January 26, 2005
Voter database

The voter database seems to be a bit of a hit. Cool!

I just rolled out an enhancement: It's now possible to lookup voters by name!

--

Coming soon: I'll be adding data for Jefferson, Grays Harbor and Yakima counties.

If anybody wants to volunteer to obtain the voter rolls for some of the other big counties so I can add those too, that would be much appreciated. Pierce, Thurston and Kitsap are especially high priority. E-mail me to volunteer.

--

Other potential enhancements: include all registered voters, not only those who voted in November 2004; show permanent absentee status and date of registration; show partial mailing addresses for those whose mailing addresses are different from their residence;
--

One reader discovered by using the database that a complete stranger is registered at his house. The stranger's name does not even match the name of the couple who previously owned the house and lived there from 1990 to 2002.

--

I'm not making this up. There's a registered voter in Seattle whose last name is "Lovejuice".

--

Reader Deborah has been finding a lot of the voters who live in private mailboxes and storage lockers. It would be hard for me to believe that it's not illegal to list such an address on a voter registration form. Unfortunately, my understanding is that these are the sort of improper registrations that have to be challenged before an election and that they don't count as "illegal votes" for the purposes of a contest. I wish I were wrong. On the other hand, if it can be shown that election officials engaged in misconduct related to illegal registrations that might be a different matter.

As it turns out, long time observers of the King County elections office tell me that after the 1998 KING-5 News expose, the elections office eliminated private mailbox voters and implemented strict controls to prevent new registrations at such addresses. They also tell me that these controls were lifted after Dean Logan took over the department and it was never made clear why.

UPDATE: I'm going to ask readers to refrain from posting comments with examples from the voter database unless they have very strong independent evidence of an irregularity. If all you can come up with is two people with a very common name living in the same city, it's just not enough to bother with. Even two people with the same name at the same address is unremarkable. In most cases it's just a parent and child. It does no good to embarrass someone with speculation and insinuations unless you can present other facts.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 26, 2005 12:59 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Stefan,

Great work, Great Site. I was reading the comments associated with the new database. One comment in particular struck me. The comment gave someone's full name, described that person as a felon, and ascribed certain behaviors to that person. My thought was that such a comment could be harmless but it could also be designed to cause you grief. Can you imagine if that person then started attacking you and/or your web site for defamation to try to take down your immense credibility? I don't want to see anything evil to happen to such a great site. Thanks for all of your hard work.

Posted by: ML on January 26, 2005 04:28 AM
2. Thanks for posting the Voter Database information! The data you received is flawed because it captures current addresses, not addresses at the time of the election. In my example I moved after the election within the same county. The database shows that I voted at my new polling place, where in fact I voted at my previous polling place. The signatures and ballots won't add up if this is how they queried the data for the recount.

Posted by: Annette on January 26, 2005 05:10 AM
3. I think the last thing anyone expects is that the numbers will add up. Incompetence or corruption? How incompetent can any organization be?

Posted by: South County on January 26, 2005 05:35 AM
4. Alleged vote fraud in East St. Louis:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com

Posted by: Boolnie on January 26, 2005 06:20 AM
5. Great work Stefan - although I have a new homework assignment for you, assuming you haven't already done it....

Don't worry - it's easy!

Posted by: Ironman on January 26, 2005 06:20 AM
6. Great Work!! Getting paid tomorrow, need extra $$? I'd be happy to help.

Posted by: Raylene on January 26, 2005 06:44 AM
7. The new list by NAME is great. I'm not even from Washington, but I'm able to do some preliminary checking.

I don't recall if anyone else has posted THIS website. It's the King County property tax records by OWNER NAME:

http://www5.metrokc.gov/parcelviewer/Viewer/KingCounty/Viewer.asp?App=Parcels&SearchFor=Addstart

You can put in just the name of the street and it will list every address and owner. In this file you do not enter directionals (SW, NE, etc.) or suffixes (St, Ave, Way). Let's say you put in "316th". You will get a list of every address---in numerical order!---for all 316th's, whether NW or SE or whatever. You can then search for matches to the partial address in Stefan's file.

I searched in Stefan's file for "Jones, Ja". I found two voter registrations for Jack L. Jones: one on SW 316th St and one on SW 45th Av.

By cross checking in the property records, I found that Daren S. Jones (father?) is recorded as the property owner at the 316th St. address. The owner of the 45th St. address is a Robert Setzer. Roommate???? This could very well be two different Jack L. Jones...I'm just providing this as an illustration.

Stefan: Have you run the data to extract exact name matches? You probably have...I can't keep up with you!

Posted by: JeanneB on January 26, 2005 06:46 AM
8. Stefan,

Dropping the question about which county would help or putting a selection for all counties. This will help find duplicate voters.

Posted by: Doug on January 26, 2005 07:02 AM
9. I'm not a WA resident but have been reading your site with interest. I just did a few searches in the database - thought this was interesting:

MAN MUSLIM 1132e 5TH AVE SW SEATTLE Abs
MAN SOUR 1132e 5TH AVE SW SEATTLE Abs

So Muslim Man, and Sour Man, both voted absentee from the same address. Interesting.

Posted by: CharlesC on January 26, 2005 07:05 AM
10. It would be interesting to compare the way King county handles voting and taxpaying in terms of detecting and prosecuting fraud. Hypothesis: the voting procedures are fraud-friendly and the tax procedures are fraud-hostile.

Posted by: Boonie on January 26, 2005 07:13 AM
11. Perhaps "fraud-friendly" will become a common way of describing King County's voting procedures.

Posted by: Boonie on January 26, 2005 07:16 AM
12. Stefan,

Thank you for the name search function. Very useful and a wonderful addition. Makes it a lot easier for we neophytes to track it down.

I have to believe that at some point, enough evidence can be derived that could result in throwing out the address challenge requirements. When the number of mail center voters, double voters, wrongly addressed voters becomes known, a tipping point develops that a judge would have to throw the mess out. No way to reasonably manage a large volume and place too big a burden on the public in resolving this horrible mess, in the absence of public officials doing their job.

