including, if necessary, filing for immediate injunctive relief. Especially in presidential elections, there are multiple layers of problem solvers both in every county.
I've been a board of elections observer in both Republican and a Democratic counties. Both boards were very concerned about having open and fair elections - and were responsive to problems I reported. I was lower in the observer hierarchy when I reported issues in the Republican County to the folks in my team higher up, who elevated it to the state, and it was quickly resolved. That report got the attention of the folks in charge of the Democratic observer team, who elevated me to the "war room" in the next presidential election (the "war room" takes all of the calls from the 1st line precinct observers, trouble shoots and - if necessary - elevates it to the trouble-shooters in the Board of Elections. After serving in the "war room" for Obama's re-election, I was asked to move up a step to replace one of two observers in the Board of Elections, when the previous person in that role was named the president of the Board of Elections. In that role, I took referrals from the "war room" that they could not resolve directly to either an employee of the county board of elections or a member of the board of elections. If it could not be resolved there, we take it to the Democratic state team (heavily supported by the Democratic national team) for resolution. If necessary, they file an immediate lawsuit for injunctive relief.
Reports like these are often the result of the Democratic observer team filing - or threatening to file - for immediate injunctive relief:
Seitz's proposal comes after judges in Southwest Ohio kept polls open late during the March and November elections. Last November, Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman, a Republican, ordered polls to remain open an additional 90 minutes because of technical glitches that caused some delays on Election Day. During the March 15 primary, U.S. District Judge Susan Dlott ordered polls to stay open another hour after learning about a serious crash on I-275.
At least in the years I've worked, the Democratic observers were consistently present (unlike the Republican sounterparts), and consistently better organized than the Republican counterparts. For example, in the Republican county, I went daily to the Board of elections during the early voting - I didn't encounter any Republican observers until election day, and the processing of absentee ballots after the election. Observers are permitted to be present during all stages of the operation - at the request of a candidate - and must be formally registered with the state in advance of the election. Republicans (at least in our state) just aren't very good at getting organized and filling their rosters.
I haven't encountered any observers not willing to fight - a more likely problem is observers who don't understand what they are seeing and - for example - start accusing election officials of rigging the vote by using machines that switch people's votes - rather than asking for a miscalibrated machine to be taken out of service until it can be re-calibrated, and elevating to the next level. (When well-intended observers are perceived as being disruptive, they can be removed - and there is no ability to replace them on the fly becuase all observers must be registered in advance.
= new reply since forum marked as read
