Reasons why overseas ballots were thrown out

[barry glisson]

No post mark, post marked after the 7th, not signed, not witnesed signature did not match the sample on file. all of the above checks were made before the ballott was opened. one with everything correct was empty. That was Orange county.These were checked in front of the tv cameras,no hanky panky.

[Fingers]

I'm not familiar with the design of an absentee ballot, but how were the signatures checked if "all of the above checks were made before the ballott was opened"?

Furthermore, the ballots that were discarded due to lack of a postmark or a blurry postmark, are not the fault of the voter (unlike the Palm Beach ballot).

It is not unusual for mail being sent by naval personnel, whether embarked on naval vessels or otherwise, not to have a postmark. ~ Edgardo Rodriguez, chief postal clerk of the aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy

The party of the man who wants to be the next commander in chief is trying to throw out the votes of the men and women he will be commanding.

[barry glisson]

all of the information is on the back side of the envelope. there is only the ballott on the inside no identifiers as to who voted. It wasn't just the overseas votes that had to meet this criteria but all absentees. barry

[OuTpaTienT]

No post mark is NOT a valid reason for discounting that ballot. A Post Office error is not the fault of the voter exactly as a ballot machine error would not be the voter fault.

Besides, I thought you Democrats were all concerned with the will of the voter. Why does that not apply to military votes?

[Fingers]

Thanks for clearing that up, barry.

Actually, according to the law, the ballots have to be postmarked by no later than Nov. 7. I agree with OuT, it is due to no fault of the voter that these ballots were not postmarked, I thought ALL mail had to be postmarked?

Some of these absentee ballots were stamped with a date by election officials on Nov. 8; the same day they were received, yet they still were rejected. If they were received in the mail on Nov.8, then just when do they think they were mailed?


While trying to find the article about the "stamping" of received ballots, I found this: (http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/pres66.htm) In Seminole, attorney Joe Egan, representing the Democratic Party, objected several times and wanted to compare signatures on ballot forms the voters filled out with the signature of the person who requested the ballot to make sure they matched. The canvassing board allowed Egan to spot check six ballots and they matched.

Still, Egan objected, wanting to check additional ballots before they were accepted. "Once you open those ballots and separate them from the signatures, anything we find later would be moot," Egan said. Did this bonehead have a reason for opposing these ballots, or did he just know that they were more likely to favor Bush? http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/frown.gif


"They had us there for nine hours checking signatures, even though the elections supervisor had already done that," said Post. "They objected to over 100 of them. "That T doesn't match that T, we object." We won every single one of those objections.


[This message has been edited by Fingers (edited 11-19-2000).]

[Fingers]

It is a very sad day in our country when the men and women of the armed forces who are serving abroad and facing danger on a daily basis ... yet because of some technicality out of their control they are denied the right to vote for the president of the United States who will be their commander in chief. ~ retired Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf

[BBA]

THEY are only denied the right to vote because Gore is LOSING!

The issue of ballots was pre-arranged. The Federal law says MILITARY MAIL FROM ABROAD DOES NOT NEED DATE STAMPING POSTMARKS. I assume this to avoid complications of unit positions in different time zones effecting the local date.

The POST OFFICE is more than happy to NOT date postmark the overseas absentee ballots...because of this.

Therefore, by nature, all overseas military ballots would be regarded as NULL AND VOID...except for one thing: The Federal law that addresses this issue says MILITARY BALLOTS NOT DATE STAMP MARKED WILL BE ACCEPTED!

Barry...what the hell is your problem? You want ALL votes counted...unless they are for BUSH? You are a disgrace to the election system if that is how you think.

The more I read about it...the more pissed I get. Being one of those in the military who never recieved an absentee ballot after requested, in the passed, I now know why: The Democrat biased and UNION controlled postal service of the UNITED states is corrupt.

I wish I could have done something about it at the time, but I was not even able invoke a response from my own congressman at the time.

I tell you...Democrats are involved in the BIGGEST organized CRIME organization this country has ever seen...even moreso than the MAFIA ever could have been!

Barry...you just keep right on sucking up to them!

[Ed_S]

All of this **** has accomplished one thing in my view.

I have always voted for the candidate rather than the party. Not just presidential, but ALL elections.

In THIS voters eyes, the Democratic party has done so much damage to their reputation that it'll be years before I'll seriously consider voting for ANYONE with (D) attached to their name.


BBA - I've agreed with many of your posts recently, but I'll take issue with "...UNION controlled postal service..."

Don't bring unionism into this. Yes, the major unions do push the Dems, but I've been a Teamster member most of my life, and (believe it or not http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif) we ARE capable of individual thought. Very few of my coworkers really swallow the union's line. Many are Republicans.

