Here's my trip report from this morning's hearing to challenge the King County voter registration of Atlanta physician Daniel M. Sosin.
The punchline: there is no punchline yet. Dean Logan promised a written ruling within a few days. The following is a brief run down of the proceedings, a recapitulation of the evidence that I presented, and a discussion why voting eligibility by residence is an important non-partisan issue that is largely unrelated to the governor's race and that merits a serious discussion.
Dean Logan presided over the hearing as a kind of judge. He was accompanied by Janine Joly from the county prosecutor's office. Superintendent of Elections Bill Huennekens was there to present evidence on behalf of the elections office. There was a court reporter, myself and two spectators in the audience. Dr. Sosin did not appear in person, nor did he submit a written affidavit to defend his own claim that he is a legal resident of King County.
Dean Logan opened the proceedings with an explanation of the process. Bill Huennekens submitted into evidence the voter registration files for both the Challenger (me) and the Challenged Voter and proof that the Challenged Voter was given proper notice of the hearing.
I then presented my case, based on RCW 29A.04.151, which defines residence for the purposes of voter registration. In particular, I relied on the following portions:
Residence" for the purpose of registering and voting means a person's permanent address where he or she physically resides and maintains his or her abode. However, no person gains residence by reason of his or her presence or loses his or her residence by reason of his or her absence:In particular, I asserted that Dr. Sosin was never eligible to vote in King County. He was an active duty officer in the Public Health Service before he came to Seattle. The record shows he came to Seattle on a temporary assignment under orders of the Public Health Service for the purpose of obtaining a graduate degree. The facts suggest that his intent was that it be a temporary assignment and that he made plans for his expected return to Georgia even while he was in Washington; and that he had established a permanent abode in Georgia which he has maintained ever since.(1) While employed in the civil or military service of the state or of the United States;
...
(3) While a student at any institution of learning;
The facts which I presented:
1. A letter from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) verifying that he has been an active duty commissioned officer in the Public Health Service since July 1986 and that his assignments were in Frankfort, KY, Seattle, WA and Atlanta, GA
2. A letter from the CDC verifying that the dates of his Seattle assignment were from September 9, 1991 to August 21, 1992.
3. His self-submitted educational history attached to his Georgia medical license, indicating that he attended the University of Washington from Sept. 15, 1991 to August 30, 1992
4. His King County voter registration file which indicates he first registered to vote in King County on October 11, 1991.
5. A letter from the Georgia Composite State Board of Medical Examiners showing that he was first licensed to practice medicine in Georgia in 1989 and that he renewed his GA medical license on December 31, 1991, (while he was on assignment in Seattle); that he has renewed his Georgia medical license several times subsequently, and that he is currently licensed to practice medicine in Georgia.
6. A letter from the State of Washington Department of Health Health Professions Quality Assurance office indicating that they find no record that any health profession license has ever been issued to a Sosin in the State of Washington.
7. The property tax record for the address which he claims as his Washington residence, showing that he is not the owner of the property, nor was he the owner at the time he claimed to live there; I also stated under oath that I was unable to find any record that he ever owned property in the State of Washington.
8. Sosin's wife's voter registration record in DeKalb County, GA, indicating that she registered to vote there on September 24, 1992, only a few weeks after Dr. Sosin's Seattle assignment ended and the family returned to Georgia.
9. A property record from DeKalb County, GA showing that Dr. and Mrs. Sosin purchased a home there in January 1993, only a few months after the Seattle assignment ended and the family returned to Georgia.
10. The property tax record from the home that Dr. and Mrs. Sosin currently own in DeKalb County, Georgia.
After I presented and discussed my evidence, Dean Logan asked me a number of questions about the evidence and my arguments.
In light of all the above, it appears to me that Dr. Sosin and his family knew that they were coming from Georgia to Seattle on a temporary assignment for the Public Health Service so that he could earn an advanced degree (a Master's in Public Health) and that their intention was to return to Georgia, which was their permanent residence. The fact that he renewed his Georgia medical license only 3 months after he arrived here and never obtained a Washington medical license, stares out at me as the smoking gun that he and his family intended their stay in Seattle as a temporary educational sojourn and not an establishment of a permanent residence. I want to make clear that I have no information to suggest that Dr. Sosin knowingly broke any laws when he claimed a Washington residence and I am not accusing him of knowingly violating any laws. I am only arguing that the facts of his circumstances that I presented (and he chose not to defend his claim of voting residence) indicate that he never established a bona fide residence in Washington and was never legitimately eligible to vote here, nor is he eligible to vote here in the present.
