Advancement Project Files Complaint Over Students Purged From Voter Rolls - UPDATED With Full Complaint

Just got some breaking news from Denise Lieberman, the Senior Attorney for a nonpartisan group of election protection advocates that was monitoring the elections. See my previous reporting on this issue here and here.

The press release:

(ST. LOUIS -- Nov. 11, 2010) – With a razor-thin margin of 176 votes separating the candidates in State Senate District 24, 198 provisional ballots remain to be counted and Advancement Project has discovered that many students may have been wrongfully turned away without being provided provisional ballots. If these allegations are substantiated and reveal an illegal purge that could affect the outcome of the election, voters or candidates could seek legal remedies including setting aside the election.

As election officials move to certify final election results next week, Advancement Project, a leading nonpartisan voter protection organization, is investigating apparent wrongful purges of student voters at Washington University’s campus, many of whom were inexplicably missing from the voter rolls on Election Day and were turned away without being offered a provisional ballot.

“We received reports that students who were duly registered and voted at the polling site on Washington University’s campus as recently as two years ago could not be found on the voter rolls at all, were turned away without being directed to their correct polling location and were expressly refused provisional ballots,” said Denise Lieberman, a senior attorney with Advancement Project who headed non-partisan Election Protection efforts in Missouri.

“Under the law, voters cannot be purged from the rolls unless they’ve died, been convicted of a crime, been adjudged incapacitated, notified the election board that they have moved outside the county, have asked to have their name removed from the voter registration roll, OR have not voted in two federal elections and have had mailing notices returned as undeliverable,” Lieberman said. “No student who registered and voted on campus in 2008 could be legally purged from the rolls unless they had affirmatively changed their registrations to a new jurisdiction or fell into one of the other categories.”

Under the law, voters who move within St. Louis County remain registered voters in the county. While they may be placed on the inactive list if mailings to an old address were returned, this does not prevent them from voting. Rather, the poll worker must direct them to the polling place serving their new address, where they should be allowed to cast a regular ballot upon completing a change of address form.

While some Washington University students who registered on campus in 2008 have moved since then, most have moved within St. Louis County, typically to Clayton or University City, and thus, should have been allowed to vote.

“These students should not have been dropped from the voter rolls,” Lieberman said. “At the least, if there were problems verifying their eligibility, they should have been given a provisional ballot. That way their votes could have been counted later when their eligibility was established.” But a poll supervisor for the campus polling site reports being told by election officials not to give students provisional ballots.

Moreover, where provisional ballots were used, too often, voters who moved were not directed to their new polling place and instead made to cast provisional ballots in the wrong location, which may not be counted because they were cast at the wrong polling place. Advancement Project accordingly has urged officials to count such ballots unless it was clear that the poll worker directed the voter to her correct location but the voter refused to go.

>Full complaint here:

St. Louis County Voter Purge Complaint -

Activist Hub Radio 11/7/10

This week Adam and I discussed the political fallout from the 2010 midterm elections. We talked about the ongoing debate between the weakened "Blue Dogs" and Progressives about the future of the Democratic Party, along with the St. Louis Tea Party and Ed Martin's refusal to concede to Congressman Russ Carnahan.

County Elections Director Says "Unruly Students" Had To Be Escorted From Poling Location

I wrote earlier about how Washington University students were apparently purged from voter rolls and denied provisional ballots. This is part of long history of problems from the Board of Elections at Wash U polling locations, and takes on a special significance in this election because at first count Democrat Barbara Fraser was said to be trailing Republican John Lamping by only 176 votes out of 60,000 cast.

Today, Jo Mannies at the Beacon did some digging on this story, and the reaction from Democratic elections director Joe Donahue was truly remarkable:

Donahue did, however, take issue with reports that some Washington University students were improperly denied provisional ballots when they showed up at a polling place that serves the campus' South 40 dorms.

The account he had received from all the poll workers, said Donahue, "totally contradicted'' what the students said earlier to the news media.

Those students no longer were on the rolls, Donahue said, because they had moved off campus to University City or elsewhere. Even if they had cast a provisional ballot at the South 40 site, he said, the votes would not have counted because such students were at the wrong polling place -- and actually lived outside the 24th District.

He asserted that some students had gotten unruly, forcing the poll workers to call Washington University's security officers. No charges were filed.

I, for one, find it extremely unlikely that students were being allowed to vote yet somehow were being "unruly." Furthermore, given this report by KSDK, it seems very likely that the "unruly students" being referred to is actually Kate Gaertner, the Editor of Washington University newspaper Student Life. Here's what that report said:

"There are no circumstances that I can envision in which these voters should have been denied at the least an opportunity to cast a provisional ballot," Lieberman said. "Provisional ballots exist as an avenue of a last resort for people who eligibility can't be immediately established."

"And I saw four kids in a row get turned away," said junior Robert Pino.

Gaertner went to get the numbers - how many registered voters can vote here, how many did, and how many provisional ballots were filled out - all of which Lieberman said are a matter of public record.

