Yesterday I obtained a copy of the latest King Ukraine County voter registration file (updated Nov. 1) so I could learn more about the 573 allegedly disenfranchinsed magical mystery voters. Here are just the first things I've discovered.
There is a suspicious pattern regarding the dates when these alleged voters allegedly registered to vote.
[click for a larger image]
The bar graph illustrates the number of voters on the list of 573 ("The List") that were registered in each month. The first month for which one of these voters registered was July 1952. 86 of the members of The List were registered before 1998. This small number of List voters registered in any of the months before 1998 would be consistent with the theory that these are a small number of random voters whose signatures were erroneously not transferred from paper to computer during the system upgrade.
But 487 of the List voters (85%) were registered in 1998 or later, compared with only 38% of King County registered voters who have registered in the last 7 years. It's reasonable to assume that recent registrants are over-represented among those who actually vote, but the county hasn't released numbers to confirm this. In any case, turnout was 83%, high enough that the percentage of 1998+ voters in the List is disproportionately high.
But wait, there's more! Notice the spikes in the bar graph. We get the following clustering of List voters in certain months.
| Months | Number | Percent |
| June - October 1998 | 31 | 5.4% |
| September - October 1999 | 57 | 9.9% |
| August - October 2000 | 40 | 7.0% |
| May - October 2002 | 120 | 20.9% |
| March - October 2004 | 144 | 25.1% |
| Total | 392 | 68.4% |
Clearly, there is an anomaly with the timing of these registrations. What appears to be the case, is that an unusually high number of these allegedly disenfranchsed voters registered during a major register-to-vote drive. It's reasonable to assume, and an investigation is in order, whether the county accepted a large number of faulty registrations during those periods, that cannot now be validated. It's also possible that county workers screwed up in processing valid registration and lost the signatures. Either way, it looks like the voter registration process appears to be severely flawed. What other mistakes is our Ukrainian elections office making? Are they allowing ineligible voters to vote? Perish the thought!
And there's more!
As I was tabulating voters by month of registrations, I found a few more gems in the King Ukraine County voter database.
* There are two voters who are recorded as having registered in 1904. As we Jews like to say "ad me’ah v’esreem!" May you live to 120! Okay, I can tell from the other data that these voters actually registered in 2004. But you can only wonder what other mistakes the Ukrainian elections workers are making when they register new voters. Are they allowing ineligible voters to vote? Perish the thought!
* The next oldest voters are recorded as having registered in 1920. Alvin J. Huber of Shoreline, still flagged as an "Active" voter, last voted in the election of September 1995. According to the Social Security database, he voted with his feet in 1998 and moved to a county where there are no elections. But if Mr. Huber is still eligible to vote in King Ukraine County, I have to wonder who else is eligible to vote here, and whose relatives are taking advantage of that fact?
One other 1920 voter could either be another error, a case of fraud or a heartwarming human interest story. I'll assume it's the latter.
Chris W Tidwell of South Seattle voted as recently as April 2003 in the special election for the Highline School District Levy. He's not even an absentee voter. 104 years old and he's still willing to go down to the polling place and cast a vote for the children. God Bless Him and may he live to 120.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 21, 2004
12:19 PM | Email This
Why wouldn't they?
The powers that be in this state have been allowing unlicensed and/or uninsured drivers drive for years, as a matter of policy. Some statistics I have seen suggest that noncompliance is as high as 25%. If true, we would not have any congestion on our roads but for the unlicensed and uninsured drivers.
Driving, voting, whats the difference?
Apparently both are inalienable rights rather than priviliges, and as such, do not require compliance with the licensing or registration requirements of state law.
Posted by: Tim on December 21, 2004 02:25 PMJeffro
Posted by: Jeffro on December 21, 2004 02:30 PMNo, "Jimmy", it is not "conspiracy theory". I have repeatedly stated that I don't believe there is any kind of orchestrated fraud or corruption.
What I do suspect is that there is so much sloppiness and incompetence in the way the election departement is managed, that it enables individuals to take advantage of the situation and produce more votes than should legitimately be case.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 21, 2004 03:08 PMJeffro
Posted by: Jeffro on December 21, 2004 03:14 PMNo doubt an investigation is in order here. But I'd bet good old fashioned American incompetence is to blame, not an insidious intersection between voter registration drives and a corrupt Democratic establishment.
Too bad that that incompetence is going to undermine the legitimacy of whoever ends up winning this thing. With the problems this state faces, we all deserve better than that.