[This message has been edited by Ed_S (edited 11-19-2000).]

[stylin19]

The FEDS recently rewrote the law re: absentee ballots in relationship to elections for federal positions.
Does it supercede state law ? some say it does.

Supposedly, federal law applies ( i havent been able to find it, yet ) when voting for federal office by absentee ballots. Katherine Harris supposedly isssued an opinion on 11/14/00, indicating post mark not required, as per fed law.

I will try and find that fed law, in the meantime:

Here is part of some fed laws and penalties for infringing on those rights that some are citing:

TITLE 39 - POSTAL SERVICE
PART IV - MAIL MATTER
CHAPTER 34 - ARMED FORCES AND FREE POSTAGE
Sec. 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;

** note** some repubs are using "expeditiously" as their reason for allowing no postmark

TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 29 - ELECTIONS AND POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
Sec. 608. Absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters
(a) Whoever knowingly deprives or attempts to deprive any person
of a right under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee
Voting Act shall be fined in accordance with this title or
imprisoned not more than five years, or both

it gets sadder & sadder

[This message has been edited by stylin19 (edited 11-19-2000).]

[BBA]

Ed_S...I can agree that not all in unions are corrupt...but the events of Teamster union boss corruption, removal and then subsequently putting the same corrupt people right back in the same place is analogous to being slapped on the hands for getting caught...it's completely absurd to me why anyone would continue supportting that union.

AND don't get me started on the UPS strikes...that cost many UPS workers I know to loose more than they will EVER recover as a result! ( I was dating a UPS driver chick at the time...)

All I am trying to say is the USPS has already been involved in ballot fraud in Fl, ballots have been placed to the side...stamped and mailed as 4th class to military units...

Ok..I'm sorry for ranting the unions, but from what I see for myself, they are CORRUPT in general.

I am not saying YOU are corrupt, in fact I would argue the oppossite.

Just my opinion.

( BTW: I am not in any union, state or federal service, and I am registered as "Independant" for party affiliation, just to show I am not BLIND to partisanship )

[stylin19]

I found the ( a ?) law:
<A HREF="http://www.fvap.ncr.gov/uocava.html" TARGET=_blank>UNIFORMED AND OVERSEAS CITIZENS
ABSENTEE VOTING ACT (UOCAVA)</A>

it appears the repubs don't really have a leg to stand on re: the post-mark. It is only a recommendation Sec.104 #5.

the exception being, if the FSOS opinion of 11/14/00 is binding.

[Ed_S]

No argument from ME that much of the union leadership is dirty.

But it's membership which does the actual work. (such as mail handling)
And casts their votes. Yes, many are like sheep, taking the leadership's word for everything & voting accordingly.
But many more are not, & it would only take ONE postal worker with definate knowledge of ballot fraud to blow the whistle.

BTW, I appreciate your comment, BBA, and I know (as you do) that none of this is on a personal level! http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/biggrin.gif http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/biggrin.gif

Ed

[BBA]

Stylin...why is it I can not find the actual code that regulates absentee ballots?

"44 U.S.C. Chapter 35"

I cant even find it on the GPO web searches.

The UOCAVA you link to does not address this case, as far as I can see.

Please contest what I say, and show me what you mean.

[BBA]

edit: I'm really a nice guy.


[This message has been edited by BBA (edited 11-19-2000).]

[alondra]

long d/l but worth every minute, had Sons in Nam. nuf said.

[stylin19]

BBA

Good job on finding the US Code.
I'm not sure what you are asking me.

If it's this:
Sec. 104 is a RECOMMENDATION to the states.

I'm guessing that the states can reject the recommendations. In this case, the FSOS made an opinion re: postmarks, that they don't have to be there. Which means to me, she took the recommendation of the US Code over Fla. Statute. Can she ? i don't know. It seems we are in agreement here.

If it's not this, then i'm not sure what you are asking me.

thanx again for finding the US Code.

p.s...WorldNetDaily brok this story and has been all over this story since the get go:
Story breaks re: missing military ballots (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_dougherty/20001104_xnjdo_military_m.shtml)

Pentagon's Bacon Denies Problem (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_dougherty/20001107_xnjdo_bacon_deni.shtml)

[This message has been edited by stylin19 (edited 11-19-2000).]

[Fingers]

&lt;no longer necessary&gt;

[This message has been edited by Fingers (edited 11-20-2000).]

[Fingers]

With out any specific knowledge, I'm going to make a reasonable assumption. (stop snickering guys)

Absentee ballots recieved on or before Nov. 7 do not need postmarks because they clearly were sent on or before election day. Whether or not the absentee ballot was dated, they should not have been rejected if they were recieved on or prior to election day. Any valid absentee ballots that were recieved before the election have already been opened and were included in the Counties official tallies that were given last week.

