Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

GA: SoS, Cathy (Blackwell) Cox, Violated Voter Rights, Judge Rules

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:08 PM
Original message
GA: SoS, Cathy (Blackwell) Cox, Violated Voter Rights, Judge Rules

Georgia Secretary of State Cox Violated Voter Rights, Judge Rules

By Sarah Epting

3-10-06

(APN) ATLANTA A Senior US District Judge found that Georgia Secretary of State (SOS), Cathy Cox, violated voter rights by undermining voter registration drives, Atlanta Progressive News has learned. Cox, a Democrat who is currently running for Georgia Governor, is already under criticism for her stewardship of the states electronic voting contract with Diebold.

"The Court finds and hereby DECLARES that the rejection of voter registration applications on the ground that they were submitted in a bundle, or by someone who was not a registrar or deputy registrar, violated the NVRA ," the Consent Decree states.

Meanwhile, a new Georgia Senate Bill 590 introduced by Democratic Minority Leader Gloria Butler would further codify the rights of private groups to conduct voter registration throughout the state. However, private groups always had that right, the courts have recently found.

"These volunteers drive our voter registration in this state and we should make it easier, not harder, on them to help Georgia citizens complete the voter registration process," Butler said during a Feburary 24, 2006, press conference on voter rights sponsored by US Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA).

snip

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/292... /

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mom cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. This is a great ruling! May there be many more!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-10-06 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. Kick.
And "R"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JunkYardDogg Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
3. Systematic Demographic Disenfranchisement
It is an integral part of the plan to subvert and control elections and manipulate the vote
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amaryllis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-11-06 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. Further proof that election integrity subversion is bi-partisan. Another
Edited on Sat Mar-11-06 08:37 PM by Amaryllis
DINO on Diebold's payroll.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 03:34 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Cox gets money from Diebold?
Edited on Sun Mar-12-06 03:35 AM by Wilms
:wow: Wow.

I know she's one of Diebold's biggest cheerleaders. I know she opposes VVPAT. I know she lent her smiling face for a Diebold brochure. I know she won't give the public access to election records.

And knowing that, I certainly, and legitimately, wonder if anything else is going on.

But her being on the payroll, or I guess you mean "on the take", that I didn't know.
Come on, now. Spill the links. :bounce:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Links?
Edited on Sun Mar-12-06 09:04 PM by BeFree
Yeah, right. That's absurd. If she is being paid, and it appears they could be, it won't be linked until she's arrested. And with the press in the pockets of the big companies, and the big companies in the pockets of the corrupt politicos, the arrest may never happen.

With all the big money floating around one can rest assured that if direct payments are not being made, favors are being distributed. Heck, I bet they even pay some DU'ers to keep track of us, eh?

On edit: Found a link you might like:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 02:21 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. I read a lot about Delay and Abramoff before they had pictures taken.
I was excited to see allegations of Cox being on the take with Diebold because it would be better evidence of corruption than the items I listed, or even the link you provide, (though it would be fun to see all the receipts from that event).

Frankly, however, I'd be surprised if she was on Diebold's payroll. Does that make me bad/suspect?

You see, to me, it's more likely Diebold's on her payroll. She's running for Governor. Logically, I would also have to include the possibility of a simple quid pro quo.

Is it wrong of me to consider these other ideas, BF? :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amaryllis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I meant it metaphorically. She is another election official who fervently
Edited on Mon Mar-13-06 11:48 AM by Amaryllis
defends Diebold and just as fervently fights paper records on the paperless Diebold machines. And no, I don't have a link. But I am in touch with election reform activists from GA who have worked their butts off trying to get paper in GA and have been stonewalled by her at every turn. You probably have read some past threads to this effect on DU. While I respect your wanting accuracy, I cannot always access links without a lot of searching and I don't have time for that, and sometimes there aren't links. So I guess it gets down to: do you trust those who have repeatedly reported what I said above, who have worked directly on this issue of trying to get verifiable elections in GA?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I'm being a bit stern, so take it with a grain of salt, Amarylliss.
My comment was largely in response to the ideas we're currently discussing on this thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

The claim that Cox has acted in a manner contrary to transparent election is well documented. For that, I wouldn't need a link.

But that's not what you wrote. You said she was on the "payroll". THAT I would need a link for.

And, considering there may not be a link to that I question such practice.

I consider inaccurate information to be counter-productive. That Cox has such a nasty rap sheet already should give sufficient opportunity to reasonably call her integrity into question.

Instead, what you have done, and do, is posted information that could reasonably be used to call DU's and your integrity into question. Given your significant contributions, let alone that of other DU posters, that seems rather unfortunate.

Instead of posting untrue info you could have simply, accurately, and informatively, cited as you did in the post to which I now respond.

As a side note, there are many posts claiming the AAPD has taken money from Diebold with the implication that it was used to buy them off. Turns out, that notion is assailed by the fact that the money in question was a settlement over an ATM lawsuit that went down BEFORE Diebold got into the voting machine business.

I'm not saying AAPD's relationship with Diebold shouldn't raise eyebrows, but I, for a whole year, had been walking around with information unsupported by facts. Again, unfortunate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amaryllis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. YOu are right that I shouldn't have said she is on their payroll. People
wouldn't know I meant it metaphorically. I would guess that she is profiting in some way from her relationship with Diebold; how else does it make sense? But I can't prove it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I think suspicion is reasonable, as I outlined in the post above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 21st 2014, 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC