by kevin22262, Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 08:34:18 PM EDT
After seeing the following diary on Dkos, 600,000 Ohio voters subject to GOP caging. . . I had to pass along another diary from EENR that seems to be just the opposite.
The following is from Karita Hummer at EENR.
Federal law and the U.S. Constitution to trump Ohio Election Law.
Lo and Behold! Voting Progress from Columbus! Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner gives us good voting rights news for a change.
In a Press Release issued from the office of Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, it was announced that she was sending clarification to local Election Boards that " that 60 day notices sent by boards of election to voters that are returned as undeliverable cannot be used as the sole reason for canceling an Ohioan's voter registration."
by ge0rge, Mon Nov 05, 2007 at 08:45:30 AM EST
Is anybody willing to publish a summary of
how each of the big 3 candidates are faring
with respect to violations of campaign laws?
This being an adversary system, I suppose
the Clinton people will report the Edwards
mistakes, the Edwards people will report the
Obama mistakes, and the Obama people will report
the Clinton mistakes. But I am not an investigative
reporter and I can't present ANY of it. I was just
wondering if anybody feels motivated to collect it
all in one place for easy factual comparison.
by Project Vote, Tue Jun 12, 2007 at 02:33:19 PM EDT
I've been following with interest the debate between Gerry Hebert, Bob Bauer and Brad Smith on Hans von Spakovsky's nomination to the FEC (courtesy Rick Hasen Election Law blog coverage). Mr. Hebert urges the Senate Rules Committee to reject von Spakovsky's nomination on the well-documented grounds that he has used his position as Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights to advance his partisan agenda at the expense of our nation's voting rights laws. Mr. Bauer responds by suggesting that Hebert has used stark differences of law and policy between him and von Spakovsky to infer, but not prove, personal failings on the part of the nominee that would render him unfit for the position. Hebert responds to one of Bauer's points--that he hadn't assessed von Spakovsky's performance at the FEC-- by documenting instances where von Spakovsky demonstrated bias and disrespect towards the organizations appearing before him. Mr. Smith drops Bauer's respectful tone and rebukes Hebert for suggesting that his interpretation of the law is "the law" and von Spakovsky's is "wrong."