Yes, that route takes a while, probably up through the Washington Supreme Court (unless someone takes it on a federal civil rights deal to the 9th). Ultimately, no effect on this election, but still worthy of fixing. And, expect the defenders of their kingdom to put up a great fight. (Process is their friend)

My question is, can we show enough volume of varied 'irregularities' that can show a judge or series of judges a level of intolerable conduct that unquestionably adversely affects our system, our rights, and our ability to have our vote counted?

Posted by: Patches Pal on January 26, 2005 07:32 AM
13. Seems to me if your going to stuff the ballot box, you’ll first have to stuff the PO box and locker boxes!...And yes, interesting that Logan dropped the enforcement of the rules prohibiting such practices prior to this election.

Posted by: R.W. Nut on January 26, 2005 07:37 AM
14. The name check is great. I found something interesting:
GOLDING MARSHA A 559o LAKEMONT BLVD SE BELLEVUE Abs
GOLDING KEVIN R 559o LAKEMONT BLVD SE BELLEVUE Abs
GOLDING MICHAEL 1281o SE 38TH ST BELLEVUE Prov

I had posted before that Michael Golding lives at the UPS store in Factoria. It appears that Marsha and Kevin Golding live in a Bellevue public park on Lakemont.

Posted by: Janet S on January 26, 2005 07:42 AM
15. Check out 3200 W Wheeler St. This is the address of The Mailbox in Magnolia, a company that holds private mailboxes. As you will see, all 17 people are registered on the odd side of the street. Unfortunately, there are only businesses on that side... thus these folks are all registered at a PMB.

When will Maleng get off his duff and threaten action against these people?

Posted by: bmvaughn on January 26, 2005 07:45 AM
16. To All...
If you consider the limited number of posts,as of now, showing ficticious names and addresses... I wonder just how many there really are? After all, now we have a tool to point out irregularities and fwd them to Rossi's camp...do we not? A collective effort by all of us could potentially produce thousands of examples of fraud.

Posted by: R.W. Nut on January 26, 2005 07:52 AM
17. Why aren't Dean Logan or Bill Huennekens recorded as voting? Do they live in other counties? Or did they make their voting record sealed based on privacy restrictions? Or do they not vote because it's a conflict of interest?

Posted by: bmvaughn on January 26, 2005 07:53 AM
18. Quick question - how did Dean Logan get his job? Was he hired by Ron Simms? I'm wondering who we can hold accountable for his behavior.

Posted by: colin on January 26, 2005 08:10 AM
19. I live in Kistap.... Let me know what I can do to help

Posted by: Sunshinepita on January 26, 2005 08:19 AM
20. Just a small comment - there really is an old home there at the Bellevue Park on Lakemont Blvd... that park is just now being developed. Part of it is now being worked on. I imagine that address will change next time.

Posted by: FD on January 26, 2005 08:37 AM
21. I apologize to the people living in the old house in the park, if true.

Posted by: Janet S on January 26, 2005 08:41 AM
22. BMVaughn,
I know both Dean and Bill live in other counties. I can't remember which, pretty sure it is Pierce? But they don't live in King. I think it should be mandatory that the auditors of the County should be residences of the county!

Posted by: Joe on January 26, 2005 08:43 AM
23. By the way has there been any word of writing an initiative to change the county charter to make King County auditor an elected official with a 2 or 4 year term?

Posted by: Joe on January 26, 2005 08:48 AM
24.
Janet - and I should apologize for saying "old home", which some might take as perjorative... in Lakemont, "old" is anything not built in the 90s or 00s :).

The Goldings are in the phone book at that address, by the way.

Posted by: FD on January 26, 2005 08:50 AM
25. Here's something interesting:

ROGERS NANCY B 180e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Abs
ROGERS STEVEN B 180e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Abs
GREEN MARGARET M 181e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Poll
GREEN SUZANNE 181e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Poll
RASMUSSEN JOHN R 181e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Poll
RASMUSSEN KATHLEEN M 181e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Poll
ROSSELL DELOREZ 182e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Abs
ROSSELL DENTON 182e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Abs

This is my block; Suzanne Green is my next door neighbor. She lives alone. Margaret Green is her daughter who does not live at 180e Magnolia Way W; she lives in Bellevue.

Here is a search on "Margaret Green":

GREEN MARGARET L 43o 140TH AVE NE BELLEVUE Abs
GREEN MARGARETTE J 180e SW 318TH PL FEDERAL WAY Prov
GREEN MARGARET A 810o DELRIDGE WAY SW SEATTLE Poll
GREEN MARGARET W 876e GREENWOOD AVE N SEATTLE Abs
GREEN MARGARET M 181e MAGNOLIA WAY W SEATTLE Poll

I don't know if my neighbor's daughter's address in bellevue is 140th ave NE; but if it is, she voted twice with a different middle initial, at the polls and absentee.

Stefan, can you match the two names to their dates of birth? Or another stategy: my neighbor's daughter's old, unlicensed car is parked out on some common property near my house. Is there any way to match the license number to the owner's address?

Posted by: srogers on January 26, 2005 09:26 AM
26. Absentee Voters from 11300 block of 5TH AVE SW Seattle:

Anona M Hasme 1130x 5th Ave SW Seattle
Mohamad I Man 1132e 5th Ave SW Seattle
Muslim Man 1132e 5th Ave SW Seattle
Sour Man 1132e 5th Ave SW Seattle

It just SOUR's me to know that I could have voted absentee ANONYMOUSLY.

Posted by: Nathan on January 26, 2005 09:37 AM
27. // beg quote
One reader discovered by using the database that a complete stranger is registered
at his house. The stranger's name does not even match the name of the
couple who previously owned the house and lived there from 1990 to 2002.

...

