We lost a Big One in PA today...And I can't figure out how...

[Junkdrawer]

The Pennsylvania Constitution says that only The Voters can change the type of machine used to record their vote.

The US Constitution delegates the manner of elections to the States.

So tell me, how can the PA Supreme court find that the PA Constitution is subservient to a flawed interpretation of HAVA????

HARRISBURG, Pa. - The state Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a county may replace its mechanical lever voting machines without voter approval in a case that pitted new federal election laws against the state constitution.

The ruling eases concerns about possible disruptions in the planned upgrading of voting systems in dozens of counties before the May 16 primary election.

The decision, which overturned a lower court, was announced in a one-page order that promised a subsequent opinion explaining the justices' reasoning.

The lower court judge - Commonwealth Court Judge Dan Pellegrini - said the 2002 federal law that requires many counties to upgrade their systems before the primary affects only federal elections, while the state constitution requires voters' approval for any change in voting systems.

....

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-03022006-620337.html

The damned thing is that they haven't said HOW they came to that decision. I guess on news-dump Friday we'll find out...maybe.

[aquart]

1. Who paid for these judges?

[Junkdrawer]

4. One of the judges was Justice Ronald Castille....

Google him and about 500 "Why Justice Ronald Castille Should Remove Himself, Free Mumia" websites appear...

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Ronald+Castille%22&btnG=Search

[Ksec]

2. More money for Diebold

These kinds of decisions show who runs this country. It aint the people. They elect politicians who ignore them and do whatever the Hell they please.

[wain]

3. And who will ultimately pay for the new machines?

The poor sucker voter, that's who.

The new electronic machines will cost millions, so not only don't we have a say, we have to pay for what we don't want.

[Nikki Stone 1]

5. They don't even try to cover their inconsistencies anymore

Bad news...

[Junkdrawer]

6. Judicial reasoning every bit as good as BUSH v. GORE I'll wager...

But at least they didn't say "Hey, we'll tell you later how we came to this one."

[tom_paine]

8. Why bother? The Imperial Subjects of Amerika are weak and slavish

I wouldn;t give such a people the respect accorded a Free People, either.

Fuck us all, for we are fucked.

And each and every one of us are responsible by our actions or inactions.

[tom_paine]

7. Oh Dear God, Free America is a fading memory now

I guess PA will soon be joining the BushPutinists now and forever.

Goodbye, Governor Rendell. If you think the Imperial Family s going to suffer you a moment longer than they have to, you are mistaken.

Goodbye, everything that was great about Free America. Now, we're just another crooked 3rd World Nation.

[Junkdrawer]

9. Rendell applauds this decision...

PA Governor Rendell Commends State Supreme Court for Clarifying That Counties Can Buy New Electronic Voting Machines

Counties can purchase electronic voting machines without a referendum

HARRISBURG, Pa., March 2 /PRNewswire/ -- Pennsylvania Governor Edward G.
Rendell commended the Pennsylvania Supreme Court today for taking action that
will allow Westmoreland County, and other counties, to move ahead with plans
to buy new electronic voting machines as part of a federal requirement before
the May primary election.

"The Supreme Court today has clarified the rules that will help
Pennsylvania counties appropriately prepare for upcoming elections," Governor
Rendell said. "With this prompt decision by the court, counties can now move
forward in meeting the federal requirements under the Help America Vote Act
(HAVA) and buy new electronic voting machines."

The state Supreme Court reversed a February 13 decision by Commonwealth
Court that had prohibited Westmoreland County from buying new electronic
voting machines (Mary Beth Kuznik, et al. v. Westmoreland County Board of
Commissioners, et al., No. 18 MAP 2006).

"Though the State Supreme Court soon will issue an opinion explaining its
order, we believe that the Court's ruling validates what the commonwealth's
position has been all along," Governor Rendell said. "Federal law supersedes
any state laws that hinder the commonwealth's compliance with mandates of
federal law.

...

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-02-2006/0004312542&EDATE=

I don't know if he's in on the fix, or just a victim of bad advisers. During one of the hearings in Pittsburgh I attended, one of his chief advisers (and a former chief consul to the National Democratic Party!) appeared as a paid advocate for Diebold - and he was so transparently paid-off that even the county commissioners were laughing at his "testimony".

