ColumbiaMagazine.com
Printed from:

Welcome to Columbia Magazine  
 



































 
Ben Arnold: We must defend our voting rights

The Attorney's Bill: "Anyone who would have looked at this election with an open mind would surely have concluded it was grossly flawed! Further, and maybe even more disconcerting, KY Elections laws were violated . . . " - BEN ARNOLD.

By Ben Arnold
Personal Commentary

The County Board of Elections (CBE) led by the County Clerk and legally directed by our County Attorney (CA) collectively run elections.

The County Judge Executive and the County Court do not control this group nor have direct responsibility for their actions.

I understand the taxpayers who don't want to pay the legal bill.



I understand Curtis's disappointment because of the Election Contest. Others will better know who should pay the bill, but the real issue before the citizens of Adair county is much more important than the bill.

Why did the CBE file the appeal in the first place? We know of no cases where an Election Board has done this and indeed attorney Elmer George believes they have no standing to file this appeal.

Our voting rights are so important and fundamental to our way of life, we must defend them!

This was not even the issue when I filed the Election Contest.

When the voting machines were rolled out for ballot counting as ordered by Judge Vance, two of the machines had no seals in place as required by KY Law. One blue seal was seen inside the Absentee machine when it was opened.

Because ballot stubs could not be found by the Clerk, I requested and got a 2nd visit.

One week later this blue seal was not seen inside the Absentee machine. The Law requires that all machines are not only locked but also sealed. The Law requires that the seals are not broken or removed. The seal is the only verifiable audit trail for machine tampering.

The State recognized this possibility and therefore included this in election Law. Our county attorney Jennifer Hutchinson-Corbin argued in the court case that the locks were not broken and the machines were locked and therefore no harm was done. Since the keys were stored in the offices and the machines can be unlocked and then relocked, the locks provide no audit trail.

When it was observed by all of us including the County Board of Elections and the County Attorney that the voting machines were not as prescribed by Law, it was their responsibility to have acted.

The county attorney is the attorney for the people with the fiduciary responsibility to defend the people's interests. The CBE have been placed in a seat of great trust. When they saw this breach of Law, they themselves collectively should have taken on the wrongs of the Election with their own positive legal action and it should have no longer been my case.

In light of all of the evidence and Judge Vance's thoughtful decision, accepting that decision in the best interest of the people was a minimum.

Why was the appeal filed? Curtis didn't feel strongly enough to file.

The City didn't file an appeal. It was those responsibile for execution of the Election who filed, expecting to use the people's tax money.

There were 285 unaccounted voter signatures (ballots) in an election with a 162-vote difference.

After accounting for votes and voters just not included, machine errors, and true undervotes, there were still about 100 unaccounted votes or ballots, or about 2 ballot stub books of 50.

I thought it was just a greatly flawed election from misfeasance until observing the voting machines. Now the questions are heavier. - Ben Arnold

Comments re article 76484 James Rowell comments on Board of Elections lawyer bill


This story was posted on 2015-07-17 15:30:03
Printable: this page is now automatically formatted for printing.
Have comments or corrections for this story? Use our contact form and let us know.



 

































 
 
Quick Links to Popular Features


Looking for a story or picture?
Try our Photo Archive or our Stories Archive for all the information that's appeared on ColumbiaMagazine.com.

 

Contact us: Columbia Magazine and columbiamagazine.com are published by Linda Waggener and Pen Waggener, PO Box 906, Columbia, KY 42728.
Phone: 270.403.0017


Please use our contact page, or send questions about technical issues with this site to webmaster@columbiamagazine.com. All logos and trademarks used on this site are property of their respective owners. All comments remain the property and responsibility of their posters, all articles and photos remain the property of their creators, and all the rest is copyright 1995-Present by Columbia Magazine. Privacy policy: use of this site requires no sharing of information. Voluntarily shared information may be published and made available to the public on this site and/or stored electronically. Anonymous submissions will be subject to additional verification. Cookies are not required to use our site. However, if you have cookies enabled in your web browser, some of our advertisers may use cookies for interest-based advertising across multiple domains. For more information about third-party advertising, visit the NAI web privacy site.