This just in
Less than a day after Democrat Christine Gregoire vowed to concede the race for governor unless Democrats come up with enough money for a full rather than partial vote recount, her party said it had the money to do so.Great. Wild human error, hanging chads, newly discovered mystery ballots and endless lawsuits, here we come.State Democrats scheduled a news conference for 2 p.m. Friday when they were expected to announce that they had commitments for the $750,000 downpayment to pay for a hand recount of all the votes across the state in a governor's race that is closer than any in state history.
hat tip: Terry Mueller
An UPDATE:
OLYMPIA, Wash. — Washington Democrats, hoping the third time's the charm, will pay for yet another recount in the state's ultra-close governor's race that remains unsettled after more than a month.Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 03, 2004 12:35 PM | Email This
The party also is heading to the state Supreme Court to seek a ruling that all ballots be treated the same from county to county.
The one side cried foul, and demanded a recount. The one side said, "I demand a hand recount", because there's no way the other side could have beat me.
And you republicans will sit and chastize Gregoire for doing this, when Republicans demanded a recount when the election results in Texas showed Democratic challenger Hubert Vo to have defeated the Republican incumbent Talmadge Heflin by 32 votes for the state House on Nov. 2nd.
But he won't concede. So tell me, why *IS* the Republican Party so hypocritical here?
And the first order of business after Gov. Rossi is finally sworn in should be a review of the campaign laws.
ed.
See? Not hypocritical.
Posted by: Timothy on December 3, 2004 12:47 PMThe republicans are hypocritical, because they always claim that if the shoe was on the other foot, they wouldn't press for the hand recount that is "much more error-prone".
My arse.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 3, 2004 12:49 PM
Nobody has sought my input on this.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2916692
mmmmm hmmmm.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 3, 2004 12:53 PMhttp://pullonsupermanscape.typepad.com/pull_on_supermans_cape/2004/12/flash_king5_rep.html
Posted by: MC on December 3, 2004 12:55 PMIt's within the probability factor...
Posted by: DustinJames on December 3, 2004 01:03 PMI hope Sam will do this.
1. Have one demo and one rep look at each vote.
2. If they don't agree, have the vote sent to a the state supreme court and have them decide all of them consistantly.
I could live with this.
Posted by: DRE on December 3, 2004 01:05 PMWhy do Democrats insist on making endless analogies and comparisons of unlike situations?
Washington is Washington, and Texas is Texas, okay? Many of us here don't give a rat's a$$ about a Texas election....mmmmm-kay?
Newsflash: Hubert Vo is not Dino Rossi. Talmadge Heflin is not Christine Gregoire. I'm sorry that I am forced to point this out to you, since you couldn't figure it out on your own.
Whatever is happening in Texas....is...happening...in....SURPRISE...Texas!
Please don't muddle the water by suggesting that the circumstances here are exactly the same as the circumstances there, and furthering your bad logic (illogisms?) by suggesting that we are hypocritical. It makes you look foolish.
Christine Gregoire should concede. As for Texas? Personally, I don't care. Let them do whatever they see fit under THEIR circumstances.
Posted by: Larry on December 3, 2004 01:07 PMIt would be fitting if the Democrats end up having spent another million or so in vein.
"They will steal anything, and call it purchase." - Shakespeare
Posted by: Jeff B on December 3, 2004 01:08 PMSome of you good folk, Timothy and KLS, have shown themselves to not be hypocritical.
Others of us, including Larry and myself, basically care about getting our candidate into office because we each believe our respective candidate may have won.
I'm not hypocritical because I would tell that republican in TX to kick and scream until he's out of options, because as someone else pointed out, it sounds like he may have some aspects of the law that he can legally use...
Posted by: DustinJames on December 3, 2004 01:13 PM1) The Repubs never expect to win, it would have been just another loss, and they would never bother fighthing against democrat controlled elections boards, judiciary and legislature.
2) The pressure from the left which controls so much of the press, government, academic, and other policy driving institutions in this state would have been overwhelming for Rossi to concede, far greater than anything we have seen asking Gregoire to concede. He would have had to back down for the sake of any future hope for his political career.
