unfilled

IA. Iowa Secretary of State: New Precinct Management Software to be Utilized in Upcoming September 8 School Board Election
8/26/2009. Secretary of State Michael A. Mauro announced today that a new software program will be used in some polling places to assist precinct election officials during the Sept. 8 school board election. The program, called “The Precinct Atlas,” is an electronic poll book which will help precinct election officials effectively and consistently process voters on election day. ..More than 50 counties plan to use the program in either the Sept. 8 school election or the city elections in November.
http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=168306

MA. Massachusetts Legislature May Expedite Bill on Senate Vacancies
August 27th, 2009 …In January 2009, Massachusetts State House member Robert Koczera introduced HB 656, to permit the Governor to fill the vacancy immediately, although the state would still hold a special election approximately five months later.

The Voting News Daily: Pima county RTA Ballot Case Back in Court Friday, Aug. 28, 2:30pm

RTA Ballot Case back in court tomorrow Friday August 28th
Bill Risner Will Ask Judge Harrington for Stay to Preserve Ballots During Appeal.

Attend Hearing Friday August 28th2:30pm
Pima County Superior Court
110 West Congress, Judge Charles Harrington’s Court room- 4th floor, room 472.

The Hearing topic is the Pima County Republican Party’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The lawsuit is Beth Ford v. Democratic Party of Pima County that also includes the Libertarian and Republican Parties and the RTA. It is a Declaratory Judgment action where Beth Ford, Pima County Treasurer and custodian of the RTA ballots, has asked the court for “direction” as to whether she is required to destroy the RTA ballots.

The Democratic Party through their attorney Bill Risner, and the Libertarian Party, will ask the judge to “stay” his order until we appeal his earlier decision where he claimed that Arizona courts did not have subject matter jurisdiction to consider allegations of fraud in any election. Basically, the only issue that will be of interest is the decision on the stay question. The legal issue is extremely important but would be moot if the ballots were destroyed.

What’s At Stake

The real issue is whether our courts have any role in guaranteeing honest elections. Judge Harrington ruled that he is unable to consider that an election was rigged. The procedural ruling said that the court did not have jurisdiction of the very subject. It was assumed for the decision that the election was fraudulent and the result “rigged” to give a false result. Nonetheless, the Judge said Arizona’s courts could not hear or consider such a case. He said that a voter has five days only to challenge an election after the election canvass is approved. It is impossible to challenge an election within five days because a challenge must allege specifics that prove the outcome was actually different. Such evidence can never be obtained.

If proof is obtained, like for instance a sworn statement that the computer operator had been ordered to rig the election and did so, the court is nonetheless powerless to consider it. That is an unacceptable situation in a democracy, whether in Arizona or anywhere in the world. We want to appeal. An appellate court needs to rule on this issue. We think it is clearly wrong. If correct, we want it in writing from an appellate court that our courts are powerless to consider fraudulent elections. That is the issue. If the ballots are burned then a court of appeals could not consider the case.

We are seeking “prospective relief” so they cannot cheat in the future. However, history tells us there are many ways to cheat and if more ways are found we need to have the courthouse doors open to right the wrong. This case is as fundamental as it gets.

Add to this all the other problems previously exposed, documented and yet not answered leaves the public questioning whether our votes are being secured and accurately counted in Pima County.