Reader Deborah has been finding a lot of the voters who live in private
mailboxes and storage lockers.
// end quote

Washington State has a program: Address Confidentiality Program (ACP).
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/acp/
It allows people (mostly women) to...

"assists crime victims (specifically victims of domestic violence,
sexual assault and stalking) who have relocated to avoid further
abuse. It helps participants keep their home, work and/or school
address secret by providing a substitute mailing address. It
also allows clients to register to vote or apply for a marriage
license without revealing their actual address."

Posted by: JDM on January 26, 2005 09:43 AM
28. What am I doing wronng? My wife and I both voted, but I can't find our name in the data base, As a matter of fact I can't find anyone on our street that voted.
Sound Politics Voter Database
Snohomish County
Last Name First / Middle Name Number Street City Vote Type

There were no matching voters for: 1000 Kulshan in Snohomish County. If you believe this is an error, be sure to carefully check the spelling of the street name, with correct street type, directional prefix and suffix (if needed).

Posted by: Johnnie Dontos on January 26, 2005 09:45 AM
29. What is the policy on out of state University of Washington Students voting? Are they considered residents for the time they are in school? I noticed a number of names that gave their address as UW Lander Hall or UW Haggett Hall in Seattle. As an example, there were 66 voters who listed Lander Hall as an address. 34 voted absentee and 4 provisionally. Could these students be from out of state? Why would they show up as absentee ballots in King county? If they were State residents, wouldn't their absentee ballot show up in their home county? If they were out of state students wouldn't their absentee ballot show up in their home state? Why the high percentage of absentee ballots? We used to have polling places in the dorms where I lived in College. Could they also have voted in their home counties and in King county?

Posted by: Ed McDermed on January 26, 2005 09:53 AM
30. I know of two people in snohomish that voted at the polling place. Their names are not on this list. Could there be any mistakes in this list?

Posted by: Martha-w on January 26, 2005 09:54 AM
31. They may also be addresses to avoid a certain Seattle auto tax...

Posted by: CandrewB on January 26, 2005 09:54 AM
32. Ah, here we go with a representative of the victim cult. JD McCay is part of the domestic violence industry, which profits from drumming up hysteria with exagerations and often outright lies about the frequency of DV. Chief among the lies is that 95% of DV victims are women.

You see, his company depends on Seattle and King County building more and more public house. One great, sure fire way to get the government to build more free housing is to say it is for domestic violence "victims." So, he will tell you that there are huge numbers of women out there hiding from some violent man.

Now, there are a few that are legitimately doing that, but if the numbers are in the thousands, as he would like you to believe, clearly something has run amock in the system.

It's interesting that he is posting here, because there are few people that depend more on big government that he does.

If you would like to learn more about his particular brand of profitable hysteria, check out:

www.glennsacks.com

Posted by: DeamManVoting on January 26, 2005 09:54 AM
33. Would like someone get the data base for Thurston County to enter on this web site as they did for King County. I feel certain that numerous errors would be found. Thurston Count is the democrat's mecca, home to Evergreen State College and the state workers.

Posted by: Diane on January 26, 2005 10:00 AM
34. Stefan,
I think your doing a wonderful job here. Please continue exposing the underhanded 'voting process' the KC and Dean Logan dont want us to know. All Bloggers are doing a great job.
But this information with voters names and address could be a dangerous one. Some smuck could look up a x-girlfriend or wife and do some damage. Please be careful with such a tool. The address could be used in so many harmful ways. I just looked up ten top famous people and their address with total ease.

Posted by: Mehutch on January 26, 2005 10:02 AM
35. Johnnie - it took me several tries. Try using all lower case and different abbreviations for "street" or "avenue," etc ... you'll get it eventually.

Posted by: DeadManVoting on January 26, 2005 10:03 AM
36. Mehutch,

Relax. This is public information, all of which is available from other easily accessible sources and with full addresses. There are also provisions for people with grounded fear of stalkers to have their names removed from the public list.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on January 26, 2005 10:05 AM
37. Mehutch -

I think you are exagerating the dangers. If someone wants to find pretty much anyone, there are better ways to do it than putz around this database. At any rate, freedom always involves taking some risks, and the larger cause here is more important than worrying about the safety of celebrities.

One other point: it's just as likely that a WOMAN would be in pursuit of an ex-boyfriend. Just ask Dean How-Lai, who was tracked down and shot by his estranged wife last year. (I don't think she used this database).

Posted by: DeadManVoting on January 26, 2005 10:08 AM
38. I am just new to the game here. I come from overseas and we never had such a thing. Thank you for all that you do. Freedom is great

Posted by: Mehutch on January 26, 2005 10:09 AM
39. While I am very much in favor of honest elections, I am also something of a personal privacy advocate. Is it just me, or is what is going on here more than just a bit frightening?

I've been honest and given my full name on these boards, as I believe that a person should be willing to stand up for what he believes.

One thing I have not given was my address, as some of the people here seem to be of, shall we say, a rather extreme bent. While I'm willing to stand up for my views, I am somewhat reluctant to have my family as a target for those that believe that anyone that disagrees with their position is evil.

Now we have neighbors checking on neighbors, asking if "any way to match the license number to the owner's address?"

What's the next step? Telephone threats? "The Goldings are in the phone book at that address, by the way." Do I need to be on the lookout for vandals? (I might mention, I have very good neighbors, we do look out for each other, and that I, for one, do not hold with the views of the extreme wing of my party that personal firearms should be banned.)

While all of this is already public information, privacy advocates relied on the fact that it was somewhat cumbersome to retrieve data on individuals. For example, the Pierce County Auditor's site does not allow individuals to search by owner's name, to preserve the privacy of the property owner.

Now, apparently, it has become easy for a disgruntled client, or even someone that believes that what I say has "no value" can look me up and confront me in my driveway, or even confront my wife and son.

I'm wondering how many confrontations we've already had because of this?

