McCain Absentee Ballot Apps Must Be Accepted

Earlier this week, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that Secretary of State Brunner must direct Ohio's county boards of elections that the McCain-Palin distributed absentee ballot request forms, which included a checkbox next to an affirmation that the applicant is a qualified elector, must be accepted regardless of whether the box is checked.

Brunner had been taking the position that those who failed to check the box were indicating that they weren't qualified electors, and therefore not entitled to receive an absentee ballot. The Supreme Court rejected that argument (rightly, in my opinion), holding:

[Ohio election law] does not expressly require that the statement be located a certain distance from the applicant’s signature. Because the statute also does not strictly require that the box next to the qualified-elector statement bemarked, we cannot require it. . . . Moreover, we “must avoid unduly technical interpretations that impede the public policy favoring free, competitive elections.” No vital public purpose or public interest is served by rejecting electors’ applications for absentee ballots because of an unmarked check box next to a qualified-elector statement. There is also no evidence of fraud. As relators persuasively assert, the “only reason to complete the form was to obtain an absentee ballot for the November 4, 2008 election,” and signing it necessarily indicated that the applicant represented, “I am a qualified elector and would like to receive an Absentee Ballot for the November 4, 2008 General Election,” regardless of whether the box next to the statement was marked.

(Slip op., paras. 21-23) (citations omitted). So I'll say it: the Republicans were right, and Jennifer Brunner was wrong.

I'll admit: it was fun watching Brunner stick it to the Ohio GOP. After all, the McCain campaign had created an unnecessarily encumbersome form, so it was the GOP's own fault that not everyone filled it out as intended. Moreover, it's been the GOP that has, over the past eight years, strived to create additional barriers to access to the ballot box. And Brunner's position wasn't going to deny anyone the right to vote: all voters had to do was submit a new absentee ballot request. If they didn't, they'd still be able to vote on Election Day. (These weren't, after all, registration forms.)

But the principles enunciated by the Ohio Supreme Court were exactly right, and I'm glad they reached the decision they did. Our public policy should be geared towards making it easier to vote, not harder. And the GOP (some of whose members believe the Seventeenth Amendment should be repealed) should bear this in mind when open access doesn't necessarily favor their candidates.

D'Oh: "Maybe in Ohio, but not in America"

I thought this was funny.

Two-Wheeled Menaces

I know from my survey of the Internets that many local bloggers think Cincinnati needs to become a more bicycle-friendly city.  That's probably true (perhaps we could start by flattening the landscape--who really wants to bike from downtown up to Clifton, Mt. Adams, or Price Hill?).

But a few words of wisdom for bicyclists:  just because you're not in a car doesn't mean you can ignore all traffic laws.  You know those traffic lights in the middle of intersections?  When they're red, you're supposed to stop.  I nearly had to scrape one of you off my bumper earlier this evening when you didn't stop for the light, and I (naively) thought I could proceed through the intersection with my pretty, green light.

And you know those hand signals we learned when we were kids?  The ones for left and right turns?  Try using them.  Those of us in our four-wheeled vehicles might have a clue as to what the hell you're doing.

I Like Pizza! I Like It!

Remember Multiplicity?  That pretty awful Michael Keaton movie where Keaton's character clones himself?  And then one of the clones clones himself?  Explaining the erratic behavior of the clone of the clone, one of the clones says,

"You know how when you make a copy of a copy, it's not as shap as, well, the original."

I'm pretty sure that explains the Republican nominee for Vice President.  You see, George W. Bush has always fancied himself a copy of Ronald Reagan (he's not, but that's a whole separate discussion).  And Sarah Palin is a clone of George 43.  She's trying to emulate the populist aura he exuded during the 2000 election.  She's trying to support his concept of a nearly unrestrained executive (that's why she appeared to agree with Cheney when Ifill asked her whether Palin felt, as does Cheney, that the VP is "outside the executive branch").  And, of course, she decided that Dubya really has been correctly pronouncing the word "nuclear" all these years.

But Bush isn't as sharp as Reagan, and Palin isn't as sharp as Bush.

