Jason Osgood announcing as the Democratic candidate for Secretary of State could cause Sam Reed some real problems.
It is an under-discussed fact that Reed's approach in 2004 of defend the system first, ask questions later left the GOP grassroots with a very bitter taste in its mouth. Later revelations of ballot mishandling by King County - such as the counting of "fatal pend" ballots, where the legitimacy of the voter registration was never established - forced Reed himself to backtrack and express appropriate dismay once the depth and breadth of the King County Election Office's bumbles were made clear.
Meaning if Osgood can present himself as a non-partisan candidate with a serious interest in fair-minded election administration, as his reputation has already been established in certain political circles, he's got a shot to win some Republican votes that Reed otherwise needs to win in this blue state.
Maybe that won't be enough to make Reed lose, but it will likely cause him some heartburn. There's not going to be too many activists eager to carry his literature on their doorbelling walks.
And count this voter as one interested in hearing what Osgood has to say.
Posted by Eric Earling at June 02, 2008 08:52 PM | Email ThisI'm still waiting for the King County Prosecutor -- you know, the Republican whose job depends on accurate, unbiased vote-counting here in King County -- to consider any of SP's allegations seriously. Maybe you can help take him out, too!
Posted by: tensor on June 2, 2008 09:34 PMAs you should Eric. Jason is a smart guy, mild mannered, and really focused on the issues of election integrity.
Posted by: Daniel K on June 2, 2008 11:48 PMI think he has done some good things in the time since election '04, but it remains to be seen if it has been enough. perhaps it has been. We'll see.
Posted by: Michele on June 3, 2008 12:35 AMReed sat on his hands in 2004 while election fraud ran rampant in King county, so I'll have no problem voting him to the sidelines this time around. I'll take anyone showing even a modicum of system integrity (whatever the party affiliation) over an incompetent party member anyday of the week.
Posted by: Rick D. on June 3, 2008 05:15 AMPlease help me to understand how Mr. Reed can still be the Secretary of State? He should be at minimum be fired.
Posted by: Snuffy on June 3, 2008 05:43 AMPosted by: Saltherring on June 3, 2008 06:59 AM
It would take a real jerk to be worse than him!!!!!!
If his opponent has a minimal amount of brains, he will get my Conservative vote.
Posted by: Norm on June 3, 2008 09:59 AMI lauded Dean's appointment in 2003 because of the experience that he brought to the job. Unfortunately, Dean did not appreciate the scope of administering elections in a county the size and complexity of King County. When he got over his head, he evidently made the mistake of denying there were problems. Sam took Dean's word that he knew what he was doing. He found. much to his chagrin, that such was not the case. Sam was then caught up on the horns of dilema since the elections laws at that point pretty much tied his hands.
I would suggest that the voters think twice before they do in a person of Sam's experience in election mangement, especially after the lessons learned in 2004.
Posted by: Desert Rat on June 3, 2008 10:03 AMAnd, for you "conservatives" out there, take a look at who the statewide Republican officholders are: Sutherland, McKenna and Reed--hardly "conservative" by any stretch. The reality is that a "conservative" cannot win statewide. As a former PCO and Ron Paul delegate at the local conventions, I am as conservative as anyone but I care more about seeing Republicans get elected. You so called "conservatives" care more about philosophical purity than about having political majorities and actually governing well. Until that changes, have fun whining and being in the minority.
Posted by: Deadhead on June 3, 2008 10:56 AMAnd, for you "conservatives" out there, take a look at who the statewide Republican officholders are: Sutherland, McKenna and Reed--hardly "conservative" by any stretch. The reality is that a "conservative" cannot win statewide. As a former PCO and Ron Paul delegate at the local conventions, I am as conservative as anyone but I care more about seeing Republicans get elected. You so called "conservatives" care more about philosophical purity than about having political majorities and actually governing well. Until that changes, have fun whining and being in the minority
Sorry, deadhead, you don't get it.
SecState is an important statewide office, as it is directly involved with how the elections are run. Reed is an incompetent boob. That's a fact. The man is worthless, and will not be getting my vote under any circumstance.
The MOST important thing is to get reasonably competent people in office. Reed is neither reasonable nor competent. I could care less if he was the very last Republican to hold any statewide office: He needs to go.
Posted by: Steve in Queen Anne on June 3, 2008 01:33 PMSam Reed may be a nice guy, but we need massive election cleanup in this state.
Posted by: gs on June 3, 2008 05:01 PMThe Secretary of State did not -- and does not -- decide if contested ballots in King County count or not. State law (RCW 29A.60.140-200) vests that regulatory decision in the King County Canvassing Board.
The Canvassing Board is made up of the chief County Election Official, the County Prosecutor and one Council member. Canvassing Board meetings, which review and decide all contested ballots, are public and the news media and party observers attend all sessions.
Anyone who is aggrieved over any ballot(s) counting or not counting can file a contested election lawsuit. That happened in 2004. The courts, not the Secretary of State, make the final decision by law.
Anyone who is unhappy with the administration or decisions of King County Elections needs to talk to the County Executive who is the one who hires, fires and manages that office.
By law, hat is the role of the Secretary of State?
Prior to every election, The Secretary of State adopts the rules that govern that election.
In 2000, the US Supreme Court said (Bush v. Gore, 521 US 98), that elections officials cannot change the rule in the middle of the count or recount. The rules that govern an election are those in place prior to the election. Obviously, the Court did not want people "gaming" the system or influencing the outcome.
Under the State Constitution, the Secretary of State transmits the tally of all 39 counties to the Legislature and the Governor...but has no authority to change the count. And, remember, the 2004 gubernatorial election contest determined the final count. On what grounds, could the Secretary of State pretend to change the judicial outcome? There is none.
The Secretary of State does have the statutory power to "review" a county's elections procedure. King County has been formally reviewed by our office and findings were made and improvements are recommended.
In addition, we offer advice and technical assistance to the counties...which they can follow or ignore under state law. We recommend that the County Deputy Prosecutor and our Assistant Attorney General confer to determine how the statutes and court decisions resolved similar issues in the past. Again, the state role is consultative.
Lastly, the Secretary of State can take the bully pulpit and propose executive request legislation for election reforms. That has been done. Much of our state's election laws have been overhauled so some of the issues of the 2004 Election Contest are not repeated.
For example, all 39 counties must now certify their election results on the same day...King County will no longer be last to certify. Canvassing Board members cannot delegate their decision-making to subordinates. The primary date has been moved to August to allow adequate transit time for military and overseas ballots to go out and come back in time. The list is long and I would be happy to anyone who emails me.
Hope this sheds some light on the discussion
Steve Excell
Assistant Secretary of State
Olympia, WA 98504
If ballots cannot be read by machine, then the Canvassing Committee should interpret, count and tally each and every one by hand, in full view of public observers.
Posted by: Mom on June 9, 2008 04:37 PM