Posted by: John Barelli on January 26, 2005 10:17 AM
40. I agree John. I find it very disturbing and frightening that folks are posting complete names and addresses. They are risking their own safety if they post their own info and they have no business violating the privacy of other folks.

Posted by: Cheryl on January 26, 2005 10:24 AM
41. Stefen Sharkansky,

“It would be hard for me to believe that it's not illegal to list such an address on a voter registration form. Unfortunately, my understanding is that these are the sort of improper registrations that have to be challenged before an election and that they don't count as ‘illegal votes’ for the purposes of a contest.”

The phrase “illegal votes” refer to votes cast by persons not privileged to vote and votes not entitled to be counted because not cast in the manner provided by law. Faulkes v Hays, 85 Wn.2d 629. Your understanding is probably correct if such persons are entitled to vote in the precincts where they registered. However, a vote cast in the wrong precinct is a vote “not cast in the manner provided by law”. (I suspect that many of the people living in private mail boxes and storage lockers are voting in the wrong precinct.)

The mechanism for challenging a person’s registration in advance of an election is provided by statute. However, failure to use the mechanism does not preclude establishing the vote as illegal for purposes of an election contest. See Gold Bar Citizens v. Whalen, 99 Wn.2d 724. In Gold Bar, an election was challenged on the basis of allegedly illegal votes cast by persons who were not residents of the city. A statute (subsequently repealed) required that registration of a voter be challenged 60 days prior to an election. The trial court excluded evidence of non-resident voting based on the construction that the specific requirement of this statute overrode the general provisions of election contest statutes. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment holding that:

“[N]o conflict exists between the two statutes: they are simply different, alternative remedies.
For instance, RCW 29.59.010 provides the mechanism to challenge a voter's right to cast a vote, while RCW 29.65.010 supplies the remedy when the improperly registered voter actually casts a vote. Viewed in this manner, the statutes simply complement each other. This result coincides with the general rule that election statutes are considered remedial and should be liberally construed.”

It’s worth reading the Gold Bar opinion in its entirety. There is much that applies today. The opinion is posted at http://www.mrsc.org/mc/courts/supreme/099wn2d/099wn2d0724.htm

Posted by: Bob Edelman on January 26, 2005 10:38 AM
42. Would someone please take a look at the last name Cook. It looks to me like there were duplicate voters.

Posted by: MH on January 26, 2005 10:40 AM
43. I did a brief review of the voters with last names throught "H" listing University of Washington Haggett hall as their address in the King County data base. 17 of the 51 names checked are not listed as students in the U of W student or faculty database at link http://www.washington.edu/home/peopledir/
Of those 17 not showing up in the U of W database, 11 voted absentee including Joshua E. Day and Joshua C. Gay from Haggett Hall.

Posted by: William M on January 26, 2005 10:41 AM
44. Dear John Barelli,
I admire your boldness and standing up for your beliefs. I choose Mehutch because Mestarsky sounded funny? I am old, 83 years, and I live whole life with armed thugs wandering through my village. Now I live in USA and will die free. So voting is important to me, I too will fight for the truth, but old fears are hard to forget.

Posted by: Mehutch on January 26, 2005 10:46 AM
45. Well, I find it even more disturbing and frightening that nonentities claiming to be people are fiddling their contrived registrations into PO boxes and parks, and then casting votes that negate mine.

Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on January 26, 2005 10:49 AM
46. Citizens take action when they perceive that the job is not being done by those appointed to do so. Now that Dean Logan and Sam Reed have stated that their jobs are not to verify any information provided to them on a registration card, it leaves it up to the people to do so.

Is this how it should be? Probably not. But the records are public, and democracy can be a messy thing. I just wonder what will results from all this research. There are elections taking place in February, and it is clear that some number of names should be removed from the books before that.

Posted by: Janet S on January 26, 2005 11:05 AM
47. "Insufficiently Sensitive" wrote:

Well, I find it even more disturbing and frightening that nonentities claiming to be people are fiddling their contrived registrations into PO boxes and parks, and then casting votes that negate mine.

Nor do I, however I am not willing to throw out my privacy if there are other ways of solving the problem.

I note that you have solved that problem on these boards by hiding behind a false name. (If your parents, Mr. and Mrs. Sensitive, actually named you "Insufficiently," please accept my apology.) Nobody will be coming around your house to talk to your children about their father's politics. Perhaps I should have taken the precaution of being what Mr. Sharkansky calls an "anonymous troll," however, that just isn't my way.

Has anyone here given thought to the idea that many of those PMB addresses might just be because the person didn't want to have someone get their home address off the voter rolls?

Posted by: John Barelli on January 26, 2005 11:15 AM
48. Dean Logan should be a registered voter in King County, shouldn't he?
He should have voted, yes?
He should be on the list, then, no?

Am I missing something?

Posted by: Dishman on January 26, 2005 11:17 AM
49. Dishman asked:

Dean Logan should be a registered voter in King County, shouldn't he?
He should have voted, yes?
He should be on the list, then, no?

Am I missing something?

Yes. The point about privacy. He apparently has (for good reason, considering that you tried to look him up) concerns that someone would use the voting records to invade his privacy.

It is therefore reasonable to presume that his is one of those addresses that is removed from the public database for that reason.

Oh, and Mr. Sensitive. I would have sent my comments to you off-line, but it seems that the domain "goliotok.net" is not currently in use, hence my inability to e-mail you.

Posted by: John Barelli on January 26, 2005 11:38 AM
50. I just was working on the database and on a whim decided to look and see if my wonderful, but departed in 1992 grandfather might have voted. His exact name does appear in the database as an absentee ballot, but from a different address than where he lived (when he was living, that is) How do I further explore to determine who this person with the same name is? His name is not common, and in doing research years ago for our family tree, the people whos names were the same were actual relatives. Any suggestions? I would rather not call the elections department, as I don't believe for a minute they have any interest in revealing the truth but, rather, covering it up. Any suggestions, I am happily accepting. Thanks for this site, you are all awesome.