I always knew that when the torch is passed to my generation (I was born in 1974), we'd have politicians winking into the camera, as if it's a person with whom the candidate is having a conversation.  After all, we grew up watching things like Ferris Beuller's Day Off and Saved by the Bell, where TV characters threw off convention and regularly made asides to the camera.  But Palin's about ten years too old to have been influenced by that, and winking into the camera just looked weird.

That having been said:  I think Palin did pretty well.  She wasn't as substantive as Biden was, but Biden came off a little whonk-ish at times.  I'm not sure she made any real connection with the voters, but the debate didn't really focus on social issues, which I think is where she'd have liked to stoke the fires of the conservative base.  Biden came awfully close to advocating for gay marriage (fine by me, but not a winning issue in this country yet), but cleaned it up.  Biden had two good moments, I thought:  first, when talking about Afghanistan and Iraq, and comparing the amount of money we've spent in each.  And second, when he choked up a little bit talking about being a single father.  That was unexpectedly unscripted--one of the few non-canned responses either candidate gave all night.

What were your thoughts on the debate?  Did it change your mind about anything?  And try not to feed the trolls....

New CityBeat Website Design

I haven't had the chance to dive into CityBeat's newly redesigned website, so check it out and chime in with opinions.

Putin Rears His Head . . . . .

Hmmmm, I couldn't think of Supreme Court decisions either in my Constitutional Law final years ago, but then I was never Mayor of Wasilla or Governor of Alaska and never thought I was qualified to be a 72 year old's heartbeat away from being President and was certainly never quoted three months ago in the press saying the following about the SUPREME COURT DECISION in EXXON V. BAKER that directly affected --- what state? --- wait for it --- drumroll --- ALASKA:

Gov. Sarah Palin [said,] “I am extremely disappointed with today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court,” Palin said. “While the decision brings some degree of closure to Alaskans suffering from 19 years of litigation and delay, the court gutted the jury’s decision on punitive damages.” Palin added, “It is tragic that so many Alaska fishermen and their families have had their lives put on hold waiting for this decision. My heart goes out to those affected, especially the families of the thousands of Alaskans who passed away while waiting for justice.”

"As Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America, where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state."

I love America, even though Rush tells me that we are about to be taken over by the radical Marxists (are there still radical Marxists anywhere?)!

Wake Me Up When It's Over

Matt Damon called me today to remind me to vote for Barack Obama. I don't think it was him, really, just a tape recording. At least, he wouldn't stop to answer questions.

I love politics. And I'm sick of this election.

Has anyone ever cast a vote because Matt Damon persuaded them to do so?

I paid for an Obama/Biden car magnet over the internet (at the campaign website) just before the DNC convention. I still don't have it. I'm tempted to buy a McCain/Palin magnet, and put the one that comes first on my car.

And how about a VP debate drinking game for tomorrow night?

• A chug every time Palin mentions "hockey mom".
• A chug every time Biden mentions the nuns at Catholic school growing up.
• A chug every time Palin says "nucular". If "nucular" is followed by an attempt at "proliferation," finish your drink.
• A chug every time Biden says "Scranton".
• A chug every time Palin mentions the Bridge to Nowhere or the airplane that was(n't) sold on eBay.
• Finish your drink whenever Biden tells you that he takes the train home every day.
• A chug every time Palin says "gotcha journalism," "maverick," or "reformer." Finish your drink anytime she mentions her son in Iraq.
• A shot (preferably of Stolichnaya) anytime Russia's proximity to Alaska is mentioned.

Any additions?

Same Day Voting: Update

Earlier today, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision (that is the subject of the post immediately below) of District Court Judge George Smith, denying the Ohio Republican Party an injunction that would prevent same day voting. The three-judge panel was comprised of Judge Karen Nelson Moore, Judge Richard Allen Griffin, and Judge Myron Bright, a judge of the Eighth Circuit who was sitting by designation. (A judge from another circuit sitting by designation on a panel is fairly routine.)

The panel had to decide two issues: first, whether to require the Secretary of State to force boards of elections to segregate ballots cast as a result of same-day voting, and second, whether to require the Secretary of State to mandate that boards of elections permit observers to be present during the same-day voting period.

