created of the Judiciary Committee on December 2, 2004.105
Analysis
Through intent or negligence, massive errors with led to demo lines were made in the
distribution and allocations of voting machines. The Washington Post version that in
Columbus alone, the misallocation of machines reduced the number of voters by up to 15,000
votes.106 Given what we have learned in our hearings, this is likely conservative estimate, and
statewide, the shortage of machines could have resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands
of votes. The vast majority of this lost vote caused by lengthy lines in the midst of adverse
weather was concentrated in urban, minority and Democratic leaning areas. As a result, this
misallocation appears to be of the pivotal factors concerning the vote and outcome in the entire
election in Ohio.
On its face, the misallocation, shorting, and failure to timely deliver working machines
would appear to violate a number of legal requirements.
First, it would seem to constitute a violation of the Voting Rights Act and the
constitutional safeguards of Equal Protection and Due Process, particularly given the racial
disparities involved. Denying voters the means to vote in a reasonable and fair manner is no
different than preventing them from voting outright.
Second, the failure to provide enough voting machinery violates both Ohio's
Constitution, that provides all eligible adults the right to vote, and the Ohio Revised Code
which requires the Boards of Elections to provide "for each precinct a polling place and
105
See Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Jerrold Nadler, Tammy Baldwin, Melvin L. Watt,
Linda Sanchez, Robert Wexler, Maxine Waters, Sheila Jackson Lee, Martin Meehan, Zoe
Lofgren and Anthony Weiner to the Honorable J. Kenneth Blackwell, Ohio Secretary of State
(Dec. 2, 2004) (on file with the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff and at
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohblackwellltr12204.pdf). Secretary Blackwell was
asked, and has yet to respond to, the following questions:
·
How much funding did Ohio receive from the federal government for voting machines?
·
What criteria were used to distribute those new machines?
·
Were counties given estimates or assurances as to how many new voting machines they
would receive? How does this number compare to how many machines were actually
received?
·
What procedures were in place to ensure that the voting machines were properly allocated
throughout Franklin and other counties? What changes would you recommend be made to
insure there is a more equitable allocation of machines in the future?
106
See Powell & Slevin, supra.
29