[tom_paine]

11. What? A clueless Dem applauding the rope he's to be hanged with?

Shocked! Shocked I am!

[cybildisobedience]

16. Rendell does not get it

And his sec. of state, Pedro Cortez, is even worse. The two of them spout talking points about the wonderful electronic voting machines like they're representing the Repuke companies that manufacture and program them.
They don't get it, and we're all screwed because of it.

[Junkdrawer]

17. In 2004, a buddy of mine got on the HAVA advisory committee...

he's an advocate for the disabled, so they thought he was a sure thing to support the new machines. When he got the committee to agree that voter verified paper ballots were necessary, Cortez refused to meet with them (he sent a secretary to one of their meetings to get their findings). So, yeah, the fix has been in for a while.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

10. Honestly, I don't see how we could have won

Maybe I'm missing something, but Federal law always trumps state law. It goes for abortion, it goes for voting machines.

[Steve A Play]

12. The US Constitution trumps any Federal law

It's the US Constitution that stipulates that each State has control over how voting is conducted within that State. The HAVA act only passes as 'constitutional' in that the Federal government is attempting to 'strong arm' the states into dumping their chosen voting systems in order to get Federal funds. Note that the HAVA Act does not 'outlaw' the use of those technologies directly, (Punch Cards and Lever Machines) it only outlaws a state from receiving HAVA funds if they continue to use those technologies.

Text of the HAVA Act

<snip>

SEC. 102. <<NOTE: 42 USC 15302.>> REPLACEMENT OF PUNCH CARD OR LEVER
VOTING MACHINES.

(a) Establishment of Program.--
(1) In <<NOTE: Deadline.>> general.--Not later than 45 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator
shall establish a program under which the Administrator shall
make a payment to each State eligible under subsection (b) in
which a precinct within that State used a punch card voting
system or a lever voting system to administer the regularly
scheduled general election for Federal office held in November
2000 (in this section referred to as a ``qualifying precinct'').
(2) Use of funds.--A State shall use the funds provided
under a payment under this section (either directly or as
reimbursement, including as reimbursement for costs incurred on
or after January 1, 2001, under multiyear contracts) to replace
punch card voting systems or lever voting systems (as the case
may be) in qualifying precincts within that State with a voting
system (by purchase, lease, or such other arrangement as may be
appropriate) that--
(A) does not use punch cards or levers;
(B) is not inconsistent with the requirements of the
laws described in section 906; and
(C) meets the requirements of section 301.
(3) Deadline.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph
(B), a State receiving a payment under the program under
this section shall ensure that all of the punch card
voting systems or lever voting systems in the qualifying
precincts

<[Page 116 STAT. 1671>]

within that State have been replaced in time for the
regularly scheduled general election for Federal office
to be held in November 2004.
(B) Waiver.--If a State certifies to the
Administrator not later than January 1, 2004, that the
State will not meet the deadline described in
subparagraph (A) for good cause and includes in the
certification the reasons for the failure to meet such
deadline, the State shall ensure that all of the punch
card voting systems or lever voting systems in the
qualifying precincts within that State will be replaced
in time for the first election for Federal office held
after January 1, 2006.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

13. Isn't this the same way they get states to make legal drinking age >21?

They withhold funds? I get what you're saying now but I can't say I'm surprised that the state wouldn't pass up the bucks.

Glad we passed on Diebold in Allegheny County...went with Sequoia

[Junkdrawer]

14. I'm not sure Sequoia is that much better...

As I said during the Pgh. hearings, we have data on Diebold and so we know how bad they are...the rest are just a big question mark.

What we need are voter verified ballots and random audits. There are bills in the PA legislature, but Republicans are holding them up. Also, we're not buying the ballot printers with the HAVA money, so even if the bills pass, Lord knows if the counties will find the cash for the ballot printers.

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. Well, if I apply what I know about what's happening in Florida...

What they do is say that you voted for someone to represent you, therefore, you conceded your power to them to make decisions for you. The weasel good ole boys in my community love to find lawyers who will interepret any loose wording in the Bylaws to show that the president of the Home Owner's Association has absolute power to convey property. The next thing you know, your Association has been handed over to a new developer through a replat, and the good ole boy President of the H.O.A. claims there's nothing anybody can do because he has the full power to do it. Worse, if you sue him, the money will come out of your pocket for his legal representation...I'm rambling.