On the first issue, the panel was unanimous: the GOP was deemed not entitled to the relief they sought. Interestingly, the Republicans appear to have shifted their focus once they reached the court of appeals. In the district court, they wanted to enjoin same-day voting altogether; in the Court of Appeals, they merely wanted ballots to be segregated. The Sixth Circuit held that because the relief the GOP now seeks was not presented to the district court, the court of appeals would not grant it.

With respect to the second issue, the panel split 2-1. The majority (Judges Moore and Bright) reversed the district court's decision requiring the permissive presence of observers, holding that no federal law required such a result. (The court explicitly left open the question of whether state law requires boards of elections to be present, as a federal court may not tell a state official how to apply a state law.) Judge Griffin, dissenting in part, would have affirmed the district court.

So judges from both sides of the political spectrum have now agreed (finally, it appears) with Jennifer Brunner that same-day voting is permissible under Ohio law.

For what it's worth, I agree (partially) with Judge Griffin: SOS Brunner should permit observers to be present for the thirty-five days prior to Election Day during which absentee ballots are turned in. (It's not clear to me, though, the basis to conclude that federal law requires this.) It is absolutely essential that the public's confidence in the integrity of our elections is restored, and disallowing observers is entirely contrary to that goal. Remember that because the General Assembly rewrote the election law after 2004, "observers" are not "challengers." Observers have no right to challenge voters or to attempt to intimidate voters. Thus, no harm comes from the transparency that the presence of observers would create, and people on both sides (both Democrats living in counties controlled by Republicans and vice-versa) would be assured of a fair process.

Same-Day Voting Permitted In Ohio

You may recall hearing about a controversy regarding so-called "same-day voting" in Ohio. When the Republican-controlled legislature rewrote our election law, it created a five-day window during which people could both register to vote and cast their absentee ballot. Democratic Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has interpreted the law to allow people to do both on the same day.

The Ohio GOP disagreed with Brunner, and has filed lawsuits to prevent same-day voting. The courts have now ruled that Brunner is right and the Republicans are wrong.

Yesterday, the Republican justices of the Ohio Supreme Court, by a 4-3 vote, dismissed the lawsuit that sought to prevent same-day voting. Its order is available here. The Republicans also have filed suit in federal court seeking to enjoin same-day voting. United States District Court Judge George Smith (appointed to the bench by Ronald Reagan) has issued an order (available here) deferring to the judgment of the Ohio Supreme Court, but requiring that observors be permitted to be present. His decision has been appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which will almost certainly order expedited briefing and rule quite quickly.

The upshot: if you are not registered to vote, you can both register and cast an absentee ballot on the same day from now through October 6. So can your family, friends, and neighbors. So pass the word and go vote.

The Enquirer's article (albeit with a misleading lede) is here. For up-to-the minute coverage of Ohio election litigation, check the Election Law Blog, based at the Moritz College of Law at The Ohio State University.

CAC Diversity Training Spotlighted

The Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Center was singled out for work done over the sumer on a diversity program. Plans are being put into place to fully implement it in 2009.

NewsAche Blog Is No More

After 2 years of hard critiques of the Cincinnati Enquirer NewsAche signs off along with those leaving the Enquirer because of the buy out options. Often harsh, but consistent, Newsache will be missed. The lingering question is, who was the author? This departure suggests that the author, who is believed to be an Enquirer employee, is one of those leaving the company.

Downtown vs. OTR

If you were buying a condo or loft tomorrow (assuming you could find a bank willing to extend you credit prior to their reception of a 700 billion dollar bribe), where would you buy: Downtown or Over-the-Rhine? What are the advantages and drawbacks to each? If you were renting instead of buying, would your answer change?

The biggest, most obvious difference is probably cost: I expect people are paying less per square foot in OTR than in Downtown.

Obviously, I've chosen to rent downtown (in a building where I pay a shockingly low amount per square foot). Griff and Julie have bought in OTR. When (if) I buy, I'm more likely to buy a house, making either neighborhood an unlikely spot for me (unless I win the lottery--then I'll just buy Parker Flats, tear down a lot of interior walls, and make it my own downtown mansion).

