NY Times calls Shelley hero for working to make e-voting trustworthy

[Amaryllis]

February 14, 2005
EDITORIAL
Umpires Still Taking Sides

The scandal of state election officials who are also political partisans has reached a new low. California's secretary of state announced his resignation this month amid charges that his office spent federal money on Democratic Party politics, and the National Association of Secretaries of State passed a resolution allowing its members to continue their partisan activities. There is an urgent need to fix this mess; if election officials won't do it, Congress must act to protect the integrity of federal elections.

Kevin Shelley, California's secretary of state, has long been a hero for the important work he did in fighting to make electronic voting trustworthy. But he came under federal and state investigation after a state auditor's report raised questions about consultants paid with federal money who attended fund-raisers and a state delegation meeting for the Democratic National Convention.

Mr. Shelley's downfall comes after an election in which secretaries of state appeared to be routinely using their power for partisan ends. Kenneth Blackwell of Ohio was arguably the worst offender, serving as co-chairman of the Bush-Cheney campaign in his state while repeatedly making rulings that seemed designed to help his side.

There were loud protests from voters over the conduct of Mr. Blackwell and several other secretaries. But the secretaries' association recently reiterated the right of its members to wear the two hats of election manager and political partisan. Kentucky's secretary of state told The Associated Press that "if the voters think we are being too partisan, they can kick us out of office." That isn't good enough. By that logic, there should be no ethics laws for any elected officials.

More:
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/opinion/index.html?hp

Ummm..."if the voters think we are being too partisan, they can kick us out of office." Anyone see a catch-22 in this logic? Do they think we are really stupid?

[stevedeshazer]

1. They think we're stupid

I missed the memo that let me know that "E-voting" is "trustworthy".

Since when?

[Amaryllis]

6. He fougnt to make it trustworthy as it could possibly be. They fought him

every step of the way.

[rigel99]

2. Good Post Amaryllis

Finally some MSM doing it's damn job.

Good NY Times articles.. although way too weak on what this really means... liked to have seen some meat like why they won a $2.6M judgement in CA against Diebold ...

where's the meat on how this is really a witchhunt on anyone that challeges big business or *....

good post.. thanks for article...

[berniew1]

3. So why did he resign???

[Helga Scow Stern]

4. For lots of reasons.

Although the charges against him are exaggerated and unlikely to be proven, the ostracization he faced was devastating, and greatly interfered with the work that needed to be done by his office. The main thing, however, was that his mother was put into intensive care that same week.

When you are the victim of an orchestrated character assassination from all sides, you have to get away out of the hotseat if you expect to survive, you really don't have a choice.

[Helga Scow Stern]

5. Thanks for posting.

Although it is better than the one in the SF Chronicle that compared Shelley to Blackwell and Harris, it still misses the main point. However, it's good that it's raising the issue about the SoS's.

For it to say so clearly:

"announced his resignation this month amid charges that his office spent federal money on Democratic Party politics."

and

"But he came under federal and state investigation after a state auditor's report raised questions about consultants paid with federal money who attended fund-raisers and a state delegation meeting for the Democratic National Convention."

Makes me feel like it is still propaganda, designed to cover up the real issue and discredit Shelley so that attention is distracted from redistricting. This is a very orchestrated attempt.

[Amaryllis]

7. Yep. No one in MSM does real investigative journalism any more. You have

to got to alternative media for that. Well, Olbermann does pretty well for MSM.

At least they called him a hero for his work with e-voting.

[skids]

8. Wow...

This is an unsigned editorial (unless the online site is screwed.)

That's big.

E-voting debate aside. That's big.

[Helga Scow Stern]

9. They like those unsigned editorials.

Then they use them as "evidence" on the floors of the House and Senate.

This one in the SF Chronicle, which has the same talking points, but with more of an attack on Shelley, is also unsigned.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/02/13/EDGSMAPBLM1.DTL&type=printable

[McCamy Taylor]

10. Is there much MSM coverage of this? Seems to me the RNC would

want it kept quiet since if Shelley is forced out for partsian political activity, this would fuel the calls for action against Blackwell and increase the anger against Harris who is thinking about running for Senate.

Here is a suggestion. Try making a stink at a national level. See if you can get the MSM to notice California. That is the real purpose of this NYT piece, I think. I just sent an email to Olberman.

[Amaryllis]

11. Coverage, yes, but almost all is parroting the smear campaign claims

against Shelley.