I completely understand why ballots recieved AFTER the generals election require verification, this is the only way to assure that they were not completed and sent after the results of the general election were already known. Having said that, it is still completely unfair to reject military absentee ballots that were sent on or before Nov. 7, just because military correspondense doesn't alway require postmarking.
Is there no other way to determine when these ballots were sent? I've already noted that at least a few were recieved and stamped with the date of Nov. 8 by election officials. Clearly these ballots were sent on/before Nov. 7, yet they were still rejected.

Can anybody verify that only "late" ballots require postal dates? I certainly hope no absentee ballots recieved before the election were discarded due to lack of postmarking.



[This message has been edited by Fingers (edited 11-19-2000).]

[alondra]

after reading those links can any one honestly say there is no dishonesty going on here,, also supposedly not knowing how the vote would be in the military vote, why does Gores bunch want to throw them out,

[socalgal]

Barry,

You've Got Mail.

[narayan]

http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/Forum17/HTML/001651.html

[Thud]

I realize I'm chiming in a little late in the game here, but wanted to shed some light on how the absentee ballot was laid out (as per Fingers first post waaaay up there):

The ballots themselves were sealed in an envelope simply labeled "Ballots".

This was sealed inside another envelope with an affidavit printed on it. This I had to sign swearing that I was in fact eligible to vote in the election.

Then the whole enchilada was sealed into the mailing envelope. Postage paid by Uncle Sam--for which I was greatful, since the thing weighed ~5 lbs. by the time I had it all put together!!

Sometime after it was mailed, chaos ensued, and there was much ugliness and name-calling; but that's another story...

[barry glisson]

This post has been edited.

[This message has been edited by barry glisson (edited 11-19-2000).]

[jacobnero8196]

I'm pretty sure the Democrats went after the Military vote so strongly because they knew it would give Bush to big of a lead. The ones they did count were 2 to 1 in Bush's favor. The 1400 if counted would have put Bush in the White House for sure.

The military deserve to vote more than any one else in the country so it's sad that the Democrats would attack them.

[BBA]

It's like the military is nothing more than slave labor used as a tool to meet clintons political objectives...an expendable tool not being replinished, not being minded...just used and abused.

[alondra]

a carefull analysis of the use they have been put to would conferm this.

[alondra]

at the risk of being flamed, how many ballots from Isreal did the Demos protest???
(VP Leibermann)

[BBA]

42 USC 1973ff-1.

SEC. 102. STATE RESPONSIBILITIES.

Each State shall —

(1) permit absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters to use absentee registration procedures and to vote by absentee ballot in general, special, primary, and runoff elections for Federal office;

(2) accept and process, with respect to any general, special, primary, or runoff elec-tion for Federal office, any otherwise valid voter registration application from an absent uniformed services voter or overseas voter, if the application is received by
the appropriate State election official not less than 30 days before the election; and

(3) permit overseas voters to use Federal write-in absentee ballots (in accordance
with section 103) in general elections for Federal office.edit





42 USC 1973ff-3. SEC. 104.

RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE STATES TO MAXIMIZE ACCESS TO THE POLLS BY ABSENT UNIFORMED SERVICES VOTERS AND OVERSEAS VOTERS.

To afford maximum access to the polls by absent uniformed services voters and overseas
voters, it is recommended that the States —

(1) use the official post card form prescribed under section 101) for simultaneous voter registration application and absentee ballot application;

(2) adopt the suggested design for absentee ballot mailing envelopes prescribed
under section 101;

(3) waive registration requirement for absent uniformed services voters and overseas
voters who, by reason of service or residence, do not have an opportunity to register;

(4) if an application other than an official post card form (prescribed under section
101) is required for absentee registration, provide that registration forms be sent with
the absentee ballot and may be returned with it;

(5) expedite processing of balloting materials with respect to absent uniformed ser-vices voters and overseas voters;

Armed Forces.

(6) permit any oath required for a document under this title to be administered by a commissioned officer of the Armed Forces or any official authorized to administer oaths under Federal law or the law of the State or other place where the oath is
administered;

Uniformed services.

(7) assure that absentee ballots are mailed to absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters at the earliest opportunity;

(8) assist the Presidential designee in compiling statistical and other information
relating to this title; and

Armed Forces.

(9) provide late registration procedures for persons recently separated from the
Armed Forces.





39 USC 3406. Ҥ 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


39 USC 406.

“(2) may be mailed at a post office established outside the United States under sec-tion 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.”



