Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
GREEN CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE ARRESTED AT SIT-IN AT SF DEPARTMENT OF ELECTIONS
Green Party Congressional candidate, Terry Baum, was arrested at the Dept of Elections in protest of the Dept's refusal to certify her successful write-in campaign.
San Francisco – (A12, 6:26 p.m.) Four people – including a Green Party
congressional candidate – were arrested after a dramatic sit-in at the
Elections Office at City Hall late yesterday afternoon.
All are being cited and released, according to authorities, who would not
disclose the charges. About two dozen demonstrators entered the Elections Office at about 4:30 p.m. Monday to protest voting irregularities during the March vote.
Terry Baum, a write-in candidate for Congress (8th District) on the Green
Party ballot in March, was among those being arrested. Others include
voters who said their votes were not counted in March.
Baum had apparently won her party's nomination in March – but then lost it when the city refused to count hundreds of votes.
City elections officials, a week after the Primary, told Baum she had won
the Green Party nomination with 1,659 valid write-in votes, 54 more than
necessary – the first third party write-in to win a state nomination in 36
years. But, a week later, the city invalidated hundreds of ballots,
claiming voters, despite hand-writing in Baum's name, had failed to fill in
an "arrow" on the ballot correctly, thus technically violating an obscure
state code.
"We refuse to allow San Francisco to become another Florida. If
disenfranchised voters in Florida in 2000 had been willing to go to jail to
preserve their voting rights, we might not be facing the horrible mess in
Iraq that we read about every day with such pain, and sense of doom," said Baum earlier Monday.
congressional candidate – were arrested after a dramatic sit-in at the
Elections Office at City Hall late yesterday afternoon.
All are being cited and released, according to authorities, who would not
disclose the charges. About two dozen demonstrators entered the Elections Office at about 4:30 p.m. Monday to protest voting irregularities during the March vote.
Terry Baum, a write-in candidate for Congress (8th District) on the Green
Party ballot in March, was among those being arrested. Others include
voters who said their votes were not counted in March.
Baum had apparently won her party's nomination in March – but then lost it when the city refused to count hundreds of votes.
City elections officials, a week after the Primary, told Baum she had won
the Green Party nomination with 1,659 valid write-in votes, 54 more than
necessary – the first third party write-in to win a state nomination in 36
years. But, a week later, the city invalidated hundreds of ballots,
claiming voters, despite hand-writing in Baum's name, had failed to fill in
an "arrow" on the ballot correctly, thus technically violating an obscure
state code.
"We refuse to allow San Francisco to become another Florida. If
disenfranchised voters in Florida in 2000 had been willing to go to jail to
preserve their voting rights, we might not be facing the horrible mess in
Iraq that we read about every day with such pain, and sense of doom," said Baum earlier Monday.
For more information:
http://www.terrybaum.com/
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
It is really hard to conduct a "write in" campaign. Calls for a great deal of voter education. Even here in MA, where "write in" campaigns are common, there are often "sticker" campaigns or "how to" cards printed.
The problem is that there are always at least TWO steps to the process. One step is adding the candidates name to the list of candidates properly. Some jurisdictions are very strict abotu how the name is sopelled, whether an address is needed for write in candidates, etc.
NEXT TIME PRINT UP INTRUCTION LEAFLETS (or "stickers" if these are usable on your ballots)
The second step is actually voting for the candidate you have added.
Easy to space that, yes? After all, you added a candidate's name, SURELY that indicated your intent to vote for that candidate. Well...... maybe not that obvious. By the rules, you can write in as many candidates' names as you like and don't have to vote for any of your write ins. Yeah, silly to do that, but you COULD (it would still be a valid ballot if you wrote in a name but then voted for a pre-pronted candidate). Or you might have a reason to write in several candidate names even though you could only vote for one (imagine a protest where ALL "left" parties were denied ballot status -- you might protest that in this fashion).
So that's why this rule. First you write in the candidates name and then you draw the arrow (or make whatever other mark indicates "vote cast for THIS candidate). No arrow or mark, no vote cast.