The senior explained then that all the questions prompted poll workers' call to police.

"I was just on the phone with a lawyer," she said she told poll officials. "She said we have a right to this information, we can press charges if you don't give it to us."

In the end, she was escorted off campus and Robert Pino saw no resolution.

So Donahue's "unruly" student, as far as I can tell, was a journalist trying to get public information that she had a right to. Furthermore, Donahue's claims not only contradict the statements of students, but also the statements Polly Guth, a supervisor of the polling location. Here's what Guth had to say:

It is unclear how many voters were denied provisional ballots or turned away without the proper information, but Polly Guth, a supervisor of the polling place on the 40, said that voters who requested a provisional ballot earlier than 4:30 p.m. were denied. Officials indicated that only a small handful of students were turned away at the polls.

“The person this morning who we talked to [on the St. Louis Board of Election Commissioners] said no [to giving out provisional ballots] and did not give us a follow-up number,” Guth said.

And later:

Guth said that she was just following orders and understands why some students were upset.

“I know how frustrating it is, and I do apologize, but what they [the St. Louis election board] tell you, you have to do it,” Guth said. “It’s scary when you don’t.”

This reaction from the Board of Elections, which as I mentioned has a history of causing problems for students and for minority districts, strikes me as extremely implausible. It also raises a number of questions:

Who told Polly Guth not to give out provisional ballots? Why did they do so?

Why weren't the poll workers provided with a follow-up number if they had questions?

Why were provisional ballots not provided until 4:30?

Why were students' names purged from voter rolls, which in my understanding violates federal law?

Why didn't poll workers direct students who had moved to their correct polling locations?

Why didn't poll workers provide public information when asked?

Why does the board of elections routinely not answer their phones during elections?

This case is extremely fishy. I'm glad Mannies is on the beat, and I hope the journalists at Student Life can get to the bottom of this issue, especially considering that a state senate seat might hang in the balance.

Did Voter Suppression Steal A Democratic State Senate Seat?

Barbara Fraser, a Democrat running to replace Joan Bray in Missouri's 24th State Senate district, lost to Republican John Lamping by only 172 votes out of 60,000 cast. However, the 24th district includes the Washington University dorms and surrounding area, and there were serious problems reported at those sites. Students who had voted two years ago had been taken off the voting rolls, and these students were not provided with provisional ballots as they should have been. Student Life reports:

Some students who voted on the South 40 in 2008 did not show up as registered voters on Tuesday, even if they had not notified the state of a change of address.

The voting rolls should have listed them as “inactive voters” on Tuesday.

Inactive voters are those who have not voted recently and may have a change of address.

Inactive status is partially determined by notification cards that the St. Louis Board of Election Commissioners sends out over the summer to confirm that registered voters kept their addresses.

Many students’ cards were returned to the Board undelivered because they moved off campus or had a change of address.

When these cards come back to the Board of Election Commissioners, the voters should have been put onto an inactive voter list.

The article continues:

This did not happen for some students who voted on the South 40 in 2008 and did not re-register to a new address. Instead, they were taken off the voting lists entirely.

“The students say they voted two years ago at Wash. U., so they should be registered. The judge says that over the summer Wash. U. returned a bunch of update cards that the Board of Elections had given out, and they did a dump of all the names,” said Loretta Haggard, a volunteer with the Democratic Voter Protection Effort who was outside Ursa’s on election day. “I think that they should have been put on an inactive list.”

Senior Liz Nylund was in line at the South 40 polling place because she voted there in 2008. She had moved since then, but was hoping that the people working there would help her.

The girl in front of her was in the same situation and had voted on the South 40 as recently as 2009.

“[The supervisors at the South 40 polling place] were trying to find her in the system and they couldn’t find her,” Nylund said of the other girl in line. “They told her she couldn’t vote today.”

And in fact the poll workers were told by the Board of Elections not to give out provisional ballots, which should have allowed the students to vote:

The poll workers were told by someone at the Board of Election Commissioners Tuesday morning not to give out any provisional ballots, according to Polly Guth, a supervisor at the South 40 polling place.

These orders were reversed when the poll workers asked again at around 4:30 p.m.

According to Donahue, the Board of Election Commissioners is investigating why no provisional ballots were given out earlier in the day.

“We are doing an investigation of that comment here at our office,” Donahue said.

Phone calls made to the board of election were not answered. When the editor of the StudLife Kate Gaertner went to the polling place to investigate and ask questions, the police were called and she was escorted away:

She explained that she got a call at around 5:10 p.m. Tuesday that students were being turned away, they weren't allowed to cast a vote, and weren't being offered the option to fill out a provisional ballot. She called a Washington University adjunct professor and voters' rights attorney, Denise Lieberman.

"There are no circumstances that I can envision in which these voters should have been denied at the least an opportunity to cast a provisional ballot," Lieberman said. "Provisional ballots exist as an avenue of a last resort for people who eligibility can't be immediately established."

"And I saw four kids in a row get turned away," said junior Robert Pino.