In case you were asking, heres 406:


Sec. 406. Postal services at Armed Forces installations

(a) The Postal Service may establish branch post offices at camps, posts, bases, or stations of the Armed Forces and at defense or other strategic installations.

(b) The Secretaries of Defense and Transportation shall make arrangements with the Postal Service to perform postal services through personnel designated by them at or through branch post offices stablished under subsection (a) of this section.


My take is the federal law says as long as it is recieved before the deadline of the state, which was midnight on Friday, 11/17, it must accept the ballots.

If the state has a law that says they must have a postmark on them, it is in violation of federal law, and federal law takes precedence.

Then again, I'm not a laywer...so I could be wrong.

But, as long as the Democrats were pushing that all votes be counted...I will eextend that to say ALL, no matter if they are absentee ballots or not should be counted.

[This message has been edited by BBA (edited 11-19-2000).]

[This message has been edited by BBA (edited 11-19-2000).]

[barry glisson]

This post has been edited by barry glisson

[This message has been edited by barry glisson (edited 11-19-2000).]

[stylin19]

Here's a link to,IMHO, a powerful post:

Warning********* longer load times***********

Count The Military Vote (http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a1819ae310d.htm)

[stylin19]

alondra

that is a very good question. i have found nothing on this, doing scans on the wire services.

[alondra]

just heard on the radio that the dems are going to let the mil. ballots be counted, I guess they are feeling the heat over their nit-picking over stamps,(the mil. is free dont need a stamp) and postmarks. it also said one county recount was half over and Gore only gained 3 votes, maybe it wont matter and the Mil. vote will settle it. only thing that now worries me is how much is an electors vote worth $$$$

[Fingers]

Alondra, I've been watching this story too. Sounds like good news, right? I hope so, but according to this source, it's a trick because the ballots don't have a space for a date. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/frown.gif I hope I'm wrong.
(Florida Attorney General) Bob Butterworth's ruling does not change much because the absentee ballots included a signature line, but no space to write the date. (http://foxnews.com/election_night/112000/military_ballots.sml)


In next-door Palm Beach County, Bush appeared to be holding his own.
"There’s been very little change" in the margin between the two men, said Judge Charles Burton, head of the county canvassing board. With 103 of 531 precincts recounted, Gore had picked up three votes, officials said.

Here's the link with reports on the progress of all 3 Counties. Effect of recounts may not matter (http://www.msnbc.com/news/491409.asp?cp1=1)

This is also encouraging, but I've also read that the County is setting aside all "questionable" ballots to be evaluated later by the canvassing board, and these ballots might not be included in these projected numbers.

Thanks for the clarification, thud. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif Do you remember if you added a date to the ballot anywhere?



[This message has been edited by Fingers (edited 11-20-2000).]

[alondra]

this postmark thing got me to remembering, after wwll the only way home was by ship, the lack of which made us unhappy, our postal people made a rubber stamp with a ship and the words " no boats-no votes" this went on every letter home. this was our post mark, I have such letters, by the way we started geting "boats" guess back then our vote counted. Id put a pic here if I knew how http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by alondra (edited 11-20-2000).]

[Fingers]

If Al Gore ends up winning this thing, I think we are going to have a serious problem will military morale. Whether Gore wins because it is the true intention of Florida, or because he manipulated the system to gain an unfair advantage, many in the military are already denouncing Vice President Gore and the Democratic Party.

Military upset over invalid ballots (http://www.msnbc.com/news/492881.asp?cp1=1)
Public opinion is changing too, 67% now say the Florida Supreme Court should stop the manual re-counts and declare George W. Bush the winner.

The Democrats scheme to deny absentee military ballots from being counted is going to end up doing Gore much more damage than anything he could have gained from it.


"Let me just say that Vice President Gore and I would never authorize, and not tolerate, a strategy that was aimed at disqualifying military ballots," Gore running mate Joe Lieberman told Fox News Sunday

But a five-page memo drafted by Gore campaign attorney Mark Herron circulating publicly Monday revealed that Democratic officials were gearing up election observers to look for errors in the military ballots that would disqualify them.

Specifically, the memo provided a sample protest form for overseas ballots that listed 11 reasons for rejections, including late postmarks, domestic postmarks "(including Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.)," or no postmarks.

Looks like Al Gore isn't the only one who puts his foot in his mouth, Vice Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman has a big mouthful of foot sandwich right now also.

[alondra]

it is apparent the military feels disinfranchised, and with good reason, If Gore becomes their CinC. I forsee the emergence of a slightly modified hand salute http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[Thud]

Fingers- not on the ballot itself, but I'm sure I did on the affidavit accompanying it.