If nothing else, the bottom line is that the situation is not reveresed, specualtion is a lot of fun, but its not reality. Reality is that Rossi has won twice, even with heavily partisan tactics of counting many ballots that are highly suspect given the rules for acccepting provisionals. Were it not for the democrat biased Judge Lum, this would not even be an issue. An invalid ballot is and invalid ballot.
Adios Dino! Try again in 2008!
Posted by: Me on December 3, 2004 01:23 PMIn fairness, a lot of Rossi supporters around here have been pointing out similar historical situations as evidence that the Republicans consistently take the high road, and Gregoire should concede. I know you haven't, but others have and you haven't gotten on their case like you did DustinJames' just now.
That said, not knowing much about the Texas situation, I would say that if the Republican has some sort of hard evidence of fraud or misconduct, he should fight it. If all he has is "irregularities" like Ms. Gregoire, he should definitely concede. Is that a double standard? I think not.
Posted by: Skor Grimm on December 3, 2004 01:27 PMDo you live in TX (I assume Travis county)? Or did you scan the entire electoral slate from Nov 2nd to find a race where a Republican lost and did not concede? I heard the race for dog catcher in Dakota county in MN...
Previous postings here have shown that counter-examples to yours of electoral grace, of far more important national importance, abound (this is aside from the only one that matters to the residents of Washington). I could come up with several, and did not even need to go to the level of local elections in NY State 2000 and one in Maine 2000 (where the balance of the Senate was at stake).
But if it makes you feel better -- Guy in Texas, concede; and Republicans in the TX House, settle for a 24 seat majority, instead of 26.
Posted by: Curious Out of Stater on December 3, 2004 01:30 PMThere, she collaborated with various trial lawyers, particularly the notorious Dicky Scruggs, to file an anti-trust lawsuit against major tobacco manufacturers that had as its remedy the adoption of legislation securing market share for those same companies in exchange for agreement to transfer "escrow" funds to an account that would distribute funds to states and liberal interest groups after, of course, certain firms took billion dollar fees.
The key component of the "settlement" was adoption of legislation in each participating state subjecting the competitor companies to this state-mandated market share limit. This was nothing more than a tobacco tax lobbying effort masquerading as a legal settlement (a lobbying effort that avoided ethical restrictions against collecting fees as a percent of results for lobbying and thereby allowed its conceivers, Scrugges, etc. to collect billions in windfalls out of tax dollars). The only expert to testify on Gregoire's bill before the House of Reps was a former Treasury Dept deputy director level economist under Clinton. He, correctly, described it as a tax scheme masquerading as litigation; and he was 100% correct. The "settlement" punished big tobacco's competitors and secured big tobacco's market share. It was a violation of every principle of good government not to mention market based economics. And it was highly unprincipled.
Rossi is a leader and not a lawyer. We don't need anymore litigous schemers here in Washington. We need a leader to help pull the WA economy out of the doldrums caused by years of left leaning ideas.
I'm a poltical junkie. I use this race over some of the others that you loosely cite because it's a current election reversal of what's happening here.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 3, 2004 02:21 PMHere's the distinction. The Democrats have asked to hand-count 4,000,000 ballots in Washington State. The Texas house race involves perhaps 50,000 ballots.
Also keep in mind that the Texas Democratic Party, after LBJ's 87-vote-margin Senate primary victory over Coke stevenson in 1948, is a nest of vote-stealing vipers.
Posted by: Fed Up With This on December 3, 2004 02:25 PMI don't understand your point. Are you saying that the sheer number of votes in this race is incomprehensibly uncountable to you? Take off your shoes and count the piggies if you need 'em.
Posted by: DustinJames on December 3, 2004 02:30 PMI am thrilled with the Hand recount. But I will give you points for very funny byline "Hand Job." I laughed for some time at that. Don't worry Rossi still has a better chance of winning. He is 42 vote ahead. Also who ever posted I like the Supreme Court idea I think they should decide the questionables.