Gaertner went to get the numbers - how many registered voters can vote here, how many did, and how many provisional ballots were filled out - all of which Lieberman said are a matter of public record.

The senior explained then that all the questions prompted poll workers' call to police.

"I was just on the phone with a lawyer," she said she told poll officials. "She said we have a right to this information, we can press charges if you don't give it to us."

In the end, she was escorted off campus and Robert Pino saw no resolution.

The Washington University dorm area is also in Missouri's Third Congressional District, where Congressman Russ Carnahan won a close race against Ed Martin. Students at Wash U overwhelmingly vote Democratic: a 2008 poll showed that students preferred Obama to McCain 78%-15%, with nearly 90% voting for Obama in 2008. With the turned away voters, only about 400 out of the 1800 registered voters in the Wash U precinct voted on Tuesday.

This is not the first time students at Washington University have been disenfranchised. In 2002, poll workers also refused to give students provisional ballots. In 2004, students were inexplicably only allowed to use 3 out of 13 available voting machines, which led to 2 hour waits. In 2006, students who were registered to vote were also left off voter rolls. In 2006, when some students went to the St. Louis County Board of Election Commissioners office, where they could cast a regular ballot, Joseph Goeke, the current Republican Director of the St. Louis County Board of elections, originally told them to go back to their polling location then said they'd have to stand outside because they were "rowdy."

The St. Louis County Board of Elections is also no stranger to sketchy events off-campus. In 2008, there were ridiculously long lines and voting problems in areas with high African-American populations. Goeke ignored election protection activists who told him that the county was not providing enough ballots and claimed to have not known about 6 hour waits in one of his polling locations until he spoke with a Post-Dispatch reporter at 4 PM. In 2006, the County Board of Elections combined four precincts into one location in Democratic University City, resulting in four hour waits.

With a razor thin margin of 172 votes in the original voting tallies (and with provisional ballots still needing to be counted), this incident needs to be seriously investigated.

A Special Thanks To The People Who Win Elections

Last night was brutal for Democrats, but it could have been much worse here in St. Louis. Congressman Carnahan won. Charlie Dooley won. Prop B won. A strong message was sent in St. Louis that Proposition A will be crushed in April. All of these are great news, especially when considered against the alternatives.

So in light of these victories, I hope everyone can take a moment to thank the people who make the real difference in elections. The people who tirelessly made phone calls, who knocked on doors, who drove people to the polls, who stood out in the cold reminding folks to vote, who attended crucial rallies. I'd also like to thank the great staff for these efforts, who I know were working their butts off seven days a week for many months in each case to eek out victories.

I spend a lot of time sharing information and having discussions online. But I know that what really wins elections is the Get Out The Vote Effort. For those who fight the good fight on the ground, thank you so much. And for the rest of us, let's keep in mind the people who do the real work providing a buffer against insanity.

Missouri Voter's Bill of Rights (Downloadable Version)

Download and print out a copy and give some to your friends. And, easiest of all, remember to call 1-866-OURVOTE (866-687-8683) if there are any problems.


Missouri Voters Rights -

h/t Dr. Des Chene.

Why You Should Expect Dirty Tricks

Just want to remind people of what the St. Louis Tea Party tried to pull during the vote on a 1/2 percent sales tax increase for public transportation back in April. John Burns mysteriously decided at the last minute to hold an anti-transit rally in Chesterfield and then claimed that the Chesterfield Mayor, who happened to be the leader of the pro-transit campaign, was "harrassing" the tea party:

Lt. Steven Lewis, spokesman for the Chesterfield police, said this morning that the department "does not allow anyone to stand at that intersection" for safety reasons.

Even Boy Scouts are barred, Lewis said, because the intersection is so prone to accidents. "It's not a political statement," Lewis said. "It's about safety."

Burns disagrees, and contended that the police action was tied to the fact that Chesterfield Mayor John Nations is chairman of the chief pro-Prop A group, Advance St. Louis. Nations, alleged Burns, "instructed the police to shut us down. We were not obstructing the view of any motorists. Not at all. What City Hall did was totally wrong."

John Burns is now employed by American Majority and is leading several efforts for the St. Louis tea party. Don't be surprised if they scream about some manufactured controversy early in the day tomorrow.

New Evidence Tea Party is Violating 501c(4) Status

As I documented previously, an advertisement on Reboot Congress paid for by the St. Louis Tea Party directed people to a site that said that Ed Martin "deserves your vote" and that "Ed Martin deserves to Serve Instead of Russ Carnahan." This appears to be a straightforward violation of the tea party's 501(c)4 status, which permits them to communicate endorsements to their members but not to the public at large. It's hard to think of a better example of "communicating to the public" than placing a web ad that takes you directly to a site that tells you to vote for Ed Martin.