The above argument looks like a common sense slam dunk to me. If Dr. Sosin is permitted to continue to vote in King County in light of the above facts, then I suspect that the practical burden of challenging a voting residence is so high as to be all but impossible. But reasonable people can debate this issue and the interpretation of the facts that I presented. Unreasonable people will undoubtedly use this as just an opportunity to launch silly attacks on my character. That would be unfortunate. I entered this challenge to uphold a universal and non-partisan principle that most reasonable people should agree on. Namely, that the franchise to vote in a community and participate in its public decisions should be limited to bona fide residents who have a permanent abode in that community and have to live with the consequences of their votes. Those who do not live in Seattle and do not own cars or depend on public transportation here should not be voting on the Monorail. Those who live and send their children to public schools elsewhere should not be voting for Seattle school board candidates or on Seattle School District property tax levies. I have no idea how Dr. Sosin votes. For all I know he votes exactly as I do. The one thing I do know is that every time he casts a ballot he cancels the vote of an actual Seattle resident.
Washington voters are particularly vulnerable to out-of-state residents asserting a sham voting residence in our state. Since we do not have a state income tax, it may be tempting for out-of-staters to claim a Washington residence in order to avoid taxation in the states where they properly live. I show that 10,000 people voted absentee in King County in November 2004 from out-of-state mailing addresses. Many of these are undoubtedly bona fide King County residents temporarily away from home -- military members, students, people on work assignments. But it's also fair to assume that many of them are merely using Washington state as a tax haven. I cannot say whether this was Dr. Sosin's motivation to claim a voting residence here and I am not accusing him of such. I only mention this as a general issue that we should all be mindful of, and that we should be vigilent to defend our voting rights from being unfairly diluted by out-of-state residents.
I look forward to Dean Logan's prompt ruling.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 18, 2005 01:45 PM | Email ThisCarla? The headless wonder? Et al?
Posted by: niceville on February 18, 2005 01:57 PMWhat questions did Logan or other panelists ask you?
Posted by: JeanneB on February 18, 2005 02:30 PMYou are truly amazing! Great job.... and please ignore whatever left rants appear. They are wrong. They are just trying to get on nerves and re live their childhood hippie days!
Posted by: sgmmac on February 18, 2005 02:48 PMI'm guessing that a soldier, and correspondingly a health service doctor, can basically chose what state they want as their residence from any that they have lived in. But I haven't researched it, so I could be wrong.
Posted by: chew2 on February 18, 2005 03:02 PMWonder if the good Dr. is registered to vote in GA or KY?
Posted by: David Bolotin on February 18, 2005 03:04 PMhttp://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/scra/bl705.htm
So the question becomes, what was the Doctor's residency status at the time he first came under orders of the Federal Government? That was the question I was asked when I was in the military and residency was being established for me for tax purposes.
Posted by: Jason on February 18, 2005 03:16 PMTimman
Posted by: TimMan on February 18, 2005 03:32 PMHmmmmmmmm!
Posted by: TimMan on February 18, 2005 03:41 PMRules for maintaining New York State residency takes up around four pages in their income tax booklet. (Something like physical presence for 180 plus days, rent/owned property for 9+ months, plus other things).
Posted by: Al on February 18, 2005 03:47 PMToo bad government agencies aren't better at sharing data.
Looks like you did indeed uncover intentional fraud, just not the kind initially sought. While not the purpose of this site, fraud is fraud.
You're not prosecuting him, you're just exposing his actions to light of day. If they're honest and upright, he's got no reason to be concerned.
Posted by: Wondering on February 18, 2005 03:51 PMWin or loose, you have established a time and cost of challenging an alledgedly invalid registration.