The problem is that there are always at least TWO steps to the process. One step is adding the candidates name to the list of candidates properly. Some jurisdictions are very strict abotu how the name is sopelled, whether an address is needed for write in candidates, etc.
NEXT TIME PRINT UP INTRUCTION LEAFLETS (or "stickers" if these are usable on your ballots)
The second step is actually voting for the candidate you have added.
Easy to space that, yes? After all, you added a candidate's name, SURELY that indicated your intent to vote for that candidate. Well...... maybe not that obvious. By the rules, you can write in as many candidates' names as you like and don't have to vote for any of your write ins. Yeah, silly to do that, but you COULD (it would still be a valid ballot if you wrote in a name but then voted for a pre-pronted candidate). Or you might have a reason to write in several candidate names even though you could only vote for one (imagine a protest where ALL "left" parties were denied ballot status -- you might protest that in this fashion).
So that's why this rule. First you write in the candidates name and then you draw the arrow (or make whatever other mark indicates "vote cast for THIS candidate). No arrow or mark, no vote cast.
Who should we call to support Terry's being accepted as a candidate?
Contact information to file your complaint; file w both offices:
General Information - Elections Division
Phone: (916) 657-2166
Fax: (916) 653-3214
E-Mail: Elections [at] ss.ca.gov
Dept of elections
415) 554-4375
rachel.gosiengfiao [at] sfgov.org
url to background information including chart of how restrictive California's laws are by comparison to other states.
http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/04/1676682.php
General Information - Elections Division
Phone: (916) 657-2166
Fax: (916) 653-3214
E-Mail: Elections [at] ss.ca.gov
Dept of elections
415) 554-4375
rachel.gosiengfiao [at] sfgov.org
url to background information including chart of how restrictive California's laws are by comparison to other states.
http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/04/1676682.php
For more information:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2004/04/167668...
There are some on the left who are Nazis like that - they're called the Kerry Democraps.
Leave the rest of us alone. We have our own brains and we are not voting for Kerry, nor are we targetting right-wingers to different standards. Anyone with a brain will not apply different standards or will correct their actions once they do.
Kerry-fascist-Demonazis can be counted on to be no different than you, right-winger, who is targetting lefties as though there's something special and different from your own.
Leave the rest of us alone. We have our own brains and we are not voting for Kerry, nor are we targetting right-wingers to different standards. Anyone with a brain will not apply different standards or will correct their actions once they do.
Kerry-fascist-Demonazis can be counted on to be no different than you, right-winger, who is targetting lefties as though there's something special and different from your own.
first off facists are more on the right side then the left. Second their not whining. If a canidate is lied to in that way, and is not allowed to be in an election, then where is the democracy. You "righties" might be able to get away with cheating, ie President Bush. But the green party must not belive in it. The protesters were arrested, for what? I thought in America you could have a peaceful protest. But in the past months i have seen and read that this statement is false. Land of the free indeed!
So somehow they forgot to notice the votes were invalid the first time? How remarkable. Such "incompetance" will surely be rewarded by the Republicrats. Keep an eye on who the Officials were who "noticed" that these votes should be invalidated, and where they end up over the next 12 months.
One wonders what sort of threshold there is for determining what is an unreasonable or suspiciously complicated barrier to ALL CITIZENS OF VOTING AGE and their RIGHT TO VOTE FOR WHOM THEY CHOOSE. A test case should be made for this. Chads, arrows, etc., are all there for convenient selective enforcement when you happen to vote for the wrong candidate and they happen to win. The system isn't stupid, you know.
One wonders what sort of threshold there is for determining what is an unreasonable or suspiciously complicated barrier to ALL CITIZENS OF VOTING AGE and their RIGHT TO VOTE FOR WHOM THEY CHOOSE. A test case should be made for this. Chads, arrows, etc., are all there for convenient selective enforcement when you happen to vote for the wrong candidate and they happen to win. The system isn't stupid, you know.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$195.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network