Posted by: Laura on January 26, 2005 11:41 AM
51. John, the question is, how would you have the process be audited? Logan has said it's not his responsibility.

You've said it's reasonable for him to conceal his information because he wants to. Is that a carte-blanche for him to conceal whatever he desires?

To my mind, government figures must be exposed to at least as much scrutiny as private citizens.

Posted by: Dishman on January 26, 2005 11:53 AM
52. Mehutch - I respect your lingering concerns based on your past experience and I admire your dedication to freedom in the USA. I sarcastically call myself "DeadManVoting," but understand that many people throughout the world need to worry about being Dead-Man-After-Voting in reality.

Mr. Barelli - I also respect your concerns, but I do not believe that The Shark's database search tool rises to the threshhold of deliberately putting people at risk. He has taken great care to make it cumbersome for anyone not doing a very specific search of someone to use it to track people down. If you know a name, but not the address, of someone, you would need to either be a very good hacker or willing to dedicated many, many long weeks to find the address of that person using this database search tool.

Regarding you fear of extremists on this site: You will find extremists in any group interested in politics. I have not seen anything in the posts on Sound Politics to make me believe that there are people here out to harm anyone.

Unfortunately, Seattle is so prone to group think that any view outside the group is considered extremist and "combative" or "divisive." Isn't it ironic that "divisive" is one of the favorite terms used by Seattle politicians (and media for that matter) to criticize another politician?

One of the most important things that the people of King County can learn is that "diversity" also means different ideas and views.

Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on January 26, 2005 12:00 PM
53. I have personally uncovered 2 military ballots that did not get counted. My friend confirmed this through the KC Elections committee and thru the new voter fraud database. We're seeing what he can do about it. He's on a plane as I write re-deploying to "hell" in a "danger zone".

I'll update as I have info.

Posted by: Tinwhistler on January 26, 2005 12:02 PM
54. John Barelli,
I seems we have come to another disagreement.

Please tell me how publishing this database is any different from a neighborhood watch program; if my house is broken into, and the neighborhood adults get together and post a watch, and catch a neighbor's 18 yr old kid preparing to break into another neighbor's house, are you concerned with a violation of the kid's "privacy?" What I posted on this comment page anyone in america with an internet connection could have looked up for themselves - it is not private information.

Having looked at the public information on the database, I found evidence that my neighbor's daughter may have committed a crime. Whether or not she did can be proven or disproven with a little more legwork, and I was hoping that among the readers here, someone would either know the DOBs of the voters in the database (which The Times, for one, has received from King County), or would know if it is possible to access DMV records to get an address for a publicly displayed license plate on an abandoned car that we neighbors have repeatedly asked to have moved off the public property adjacent to our homes.

What the heck to you even mean by "throwing out your privacy" or "privacy rights?" If you do not participate in society, and hide behind a wall, you will have absolute privacy. But in coming out and interacting in society, you leave a trail of information that is readily accessible to anyone. Certain information is protected by law, but that information doesn't include a match between your name and your address, or your name and your real property. Anyone who reads the "N" number off the side of my airplane can go to avweb.com and look up the owner. Some people set up corporations to own their property so that their name will be harder to find, which of course costs some money - extra privacy is a luxury that can be purchased. That is an uncomfortable truth that has existed for hundreds of years, even in societies where the purchase of privacy was illegal and required a bribe to be paid to a government official.

It just seems to me that you have a very unrealistic expectation of "privacy."

Posted by: srogers on January 26, 2005 12:06 PM
55. Dishman asked:

John, the question is, how would you have the process be audited? Logan has said it's not his responsibility.

And I disagree with him. You'll find my personal opinion of the professionalism of Mr. Logan in any number of my other posts, but the short answer is that King County needs to replace him.

You've said it's reasonable for him to conceal his information because he wants to.

Not what I said. My exact words were "He apparently has (for good reason, considering that you tried to look him up) concerns that someone would use the voting records to invade his privacy

Is that a carte-blanche for him to conceal whatever he desires?

No. As I understand it, there is a provision in the law that allows for people that have a reasonable concern that the voting records would be used to invade their privacy to have those addresses removed.

To my mind, government figures must be exposed to at least as much scrutiny as private citizens.

No argument, but I also understand the concern of government figures that someone might use public data in order to find their home address. That's why this whole "look up by name" feature disturbs me.

There are people on this board that would like to look up Mr. Logan and give him a piece of their mind. They can this through mail or e-mail to his office, and I encourage them to do so.

They should not be able to do so by catching his wife on the way to pick up their morning newspaper.

Posted by: John Barelli on January 26, 2005 12:07 PM
56. Stefan, I have the Thurston County voter list on CD. Would you like me to mail it to you? (I'm not at my computer at the moment, but I can access this website from my Palm.)

Posted by: TADD on January 26, 2005 12:13 PM
57.

if my house is broken into, and the neighborhood adults get together and post a watch, and catch a neighbor's 18 yr old kid preparing to break into another neighbor's house, are you concerned with a violation of the kid's "privacy?"

Not in the least.

Having looked at the public information on the database, I found evidence that my neighbor's daughter may have committed a crime. Whether or not she did can be proven or disproven with a little more legwork

No, you found evidence that in a county with well over a million people, two people have the same name. No big surprise there.

Also, try to remember that in this country we are "innocent until proven guilty."

Why did you check her name? Perhaps because you know she disagrees with you politically? Are we getting into checking into our political enemies?

extra privacy is a luxury that can be purchased.

I'll just leave that statement as it is.

Posted by: John Barelli on January 26, 2005 12:25 PM
58. John,

As it turns out, I simply typed in my steet address when the database turned up on this blog. Just out of curiosity, But I found two interesting things where I expected to find nothing unusual.