That is now a benchmark to assess the proposals for improving the process. If people do not take ten more seconds to properly establish registration, we may find it takes ten man-hours per registration to clean the list of registred voters. A solid case of "If you don't have time to do it right, when are you going to find time to do it over!"
It is often said, "Better 100 guilty go free than to falsely jail 1 that is innocent." 100 to 1 is an established ratio. Assuming it takes 10 man-hours to clear one illegal registration, then having a registration process take up to 6 minutes to verify documents ought to be acceptable.
Good work, Shark. There is nothing more comical than to follow absurd procedures to the letter.
Posted by: StephenR from Houston on February 18, 2005 03:56 PMThat said, when in the employment of the Federal Government, your state tax liability is determined by your state of residence. When I was in the Army, Oregon was my state of residence. Oregon has an income tax, but they also have a provision for members of the military that says if you spend 30 or fewer days per year in the state, you are not subject to income tax. So I never had to pay. My fellow soldiers from states like NY and MA weren't so fortunate. Anyway, my point being that just because your pay comes from the U.S. Treasury in Washington D.C. does not mean that you are subject to the tax laws of Washington D.C., it's based on your residence, or as we called it in the Army, your "Home of Record".
Posted by: Jason on February 18, 2005 04:03 PMBecause the orders that Dr. Sosin came to Washington on were more than one year, they were most likely classified as Permanent Change of Station (PCS) orders. This would allow his family to move with him and his household goods to be brought to Washington.
Temporary duty orders are usually only issued when travel would be less than 6 months, as the cost of per diem would outway the transportation costs.
Under the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act, Dr. Sosin would have been eligible to change his residence to Washington at the time and to maintain the residence when he returned to Georgia.
It is very common for military members to change their residence to a state where they reside during training to gain a tax advantage.
I am from Washington, went to college in Georgia, was in the military for 11 years and an overseas employee of the government for another 10 years. Although I didn't live in Washington for 25 years, I still maintained an official residence and voted there. In the early 80's, I was stationed in Texas and Florida for training for less than a year in each location. I could have changed my residence at that time to either of those states, but didn't need to since I was from a non-income tax state. Also, I have always considered myself a Washingtonian, no matter where I have lived.
It may not pass your common sense test, but it is legal. I don't think it places an unusual burden on challenging voting residences as it only applies to members of Uniformed Services. If Dr. Sosin had been a member of the USMC instead of the Public Health Service, I don't think there would have been a question of his eligibility.
Posted by: Tony on February 18, 2005 04:04 PMSo lets see - lets not follow the rule of law just because it is convienient? What a fallacy? -Lets go ahead and run that red light - thats OK - there is not a cop around - opps lets just go ahead rob that store - there is no johnny law around - opps - lets just go ahead and bomb that cathedral -
Where does it stop - your reasoning is a very slippery slope
If you live in a state with income tax you should pay the tax.
I could have change my residency to Alaska while in the Military but never did even though I lived their for six years. Alaska was paying the Oil Dividend during that time but it would have been dishonest for me to claim that because I did not consider myself a resident of that state becsue I would never be returning. I lived in Washington State in 1972 while stationed at Ft Lewis for two years but I did not claim Washington as my home state until I moved back here (Thank Goodness) in 1991. Until then I payed my taxes as they were due even though my paycheck was paid from Washington DC.
The dear Doctor does have a lot of explaining to do which I would love to hear!
Tim
Posted by: TimMan on February 18, 2005 04:38 PMI don't think anyone has challenged the applicability of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (as the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act is now called) to Dr. Sosin. As a commissioned member of the Public Health Service, it most certainly does apply to him. However that doesn't make him immune from the requirements of residency, it simply means he can't be denied residency purely due to absense from the state.
You'll also notice that in the section titled "Residence for tax purposes"
http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/scra/bl511.htm
The law says that by virtue of you being somewhere on orders does NOT give you the right to give up or aquire residency for the purposes of changing your tax status. Orders alone are not enough, you have to take overt steps to establish residency somewhere. So while you claim it may be common for military memebers to do, it is illegal.
I'm not saying that this is what Dr. Sosin did, I'm just offering a rebuttal to Tony.
