It’s been distressing to see the race for CDP chair turn from an election into a coronation, with John Burton lining up institutional support, muscling out the grassroots and forcing his competition to the sidelines.  Coming off an historic Presidential election, with the demographics squarely on the side of Democrats and a new generation of activists who have boundless ideas to bring a different organizing philosophy to California, the right chairman of the Party could really leverage the energy and activity into something special, to lay the groundwork for a re-imagining of the political structure.  Sadly, the best can be said of Burton is that he’s an old workhorse, but there are troubling signs that he is unaware of the changes in modern campaiging, unconcerned with reforming the broken institutions both inside and outside the party, and unable to use the new energy and excitement to any decent ends.  It appears that the frenetic organizing outside the party structure may be the only hope for progressives in the near term.

But it could be even worse than that.  The new site Burton Watch offers a substantive critique of the former State Senator, with information that every delegate and voting member of the Party ought to know before turning over the reins to this guy.  The initial post surveys how Democrats could lose California under this version of leadership:

Because the public instinctively knows that when power and money compete with the public interest, we all suffer. If you’ve ever registered voters or walked precincts for a candidate, you’ve undoubtedly been greeted with this response: “I’m not going to vote because it doesn’t matter. All politicians are the same.” And as the cynicism grows, voter turnout declines and the Decline To State registration escalates — now approximately 20% of all Californians are registered DTS. So how do we combat the innate distrust that drives a large segment of our population to disengage from political parties and even voting? Well, Obama showed us a part of the solution […]

When previously disenfranchised voters, minorities, and the young are all flocking to the Democratic Party because we represent a new way, a vision of hope and change, why on earth would we want to take a giant step backwards to the bad old days? And yet that’s exactly what Democrats in California are poised to do this April. The California Democratic Party, instead of rising to meet the challenges of a new millennium with openness and inclusion, is set to reach back to one of the oldest and most entrenched political machines in California history for its leadership.

Enter John Burton, California’s much older version of Rod Blagojevich. There are so many reasons why John Burton is unfit for the role of Party Chair in California, that I’ll be doing a series of posts, each one dedicated to a disqualifying aspect of his background. All of the material I’ll be using has been obtained through basic use of the google, and the state’s Republicans could easily find and use it against California Democrats. And trust me, they will.

At the end of this series, I think you’ll agree that John Burton is the wrong person to lead the California Democratic Party in 2009.

The next installment recounts perhaps the most infamous episode in Burton’s past – the very public sexual harassment lawsuit brought by a former staffer, with excerpts from the complaint filed by Kathleen Driscoll in San Francisco Superior Court:

During DRISCOLL’S employment, BURTON engaged in hostile, demeaning and sexually abusive conduct such that DRISCOLL’S working conditions were significantly altered. His conduct over the past year easily rises to the level of severe or pervasive conduct for a hostile work environment sexual harassment claim both in California and under federal law. The harassing acts started in approximately September 2006. They consisted of numerous events, which took place throughout DRISCOLL’S employment, including but not limited to:

Asking DRISCOLL over the phone, “What are you wearing?” on approximately 10 occasions;

On one occasion, DRISCOLL sent a temporary employee to deliver paperwork to BURTON. BURTON ordered DRISCOLL to never send someone on her behalf again by berating her, “When you drop stuff off, stop in will ya? I mean I’m not getting laid under the fuckin’ table.”

Singling DRISCOLL out for exorbitant demands and attention, included but not limited to excessive demands for immediate and frequent meetings to go over routine matters, including on weekends after the work week was over in contrast to her co-workers;

There’s more at the link, and it’s pretty graphic.  It goes without saying that women make up an extremely large bloc of the Democratic base.

I don’t know what more Burton Watch will trot out, but here are some facts: Californians have little connection to their state government other than knowing that they don’t like it.  They hear things like how politicians are living high off campaign donations and it’s both alienating and corrosive.  The rules are already rigged in favor of a conservative wipeout of government and the last thing Democrats need as they seek to make structural changes is the spectre of an old-school pol with a lot of skeletons hanging over their collective heads.  John Burton has the potential to take the state backwards and it’s a chance that delegates should think long and hard about.

Today the results of the February 5 primary become official.  The final spread in the popular vote between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama is 8.9%.  Clinton garnered 51.8% to Obama’s 42.9%.  The final delegates will be 203 for Clinton to 167 for Obama.  This roughly averages out to the exact spread in the head-to-head popular vote (Hillary got 54.6% of the head-to-head vote and 54.8% of the delegates), so the convoluted delegate apportionment system worked in the case of California.

I’m also pleased to announce that 47,153 “double bubble” votes were counted in Los Angeles County.  The expectation on the day of the election was that none of these ballots from decline to state voters would be counted, but the pressure put on by the Courage Campaign and other groups led to this result.  And by the way, 51% of those votes went to Hillary Clinton and 42% to Barack Obama, so those who insisted upon viewing this through some partisan lens can respectfully shut the fuck up.  This was about voter rights and remedying disenfranchisement; it always was, even though it had no material impact on the overall election.  

