Atlanta council seat hangs on court decision

By TY TAGAMI
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 12/21/05

It's been more than a month since Atlanta voters went to the polls, yet the outcome of one city council race still hangs in the balance.

Anne Fauver, who has represented the area around Piedmont Park for the past four years, beat challenger Steve Brodie by five votes. Brodie, however, is demanding a run-off election, asserting in court that Fauver did not win a majority of all votes cast.
The outcome hinges on what constitutes a countable vote. Under state law, a write-in vote for city council does not count if it is cast for someone who is not a certified write-in candidate. To become an official write-in candidate in Atlanta, a person must file paperwork with the city clerk and notify the public with an ad in the Fulton County Daily Report, a legal newspaper. No one did so in the District 6 race.

In oral arguments in Fulton County Superior Court Tuesday, a special judge heard lawyers for both candidates assail and defend the constitutionality of the state law on write-in votes.

The law is in question because nine voters in the District 6 election chose to mark the write-in portion of their ballots, instead of selecting Fauver or Brodie. In accordance with law, Fulton County election officials did not count those nine votes in the total, and calculated Fauver had a majority of all votes cast. But Brodie notes that if those nine votes are counted toward the total, then Fauver has only 49.97 percent of the vote.

If no candidate garners a majority, then a run-off election is required under Georgia law.

Attorney Michael Coleman, arguing for Brodie, said those nine voters were cheated of their right to vote. "The failure to count a write-in vote is tantamount to taking a vote away," he said, adding that the Georgia Legislature violated the state constitution when it required that votes for people who aren't candidates be ignored.

But Robert Highsmith, an attorney for Fauver, argued that the state constitution delegated to the Legislature the authority to dictate how elections are decided. The Legislature passed a law requiring that the outcome of city council races be decided by majority vote, so the basic assertion of Brodie's camp — that Fauver did not win by a majority — is not a constitutional question, Highsmith said.

"Nowhere in the constitution is a majority vote required," he said.

One election expert said the case poses an interesting question: if citizens essentially throw their votes away by casting ballots for someone who isn't a candidate, should their votes be counted? "It's an odd situation that voting for someone who has no chance of winning effects the outcome of the race," Emory law assistant professor Michael Kang said. He predicted that if the case reached the federal level, Brodie would have a hard time winning because the federal courts tend toward pragmatism in election law. He said they consider it more important to count votes for viable candidates and to conclusively decide elections than to count protest votes.

There is pressure to decide the case quickly. The winner of the election is scheduled to be sworn in Jan. 3. The special judge assigned the case, retired DeKalb County Superior Court Judge Hilton M. Fuller, said he hoped to have a decision by next week. He gave no indication Tuesday how he would rule.

The losing side could appeal the decision to the Georgia Supreme Court.

From the office of Congressman John D. Dingell

Congressman John D. Dingell
US Congress Seal
Serving Michigan's 15th Congressional District
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Adam Benson or Michael Robbins
Wednesday, December 15, 2005 202/225-4071
202/271-8587

Dingell’s HOLIDAY Jingle for O’Reilly and House GOP

Washington, DC - Congressman John D. Dingell (MI-15) recited the following poem on the floor of the US House of Representatives concerning House Resolution 579, which expressed the sense of the House of Representatives that the symbols and traditions of Christmas should be protected. “Preserving Christmas” has been a frequent topic for conservative talk show hosts, including Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly:

‘Twas the week before Christmas and all through the House

No bills were passed ‘bout which Fox News could grouse;

Tax cuts for the wealthy were passed with great cheer,

So vacations in St. Barts soon would be near;

Katrina kids were nestled all snug in motel beds,

While visions of school and home danced in their heads;

In Iraq our soldiers needed supplies and a plan,

Plus nuclear weapons were being built in Iran;

Gas prices shot up, consumer confidence fell;

Americans feared we were on a fast track to…well…

Wait--- we need a distraction--- something divisive and wily;

A fabrication straight from the mouth of O’Reilly

We can pretend that Christmas is under attack

Hold a vote to save it--- then pat ourselves on the back;

Silent Night, First Noel, Away in the Manger

Wake up Congress, they’re in no danger!

This time of year we see Christmas every where we go,

From churches, to homes, to schools, and yes…even Costco;

What we have is an attempt to divide and destroy,

When this is the season to unite us with joy

At Christmas time we’re taught to unite,

We don’t need a made-up reason to fight

So on O’Reilly, on Hannity, on Coulter, and those right wing blogs;

You should just sit back, relax…have a few egg nogs!

‘Tis the holiday season: enjoy it a pinch

With all our real problems, do we honestly need another Grinch?

So to my friends and my colleagues I say with delight,

A merry Christmas to all,

and to Bill O’Reilly…Happy Holidays.

# # #

This is even scarier

Ha Ha!!!

Chinks in the Republican Armor

Chinks in the Republican Armor

By Fred Hiatt-The Washington Post

Monday, December 12, 2005; Page A25

Not so long ago the talk was all about the self-perpetuating machine the Republicans were constructing in Washington.

The image was of links in a chain of power that the Democrats could never break. The GOP, having captured both houses of Congress and the White House, could press lobbyists to hire only Republicans and give money only to Republicans. The money would guarantee dominance in state legislatures. The legislatures would redraw congressional districts so that Democrats could never win. And if anyone objected, too bad; Republican-appointed judges could be counted on to slap down any complainers.
All in all, a perfect loop. Even when House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was indicted in September, he was depicted as a no-longer-essential cog in the apparatus he had helped design and build. People could come and go, the chain would remain.

The mood in Washington today is different. It's been remembered that the chain holds only as long as most people vote next year the way they voted last year.