Posted by: Jason on February 18, 2005 04:39 PMSection 514
(50 U.S.C. App. § 574)
(1) For the purposes of taxation in respect of any person, or of his personal property, income, or gross income, by any State, Territory, possession, or political subdivision of any of the foregoing, or by the District of Columbia, such person shall not be deemed to have lost a residence or domicile in any State, Territory, possession, or political subdivision of any of the foregoing, or in the District of Columbia, solely by reason of being absent therefrom in compliance with military or naval orders, or to have acquired a residence or domicile in, or to have become resident in or a resident of, any other State, Territory, possession, or political subdivision of any of the foregoing, or the District of Columbia, while and solely by reason of being, so absent...
Well something slipped.
Just what are you defending?
A. That any Tom, Dick, or Harrietta can register to vote in WA without ID, proof of residency, address of your permanent domicile?
B. That a private citizen must assemble evidence to challenge a registration as in A above, and convien a hearing of indeterminant length to present the evidence to a bunch of election officials whos job it should be to keep clean records
C. Both A. and B.
In my opinion, both A and B are absurd.
Posted by: StephenR from Houston on February 18, 2005 05:01 PMI'm sure that Dr. Sosin did all of the above while he was stationed in Washington, established his residence, and is using the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act provisions cited by A Nnoyed to avoid changing his residence back to Georgia.
Posted by: Tony on February 18, 2005 05:25 PMTherefore, under RCW 29A.04.151 he never gained legal residence in Washington for voting purposes.
Posted by: ScottM on February 18, 2005 05:31 PMhttp://usmilitary.about.com/cs/militarylaw1/a/homeofrecord.htm
[Emphasis added]
Depending on their service, and local polcies, an active duty military member can change their "legal residence" by visiting their local base legal office and/or base finance office and completing a DD Form 2058, State of Legal Residence Certificate.
However, the military is required by regulation to ensure that military members are not changing their "legal residence" for the sole purpose of obtaining a tax advantage. Therefore, when changing your "legal residence," military officials at the legal office (or finance office) may require some degree of proof that you consider the new state to be your "permament home."
The easist proof is "physical presence in the state." If you are currently stationed in a state, and wish to make it your permament home, it's generally pretty easy. If you are not currently stationed in the state you wish to make your permament home, and have never been stationed there, it become much harder. Generally, you need a specific address, not just the state in general. You can show your intentions to become a legal resident by registering to vote in the new state, by titling and registering your car in the new state (notifying your old state of the change), by getting a driver's license in the new state, or by preparing a new last will and testament (indicating your new state as your legal residence). Buying real property in the new state will also reinforce your claim.
Unless you can show such clear intentions, the military will probably not allow you to change your "legal residence."
One and half days is proper notice for a guy who was probably in Georgia on Wednesday when the challenge was initiated?
7. The property tax record for the address which he claims as his Washington residence, showing that he is not the owner of the property, nor was he the owner at the time he claimed to live there; I also stated under oath that I was unable to find any record that he ever owned property in the State of Washington.
But you can be a resident without owning property.
Finally, how the argument that Dr. Sosin has no right to vote in our elections jive with this (http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/index.cfm?section=29A.40.010&fuseaction=section):
RCW 29A.40.010 When permitted. Any registered voter of the state or any out-of-state voter, overseas voter, or service voter may vote by absentee ballot in any general election, special election, or primary in the manner provided in this chapter. Out-of-state voters, overseas voters, and service voters are authorized to cast the same ballots, including those for special elections, as a registered voter of the state would receive under this chapter.Posted by: Daniel K on February 18, 2005 05:49 PM
King County mailed Dr. Sosin two certified letters (one each to his "residence" and mailing addresses), postmarked on Feb. 10, consistent with statutory requirements. Huennekens also testified that he twice left phone messages with Dr. Sosin's secretary.