The other interesting thing was in the listing of the two owners of the house three doors down. They voted absentee, same last name. There is also a completely different name (it reads like a person of a different ethnicity) listed for the same address who voted at the polls. I checked the owner of record of the property at the county PUBLIC database, and found that the unrelated name was the previous owner of my neighbors house. His registration there is bogus, but I checked his unusual name and found no entry in King County showing he voted anywhere else. Now think, John - he had to go to a polling place at a location other than where he was supposed to go and show identification with an old address in order to vote there. Probably its just bad records management on the part of KC and the guy was used to voting in one place, but he also could have voted in some other county under his correct address and registration.

As for my neighbor's daughter, the evidence is what it is. It is possible that there are two Margaret Greens in Bellevue (duh, I am not stupid), one who voted there and another who voted in Magnolia where she may have grown up; I have not met her and I don't know anything about her other than she is somewhat inconsiderate and she doesn't live where her registration says she does. Or, she may have voted twice. The evidence supports either conclusion and as I said before, a little more evidence will decide the matter.

Of course she is innocent until proven guilty - I never said she was guilty. Why do you suspect me of a political agenda, other than exposing this sham election for what it was - you don't know me at all, but you think you do.

BTW, I found your website either by checking your email address (which appears if you hold your mouse over your name or by googling you, I can't remember). Nice picture; you look like a very nice guy, good looking family. Amazing how much info is out there in the public domain. (And please don't take that as some kind of underhanded threat or sicko stalking thing - I am not the confrontational type and have absolutely nothing but respect for you, even though we disagree on many issues).

Posted by: srogers on January 26, 2005 12:56 PM
59. As is the way of social organizations, problems are often neglected until they are part of a crisis (if there is no crisis, maybe it wasn't a problem after all).

John, I do understand and appreciate your privacy concerns. I apologize for misunderstanding your words, and hope that what follows does not continue the error.

Our confidence in the process has been undermined, in part because the process itself has been neglected and/or abuse. An attempt is being made to chart a way through this to a restored confidence. This attempt appears to me to have at least a chance of success.

As I understand it, you argue that the price is too high. I am not fond of the price myself. I do believe, however, that it is lower than the price of failure. You are free to argue otherwise, though I think that arguement fails.

If you disagree about the price of failure (though I don't think you do), then it is on you to demonstrate that.

Alternatively, you can push an alternative solution. My assessment of the situation is that in order to foreclose this one, you would have to move faster than this approach does. In your favor, you can use your concerns this approach as an example of why haste is needed in whatever approach you recommend.

Posted by: Dishman on January 26, 2005 12:56 PM
60. Bob Edelman,
Thank you for your legal info on the mailbox issue. In your opinion, would it make sense for the Rossi legal team to assemble a list of votes cast by people registered at mailboxes, and add that to their case?

Or would they need something stronger, such as a list of people registered at both a mailbox AND at a regular address (probably outside King County)? This would be more difficult to achieve because anyone doing this is likely to use different versions of their name, or a different name altogether.

Posted by: Shannon K on January 26, 2005 01:09 PM
61. John Barelli asks "Has anyone here given thought to the idea that many of those PMB addresses might just be because the person didn't want to have someone get their home address off the voter rolls?"

And one may ask, has John Barelli given thought that a legal voter's registration requires disclosing a place of residence?

By JB's standards, where privacy is so sacred that it should trump any requirements of the registration process, it would be a cinch to have about 300,000 Republicans with fake IDs all register in Precinct 1823, and tilt the next election to a faretheewell.

By US standards, ballots are secret, but voter registrations must be up front and verifiable prior to casting those ballots. Fraud sucks, and vote fraud sucks worst.

Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on January 26, 2005 01:25 PM
62. John,et al,

Regarding my neighbor's daughter, the information available on King County's real property website seems to indicate pretty strongly that this is, indeed, a case of two people with the same name, each of whom voted just once.

One down, one to go.

Posted by: srogers on January 26, 2005 01:25 PM
63. Dean Logan voted in Kitsap county absentee. Bill H voted in Thurston. I am very interested to see how many illegal voters we as a group of concerned citizens can track down. I am happy to play a role here if I can be of use.

Posted by: Brian E on January 26, 2005 01:34 PM
64. Brian-
Thanks for your help. For those of you out there checking, Brian made quick work of alleviating my fears about my grandfather voting from the grave. I feel that all of this checking is critical, we all know different people after all! Since I don't know a lot about this it is very nice to know there are people like Brian willing to help. Thanks again Brian.

Posted by: Laura on January 26, 2005 02:49 PM
65. When I purchase merchandise from victoriasecret.com, and I put my address in slightly wrong - I used Ave instead of Dr- THEIR link to the USPS database kicks back a message that indicates that my address is not a valid USPS mailing address and to please review/edit it...

Soooooo why isn't the voter registration database not catching onto bogus addresses?

And why aren't the humans involved able to check on these things?

Posted by: manderson on January 26, 2005 03:04 PM
66. Let's think about my last posting here - buying a bra is more accurate than our voting system.
I am really sure our forefathers did not quite have that in mind when they came up with the whole voting for government officials concept.

But hey, maybe I'm just really picky or something.

Posted by: manderson on January 26, 2005 03:08 PM
67. mmm - I never expected politics to be . . . sexy! Thanks, manderson, for putting the "election" into its proper perspective.

Posted by: srogers on January 26, 2005 03:14 PM
68. DeamManVoting said:
// beg quote
Ah, here we go with a representative of the victim cult. JD McCay is part
of the domestic violence industry, which profits from drumming up hysteria
with exagerations and often outright lies about the frequency of DV.
Chief among the lies is that 95% of DV victims are women.
// end quote

Nice work DeamMan. :(

My last name is Mc*K*ay. I'm IT/Security/Encryption professional,
and have run my own company for 10 years. Other than layovers,
I haven't been in Seattle since '94. We have nothing to do
w/"domestic violence industry".

Wa's ACP program exists, and is detailed on Sec of State's URL.
The number of people in that program is also listed, and far
exceeds references to poster here that I replied to. How you
got from my comment to this rant on "hysteria" seems to me
rather hysterical in itself.

