http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15798029&BRD=1645&PAG=461&dept_id=10856&rfi=6
MiddletownPress.com (Connecticutt)
12/22/2005
By MELISSA BAILEY , Middletown Press Staff
HARTFORD -- A broken lever on one voting machine spurred a
remedy of unexpected size in state Supreme Court Wednesday: The court ordered a
new, city-wide election for all common council candidates, set tentatively for
Jan. 24.
Middletown’s city attorney had been fighting a lower court’s
decision that called for a limited Common Council re-vote in the district that
housed the flawed machine on Nov. 8.
Arguing such a re-vote would disrupt the council and
disenfranchise voters who properly cast their vote on Election Day, the city
made an appeal to the state Supreme Court.
But the attempt to prevent the re-vote backfired when the
panel of the state’s seven highest judges not only approved of a re-vote, but
opened the new election to all 14 voting districts in the city.
David P. Bauer, who filed the original suit when a broken
lever robbed him of an unknown number of votes on Election Day, said he was
pleased with the decision but surprised at the scope of the remedy.
He lost the 12th and final seat on Common Council to fellow
Republican V. James Russo by 102 votes, and hoped for the chance to run again
by a fair democratic process. But he never expected the whole city would get
involved.
"Wow, this is really something," he said,
contemplating the thought a city-wide campaign in the dead of winter.
The justices of the state Supreme Court had no question the
machine was flawed. Last election, Bauer tallied 188, 179 and 169 votes on
three machines at the Farm Hill Elementary School, but the fourth machine gave
him only 12 votes. A later inspection revealed that machine had a broken lever.
In past years, that same lever has proved similarly
troubling: Lever 4A tallied 12 votes in 2001; zero votes in 2002 and zero votes
in 2004, records show.
Everyone agreed the flaw was apparent, including City
Attorney Trina Solecki, who brought the case to state Supreme Court. State law
says if there are "substantial mistakes" in the vote count that cast
vote results seriously in doubt, a new election should be held.
Solecki argued that one disputed seat out of the 12-person
Common Council was not serious enough to warrant a new election. The justices
were quick to disagree.
Further, the justices said, since an election should be a
true "snapshot" of the electorate on the day of the election, the
District 11 re-vote would have disenfranchised voters in the other 13 districts
by barring them from the new election.
People could change their minds in a new vote, possibly
altering the make-up of common council, where Democrats now rule 8 to 4. All
voters must get equal say in how that make-up is changed, they argued.
Mayor Seb Giuliano agreed with this logic. "I think the
Supreme Court’s remedy was the correct one," he said in an interview
Wednesday.
Giuliano has already tried to wield the election as a
political tool in his debates with Democrats over appointments to the new high
school building committee. "Let them go out and tout David Larson,"
he threatened Democratic Councilmen in an interview this week, "go
convince the voting public that you may have to face in an election on January
24."
The court-set date of Jan. 24 may be pushed back due to time
concerns as voter registrars scramble to attempt the massive task. The election
will be open to all 16 common council candidates, who will undergo a new
lottery to determine the order of names. The broken machine will be removed,
and all others will be zeroed and re-inspected, according to the voting
registrar.
Bauer hopes the city will take the opportunity to adopt a
more rigorous inspection process. "One thing I’m definitely advocating is
that not a single machine gets out to this election before it’s adequately
checked."
Councilman Tom Serra, the Democratic Majority leader,
agreed. Not noticing a broken lever for four years is "absolutely"
negligent, he said.
He hoped those involved would inspect the machines more
thoroughly.
Serra wasn’t pleased with the court’s decision, which he
sees as disenfranchising voters whose vote was cast properly on Election Day.
He said the Democratic caucus thought a Bauer-Russo run-off
would have been the fairest solution, but he accepted the matter was sealed.
Instead, he said he’d turn his mind to the host of new
questions opened by the campaign. What if there’s a blizzard? Will as many
voters turn out at the polls?
He chuckled imagining the winter campaign: "Will we
have to get our galoshes on, our hats and gloves, and stand chattering at the
doors?"
To contact Melissa Bailey, call (860)347-3331 ext. 220 or
e-mail mbailey@middletownpress.com.
©The Middletown Press 2005
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.