Dutchess County Voter Suppression: One Student's Perspective

by: Kanamit

Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 19:23:56 PM EST

Some background information is in order. Up until 2000, Dutchess County was one of very few counties, possibly the only county in the entire nation, to deny college students the right to vote where they resided nine months out of the year. About two or three years prior to that, a group of students attending Bard College and Vassar College filed a class-action lawsuit against the County Board of Elections to process the registrations of students without subjecting them to discriminatory practices designed to prevent their registration from being accepted. While the case was tied up in the courts, a bipartisan committee was formed by the County Legislature to review the issue of qualifications and procedures for college students who wish to vote in Dutchess County. It concluded that "As a society we should encourage every class of citizen to vote, and remove every impediment to voting for every class of citizen." Then Republican election commissioner Bill Paroli disagreed. Paroli, however, found himself preoccupied after he was arrested for fraud, extortion, and several other charges relating to corruption, and resigned in disgrace. Republicans chose current commissioner David Gamache (last seen refusing to do his job) to replace him, who eventually relented and began to process the registrations of students without discriminatory practices.

I am a student at Bard College, located in the Town of Red Hook. Like a lot of Dutchess County, and indeed, like much of rural New York in general, Red Hook is a traditional Republican stronghold which is rapidly trending Democratic. Bard routinely ranks as one of the most liberal colleges in the nation; as you might expect, we aren't exactly popular with the Red Hook GOP. Me and about a dozen other students volunteered our spare time on election day  to coordinate campus GOTV, keep track of student turnout, make sure that people can get to the polling place, etc.

Insane Ruling In Dutchess County: Brands, Ciampoli Strike Again

by: phillip anderson

Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 17:24:43 PM EST

I hear that this is being appealed and I hope to have the ruling shortly.

UPDATE: Source says ruling now reversed.

Reversed. Not in writing yet but college kids can vote on machine if in book.

This should surprise no one as this ruling was completely insane. That said, I think it is high time we had a much, much closer look at the Ciampoli/Brands alliance here. It stinks to high heaven and has gone on for far too long. Sunshine, please.

More when I get it.

NY-20: Judge 'Pizza Stain' Brands Now Says Ballots Can Be Challenged Case By Case

by: phillip anderson

Wed Apr 22, 2009 at 12:42:36 PM EDT

Judge Jim Brands, the "pizza stain" judge has just ruled that not only can ballots be challenged on a case by case basis, a move that could delay the seating of a representative for the 20th for quite some time, but that the campaigns can now have access to the applications for absentee ballots so that Tedisco's lawyers can try to argue that the voters that cast those ballots aren't actually residents of NY-20. That's pretty rich when one considers the fact that Tedisco himself is not a resident of NY-20 and couldn't even cast a vote for himself.

This is certainly a break for Tedisco, but I don't know of anyone that thinks that this have any effect on the outcome. That 273 vote lead is just too great a hill to climb.

Jim Tedisco, the GOP nominee in the disputed NY-20 special election, has just won a legal victory for now, with Judge James V. Brands reversing himself on a major ruling from last week, which had appeared to stop Tedisco in his tracks in his efforts to challenge absentee votes for Democrat Scott Murphy. But he still has a lot of work to do in overcoming Murphy's current 273-vote lead.

Brands had ruled last week that Tedisco and the GOP were not entitled to copies of the original absentee-ballot applications. Brands has now agreed with the Tedisco camp's arguments that the legal precedents he cited didn't truly apply here, and that the law does entitle Tedisco to those absentee applications.

Tedisco's camp has challenged a large number of unopened absentee envelopes that are presumably votes for Murphy, saying that these individuals are not genuine residents of the district or are otherwise ineligible. And those applications are key evidence, needed to even begin winning a challenge.

However, Brands also declined to issue a blanket ruling on what constitutes residency for voting purposes -- indeed, there is an acknowledgement that the issuing of a ballot by the local officials itself provides a presumption of regularity. As such, Tedisco will now have the ability to argue against counting ballots, but will have to do so on a case-by-case basis.

So much for the corpse of the once secret ballot and all.

I ca assure you this, however. This will end. The people of the 20th will have a new representative in Congress.

His name will not be Tedisco.