Green & Libertarian Presidential Candidates to Demand Ohio Recount

11/11 - David Cobb and Michael Badnarik, the 2004 presidential candidates for the Green and Libertarian parties, today announced their intentions to file a formal demand for a recount of the presidential ballots cast in Ohio.

“Due to widespread reports of irregularities in the Ohio voting process, we are compelled to demand a recount of the Ohio presidential vote. Voting is the heart of the democratic process in which we as a nation put our faith. When people stand in line for hours to exercise their right to vote, they need to know that all votes will be counted fairly and accurately. We must protect the rights of the people of Ohio, as well as all Americans, and stand up for the right to vote and the right for people’s votes to be counted. The integrity of the democratic process is at stake,” the two candidates said in a joint statement.

The candidates also demanded that Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican who chaired the Ohio Bush campaign, recuse himself from the recount process.

The Ohio presidential election was marred by numerous press and independent reports of voter intimidation, mis-marked and discarded ballots, problems with electronic voting machines and the targeted disenfranchisement of African American voters. A number of citizens’ groups and voting rights organizations are holding hearings this Saturday in Columbus, Ohio to investigate voting irregularities and voter suppression in the Ohio 2004 general election. The hearings will be held from 1-4 p.m. at the New Faith Baptist Church, 955 Oak Street. Voters, poll workers, journalists and voting experts are invited to testify. A second hearing will be held on Monday at a location TBA, from 6-9 p.m.

The Cobb and Badnarik campaigns are in the process of raising the required fee, estimated at $110,000, for filing for a complete recount. The campaigns are accepting contributions through their websites. The Cobb-LaMarche website is www.votecobb.org. The Badnarik-Campagna contribution page is https://badnarik.org/.

The Cobb and Badnarik campaigns have displayed a level of cooperation and civility rarely found in electoral politics. The campaigns jointly participated in and/or sponsored a series of independent debates. Cobb and Badnarik were also simultaneously arrested in St. Louis protesting their exclusion from the restricted, two-party corporate-sponsored debates.

War Room is still a bit weary after the craziness of the last days of the presidential campaign -- but apparently John Kerry doesn't get tired. After a week off, sort of, he's still running for president. Kerry, according to the Los Angeles Times, has been "calling key Democratic donors to lay the groundwork for a political organization that would give him a voice in national politics and position him for another White House run in 2008, close associates say."

"His friends, contributors and former campaign aides say he was energized by winning almost 56 million votes -- more than any other candidate in U.S. history, except for Bush -- and intends to wield influence as the titular leader of the Democratic Party."

"Kerry confidants said in interviews Monday that key members of the campaign's finance team were planning to remain loyal to the 2004 nominee -- even as potential 2008 contenders such as Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and John Edwards of North Carolina begin building support -- in case he decides to run."

"Those sentiments differ significantly from the attitudes expressed after Democratic losses in 1988 and 2000, when pressure mounted on nominees Michael S. Dukakis and Al Gore to step aside after what many party leaders considered error-plagued campaigns."

"'After 1988 and 2000, there was a different sort of tone in the fundraising community,' said Robert Farmer, who was campaign treasurer for Dukakis in 1988 and Kerry this year. 'They felt they had been let down. I don't get that sense now.'"

It's not terribly surprising to find out that a major political party is acting unethically. Any viewership of this past election found many examples of both parties. However, one major story that has been ignored by the media is the misleading fundraising campaign used by the College Republicans. In today's Star Tribune, there was an article about some of the unscrouplous measures used for fundraising:

"Carmen Bakken, 88, of Cambridge, Minn., proved her party loyalty this year when she got a stream of fundraising letters from the National College Republicans.

She sent 91 checks totaling $42,985.

Told of the extent of her donations, she said, "Oh, my goodness! I don't think I gave so much. I don't remember the name College Republicans. I thought what I gave to was a national Republican company."

Similar accounts from other senior citizens in Minnesota and nationwide have put Eric Hoplin, the St. Olaf College graduate who chairs the College Republican National Committee, on the defensive about its record $8 million fundraising this year.

Hoplin, 26, whose job was once held by top White House strategist Karl Rove, says he is looking into whether the committee's chief consultant misled and preyed on elderly people with a barrage of letter solicitations.


"We've come to discover that there are a few donors who have been confused, a few donors who have some form of dementia, who aren't entirely sure of the amount of money that they're giving -- and how often they're giving," Hoplin said this week.

Hoplin also acknowledged one source of that confusion: The College Republicans raise funds "using a lot of project names" -- letters that in the past neglected to mention his group at all.

Hoplin said that, after becoming the committee's executive director in 2001, his "first reform" was to require that every solicitation identify the College Republicans."

I decided to take the liberty of registering at the Seattle Times to get a look at these articles. I recommend doing so, as some of the content is particularly interesting. They used misleading tactics as to who the donationwas going to:

"They're all from the College Republican National Committee — though one has to read the fine print to see that.

The big print says "Republican Headquarters 2004" or "Republican Election Committee" or one of the other names operators of the group use to raise money. The letters bring daily angst into the homes of senior citizens who make up the group's biggest contributors. "

" Many of the top donors were in their 80s and 90s. The donors wrote checks — sometimes hundreds and, in at least one case, totaling more than $100,000 — to groups with official sounding-names such as "Republican Headquarters 2004," "Republican Elections Committee" and the "National Republican Campaign Fund."

But all of those groups, according to the small print on the letters, were simply projects of the College Republicans, who collected all of the checks.

And little of the money went to election efforts.

Of the money spent by the group this year, nearly 90 percent went to direct-mail vendors and postage expenses, according to records filed with the Internal Revenue Service. "

Essentially then they are trying to get more money by making it appear that the individual is donating to more than one group or cause. At the same time, the actual group receiving the money spent most of their total funds in other areas, as the Star Trib article points out:

"Alison Eikele, a spokeswoman for the College Republicans, said 79 percent of the group's revenue has been eaten up by the costs of fundraising consultants. The rest went for a campus recruiting drive that more than tripled membership to 150,000, for grooming new members to be foot soldiers in the Bush-Cheney campaign's get-out-the-vote effort and for dispatching 75 paid staff members to presidential battleground states this fall, Hoplin said."

As if that wasn't bad enough, some of the tactics employed by the letters should cause alarm:

"Unless I hear from you within the next 72 hours, President Bush and our Republican leaders may have little hope of thwarting the Democrats' anti-Republican plans in this final stretch leading up to Election Day."

"Your commitment today — your contribution today — WILL determine Election Day,"

"This invoice in your hands is a bill of honor," Gourley wrote above an "ELECTION 2004 REMITTANCE."

"I ask that you submit $500 — or whatever you possibly can — with honor to Republican Headquarters 2004," he wrote, including the donor's name.

"P.S.," he wrote. "This invoice is past due only because Republican Headquarters 2004 is going up against the deep pockets of liberal special interest groups."