What are your thoughts?

The Banks and Sawyer Point

The Enquirer's article highlighting the groundbreaking Riverfront Park in the midst of the Banks reminded me of a question that's been lingering in the back of my mind: once the new park is completed, what's to become of Sawyer Point? The target date is late 2010.

It seems to me that a lot of the things that currently happen at Sawyer Point may move to Riverfront, particularly as the Banks itself is completed. I would think the City and the County would pressure groups to put events at Riverfront. Party in the Park seems like a likely candidate to move to Riverfront. So, perhaps, do Blues Fest, the Fourth of July celebration, and the Black Family Reunion.

Anyone here privy to whether there's been discussion of how diminished Sawyer Point's role is expected to be in Cincinnati's cultural life post-Riverfront Park?

Parker Flats

I saw a moving truck outside of Parker Flats (the new condo building on the southeast corner of Fourth and Central) on Friday. For a second, I thought maybe the first resident was moving in, but I'm pretty sure it was just some things for the offices.

At any rate, the ownership was feeling sufficiently good about the building's completion that it made a few extra bucks today by opening the garage to Bengals parking.

(No, the link isn't to the official Parker Flats website. 5chw4r7z is just far more interesting than Middle Eart Development could ever be. And besides, he's about to be my across-the-street neighbor; may as well help his hit count.)

Bumble in the Jungle

Well, the Bengals have fallen to 0-4, defying even my own meager expectations for the team. Daugherty's column sums things up pretty well. He argues for sitting the injured Palmer again next week, to make sure he's healthy and stays that way (since the team doesn't have much of a chance of stopping the Cowboys defense from getting to the quarterback). I'd go a step further: why risk Fitzpatrick, who may need to play for several more weeks? Let's see what Jordan Palmer can do.

The bad news? Things don't get any easier. The Bengals travel to Dallas next week, New Jersey (for the Favre-infused Jets, who put over 50 points on the scoreboard today) the following week, and then return to PBS to play the Steelers. Oh-and-seven has to be viewed as a real possibility.

The Cincinnati Bengals are now on the clock.

In Memoriam: Paul Newman

I've been trying to find a Cincinnati link to justify noting the passing of Paul Newman here. I can't.

Nonetheless, here's an excellent piece describing what is, perhaps, Newman's real legacy.


I keep wondering why AMC or some similar cable station isn't running a Paul Newman movie marathon in tribute today. Truth be told, I've never watched Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, and now I'm thinking I should.

Cincy Couture

The Cincy Couture Fashion Show went off superbly yesterday. The music list for the entire program can be on the The Conveyor.

Last Night's Debate

Personally, I thought the debate was pretty much a draw and wouldn't change anyone's mind.  Of course, I'm perplexed by people who declare themselves to be "undecided" voters.  How can you not know which of the two candidates most reflects your values and policy judgments by now?

The professional punditry seems to agree about this being a draw.  Of course, the mainstream media probably wouldn't declare anyone a "winner" unless his opponent literally vomited down the front of his own suit during the debate, for fear of being accused of bias.

Then I found this clip from Fox:  their focus group of "undecided voters" had Obama as the clear winner.

Since most believe this first debate would be the toughest of the three for Obama, the reaction of the focus group is clearly a good omen for the Democrat.  And with so many states permitting early voting, the early debates may be the only ones that matter.

You can vote in Ohio beginning on Tuesday.

Speculation on the Secret Show

WOXY's boards have a bunch of speculation on the secret show set for the Know Theatre on Saturday night.

UPDATE:The speculation was correct, the band was Radio 4.

MidPoint Starts Now!

I am packing up my notebook, camera, comfortable shoes, and schedule for Day One of Midpoint.

I will have my detailed coverage of the event over at www.theconveyor.com, so check there for a recap of day one.

CityBeat has a big central page with all things Midpoint. They will have the official word on any schedule changes.

I hope to see a bunch of faces down at the opening show which is happing right now! (I had to run home first) If you have any recommendations on what bands to see, please send them on or comment below.