Posted by: Ray on December 3, 2004 02:33 PMYou're comparing a BIG election to a tiny election. It will cost over a million bucks to recount the whole State--and that could be borne by taxpayers. Since the Washington and Texas elections are so different in terms of scale and in terms of cost, you shouldn't be whining about
"hypocrisy." LOL! You sniveling creep! You liked it when a dead woman's husband was named to the Senate in Missouri (Jean Carnahan) when they allowed her dead spouse's votes to count, and when the New Jersey courts allowed Frank Lautenberg to run illegally after Torricelli stepped aside.
I learned a long time ago that Democrats have NO shame. That includes you, poor deluded DustinJames.
What you're supposed to do now is cry and accuse the big, bad mean Republican of being "over the top." Go ahead!
Posted by: FedUpWithThis on December 3, 2004 02:39 PM"It will cost over a million bucks to recount the whole State--and that could be borne by taxpayers."
Last time I checked, the democratic party is paying for the hand count...
Posted by: DustinJames on December 3, 2004 02:44 PMThis is a typical Leftist/Dem tactic. Bring up some other subject, one that on the appears to be the same, in a morally relative way, along with the accusation that the Right is no better. Then make the accusation that because people commenting on the real issue (the gov recount) haven't condemned this new issue, they support the action that the Left is is condemning. What this does is deflect attention from the real issue, which, to state it once again, is Dem behavior here in Washington. Not only does the Leftist divert the discussion into a direction it thinks it can win, at the same time, it puts those who don't like the Dems behavior here on the defensive by having to prove that they are not hypocrites.
I don't give a damn about what's going on in Texas, and I my not caring does not make me a hypocrite. It is irrelevant to what is going on with Dems attempt to steal the governorship of Washington.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega on December 3, 2004 02:46 PMThe Democrats put down a $750,000 deposit. If the Democrat, Gregoire, wins the hand count, the taxpayers of Washington reimburse the Democrats. If Gergoire loses, the Democrats pay
the costs.
That's why Perkins Coie is going to try and sue the state to get as many additional provisionals and other rejected ballots back in play.
A purely tabular recount for Gregoire does not bode wel, so the only way to assure the result she want is to litigate.
"The Democrats put down a $750,000 deposit. If the Democrat, Gregoire, wins the hand count, the taxpayers of Washington reimburse the Democrats. If Gergoire loses, the Democrats pay
the costs."
Whoever wins the hand recount, it's best for Washington State. If it costs me an extra $1 in taxes next year because I need to pay for the recount because it switched the results, then it's something I'd gladly pay. I'd gladly pay it if it switched it the other way (if Gregoire was winning by 42 votes and Dino asked for the recount).
Posted by: DustinJames on December 3, 2004 03:08 PMWhich ballots should be recounted, and whether Counties should be allowed to review previously-rejected ballots, is a separate issue and one which will probably require court decisions.
Both Republicans and Democrats should have observers watching every vote being recounted. With only 42 votes separating Gregoire and Rossi, a fair recount could easily go either way. I'd give Rossi about 3-2 odds of winning. But if Gregoire ends up the victor, Republicans will just have to live with it.
The election law allows hand recounts, and whinging about it won't change that fact. Trying to pressure Gregoire into throwing in the towel is also rather silly, given the tiny margin and the good possibility that she might win the recount. She deserves a modicum of credit for bucking the Democratic Party and demanding that it ante up the full amount.
Posted by: Daniel Wiener on December 3, 2004 03:14 PMI don't think so.
Posted by: ADR on December 3, 2004 03:22 PMThe good news is whoever loses this final stage will concede...right? Gotta be!
Posted by: ray on December 3, 2004 03:23 PMYou shouldn't have pretended not to know that the recount could cost Washington taxpayers money. I'd say that, based on that, you have no credibility in this forum. Personally, I resent paying taxes so the power-hungry Democrats can steal an election. Like a typical Leftist, you speak of a tax or a tax increase in terms of "just pennies a day." Make no mistake: the hand recount will be a deliberate attempt at voter fraud, where Democrats make errors in Gregoire's favor. (Machines count better than humans, anyway. Ever hear of computers?)
Posted by: FedUpWithThis on December 3, 2004 03:23 PMAnd also, either way, Gregoire will have an extremely hard time with her political career. Her credibility is falling fast. She is ticking off a lot of people -- on both sides of the aisle.
