hrmmm... >From the US Commission on Civil Rights (A government agency, biased I am sure...right Sam?)
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm I think the conclusion from the executive summary says it all: "Conclusion The Commission found that the problems Florida had during the 2000 presidential election were serious and not isolated. In many cases, they were foreseeable and should have been prevented. The failure to do so resulted in an extraordinarily high and inexcusable level of disenfranchisement, with a significantly disproportionate impact on African American voters. The causes include the following: (1) a general failure of leadership from those with responsibility for ensuring elections are properly planned and executed; (2) inadequate resources for voter education, training of poll workers, and for Election Day trouble-shooting and problem solving; (3) inferior voting equipment and/or ballot design; (4) failure to anticipate and account for the expected high volumes of voters, including inexperienced voters; (5) a poorly designed and even more poorly executed purge system; and (6) a resource allocation system that often left poorer counties, which often were counties with the highest percentage of black voters, adversely affected." But there's some details... "Disenfranchised Voters Disenfranchised voters are individuals who are entitled to vote, want to vote, or attempt to vote, but who are deprived from either voting or having their votes counted. The most dramatic undercount in the Florida election was the uncast ballots of countless eligible voters who were wrongfully turned away from the polls. Statistical data, reinforced by credible anecdotal evidence, point to the widespread denial of voting rights. It is impossible to determine the extent of the disenfranchisement or to provide an adequate remedy to the persons whose voices were silenced by injustice, ineptitude, and inefficiency. However, careful analysis and some reasonable projections illustrate what happened in Florida. The disenfranchisement of Florida's voters fell most harshly on the shoulders of black voters. The magnitude of the impact can be seen from any of several perspectives:" There's more if you care to read...but hey, it's not a Neo-con blog, so be careful you don't strain your eyes... :-) And here's a bit about who is ultimately responsible in the case of Florida: "Missing Leadership Florida's governor insisted that he had no specific role in election operations and pointed to his secretary of state as the responsible official. After the election, however, the governor exercised leadership and responsibility in electoral matters in the commendable action of appointing a task force to make recommendations to fix the problems that occurred. The secretary of state, the state's chief elections officer, denied any responsibility for the problems in the election, claiming only a "ministerial" role, her clear statutory obligations notwithstanding. Rather, she asserted that county election officials are responsible for the conduct of the election, describing her role in the policies and decisions affecting the actual voting operations as limited. However, her claims of no responsibility sharply contrast to her actions in the immediate aftermath of Election Day, when she asserted ultimate authority in determining the outcome of the vote count. On the local level, supervisors of elections in the counties that experienced the worst problems failed to prepare adequately and demand necessary resources. This overall lack of leadership in protecting voting rights was largely responsible for the broad array of problems in Florida during the 2000 election. Furthermore, state officials ignored the pleas of some supervisors of elections for guidance and help. Especially at the highest levels, officials must take responsibility for leading on matters for which they have authority and, to the extent they do not have sole authority, to take the initiative for working with other key officials. Specific examples of the areas in which Florida officials need to improve are discussed in other parts of the Executive Summary and throughout the report. However, the need for key officials to exercise leadership in protecting the right to vote is imperative. This was not a responsibility that officials were willing to accept during the 2000 election." Oh and here's another finding... "Purging Former Felons from the Voter Rolls Individuals not legally entitled to vote should not be allowed to vote. Appropriate efforts to eliminate fraudulent voting strengthen the rights of legitimate voters. In fact, there are already laws in place in Florida that make it a crime to vote unlawfully. However, poorly designed efforts to eliminate fraud, as well as sloppy and irresponsible implementation of those efforts, disenfranchise legitimate voters and can be a violation of the VRA. Florida's overzealous efforts to purge voters from the rolls, conducted under the guise of an anti-fraud campaign, resulted in the inexcusable and patently unjust removal of disproportionate numbers of African American voters from Florida's voter registration rolls for the November 2000 election. The purge system in Florida proceeded on the premise of guilty until proven innocent. In 1998, the Florida legislature enacted a statute that required the Division of Elections to contract with a private entity to purge its voter file of deceased persons, duplicate registrants, individuals declared mentally incompetent, and convicted felons without civil rights restoration, i.e., remove ineligible voter registrants from voter registration rolls. This purge process became known as list maintenance. Once on the list, the process places the burden on the eligible voter to justify remaining on the voter rolls. The ubiquitous errors and dearth of effective controls in the state's list maintenance system resulted in the exclusion of voters lawfully entitled and properly registered to vote. African American voters were placed on purge lists more often and more erroneously than Hispanic or white voters. For instance, in the state's largest county, Miami-Dade, more than 65 percent of the names on the purge list were African Americans, who represented only 20.4 percent of the population. Hispanics were 57.4 percent of the population, but only 16.6 percent of the purge list; whites were 77.6 percent of the population but 17.6 percent of those purged." > Since the Dems usually control minority areas who > would be responsible for turning people away? Ultimate responsibility lies with those in charge of the state. the Governor would be a good place to go here. Failing that the Sec of State. But hey, Republicans are not really noted for taking responsibility for the actions of thier subordinates now, are they? > All the areas with > disputed votes were controlled by the Dems so who's fault is it. um... prove it? > Again who decided to buy the machines? Well Sam, I am guessing by this statement that only Dems would be stupid enough to buy Diebold machines right? Especially after the CEO's statements? Is that what you're implying? I'll dig around and see if I can find the party affiliation of the person who bought the machines, if I can and it's a Dem, then I'll publicly state so. And if as I suspect, its a Republican, well, then I guess we're in for another bit o'SpinSam-ity. > How about cigarettes for votes > or all the dead people that voted? Cherry picking info is easy isn't > it? Nah, it is clear to me that all the evidence in the world won't stand against the Patented "Sam says 'nuh-uh'" Counterattack... -- will "If my life weren't funny, it would just be true; and that would just be unacceptable." - Carrie Fisher ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:203995 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