Today it is conceivable, though by no means assured, that Democrats' vote total in 2006 could grow, and Republicans' shrink, by enough to shift control of the House or Senate. Even a whiff of such uncertainty may prompt donors to hedge their bets.

It may seem obvious, but the distinction between what the Republicans have created and a government truly impervious to public sentiment is worth noting. After all, there are regimes -- in Russia, for example -- that so pervert the forms of democracy that they insulate themselves from changes in public sentiment, unless those are drastic or somehow expressed outside the law. That's not where we are. A healthy dose of cynicism about the goings-on here is appropriate; an overdose of cynicism is not.

This doesn't mean the analysis of Republican ambitions was wrong. Much of it was right, and much of what the Republicans have done -- their Texas redistricting, for example -- merits all the contempt that it has engendered, and more.

Norman J. Ornstein, an expert on Congress at the American Enterprise Institute, says that a shift in public sentiment comparable to the one that swept Republicans into the House majority in 1994, with a gain of more than 50 seats, would produce a shift of only 20 or so seats for Democrats today. That would be enough to unhorse the Republicans, but barely. And that's in large part because Republicans have given themselves larger cushions in nominally competitive districts, he says. So the House, which was designed to be most responsive to public opinion, may now be less responsive than the Senate.

"There's no such thing as a perfect machine," he said. "But they have built in a lot of advantages, and Texas may have made the difference."

But the imperfections are increasingly visible. Some are internal: the arrogance, greed and complacency that swell with time in office, and the disparate interests of supporters that become harder to paper over. Drug companies, seniors' lobbies and chambers of commerce may all support you, but they also may have different ideas of the proper design and cost of a Medicare drug benefit. The result may make no one happy.

There are external stresses, too. Unlike in Russia, it turns out that prosecutors and judges can't be controlled, no matter who appoints them: just ask DeLay, Jack Abramoff or Scooter Libby. Unlike in Russia, neither can the press. The congressional Republicans' cringing abdication of their branch's traditional oversight role has helped diminish attention to scandal and malfeasance, but it can't erase bad news altogether.

And unlike in many pseudo-democracies, the mechanics of elections, including, not least, the counting, can't be controlled by those in power -- which means that they do need to worry about what voters think.

None of this guarantees that the Democrats will win next year. But it does mean their fate isn't entirely out of their hands; much will depend on them -- on the policies they develop, the candidates they recruit. The machine isn't indestructible.

Corzine May Tap Minority for Senate Seat

By DONNA DE LA CRUZ

The Associated Press
Thursday, December 1, 2005; 3:07 PM

WASHINGTON -- Shortly after being elected New Jersey's governor, Democrat Jon Corzine speculated aloud that he might appoint a woman to fill out his unexpired Senate term. Then he singled out black state Sen. Nia Gill, calling her an "extraordinarily capable woman."

Gill did not shy away from the hint.

Who's Blogging? Read what bloggers are saying about this article. Thunder in the House Stanford Democrats BlueJersey.net: Covering NJ like a rug Full List of Blogs (6 links) » Most Blogged About Articles On washingtonpost.com | On the web

"I have the qualifications," she told The Associated Press on Tuesday. "If I am chosen by Jon, I am more than qualified to rise to the occasion."

If Corzine does select Gill _ a 57-year-old attorney _ she would become only the sixth black, and second black woman ever to serve in the U.S. Senate. New Jersey has never had a female or minority U.S. senator. The only black woman to serve in the U.S. Senate was Carol Moseley-Braun of Illinois.

Political analysts say that by choosing Gill, Corzine would be seen as rewarding a faithful base that turned out for him on Election Day _ and possibly sending a signal about his higher political aspirations.

"It would certainly cement his status with African Americans and progressives in general, and would come in handy down the line if he's thinking about running for president," said David Bositis Sr., a political analyst at The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington, D.C., who studies black politics.

Corzine, 58, said on Thanksgiving Day that he planned to choose his successor in early December. Besides Gill, six of New Jersey's seven Democratic congressmen have expressed interest in the job. Two of them, Reps. Robert Menendez and Donald Payne, are minorities.

New Jersey law gives the governor the power to fill House and Senate vacancies. Corzine's Senate term expires in 2006 and Republicans have a strong challenger in state Sen. Tom Kean Jr., the son of popular former Gov. Thomas Kean.

The Rev. Reginald Jackson, executive director of the Black Ministers' Council of New Jersey, said choosing Gill would be a bold move on Corzine's part.

"You would add another minority to the Senate who is very capable and very qualified," Jackson said. He added that he has discussed the appointment with Corzine, but declined to say whom he would like to see named.

According to an AP-Ipsos poll on Election Day, Corzine won nearly all the black votes cast in New Jersey's gubernatorial race, and two-thirds of the Hispanic vote. He also had a 20-point edge among female voters. Corzine defeated Republican opponent Doug Forrester by nine percentage points.

Gill is a second-term state senator who previously served four terms in the state Assembly. She would not reveal whether she and Corzine had discussed the U.S. Senate seat, saying any such conversations are private.

She faces stiff competition for the Senate appointment. Three congressmen _ Menendez, Robert Andrews and Frank Pallone _ campaigned hard for Corzine and have significant war chests. And they have better name recognition than Gill, who represents a small sliver of Essex and Passaic counties in northern New Jersey.

But Gill is an intriguing possibility, said Ross Baker, a Rutgers University political science professor.

"Choosing her would be a signal that perhaps Corzine will be different and perhaps business will not be conducted in the usual way in New Jersey," Baker said.

____

Associated Press Writer Angela Delli Santi contributed to this story from Trenton, N.J.