Posted by: ADR on December 3, 2004 03:33 PMPlease be honest: its all about winning, power, control, and abuse for Democrats....
Posted by: Butt Monkey on December 3, 2004 03:45 PMMarc: "Recount laws were never intended to allow losing candidates to go on fishing expeditions to find more ballots or votes to count, it was to ensure accuracy of the machine count."
I have to disagree with you to some extent. Hand recounts are partly intended to verify the accuracy and integrity of the machine counts, but they are also intended to catch errors or fraud by election officials. If election officials tamper with ballots or unjustifiably invalidate ballots, a hand recount (with observers from all parties present) is the only effective safeguard against such shenanigans. How else would you spot such fraud, or have sufficient "reasonable cause" to get a court order to inspect the ballots?
Yes, there's a risk that a hand-recount will open a window of opportunity for additional vote tampering, and that must be guarded against. But with everyone and everything under a giant publicity spotlight, the opportunities for new fraud should logically be smaller than the original opportunities for fraud during the first count.
Seriosly, we're taking a perfectly discrete data point, a voter's decision to vote for this candidate or that one, and recording it onto a medium, paper, that's both perishable and inherently ambiguous - and then, using either a machine and/or a human, we have to deal with incompletely filled in bubbles, signature matching, hanging chads, circled names, etc to try to figure out what the original vote was. That's a digital to analog to digital conversion, which is inherently error prone. It's like copying a CD by recording it to audio tape and then recording it back onto another CD. And then, since some people don't like how the new CD sounds, we do it over again, but each time the tape degrades - i.e. chads fall out, ballots get smudged or eaten by a machine, or lost. Plus, with votes, we open the possibility of fraud and biases interpretation.
Don't get me wrong: I love voting by mail. On the Sunday before every election for the last 20 years, I've spread out all the newspapers on the kitchen table, read the voters pamphlet, researched candidates positions on the Internet (ok, not for the last 20 on that one), in order to make informed decisions - something that I can't imagine doing in some little booth somewhere (particularly given the insane number of judges and obscure offices we have to vote for in this state... Lands Commissioner? Puh-lease! But that's another topic).
But what happens next? I drop it in snail mail. Does it ever arrive? Did it make it in by the deadline? Did the $6.05/hour poll worker think my signature matched whatever the hell my signature looked like 20 years ago? What if my envelope got mixed up with my wife's and I returned my ballot in her envelope? Did the ballot get smushed in the mail, and rendered unreadable? Did my ink fade? Who knows? It's crazy.
Plus, the counting process takes forever because they open all the envelopes, and match the signatures, BY HAND! Sam Reed wants to "fix" this by requiring ballots to be received by election day. But that penalizes absentee voters relative to in-person voters. And it doesn't fix the problem, because it still takes two weeks to process the ballots on account of their arcane methodology (so at a minimum, they should use machines to open the envelopes and match the signatures).
We can fix both problems by going to all electronic voting. What I'd like is to just vote on-line. From any computer, I could log in to the Secretary of State website, enter an identifying code that they previously mailed to my house (or verify my identity by any number of other techniques), check off my choices, verify them on a confirmation screen, and have my vote tallied instantly
Posted by: Brian on December 3, 2004 04:19 PMI'm not suggesting that we switch 100% over to e-voting immediately - some people will still prefer in-person voting or traditional paper absentee ballots, but we should move aggressively to make e-voting a third option. Electronic voting machines were used successfully nationwide this election and were virtually problem free. Washington state, with our educated population and strong local information technology industry, should be a leader in taking the next step: all electronic voting.
Posted by: Brian on December 3, 2004 04:24 PMThere's just too much at stake for them to be trusted at any level during this upcoming process. Hand recounts are not only much more error prone than machine counts, but there is much more opportunity for mischeif with all those extra hands on the ballots.
This is particularly true of punch card ballots, where chads can fall out as a result of either mischeif or simply being handled too much. A Rossi vote that becomes an overvote due to the CG chad falling out is just as good for her as remarking an undervote in her favor.
Since most of the punch card counties are Rossi counties, he stands to lose more votes in this fashion than does CG.
Dino will be lucky to still be in the lead at the end of this perfectly legal but highly questionable process.