Posted by: Larry on December 21, 2004 03:19 PMShark -- how many of these 91 people who registered in October 2004 did so after Sunday, October 3, 2004 (30 days before the election)? You can register up to 15 days before the election -- or Monday, October 18, 2004, but only so long as you do it in person at the King County Elections Office and cast an absentee ballot in person at the same time.
So any of these voters who registered after October 3, 2004 would have done so in person downtown and cast an absentee ballot at the same time.
It would be really screwed up if King County managed to somehow lose someone's signature under those circumstances, and not count an absentee ballot that the voter cast at the same time they registered.
Or, on the other hand, it could be the result of outright fraud, because to make such an amazing mistake would be absolutely incredible. If someone actually cast an absentee ballot in person at the Elections Office, then their signature should be validated at the same time.
Posted by: Richard Pope on December 21, 2004 03:28 PMThe Seattle Times wrote the following concerning examining 1627 "unclear ballots".
Board member Dan Satterberg, chief of staff to King County Prosecuting Attorney Norm Maleng, explained before the board began going through the ballots that the law doesn't require voters to properly follow instructions for filling out their ballots. If their intent is clear, he said, it is the board's duty to count their vote.
Another member, County Councilman Dwight Pelz, said filling out a ballot isn't a "pop quiz" that voters flunk if they follow instructions imperfectly. "Voting is not really about following instructions, it's about participating in our democracy," he said. "You shouldn't have to pass a test to have your vote counted."
Given that the board is 2:1 Democratic and given that they already counted a Christine Rossi write-in as a "clear" Gregoire vote, one can easily predict they will find all the Gregoire votes they need, and then some, to crush Rossi.
The Dem's wouldn't have funded the recount unless they knew the taxpayers would foot the bill.
Posted by: Mike on December 21, 2004 04:28 PMNo. Go back and read what I wrote. It is not at all suspicious that a bunch of people register to vote right before an election. What is strange here is that the voters on this particular "List of 573" registered during certain periods vastly out of proportion to the other voters in the county.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 21, 2004 04:40 PM*SIGH*
Posted by: megs on December 21, 2004 07:15 PMOLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) The Democratic state chairman says recount results from King County give Democrat Christine Gregoire an eight-vote victory in Washington's governor's race.
Posted by: Julie on December 21, 2004 08:24 PMI thought we hadn't had a result yet. That's why we have recounts.
Posted by: Christine G on December 21, 2004 08:44 PMAnyway congrats Governor Fraud. Posted by: Dave on December 21, 2004 08:52 PM
This state never ceases to amaze me...
Posted by: Dan on December 21, 2004 09:04 PMIf Rossi loses, he needs to concede and let this go. Otherwise, everything they said about us will be proven true. Let them have the dirty win. It will cost them more than our win in March. Or May. Or next January.
Posted by: Janet S on December 21, 2004 09:13 PMWhat a joke. How many little votes did our lone R lose against the two demonic rats on the canvassing board? How could he ever have won? Why was he there?
Stefan? Any guesses where this all goes from here?
Posted by: Julie on December 21, 2004 09:14 PM"Too bad that that incompetence is going to undermine the legitimacy of whoever ends up winning this thing. With the problems this state faces, we all deserve better than that."
I think we could all agree with that. From whatever side you are on, an election this close with this messed up unprepared system for re-counts with loose rules open for interpretation we will be left with legitimacy issues.....that is almost funny in a strange sick way.
It's high time the Republicans stop using the fascist concept of "election rules" to disenfranchise voters, living or dead. In order to insure a strong democracy ruled by court appointed democrats, every vote must be counted - and then some. Except for the military votes, but they're all uneducated morons who vote Republican anyway.
Posted by: Liberal Larry on December 22, 2004 08:05 AMFolks, let's not get ahead of ourselves. We don't know what the results are, Berendt notwithstanding...we don't know what the Supremes will rule, we don't know if some previously counted ballots will be tossed.
I didn't agree with the Vance decision to drop the suit against the provisional ballots. Other than that, I think he's done a pretty good job. We have good lawyers and Dino has good sense. Let's wait to see what happens, and what Dino wants to do.
Posted by: South County on December 22, 2004 08:21 AMAnother thing I have heard no mention of anywhere. Behrend and his ilk came up with the $725,000.00 down payment for the estimated $1.3 million cost of the hand count. If the election swings even one vote in Gregoires favor the State and the taxpayers have to refund that money and bear the burdon! This is motive enough for everyone in K.C. recount to "impress" a vote here and there! Even if it is decided in Dino's favor in the courts, We still get the bill! AAAArrrgggh! Posted by: N.W. Native on December 22, 2004 11:04 AM