I've now found more evidence of the tea party violating their 501(c)4 status and election laws. The Tea Party has been placing google advertisements that show up on sites like Big Government:

You can see a larger version of the advertisement here:

The ad takes you to the main page of the St. Louis Tea Party site, which prominent features a GOTV video from Bill Hennessy:

You can watch the video here:

In the video, Bill Hennessy says the following:

I'm going to ask you to take one hour, just one hour, Monday or Tuesday, to come to the St. Louis Tea Party Headquarters at 4512 Hampton Avenue in St. Louis Hills, just south of Hampton Village, and give one hour to phone calls or knocking on doors asking your friends and neighbors, your fellow citizens to go to the polls on Tuesday and vote for Ed Martin and the tea party candidates across the ballot.

So, the St. Louis Tea Party paid for Google Advertisements that direct people to a site where Bill Hennessy directly asks them to vote for Ed Martin. Unless I'm missing something, this is a pretty obvious violation of election laws.

Partisan Voter Challengers May Suppress Votes

Press Release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Denise Lieberman, Senior Attorney
Advancement Project

VOTER RIGHTS GROUP RAISES CONCERN TO ELECTION OFFICIALS ABOUT AGGRESSIVE VOTER CHALLENGES IN ST. LOUIS AREA

[ST. LOUIS, MO – Nov. 1, 2010] - In light of recent media reports of systemic vote suppression efforts in early vote sites around the country, and with reports of similar aggressive campaigns planned in Missouri on Election Day, Advancement Project, a leading voter protection organization, has appealed to local election officials to ensure that poll workers are trained in how to respond to challenges at the polls.

“We are deeply concerned about poll worker confusion in light of recent reports that partisan entities plan to conduct aggressive challenges to voters’ eligibility at the polls in St. Louis and St. Louis County during the November 2, 2010, General Elections,” said Denise Lieberman, Senior Attorney and Missouri’s voter protection advocate with Advancement Project. “These aggressive operations create the risk of voter suppression and voter intimidation and are likely to have a disparate impact on minority voters.”

The letter advises election officials: “You have an obligation to ensure that voters are not intimidated, harassed, or thwarted from voting by untrained challengers or confused poll workers who fail to follow the requirements for challenges under Missouri law.”

“Election officials have the obligation to ensure that the promised presence of challengers engaged in aggressive challenging of voters’ eligibility does not create chaotic conditions, disenfranchise voters, or intimidate either voters or poll workers, who are required to allow eligible voters to cast a ballot even if challenged, upon verification of the voter’s eligibility. The fact that a voter’s eligibility has been challenged does not necessarily mean that she cannot vote a regular ballot,” Lieberman wrote to officials. A voter who is challenged must have her eligibility verified by the poll worker, but is entitled to vote a regular ballot if eligible. Voters whose eligibility cannot be immediately established are allowed to cast a provisional ballot.

Advancement Project has also prepared a summary of state laws related to challengers, watchers, intimidation and legal polling place activities that can be used to combat intimidation, challenges or other tactics that disrupt the voting process or discourage voting.

Voters who experience problems at the polls should call the toll-free non-partisan Election Protection Hotline at: 1-866-OURVOTE. Local Election Protection attorneys will be on hand to assist voters on Election Day.

St. Louis Activist Events for Nov. 1-7

(note: I strongly agree with all of the St. Louis American's endorsements in this election, except that I would also add the great Arthur Lieber, running against Todd Akin)

Election Week! Here's why you should vote and get involved. Here's how you can get involved.

This week's activist events:

Monday, November 1, the I Care Campaign, for everybody in the St. Louis Metropolitan Area (STL) who cares about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, questioning, intersex and ally issues, will be meeting from 6:30 to 8 PM at the Wine Press (4436 Olive).

Also Monday, there will be a couple trainings on the Say No to A effort. Contact jessica@mojwj.org or 314-644-0466 x13 for more info.

Also Monday, if you're interested in being a non-partisan poll-watcher on Tuesday, there's a crash course training & pre-election rally Monday night from 5:30 to 6:30 PM at the Central Reform Congregation (5020 Waterman). Listen to an interview with Denise Lieberman, leading the efforts in St. Louis, here.

Tuesday, November 2, is election day! Vote! Vote! Vote! You can find your polling station here (based on the current address you are registered to vote at). Make sure you know your rights as a voter.

Election Day Events:

Vote Yes On Prop B

St. Louis College Students Voting

Helping NARAL at the polls.

Working for Cherly Hibbeler

SLU Votes 2010

Yolanda Austin

Jim Baldwin

Election Night Parties:

St. Charles County Democratic Victory Party Potluck

Komo/Frame/Dulle/Tuggle/Viehland Election Watch Party

Tommy Sowers

Washington University

The Rent is Too Damn Pi

Colona and Montecillo

Wednesday, Nov. 2, PRIZM at UMSL is hosting a talk by Midwest Gender Queer Blogger/Activist Jac Stringer, 2 PM at the Pilot House (1st floor of MSC: 1 University Blvd).

Also Wednesday, the SLU Roundtable is hosting a dicussion on Illegal Immigration from 7 to 8:30 PM at the Busch Student Center Ballroom room 171.