However, for last 8 yrs, We donate (eg free) +- 200 hrs annualy
mostly developing/fixing software for non-profits, and over years
have done a few shelters and rehab houses. Personally, I glad
such things exist, and have seen some pretty badly beaten women
more than a couple times.

Better luck w/your future sleuthing.


Posted by: JDM on January 26, 2005 03:19 PM
69. I ran a search in the data base by my block (11900 block of NE 148th St. in King County) and I quickly recognized me and my wife as well as our neighbors by name. However I also noted that right above my name (Erik Deutsch) was another, Mr. Phillip D Cain, who voted by absentee. Mr. Cain used to live at my address but hasn't lived there in over 2 years (I know, because I've lived there for over 2 years and I still get his mail at my address!) I even have receipts for appliances that the previous owner kept in Mr. Cain's name.

So, here's a guy that voted absentee using a false address (well it was his old address), is that illegal?

Thanks,

Erik.

Posted by: Erik on January 26, 2005 03:32 PM
70. Anyone interested should take a look at the 1500 block of 4th ave in Seattle. There are 25 "voters" registered on the even side of the block there, with 19 of them voting absentee. As I see it out of my office window, that address is a park across from Westlake Center (you know, the one where all of the paid DNC kids were trying to drum up support to 'beat George Bush').

The park is backed by some commercial buildings, but no residences as far as I know...

Looks like an excellent place to conduct detailed reviews to see how many "voters" are actually "residing" there!

Posted by: Vince on January 26, 2005 03:35 PM
71. John Barelli writes: "I've been honest and given my full name on these boards, as I believe that a person should be willing to stand up for what he believes. "

John,
You bring up something I've been meaning to address!
Though it is noble of you (and anyone) to use your true name - and perhaps email addy, as a measurement of your committment to this cause while posting here, it is not wise. Unfortunately, todays' times dictate the use of caution while posting anywhere on the internet!
Sound Politics has grown a huge audience. I get emails from people from around the country!

Please try and use good judgement when choosing a name and email address while posting here. I'd advise anyone against using their full true name or an email address that contains your true name.

Posting your full true name can solicit trouble from those who enjoy bothering people on the internet - regardless of Stefan's database information!

Posted by: Deborah on January 26, 2005 04:30 PM
72. I'd like to clear up a couple of things with the Rental mailbox voters I listed in the other thread.

First of all - my lists contain only Mail Box rental companies who's address block contain no residential housing. These are mail box companies located in strip malls or other business only zoned areas that I have knowledge of. Just picking a Mail Box company address out of the phone book and putting in the 100 block information is not going to guarantee there are no homes on that particular block.
I happen to know that there are no homes in the blocks I listed of Mail Box rentals. So I can be confident the names I've posted - used PMB's for their voter registration purposes...

Another thing - It is my understanding that all voters with privacy issues (such as battered women, stalking victims, etc.) have had their names withheld from the public list. So those using the rental mail boxes as their voter registration addresses are NOT among those with privacy issues.

Posted by: Deborah on January 26, 2005 04:46 PM
73. Deborah, bless you for all your mailbox work!

Posted by: Shannon K on January 26, 2005 05:30 PM
74. This is interesting---I looked up my brother (a Rossi voter) and he is not credited with voting---you can bet he will be going to the Snohomish County Auditors' office first thing tomorrow!

Posted by: Jeffrey Thorp on January 26, 2005 05:32 PM
75. Shannon K,

"would they need something stronger?"

They would have to show that voters who illegally used fictitious addresses could have affected the election of governor. That would include people who vote more than once by registering more than once and people ineligible to vote such as minors, felons without restored rights, non-residents, and non-citizens. It would take extensive (an expensive) investigation to prove. I hope this mess can be cleaned up.

Posted by: Bob Edelman on January 26, 2005 05:47 PM
76. Let's think about my last posting here - buying a bra is more accurate than our voting system.

Politics is one thing, but priorities are priorities.

Posted by: South County on January 26, 2005 05:50 PM
77. So do I.

I just heard on the news that Rossi's team has announced finding over 700 illegal votes, including the provisionals that were put in without checking first.

Posted by: Shannon K on January 26, 2005 05:55 PM
78. Considering many of those who used mailbox addresses for voter registration, also voted provisionally, I wonder if this adds to their questionable status? I'm just wondering if these can be added to the total irregular votes submitted in the contest...

Then again....it's really those mailbox voters who voted at the 'polls' that have me scratching my head....

Posted by: Deborah on January 26, 2005 06:46 PM
79. In Stefan's 12/30/04 posting entitled, "Residence, Schmesidence" (http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/003330.html), The Shark said, "Intriguingly, one of the people in King County who has registered and voted at an illegal address is a very prominent citizen for whom a felony conviction (or even an investigation) for fraudulent voter registration could end their career. This is someone I think a lot of Democrats would feel bad about losing if they end up being sacrificed in this tsunami of illegitimate voting."

In a 1/9/05 Matt Rosenberg posting, a John Fund article was referenced. The Monday Jan. 10, The Wall Street Journal article said, "A noted local judge and her husband have been registered at the county building for years." Mr. Fund contacted her and got the “Mexican Mafia” line (posting found here: http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/003430.html).

I have been assuming that the "prominent citizen" Stefan referred to and the judge that Mr. Fund referred to were one and the same. I think I have identified the judge (see below), but its possible that Stefan and Mr. Fund may not be referring to the same person.

By the way, I am posting this information not to cause Judge Fletcher any grief (especially since my conclusion may not be accurate), but to illustrate another potential example of the poor job that the county elections officials may have done at making sure that a voter's mailing address and their residence are the same.

Now, here's the big question: is there some allowance for Federal judges that permits them to use the King County Elections Office address as their offical residence for some reason? If so, I've not seen that mentioned in any of the discussions thus far.