(I wonder what we’ll be dealing with the rest of the week. bump. – promoted by Lucas O’Connor)

So I went to my polling place at an off-hour to see if turnout was decent (it was pretty average, in my view).  It was a new location for me, in a little art gallery featuring an exhibit called “Patriot Acts” (yes, a politically themed art installation in a polling place.  Ah, the People’s Republic of Santa Monica).  I had no problem getting my ballot and heading to the booth.  The guy behind me was a DTS voter who had no idea that Republicans didn’t allow them to vote in the primary.  “I wouldn’t vote for the Republicans anyway,” he yelled as he took a Democratic ballot.  But nobody told him to make sure to fill out that Democratic oval to re-assert that he, as a nonpartisan voter, requested a Democratic ballot (as if taking the ballot in the first place wasn’t enough of a clue).  So I told him.

My neighbor was headed to the polls; she’s also a DTS voter.  I told her to make sure to fill out that Democratic oval.  She said she kind of heard something about that but wasn’t sure.

I’ve received more than a couple emails from DTS voters thanking me for telling them about the issue, or saying that they didn’t fill out the bubble, asking me whether or not their votes will be counted.

This is a NIGHTMARE.  An absolute nightmare.  This has been in place since 2002, and somehow the evidence from 2004, when so few DTS voters participated in the Democratic primary in LA County, wasn’t enough to dummy-proof the system.  Thousands upon thousands of voters are going to be disenfranchised today.  I can’t reach them all; neither can the CDP.  The Secretary of State must demand that all those DTS ballots are impounded, the machines recalibrated to eliminate this problem, and all votes reread through the feeder.  In a race so close, we cannot have this crisis of confidence.

UPDATE: I’m on a conference call with the Obama campaign right now and they’re talking about this very issue.  “There is great concern” in Los Angeles County, and “the pollworkers are confused” about this as well, according to the lawyer on the phone now (I would use the word “ignorant” and not confused).  “We’re hoping the Secretary of State and the County Registrar will rectify this situation” but they don’t sound particularly hopeful.

DTS voters are also being denied ballots in selected counties, according to the campaign.

Carla Marinucci is wondering why this wasn’t challenged previously.  This has been in place in LA County in multiple election cycles, and knowing that DTS voters would show up in record numbers, I agree that it should have been caught earlier.  My point is that the Secretary of State’s office or the county registrar should have been the ones to catch it.  The lawyer just said “We hope that they will adopt procedures to make sure these ballots are counted,” and if they aren’t adopted, he raised the option of legal challenges.

These ballots almost certainly won’t be counted tonight, and keep that in mind when you start seeing the results roll in.

They’re hoping that the media gets this out.  I’m trying.

UPDATE II: From Ezra Klein:

From the inbox: This is really weird. From the Clinton campaign:

4:25 PM EST HILLARY WIRE UPDATE…

* False reports about voting problems in LA are being drudged up

– Everything is going smoothly in LA.

What a revolting statement (if true).

Update (Lucas): LA City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo has a statement out now.

“I urge the Secretary of State and County Registrar to do everything within their power to ensure that every vote is counted, and to carefully weigh voter intent against this confusing Los Angeles County ballot design.

(Ugh. Bump. – promoted by Lucas O’Connor)

In Barack Obama’s final email to supporters, this little reminder kind of jumped out at me:

If you declined to select a political party when you registered to vote, you can still vote for Barack Obama if you request a Democratic ballot from the poll worker. Make sure you mark “Democratic” in the appropriate space or the vote might not be counted.

Vote might not be counted, ay?  What’s this all about?

Turns out that in Los Angeles County, if a DTS voter requests their Democratic ballot and casts their vote, but does NOT mark “Democratic” in the appropriate space, the vote will indeed not be counted.  The ballot will go through the scan-tron machine, not register as a counted vote, AND will not spit back out for the voter to fix.  In LA County, they feed the ballot through the tabulator right in front of the voter, presumably to prevent errors just like this.  But this one doesn’t get caught in all the tests.

This seems to me significant just as a voting rights issue.  There are 776,000 DTS voters in LA County alone, which is ¾ of everyone who has voted in the first four Democratic primaries thus far.  Setting up an additional hurdle for these voters if they want to participate in the Democratic primary, and then NOT INFORMING THEM if they fail to clear that hurdle, seems to me to be just completely unacceptable.

Here’s the ballot, and you can see that there’s virtually no reason to give people something else to screw up.  There’s only one bubble to fill out, and it’s already been implicitly “filled out” when they asked for the ballot in the first place.

Our friends in the Courage Campaign (who are urging DTS voters to vote in the Democratic primary) sent a letter to the Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters, noting that the law is pretty clear on the issue:

The statute is clear: voters who have already affirmatively requested a Democratic ballot and cast a vote for a Democratic candidate, but who inadvertently fail to mark line number 6, must have their vote counted.  To do otherwise is contrary to the statute.  We can find no statutory basis for requiring voters to mark additional boxes to indicate that they are DTS voters requesting a partisan ballot.