Also Wednesday, there will be a discussion of oil spills from an ecological and social justice perspective at Legacy Books and Cafe (5429 Delmar) at 7 PM.

Also Wednesday, there's a Community Science and Technology Night at the Lift for Life Academy (1731 Broadway) from 6 to 8 PM. hosted by fabulous St. Louis Science Blogger Daniel Lee.

Also Wednesday, SUI Edwardsville Women's Studies is hosting Healing Journeys: Gender, Sexuality, and Forgiveness from 7 to 9 PM at the Center for Spirituality and Sustainability.

Also Wednesday, an interesting experiment in art and involvement called _CommunityService_ will be at the Upstairs Lounge (3131 S. Grand) starting at 10 PM.

Thursday, Nov. 4, a Happy Hour raising money for Angel's Arms will be at the Double D Lounge (1740 S. Brentwood) at 4:30.

Also Thursday, there will be a discussion about the impact of coal at Ursa's Fireside at Wash U from 5:30 to 6:30 PM.

Also Thursday, the Diversity Awareness Partnership is hosting their 3rd Annual Diversity Dinner at the St. Louis Science Center's James S. McDonnell Planetarium from 6 to 9 PM.

Also Thursday, Metropolis St. Louis is hosting a Walk on South Hampton from 6 to 10:30 PM.

Also Thursday, Amnesty International will be screening the movie Burma VJ: Reporting from a Closed City, at the Chase Park Plaza Cinemas (212 N. Kingshighway) from 7 to 9 PM. November's City Affair will be a Happy Hour format leading up to a screening of the movie.

Also Thursday, the RFT is holding their BeAst of St. Louis 2010 Party at the City Museum from 7 to 11 PM. I'm still waiting for my free pass.

Friday, Nov. 5, the 1st Annual African American Literary Movement event will be at Forest Park College at noon.

Also Friday, PRIZM at UMSL is having a Brown Bag Lunch w/ Safe Zones from noon to 1 PM at 303 Lucus Hall.

Also Friday, the SLU OUTLaws and Rainbow Alliance are hosting Professor of business law at Lincoln University of Missouri Kylar Broadus at Morrissey Hall -the courtroom- from 4 to 6 PM.

Also Friday, A Women's Place, one-act plays about women in extraordinary circumstances, kicks off at the West End Players (733 Union Avenue) at 8 PM.

Saturday, Nov. 6, there will be a work day at the Rockhaven Ecozoic Center (7621 Rivermont Trail, House Springs, MO) from 11 AM to 5 PM.

Also Saturday, Earth Dance farms is hosting a Pesto Festo at The Savoy (119 S. Florissant, Ferguson, MO) from 6:30 to 10 PM.

Also Saturday, join Planned Parenthood for Choice Art 2010 at Concrete Ocean Contemporary Art Gallery (2257 S. Jefferson) from 7 to 11 PM.

Sunday, Nov. 7, it's Cranksgiving 2010 at Schlafly Bottleworks (7260 Southwest Ave) from 10 AM to 2 PM, a bike event collecting food can donations for Food Outreach.

Also Sunday, Borders in Brentwood Creve Couer are holding book fairs to benefit the Jewish Fund for Human Needs from 10 AM to 9 PM.

Also Sunday, the Gateway Men's Chorus is having a CD Release Party for Love Changes Everything at the Cedars @ the JCA (13190 S. Outer 40 Road, Chesterfield, MO) from 2 to 4 PM.

Also Sunday, WUSICE will be participating in a discussion From Copenhagen to Cancun: The Role of China and the U.S. about climate change, from 5 to 6:30 PM at the Danforth University Center Room 276.

Also Sunday, the Center for Theology and Social Analysis (1077 S Newstead) will be hosting Lauren Giblin discussing her Summer in Nepal from 7 to 9 PM.

Also Sunday, and every Sunday, there will be a vigil for peace at the corner of Grand and Lindell at 7 PM.

Activist Hub Radio 10/31/10

Hi all,

This week Adam and I talked with two guests. First, Denise Lieberman, the Senior Attorney for the Advancement Project, about voter intimidation and protection, and what Missouri citizens need to know about their right to vote. And second, congressman Russ Carnahan, of Missouri's 3rd congressional district, about Tuesday's midterm election and his efforts on the economy, protecting the environment, and students loans.



Links

Missouri Voter Bill of Right

For any information or problems with voting Call:1-866-687-8683 (1-866-Our-Vote)

Ed Martin's creation of voter suppression squad's with many references to ACORN

http://russcarnahan.com

Is The St. Louis Tea Party Breaking Election Law?

Jake Wagman wrote a story last week saying the St. Louis tea party was "straddling the line" in regards to election law with a recent billboard they paid for in Arnold asking "Who deserves to serve?" Here's what Wagman had to say:

The group is a 501c(4) non-profit organization, which means it has to be careful about political activity. So-called "social welfare" organizations can engage in political activity, so long as it is not their primary purpose.

They can also endorse federal candidates, so long as they communicate that endorsement only to their members and to the press.