Here's what I found using the SoundPolitics (really cool) voter database:
FLETCHER BETTY B 50e 4TH AVE SEATTLE Abs
FLETCHER GEORGETTA 50e 4TH AVE SEATTLE Abs
FLETCHER ROBERT L 50e 4TH AVE SEATTLE Abs

Via Google: Judge Betty Binns Fletcher
U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; Nominated by Jimmy Carter on July 12, 1979, to a new seat created by 92 Stat. 1629; Confirmed by the Senate on September 26, 1979, and received commission on September 26, 1979. Assumed senior status on November 1, 1998. Born 1923 in Tacoma, WA Stanford University, B.A., 1943; University of Washington School of Law, LL.B., 1956

Betty B. Fletcher’s voter information is as follows:
Precinct: SEA 37-1823. Voter Registration Number: 0722243xxx
Her current address: 500 4TH AVE SEATTLE, WA 98104
(which is the King County elections office)
Her previous mailing address was: 1010 5TH AVE SEATTLE, WA 98104
(which is the U.S. Courthouse)

Robert L. Fletcher has the same address information under voter registration number: 0722243xxx, so I assume this is the husband referred to by John Fund, and one of the reasons I think this may be the person referenced in his article. (I haven’t found information on Georgetta Fletcher, which may not be relevant).

Anyway, does anyone know if this is all cool, or is this another example of a problem in King County?

Posted by: Regret on January 26, 2005 08:42 PM
80. In response to Vince:

"Anyone interested should take a look at the 1500 block of 4th ave in Seattle. . . . that address is a park across from Westlake Center . . . .
The park is backed by some commercial buildings, but no residences as far as I know..."


Not to worry, the voters you see live in the (very nice!) condos in the Seaboard Building. Upper floors of the Seaboard were converted from office to condos around 2000-01.

Posted by: nancy on January 26, 2005 09:00 PM
81.
I looked at 4800 california ave sw, seattle. how can i find out if these are apartment buildings or mailboxes? there are 11 prov votes total. cannot believe how many people voted prov there.

Posted by: margarita on January 26, 2005 09:56 PM
82. Insufficiently Sensitive wrote:

And one may ask, has John Barelli given thought that a legal voter's registration requires disclosing a place of residence?

Yes, but here is the question. In the records everyone is looking at, is it the mailing address or the residence address (or both) that goes into the computer database?

The voter registration form has a place for both.

http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/pdf/VoterForm_20040803.pdf

So, it seems that the voter can choose to have a different mailing address than residence address.

Now, if for privacy reasons, the voter obtained a PMB and has mail sent there, does the county provide the mailing address or the residence address in the database everyone is using? (No sarcasm here. I really don't know.)

Some of my privacy concerns have been addressed by Mr. Sharkansky. I had not originally seen the statement "Because of usage restrictions we do not show the complete street address". Of course, this does tend to negate some (but not all) of the findings of multiple people at particular addresses.

As to Deborah's concern, yes, I understand a certain risk. I have a family web page, and I'm webmaster for my church. The amount of SPAM and viruses that come in from those two addresses is amazing. Why someone would think that a church webmaster really wanted unsolicited graphic porn is beyond me. Of course, I'm a retired Navy Chief. They aren't showing me anything I haven't already seen, although some of them seem uncertain as to technique.

I probably should not have come down so hard on "Insufficiently Sensitive" (although I still think that a functional e-mail address should be provided.) Still, if a person is willing to publicly take a stand, I think it carries far more weight if he puts his name on it (with a polite nod to Mr. Sharkansky.)

Oh, one last little bit. From near the top of this thread. "Mansour" is a rather common Persian name. While "Muslim Man" looks a bit strange to me, it is not outside the realm of possiblity. Assuming it to be correct, his living near someone named "Mansour" seems rather likely.

Posted by: John Barelli on January 26, 2005 10:29 PM
83. Barelli -- the voter registration file contains both the residence address and the mailing address, which may be two different addresses.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with giving a PMB for a mailing address provided that you also give a legitimate residence address.

The addresses shown in this voter database are what was given by the voter as their residence address.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on January 26, 2005 10:35 PM
84. Re "margarita"'s question about checking uses by address, King Co, the City of Seattle, and most other local cities and counties maintain parcel by parcel GIS systems on line, with links to property information.

King Co: http://www.metrokc.gov/gis/mapportal/
Seattle: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/MapCenter/default.asp

Posted by: nancy on January 26, 2005 10:37 PM
85. Nancy, thank you. I will check it out. m

Posted by: margarita on January 26, 2005 11:27 PM
86. Forgive the elementary question, I was using the database and had a question which is bothering me. I am wondering why there would be two entries (in the database) with the same name both entries show voting at the polls both entries show the same address? Am I missing something or is this a double vote? Why are there two entries for this one person? I know the person very well and know it isn't a father/son situation etc. Why two entries?

Posted by: Mary on January 27, 2005 07:38 AM
87. I would like to express my sincere apology for this previous post.
Absentee Voters from 11300 block of 5TH AVE SW Seattle:
Anona M Hasme 1130x 5th Ave SW Seattle
Mohamad I Man 1132e 5th Ave SW Seattle
Muslim Man 1132e 5th Ave SW Seattle
Sour Man 1132e 5th Ave SW Seattle
It just SOUR's me to know that I could have voted absentee ANONYMOUSLY.
It is true that a public records check has verified that the following individuals are not fictitious names. Again please except my apology

Posted by: Nathan on January 27, 2005 07:44 AM
88. Great database, and a great idea that ought to have been implemented Statewide years ago. While this is incomplete and probably has comparatively minor flaws that could be easily fixed, it has potential.

For the record, Clark County isn't on the Sound, but Sound Politics is on my computer!

Stout Hearts!

Posted by: Bob on January 28, 2005 01:11 PM
89. I believe this answers the question about Fletcher:

http://www.effwa.org/main/article.php?article_id=1023

Posted by: Grover on July 28, 2005 10:51 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?