MA investigating gay marriage signature forgery allegations

[TaleWgnDg]

.

(Massachusetts) state investigating gay marriage signature forgery allegations

by Steve LeBlanc, AP Writer | Boston Globe, February 28, 2006

BOSTON -- (State) prosecutors from (state) Attorney General Tom Reilly's office have launched a criminal investigation to determine whether workers gathering support for an anti-gay marriage amendment forged the signatures of some voters last year.

The investigation stems from allegations by some voters that their names were on signature lists despite the fact that they said they never signed the petition. It would not affect the outcome, since supporters had more than twice as many certified signatures as they needed to send the question for legislative approval for the 2008 ballot.

The question would amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage, overturning the state's historic court ruling. Massachusetts is the only state to allow gay marriage.

"Because some of these concerns raised allege the crime of forgery, these allegations were referred to our Criminal Bureau," Assistant Attorney General Stephanie Lovell said in a letter to Secretary of State William Galvin dated Tuesday.

. . . snip . . .

(Assistant Attorney General) Lovell was responding to a letter sent to (Attorney General) Reilly from (Secretary of State) Galvin late last week. Galvin said he wanted to report the allegations after receiving complaints from voters.


. . . snip . . .

Supporters of the anti-gay marriage initiative collected more than 170,000 signatures. Of those, 147,000 were certified. They needed only 65,825 certified signatures. Before it gets on the ballot, the (anti-gay marriage) question must win the backing of at least 50 members of the legislature in two successive sessions.

. . . more at . . . http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/02/28/state_investigating_gay_marriage_signature_forgery_allegations/

(bold-faced type emphasis added by TaleWgnDg)

.

So. Massachusetts Secretary of State Galvin apparently ascertained potential criminal fraud thus forwarded those findings to Attorney General Reilly's office who is the appropriate person in the Massachusetts executive branch to commence a criminal investigation and bring criminal charges. Galvin is not authorized to bring criminal charges. Let's see what happens next. My guess is that Reilly's office will commence criminal investigation(s) and file criminal charge(s) but the anti-gay marriage question will go forward unaffected.

.

[mom cat]

1. I remember them aggressively soliciting signatures outside my

poling place last election.

[TaleWgnDg]

2. Yes, Fox News channel 25 did a report about it . . . fraud . . .

I think the video may still be up . . . lemme see if I can find it . . .

_____________________________

edited to add: Yup, here it is the Fox News, Boston channel 25 video . . . http://knowthyneighbor.org/fraud.html

If anyone knows anything about:
(1.) Massachusetts anti-gay marriage petition signature-takers actively committing forgery or
(2.) if you were bamboozled into signing your name to the anti-gay marriage petition (look for your name here at http://knowthyneighbor.org/thelist.php . . . did you sign it unknowingly?) . . .
then telephone Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly's office, ask for Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General Stephanie Lovell at 617-727-2200 x 2040 . . . Monday - Friday, 9-5 PM

.

[mom cat]

3. You can check here to see if your name is on the petition:

http://www.knowthyneighbor.org/fraud.html

[TaleWgnDg]

4. yup. ty, mom cat.

[paineinthearse]

5. Does not square

The statement "So. Massachusetts Secretary of State Galvin apparently ascertained potential criminal fraud thus forwarded those findings to Attorney General Reilly's..." does not square with the article, "The investigation stems from allegations by some voters that their names were on signature lists despite the fact that they said they never signed the petition....".

My recollection of the issue is that the complaint was brought to Galvin, who refused to act.

My interpretation of the article is that some citizens took the complaint to the AG, who did take action.

Anyone have a copy of Galvin's statement to refuse to act at the time? I'll research, too.

[paineinthearse]

6. Bonifaz's Boston Globe op-ed of late December demonstrates Galvin's

...lack of action. I am glad Reilly is taking action.

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=158&topic_id=7384

Fraud taints (Massachusetts) antigay measure

paineinthearse (1000+ posts) Thu Dec-22-05 06:03 PM
Original message
Fraud taints (Massachusetts) antigay measure
"...As the state's chief elections officer, the secretary should have denied certification of this antigay measure until he had conducted a thorough investigation into these allegations. The public should be assured that our ballot initiative process is free of manipulation and deceit. At the present time, the evidence suggests it is not..."



Dear Friends,

Our campaign for Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is in the news today.

Check out this Boston Globe op-ed in which I argue that the incumbent should not have certified the signatures for the anti-gay marriage ballot measure in light of significant documentation of fraud in the signature gathering process:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/12/22/fraud_taints_antigay_measure

We look forward to keeping you updated! Have a wonderful holiday season!

Keep on,



John

P.S. We need your help to move us forward! If you have not already done so, please contribute today at www.johnbonifaz.com, and please urge your friends and colleagues to join us as well. Massachusetts law allows individuals to contribute up to $500 per calendar year. Your contribution today, within this calendar year limit, is critical to help us demonstrate our early viability!

The following op-ed was published in today's Boston Globe. Printed here in full with permission of the author.

http://www.johnbonifaz.com/node/171

Fraud taints antigay measure
By John C. Bonifaz | December 22, 2005

ON TUESDAY, the secretary of the Commonwealth certified signatures for a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage that will begin a process to place the question on the 2008 ballot. He did this despite significant documentation of fraud in the signature-gathering process.

Within days after the signature-gathering began for this ballot measure, allegations surfaced throughout the state that signature collectors were using bait-and-switch tactics to deceive people into signing the petitions. MassEquality, a coalition defending equal marriage rights for same-sex couples in Massachusetts, fielded numerous complaints of signature collectors who asked people to sign a petition to allow the sale of beer and wine in grocery stores, and instead collected the actual signatures on the antigay marriage form.

In the ballot initiative process, the secretary of the Commonwealth has the responsibility of certifying the validity of those signatures presented to him to ensure legitimate support for the proposed question. The secretary should not merely rubberstamp the signatures presented and pass this issue on to the Legislature, where the amendment only needs 25 percent approval of a constitutional convention in two successive legislation sessions in order to appear on the 2008 ballot.

Rather, the secretary should fight to protect the integrity of the process. The antigay marriage ballot measure should not move forward in the face of these serious allegations of fraud. It is the secretary's responsibility to conduct an investigation that should include a check on a random sampling of the names presented. Individuals should be contacted to determine whether their signatures were valid. If the results of that investigation confirm that signature collectors committed fraud, the measure should not be allowed to proceed to the ballot.

From the ratification of the Massachusetts Constitution to open town meetings, direct democracy -- participation of the people -- has deep roots in the history of this Commonwealth. But, in order to maintain the people's trust, the process must be safeguarded against fraud. If people begin not to trust the fairness and legitimacy of the electoral process, our democracy is threatened.

In response to the multiple complaints about the use of deceptive practices with the antigay marriage ballot measure, state Senator Edward Augustus and state Representative Anthony Petruccelli, the co-chairs of the Legislature's Joint Committee on Election Laws, have put forward a bill (S. 2251) to help rout out fraud in the gathering of signatures for ballot questions. This bill is a necessary first step to protect the process for the future.

In this case, however, we are dealing with a proposed ballot measure -- one that would deny basic equality to a great many couples in Massachusetts -- that remains under a cloud of impropriety.

As the state's chief elections officer, the secretary should have denied certification of this antigay measure until he had conducted a thorough investigation into these allegations. The public should be assured that our ballot initiative process is free of manipulation and deceit. At the present time, the evidence suggests it is not.

John C. Bonifaz is the founder of the National Voting Rights Institute and a Democratic candidate for Massachusetts secretary of state.