Posted by: Kevin S on December 3, 2004 04:34 PMProud of Dem Party??? Are you kidding?
Posted by: Susu on December 3, 2004 04:35 PMNow I've seen everything! Someone West of the Mississippi thinking that a jerk like Zell Miller is a real person? If you're an example of what the Washington State Republican Party is all about, that Party should never have anyone hold power in any position. Fortunately for you (and the State of Washington) I know a lot of Republicans there and they would agree with all Westerners that Zell Miller is an absolute idiotic throwback to Civil War-oriented Southern Dixiecrats.
The point in Washington is that Republicans, as in Florida in 2000, never want to actually have a real, definitive count of votes in a close election when their candidate has a statistically insignificant and unproven edge in vote counting to date.
Rossi and the GOP in Washington ought to show true statesmanship by agreeing to splitting the cost of the recount with the Gregoire campaign. That way, whoever comes out ahead after the true, final count, can actually govern for the next 4 years there. But since that would be an act of real statesmanship, noone should ever expect that from a Republican...
Posted by: Nelson on December 3, 2004 04:49 PMThe only good thing about it is that Gregoire's career will definitely be over for good if we get a good count. Nobody likes a sore loser.
Posted by: Richard Bennett on December 3, 2004 04:54 PMThe right people are definitely in the right places.
The Washington State D's have become desensitized by throwing millions of our tax dollars down the tube. A million bucks for a hand job is such a cheap trick.
Chris already won. All her votes just weren't counted. Her lawyers have a few loose ends to coordinate to make it legal.
Count, recount, hand job, spin, spin, spin.
Posted by: Mike on December 3, 2004 04:59 PMI have always considered myself a reasonable person regarding candidates and have chosen them on the basis of their personal platform rather than their party affiliation. No more. I can promise, for myself, for my husband and for my 2 voting age sons, that there will NEVER be another Democrat candidate to receive a vote from this household.
Furthermore, because of the shenanigans and dubious behavior in the King County elections department I will not spend another discretionary dime in King County or in the city of Seattle. The arrogant folks in the King County/Seattle area seem to have forgotten it is barely a 3hour trip to tax free Oregon. Oregon happens to have an NBA, museums, concerts, zoos, ski resorts, beaches and other wonderful attractions as well. I am looking forward to our many trips south of the border of this quasi banana republic that Washington has now become.
Chris, you should be ashamed of your selfish behavior and the loathsome example you have set for your daughters. I wonder how you will ever look them in the eye and counsel them to ever do the right thing in their lives. How sad for them. Your behavior here in this time of defeat, your arrogance, hubris and the distinct lack of grace you have shown says volumes the person you are and about what we citizen taxpayers can expect from you.
I will wish you luck, because Ms Gregoire you will certainly need it as the most despised politician the formerly great state of Washington has ever produced.
But you 'pubs are missing it. Every reference to Rossi should be "Governor-Elect Rossi." Every discussion should be "Governor-Elect Rossi." So, before the 'pubs end up in the US/Supremes sometime along this long, long road, it will appear to the voters that Ms. G is stealing it. Time to advance the PR from the 'pubs side: Dems have had it most of it to themselves so far. Play to win ('cause you already did).
Posted by: jbas on December 3, 2004 05:22 PMThe fixed price of the recount is 25 cents / ballot which comes to the ~$750,000. I cannot believe that the cost of this is going to be 3/4 Million. No way. Fully loaded costs (labor, security, power, rent) ... I would bet this recount is going to cost the state closer to $1 a ballot. I would like to see someone with access to the state/counties costs to investigate that.
If the Democrats come up short, then they lose their $750K. But if my guess is right ... the state will have lost somewhere around $2M on this.
If the Democrats manages to manufacture a win, then the get there $750K back and the state really loses.
Either way, Christine has stuck the taxpayer with the bill. Maybe we should just get that money from the tobacco settlement ...
Posted by: Thomas on December 3, 2004 06:13 PMAs a consequence of Logan's decision, several hundred new provisional ballots were "cured" in King County by persons who may or may not have been the original registrants -- we will never know because King Co. does nothing to determine this seemingly important fact. Gregoire picked up 400 new votes from persons submitting new signatures on new registrations that were never compared to signatures on file and these people were not required to make an appearance before an elections official to perform these changes.