They can't, however, communicate endorsements to the public at large -- which is why their billboard is so deliberately crafted.

He continues:

If the Tea Party billboard said simply, "Vote for Martin," or, "Don't Vote for Carnahan," they would risk losing their tax exempt status -- a status that subjects them to far less disclosure requirements than a traditional political action committee.

With a careful juxtaposition of photos, the Tea Party can effectively deliver its message, while at the same time claim compliance with IRS laws governing political activity.

But unless Carnahan supporters really do have their head down, it won't be hard to see through the intent of the billboard, which, if it sparks a legal challenge, could spell trouble for the Tea Party.

If that billboard is straddling the line, than other actions by the tea party appear to be quite plainly crossing it.

501c(4)s are not supposed to communicate their endorsements to the public at large. However, the tea party has an advertisement featuring the same image, seen here on the Reboot Congress website:

The advertisement very clearly states, "Paid for by the St. Louis Tea Party Coalition" at the bottom of the image:


If you click on the advertisement, you are redirected to this page, which states at the top, "Ed Martin Deserves to Serve Instead of Russ Carnahan," and goes on to say that they believe that Ed Martin "deserves your vote." In other words, the tea party has 501c(4) paid advertising that sends people directly to a page that endorses Ed Martin. If that's not communicating their endorsement to the public at large, then I don't know what is!

There's No Excuse For Not Being Involved In November's Elections!

On November 2nd, Missouri voters head to the polls for the most crucial election since the 2008 election that put Barack Obama in the White House. It's been a stressful two years, for a number of reasons. The primary reason is that the national Republican Party cynically decided, from the very beginning, that they would not cooperate with the Democrats on anything, even bills designed to put Americans to work or extend unemployment benefits to people who desperately needed help. Republicans bet on the fact that people vote against incumbents when they are unhappy, and they succeeded in doing everything they could to make people miserable. Billionaire right-wing extremists kick-started the tea party movement who introduced a nonstop display of screaming, pouting, foot-stomping, and offensive rhetoric into the political process, which further soured people on politics.

Though Republican obstruction was the primary reason for the difficulty of the past two years, obviously the Democrats deserve some criticism. So called "centrists" (more accurately referred to as Democrats In Name Only) significantly watered-down and outright blocked key legislation even when Democrats had a majority in the House and 60 seats in the Senate. Even mainstream Democrats were way too willing to cooperate with Republican attempts to stall, and as such allowed them to drag out the healthcare bill for almost a year. Democrats have caved to Republicans in cases where it seemed like they didn't need to, and have often failed to be as outspoken and blunt as progressives would like.

But even with these failings in the Democratic party, there are a number of reasons why we need to be involved in these races. First of all, we did pass key healthcare reform legislation that will reduce the deficit, expand health coverage to 32 million Americans, strengthen Medicare and Medicaid, and make health coverage more affordable for all of us. We passed a stimulus bill that saved up to 3.3 million jobs and strengthened investment in green jobs and infrastructure. We passed financial reform legislation. We withdrew troops from Iraq and took a more sane approach to foreign policy, in spite of neoconservatives screaming for us to bomb Iran.

And even if you don't think that these accomplishments are motivating enough for you to feel like you should reward the Democrats with your effort, consider that rewards and punishments are not limited to the Democratic Party. If Republicans take back the House of Representatives and/or the Senate, we effectively will have sent the message to them that the most cynical, dishonest, unethical type of politics is completely effective, and we will be encouraging them to continue doing it in the future. If keeping people miserable from '08 to '10 works to kick Dems out of Congress, why wouldn't it work to kick Obama out of the White House in 2012? Not working for Democrats is the same as rewarding Republicans.

One of the most obvious races where this applies is the Robin Carnahan vs. Roy Blunt Senate contest. Carnahan has ticked off progressives by moving to the right on a number of issues. And not just moving to the right, but moving on issues that seem to go against her own narrative against Blunt, like supporting tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans. Be that as it may, there is no quetion that a Senate with Robin Carnahan is far, far better than one with Roy Blunt. Carnahan cares about the environment, cares about union workers, and genuinely cares about the people of Missouri. Blunt, on the other hand, really is the "Worst of Washington." He's been in D.C. for 14 years, was connected with the convicted criminal Jack Abramoff, and was in the leadership of the Republican Party during the years marked by corruption, the turning of a national surplus into a huge deficit, and a needless war. Do we really want to reward Blunt for his behavior with a seat in the Senate? I don't. You can sign up for Robin Carnahan's campaign here.

If Robin is still too moderate for you, consider that Republicans are poised to win back the House of Representatives, which would unfortunately result in the loss of Nancy Pelosi as our house leader (and she is one of the few Democrats who really has stood tough during the last two years). Ed Martin, a dirty campaigner and a dirty public servant, is running a loud, if not effective, race against Congressman Russ Carnahan. Some people don't like Congressman Carnahan's calm demeanor, but he is a leader on environmental issues and on public transportation, whereas Ed Martin is a global warming denier who has a vested interest in big oil due to his wife's $100,000+ in Exxon stock. Sign up to help at Congressman Carnahan's website here.