I’m trying to get a PDF of the letter up as well, but I’m all thumbs with this pesky technology, so bear with me.  The point is that a lot of people tomorrow may not realize that their vote is in risk of not being counted.  Which is terrible for democracy, regardless of preference in the primary race.

[UPDATE by Julia] The full letter from our (Courage Campaign) lawyer is now on the flip.  It was faxed this morning and Steven has had several discussions with the LA County ROV about this already.

Dear Mr. Logan:

I write on behalf of our client, Courage Campaign.  Courage Campaign has recently embarked upon a campaign to educate Decline to State  (DTS) voters about their right to request and vote a Democratic ballot in the February 5, 2008 Presidential Primary Election.

As you know, as of January 8, 2008, 19.66% of the nearly 3.9 million registered voters in Los Angeles County — over 776,774 voters — have declined to state their party affiliation and are thus eligible to vote for a Democratic presidential candidate.  Barriers to voting for DTS voters are already high, since many do not know that they are allowed to vote in the Democratic Primary for president.  In addition to those barriers, we are gravely concerned that on February 5, 2008, a great many of the ballots cast by these DTS voters will be invalidated.

We have reviewed sample Democratic and American Independent ballots that DTS voters will receive once they affirmatively request them.  (See attached).  DTS voters requesting partisan ballots and registered Democratic and American Independent voters will receive the exact same Ink-a-Vote ballot. However, contrary to statutory provisions set forth in the Election Code, Los Angeles County requires DTS voters to complete an additional hurdle by marking either box number 5 (for American Independent ballots) or box number 6 (for Democratic party ballots) or their vote for President of the United States will not be counted.  Invalidating a ballot based solely upon the failure to mark a box, (box 5 or 6) even though the voter has cast his/her ballot for a candidate for president,  constitutes an improper basis for rejection and a policy that violates the rights of DTS voters. (See Cal. Elec. Code § 15154(c).)

Furthermore, the Precinct Ballot Reader (PBR) equipment in place at every polling place will not notify DTS voters that they have failed to mark box numbers 5 or 6 when they have requested a Democratic or American Independent ballot. The PBRs will only notify voters if they have overvoted or left the ballot completely blank meaning that DTS voters will not know if their choice for President will count.

The statute is clear: voters who have already affirmatively requested a Democratic ballot and cast a vote for a Democratic candidate, but who inadvertently fail to mark line number 6, must have their vote counted. To do otherwise is contrary to the statute. We can find no statutory basis for requiring voters to mark additional boxes to indicate that they are DTS voters requesting a partisan ballot.

Section 13102(b) of the Elections Code, which authorizes persons who have declined to state their party affiliation to vote in the partisan primaries of those parties which have made the required authorization, does not indicate that the voter need do anything more than request a partisan primary ballot to do so. Section 13102(b) states in part:

At partisan primary elections, each voter not registered as intending to affiliate with any one of the political parties participating in the election shall be furnished only a nonpartisan ballot, unless he or she requests a ballot of a political party and that political party, by party rule duly noticed to the Secretary of State, authorizes a person who has declined to state a party affiliation to vote the ballot of that political party.

(Emphasis added.)[1] Indeed this is consistent with the Secretary of State’s posted instructions for DTS voters on its website and the information provided from virtually every other California county elections official. (See California Secretary of State website, available at http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/v…

Under Section 13102(d), county elections officials must maintain records of which  political party’s ballot was requested pursuant to subdivision (b) or whether a nonpartisan ballot was requested, by each person who declined to state a party affiliation. These record-keeping requirements, as specified in Section 13102(d), do not require a DTS voter to mark any additional spaces to have their vote counted. Accordingly, record keeping obligations should not intrude upon the rights of DTS voters and we believe there are many other ways that the Registrar can properly maintain its records and still satisfy its statutory responsibilities. If the additional requirement is a function of the limitations of the Inka-Vote system, solutions must be immediately implemented to eliminate these extra hurdles.

When DTS voters affirmatively request a Democratic ballot and mark a choice for president they have satisfied their obligations under the Elections Code. Their ballot should accordingly be counted.  We therefore urgently request that you immediately amend your policies in a manner consistent with state law so that the votes of DTS voters requesting partisan ballots will count.  Anything less threatens to disenfranchise a significant segment of the electorate in LA County. We seek to resolve this issue as soon as possible before tomorrow’s election and before the canvass commences and so that we may, if necessary, pursue any legal options.

In this historic Democratic primary election, all voters who have answered the call to exercise their right to vote should be confident that the ballot they cast will be counted.

Please contact me to discuss this issue further.

Sincerely,

Steven J. Reyes

Associate Attorney

Kaufman Downing LLP

UPDATE: The AP has a story up.  The acting registrar (Conny McCormack left in the middle of last year because Debra Bowen asking her to actually verify votes was just too taxing) had this to say:

“It would almost be counterintuitive for someone to miss,” said Dean Logan, the acting county registrar. “We have put this information in voter education materials, and we’ve provided real clear instructions.”

So, they’ve done all they could… except reminding people when it goes through the ballot feeder, which would take approximately five seconds.