Monday, August 01, 2011

Sandy Pasch Has a Few Questions to Answer

Charlie Sykes was on this early today.

State election authorities are questioning whether a liberal group broke the law by offering both free food and free rides to vote in a hotly contested Senate recall election.

Although no formal complaint had reached the state Government Accountability Board by Monday afternoon, a spokesman for the agency said it would not be legal to combine free food and transportation to the polls in the same event - even if, as the organization contends, people could take the food without boarding the buses.

Local law enforcement authorities are reportedly looking into the get-out-the-vote "block parties."

Five such parties were sponsored by Wisconsin Jobs Now, a coalition of community and labor groups led by the Service Employees International Union. The coalition describes itself as a nonpartisan organization, although its blog posts have been highly critical of state Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), who is defending her seat against Rep. Sandy Pasch (D-Whitefish Bay) in the Aug. 9 recall vote.

Oh, yes. SEIU is scrupulously "non-partisan." And the Twilight Zone shows were all true facts!

...Since last week, about 75 to 100 voters each day have been casting absentee ballots at City Hall, often arriving in groups, said Sue Edman, executive director of the city Election Commission.

State law prohibits anyone from offering a voter any inducement to vote or not vote. Veum said her group believed it was complying with the law because no one was required to take the rides or vote to get the food and prizes.

But "that's a distinction without a difference," said Reid Magney, spokesman for the accountability board. He said it was legal to offer rides to the polls, or free food at picnics to talk about issues, but not in the same event.

Ms. Pasch states that 'it looks shady.'



Jim said...

I guess these folks are different from the Americans For Prosperity guys who sent out applications for absentee ballots to Democrats which were to be returned to a non-existent address by a date after the election.

Looks kinda shady.

Deekaman said...

Jimbo, that's a big-assed reach there. There is no commonality at all. Zip, zero, zilch, nada.

Try again.

Jim said...

Correctamundo, Deek-bo. There is no commonality. One group tries to get people to vote. The other attempts to deceive people to not vote. It's called voter suppression and is illegal.

Deekaman said...

So...explain to me how that suppresses the vote. And remember, I'm (allegedly) stupid, so please be simple and thorough.

Anonymous said...

A group that knowingly and purposely informs voters to send in their absentee ballots AFTER the required due date. To an address that is NOT affiliated with the counting process.

jimspice said...

Deek. Does this count? I mean I know a ribs dinner is not exactly analogous to a $75 gift card, but ...

Dad29 said...

Looks the same to me!

...although the methodology is different (contest??) the offer of a >$1.00 item for getting someone to vote is illegal.

John Foust said...

I eagerly await Dad29's criticism of the Appling machine.

Dad29 said...

FU, John.

Spicey, I retract my agreement with your take on the JS story.

jimspice said...

The daily talking points email must have arrived. Gotta stay on script.

John Foust said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.