RCW 29A.40.010 is irrelevant if one's residence is improper.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on February 18, 2005 05:55 PMAlso, according to the SCRA, you can't use your orders assigning you to some place like Washington as reason alone to acquire residency here. We don't know what Dr. Sosin's housing situation was here, nor do we know if he had a Washington Driver's license. We do know that he never had a license to practise medicine in this state, while he did in Georgia, and that he actively maintained that Georgia Medical license while in Washington. We also know that he owns property in Georgia, and that he never owned the property he lists as his residence here in Washington. When looking at overt steps of establishing residency, it appears to me that he has taken more with regards to Georgia than with Washington.
Posted by: Jason on February 18, 2005 05:55 PMKing County mailed Dr. Sosin two certified letters (one each to his "residence" and mailing addresses), postmarked on Feb. 10, consistent with statutory requirements. Huennekens also testified that he twice left phone messages with Dr. Sosin's secretary.
Ah. It was not clear when all this was initiated. Thanks for clearing that up.
RCW 29A.40.010 is irrelevant if one's residence is improper.
How does this compare to a person who lives overseas, has no US residence, but last lived in Washington and registered to vote here?
Posted by: Daniel K on February 18, 2005 06:03 PMBecause the orders that Dr. Sosin came to Washington on were more than one year, they were most likely classified as Permanent Change of Station (PCS) orders.
According to the information from the CDC and Dr. Sosin's self-prepared biography, the assignment in Washington state lasted less than a year. Your premise appears to be factually inaccuarte.
Posted by: Greg V on February 18, 2005 06:04 PMI'd like to know what possessed hundreds - maybe thousands - of people in the year 2004, (prior years never experienced this registration volume!) to register to vote - using RENTAL MAILBOX and COUNTY BUILDING addresses as their RESIDENCE ADDRESS - and listing their MAILING ADDRESSES from Canada,Europe and Asia?
With the current lack of verification of voter residency in King County - these hundreds - maybe thousands of new voters could be Canadian,European or Asian citizens or residents from other states in the US!
It is becoming more apparent each day that there has been an orchestrated effort - especially with the liberal "Moveon.org" and "rock the vote" type of voter registration organizations - to distribute information to ineligible registrants on how to register to vote without verification.
I'm also hearing of Moveon.org type organizations having given false information to felons to persuade them to register to vote! Telling the felons that after 7 years of serving time - the law states they have their voting rights restored automatically!
These are illegal and deceptive practices and if a link can be found to the Democrat party in any of these - whether it be organization funding or coaching - heads should roll!
Posted by: Deborah on February 18, 2005 07:20 PMBut here's an idea to ferret out and get rid of even more guys like this. Let's adopt a state income tax. What do you think?
Posted by: docbenton on February 18, 2005 07:25 PMReality- what a concept, eh, doc?
Posted by: Chuck Miller on February 18, 2005 07:48 PMAs far as when orders are issued as Temporary Duty (TDY) or Permanent Change of Station (PCS), there is a lot of discretion involved. When I was in the Navy, I received PCS orders for a 22 week duty assignment. I am not sure that it matters anyway. Dr. Sosin met the physical presence test to establish residency.
The challenge to Dr. Sosin's voter registration is a legal challenge. Whether anyone thinks it was ethical or not, Dr. Sosin met the legal requirements to register and remain registered in Washington state.
It is not a question of King County laxness, but of federal law.
I appreciate Shark's tenacity in persuing the problems with voter registration irregularities. I just think that he picked the wrong case to use as his banner.
Posted by: Tony on February 18, 2005 07:55 PMGregoire is the illegitimate governor.
Posted by: Jeff B. on February 18, 2005 09:32 PMIf the good Dr. is looking to expand his practice, then we need to make certain he is properly paying His Georgia income tax and/or his Washington State "use" tax.
I believe that it is illegal for Washington State residents to purchase titled good without paying the state a "use tax" in lieu of a sales tax, when an item is purchase outside the state.
Posted by: Bob on February 18, 2005 11:20 PMLots of millitary guys love to claim Washington as their home state for tax purposes. Otherwise, you get state taxes taken out of your paycheck from a state you don't live in and might never return to.
Stefan's right on target.