Lacy Clay probably has a cake walk, but if you don't believe me you can check out his website here.

The excuse that you're tired of political dynasties and D.C. insiders also does not work. Tommy Sowers is running a spirited grass-roots campaign against Jo Emerson. He's in a tough district, but it'd be hard to find a better candidate. Click here to help him out.

And finally, for the most pure, most idealistic Democrats in existence, the amazing Arhur Lieber is running a progressive campaign against Todd Akin that is so pure that he won't even accept donations because he's disappointed in how money has corrupted our political process! If you are a progressive, Lieber is the real deal for you. Why not help out his campaign to send a message you can be proud of?

Oh, and for those only motivated by spite, please donate a few dollars to Congressman Phil Hare's campaign so that the dishonest tactics of the St. Louis tea party don't flip a congressional seat. Could you really live with yourself knowing that the House of Representatives fell into Republican hands because of a successful lie by the St. Louis tea party that went unchallenged?

If you're not into national races, there are a number of important local races as well. Democrat Charlie Dooley is competing hard against Republican Bill Corrigan to keep his County Executive Seat. The tea party smeared Dooley and vowed to defeat him for supporting public transportation. Help prove them wrong here.

There are also a number of important races for the Missouri Legislature. Barbara Fraser is a progressive running to follow in the footsteps of the amazing Senator Joan Bray. It is incredibly important for progressives to have a strong voice in the Senate, and Fraser can provide that. Help her election campaign by clicking here.

A great candidate for State Representative is Debra Lavender. She's a true blue Democrat and is running against Rick Stream, who is waaay too extreme for his district. Get involved here.

Another excellent progressive candidate for Missouri House of Representatives is Genise Monticello. Support her campaign by going here.

If you're not that into supporting candidates, consider the following. A billionaire is trying to use the statewide ballot process to gut the budgets of St. Louis and Kansas City by eliminating the earnings tax. This would cut key city services like public safety, and would shift the tax burden to the people who can least afford it. Do you really want one man with a lot of money to be able to push around our city? If not, please get involved with Say No To A.

And finally, if you've made it this far and still don't care about getting involved in the elections, don't get cocky yet. Because there is a proposition on the ballot that would help to end cruelty against dogs if it passes. Yes, dogs. Could you really, possibly, scandalously, be so cold-hearted as to sit out the political process even when there's an opportunity to help puppies from being harmed? If you are, I'm not sure why you're reading this blog. If you're not, you can help out by going to the Yes On Prop B site.

I submit that if you are a genuinely progressive person, an activist, or someone who cares at all about making the world better, you have no excuse not to start doing something to affect the November elections. Whatever issue you care about, there is somebody or some ballot that will be voted on in November that makes a difference to that issue. You might have an out if you are already working on some other form of activism that you think is a better use of time than these elections, but for everyone else there's no excuse* to not get involved.

....

*Obviously excluding extreme situations or demands in one's personal life. But TV doesn't count!

Campaign 2010 Volunteer Opportunities

Here's the volunteer information for some worthy candidates and causes for the November 2nd elections:

Volunteer with Robin Carnahan.

Volunteer for Congressman Russ Carnahan.

Request a yard sign or bumper sticker.

Volunteer with Arthur Lieber for Congress, running against Todd Akin.

Note: I didn't see a form for volunteers from Congressman Clay, and I don't think he has a very challenging race, but send me info if you disagree.

Volunteer with Charlie Dooley for County Executive.

"Come out and support Barbara Fraser by knocking doors in the 24th District. We need her to be the next strong and effective legislator in the Missouri State Senate. We have 2,000 doors to knock every single week, be the difference this week! Contact Katie at (314)863-2956 or by e-mailing Katie@BarbaraFraser.com ."

Volunteer for Debra Lavender for State Representative.

Volunteer for Vote Yes On Prop B to end puppy mill cruelty.

Volunteer to Vote No on Prop A, a bill that would gut the budgets of Kansas City and St. Louis.

Suggestions? Send me the info and I'll make sure to update.

Benchmarks

As I mentioned on Sunday, it's really important that everyone get out and vote today against Prop C to help shape the national narrative for November. However, I thought it would be worth noting a couple of key benchmarks that can help evaluate the strength of various right-wing political movements as we get ready for the crucial 2010 Midterm elections in November.

First of all, Prop C proponents like Jim Durbin at 24th State have made it clear that their goal is 75% for the Prop C vote. That's a benchmark for evaluating how well the Right, and specifically the tea party, is able to organize. I personally don't think they'll be able to even get close to that number. Turnout will also be a key issue: if Missouri only has 25% turnout, is that really a strong number to base a national narrative on?