Most, if not all, other counties refused to allow such after the fact re-registration that was performed in King Co. Had King Co. not adopted this novel interpretation of the law after-the-fact we would not be facing the recount now and Rossi would be Governor. These votes have been tabulated and cannot be segregated from the others even were a higher court to address the underlying legal question of whether such "curing" is permitted under the law (Lum avoided them by refusing the R's motion on procedural grounds). Though it would be interesting to have a court spank Logan, it would be inconsequential for this election.
The question of the narrowness of this race should be placed in context of the known existence of 400 illegitimate Gregoire votes. Illegitimate and unrecoverable. Persons who have already aquired 400 illegitimate votes might carp about propriety of finding another 50 or so legitimate ones. That doesn't erase the unrecoverable errors already committed that are of greater magnitude.
-- Oh, so what people do many years ago should be the sole criteria for judging them today? George W. Bush was a rowdy, drunken playboy in the 70s with a whole bunch of DUIs. By your comments about Zell Miller, if we should judge him only by his 1992 speech in behalf of Bill Clinton, then we should judge George W. Bush only by his rowdy, drunken DUI days.
Posted by: Nelson on December 3, 2004 06:28 PMZell Miller will be retiring from the Senate in a month. But there's still one real Dixiecrat left in the Senate, Democrat Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who used to belong to the Ku Klux Klan. (Byrd was not just an ordinary member but a recruiter for the Klan, by the way.)
Posted by: FedUpWithThis on December 3, 2004 06:35 PMI actually was lukewarm on Gregoire her leadership on the Recount has been inspiring. I support her more.
I hope Washington can continue to shine a bright light and other states (FL, OH) can see how good our elections (including turnout, voting options, etc,) and recount process are.
WA and VT, MA usually set good trends, lets hope they follow suit.
Posted by: ray on December 3, 2004 06:39 PMKind of like Christine Gregoire, who was not only a member of a segregated sorority, but its president!
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 3, 2004 07:42 PMFrom my perspective the very first order of business in this state if Gregoire and Seattle manages to once again fabricate enough mystery votes to steal this election from the rightful party who has won two machine counts thus far will be a state wide governor recall election. Putting Gregoire (the governor of Seattle) into reign will not stand unchallenged. A Recall election in California was recently successful, and it will be no problem here. With 31 of 39 counties and most of King county (except for Seattle) helping with the recall election we will succeed. It is about time the rest of the state was represented in Olympia. One upset Partisan can collect thousands of legal recall votes and what the heck many Gregoire voters just went to the polls as Bush Haters anyway. We'll see how many of them go to the polls for Gregoire in a recall election. Good luck and may the Best Party Win! This is not over with your joke diversion of a hand count!
Posted by: Greg on December 3, 2004 10:47 PMFrom my perspective the very first order of business in this state if Gregoire and Seattle manages to once again fabricate enough mystery votes to steal this election from the rightful party who has won two machine counts thus far will be a state wide governor recall election. Putting Gregoire (the governor of Seattle) into reign will not stand unchallenged. A Recall election in California was recently successful, and it will be no problem here. With 31 of 39 counties and most of King county (except for Seattle) helping with the recall election we will succeed. It is about time the rest of the state was represented in Olympia. One upset Partisan can collect thousands of legal recall votes and what the heck many Gregoire voters just went to the polls as Bush Haters anyway. We'll see how many of them go to the polls for Gregoire in a recall election. Good luck and may the Best Party Win! This is not over with your joke diversion of a hand count!
Posted by: Greg on December 3, 2004 10:51 PMshe will never be my governor...never...
time to dethrone the Democratic rule in this state and it will come in the form of the state houses...
If Daschle can be unseated, so can the leftist in this state...one area at a time...
Nope, Gregoire will never be MY governor...she is trying to steal the election away as in the great tradtion of the Democrats....I guess if that is okay with many of the Democratic posters here, it is very telling of the kind of people that support Democrats.....
Posted by: Lee on December 4, 2004 09:44 PM