You could be right. I grew up in Las Vegas and joined the military from there. I'm in Vegas now visiting my Dad. The good Doctor that everyone is discussing here is a Federal Government employee though. They may have different rules who knows. I was in the Army for quite awhile before I learned that DOD Civilians don't pay into social security, because they have their own plan like our representatives in Washington, D.C. The interesting thing is that he claims Washington State and his wife claims Georgia.......
very strange. Either he is incredibly lazy or he's avoiding something. It's about a weird as the Judge in Seattle claiming the courthouse as her legal address because the Mafia is after her!
It's possible that in the case of Dr Sosin, claiming Washington as his residence allows him to shelter at least some of his earnings from Georgia taxes. What other explanation is there for him to continue to vote in Washington?
Mainly, I was pointing out that even if this tax avoidance works in his case, it won't work for non-military (or non-government) workers in general.
Posted by: Alan in Las Vegas on February 19, 2005 07:29 AMWages earned and paid in a state are almost certainly taxed in that state. There may well be exemptions for certain kinds of federal income.
On the other hand, investment income could probably be sheltered from state income tax by someone who maintains a physical residence in, say, Georgia, if they claimed WA as their legal residence. There is a pretty strong motivation to declare WA as a state of residence if they have significant investment income.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on February 19, 2005 07:54 AMI struggled with residency when I was in the service of our country on a number of occaisions. Came into discussions with various government entities about registrations, licensing, and 'use taxes.'
I never gave up my Washington Driver's license. I had a legitimate 'home of record.' I never let my voting registration expire. I maintained legitimate ties to this state. And, when I ended my service to this country and returned home, I got to pay sales tax AGAIN on my vehicle. (A sore point, to be sure, for neither California nor Washington had any mechanism for preventing me from paying taxes on the same item in both states)
The authorities, based on the allegations and baseline facts, can investigate and determine the other qualifications. If the person retains licensing in this state, is not registered to vote elsewhere, is registered to vote here, and has ties to this state, then there's no foul, when in the service of the government. Even without owning property. And that's fine with me.
Challenging the registration of someone out of state need not be looked at as eggregious or untoward, for it is performing the function that our auditors and elections directors should be performing. THEIR failure to do their duty and abdication should not stand, nor should it become acceptable. If the challenge leads to a determination of legality, then fine, the system is stronger. To illegality; penalties as promulgated within the structure of our laws.
I find the arguing of the good Doctor's status, intent, and legality to be interesting, but immaterial. Stefan admirably went beyond the mere talk and asked the question through the inane process set up in our legislature. He acted. And, I would guess this has never been tested in the courts. Perhaps this is the time, place, and opportunity to see if we, the people, want to change the way we do things.
Thank you Stefan.
Steve
Posted by: Patches Pal on February 19, 2005 08:15 AMReality TV is such a success because it shows folks at their best & worst. Audiences seem to crave that. This is like REALITY BLOG!!!
I appreciate your persistance Stefan. As you know, this is a baby-step in the right direction toward Election Reform. You have keenly followed the law. For some reason, Dr. Sosin choose NOT to respond to this challenge. Certainly he has had plenty of time to line up his defense....if he choose to although he is under no obligation to do so.
Stefan--since the hearing has been held, Logan cannot go out and gather new evidence at this time, can he?? In other words, doesn't he have to rule based on what evidence was presented....PERIOD?
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on February 19, 2005 02:15 PMIf the Doc is a gov't employee, the check comes from the US Gov't and they will tax that income for his Home of Record. That will hurt your case on voting fraud but it may open the way to show that the good Doc is only using WA as his Home of Record for that purpose and perhaps the
Feds or State of Georgia will find an appropriate remedy.
But, if he is employed by a private firm or the State of Georgia, I believe that will negate, or at least seriously question the arguments concerning his use of WA as his Home of Record or legal residence.
Posted by: RobertinTacoma on February 20, 2005 09:09 AMAs for the tax issue, I would do as I have done before, contact the appropriate agency, inform them of the "appearance" or wrong doing, ask for the agency to investigate without unduly alarming the subject if I was in error, let me know if I was in error, and prosecute if I wasn't. This approach kept one person from jail when his likeness was significantly like a person with a warrant against them. Another person I turned in got slammed for tax evasion and willful building code violations.
Posted by: Mark Beyer on February 20, 2005 09:15 AM