Second, as pointed out by FiredUp Missouri, Roy Blunt has stated that his goal for the Senate primary campaign is 65% of the vote. This already is a remarkably low number, considering that previous party favorites have often gotten well over 80% of the primary vote, but I wonder if Blunt will even be able to achieve this low number. If he gets less that 60%, it would definitely be in "Embarrassing" land. If he gets less than 50%, that would be a strong signal that the Missouri Republicans are not at all enthused about his campaign. I should also note that anything less than 60% would begin to raise serious questions about the fact that the St. Louis Tea Party, unlike the other tea parties in the state, refused to stand on their principles and support an actual consistent fiscal conservative candidate like Chuck Purgason.

Finally, I'll be curious to see how Ed Martin does against John Wayne Tucker in the Republican primary. Are Republicans in the 3rd District seriously so devoid of standards that they're willing to endorse the ethically-challenged GOP insider Martin over Tucker? We shall see.

Endorsements for August 3rd

The August 3rd primaries are coming up in Missouri, so I thought I'd share my 2 cents on a few of the upcoming races. I don't claim to be an expert on the intricacies of all of the local races, and as you'll see I don't have a strong opinion on many of the contests, but I thought it might be helpful to share at least one perspective from a progressive point of view on the elections. The November general elections are often the traditional Democrat v. Republican matchup, so primaries can be a great opportunity is a place like the St. Louis area to really look for candidates that reflect the values you care about.

So with no further ado...

The Most Important Point: VOTE NO ON PROP C! Proposition C is a right wing attempt to roll back the health care reforms passed after a long and brutal struggle earlier in the year. As has been pointed out by those on the left and the right, Proposition C will not be legally binding. However, it's an attempt by the Right to create the impression that people are opposed to the reforms (many of which have not even taken effect yet). In fact, with support of the new health care laws growing, this vote can be seen largely as an attempt by the Right to shift momentum back in their favor. The Right in Missouri has been organizing around this issue for a while, with no comparable effort on the Left, so Prop C is likely to win. However, since it's really about sending a message, and since the Right has raised the goalposts pretty high (for example, right-wing blogger Jim Durbin at 24thstate, who's been working on this campaign for a while, said they were aiming at getting 75% of the vote), we can send a strong message by generating a significant No on Prop C vote. Basically every vote matters for the national narrative, and everyone who votes against Prop C and for moving forward rather than backwards on healthcare reform can help shape the message for the November elections.

Missouri House Races: Pastor James Morris is a strong progressive who is very connected with the activist community. I strongly support his bid for re-election.

There are a couple of Democratic candidates who I would say are not part of the establishment and have real potential to improve the Missouri House of Representatives. Doug Clemens in MO district 77 might not call himself "progressive" on his website, but I'd say he stands for the core values of the Democratic Party: he's labor-friendly, he's environment-friendly, and he understands the need to combine the two values by helping to create green jobs. Many of the people whose opinions I value most are supporting Clemens' campaign. You can find out how to help Clemens campaign by clicking here. Byron DeLear also supports the creation of green jobs, and he brings an expert perspective as someone who has been working in the clean-energy industry and who helped pass the Property Assessed Clean Energy bill through the Missouri House. It would be fascinating to see what effect a genuine green jobs expert could have in the Missouri legislature. Find out how to help Byron here.

Missouri Senate: I don't have definitive opinions on any of these races, but I do have a few thoughts. Probably any of the four candidates in the Democratic Primary for the 14th district would be reliable progressive votes. I used to really like Maria Chapelle-Nadal, but have been very disappointed in some of her recent antics, from her obnoxious comments on Twitter, to her recent ridiculous legal threats (which she refuses to support with any evidence) against my friend Clark at Show Me Progress, to a couple other things that I won't bother to mention. If she was elected, she hopefully would vote the right way and maybe could even because a strong progressive voice in the Senate, but some of her behavior strikes me as pretty serious warning signs. Among the other candidates (Don Calloway, Joe Adams, Ted Hoskins), I don't have strong views. Don Calloway wrote a blog post several years ago that I thought very nicely articulated a progressive vision for St. Louis, and I trust the judgment of a couple of intelligent young progressives who have been working hard for his campaign, but I realize this probably isn't enough to base a "full endorsement" on.

Similarly, in the 24th District Senate Democratic Primary, I don't have a conclusive opinion. This case is a little different, however, because whomever wins will have a competitive Republican challenger in November. The race is for the seat of Senator Joan Bray, one of the most important progressive voices in Jefferson City, so I'm inclined to support Bray's strong endorsement of Barbara Fraser. She seems to me to have a stronger chance of victory in the general election.

One last thing: if you are a conservative who by some odd twist of fate stumbled across this website, surely you would support a genuine conservative like Chuck Purgason in the Republican Senate primary rather than a D.C. insider Corporocrat like Roy Blunt, right? It seems clear to me that anyone who, like the St. Louis Tea Party, supports Blunt over Purgason in the primary, is standing not for conservative values but for the exact Government-playing-favorites-based-on-who-donated-the-most ideology that free market enthusiasts claim to oppose. Just sayin.

So, those are my thoughts. Feel free to share yours in the comments.

Update: for information about voting rights and election day, click here.