Talk:National Ballot Access

From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I am moving this quote from an op/ed (referenced correctly but, as it was written, unclear what it was) from the article page, because it does not seem relevant to an article on National Ballot Access; it is a general newspaper commentary on the AZ ballot process. The column complains that it's difficult for officials to verify signatures, but it was clear in the NBA AZ case that there were a large number of problematic signatures.

The person who added this quote, Johnwynnejr, may have been trying to point out that it would have been difficult for NBA to appeal the decision on its "civil rights" initiative in AZ. However, there is no indication that NBA tried or even wanted to do so, making this a point based on a hypothetical situation and therefore not relevant to the topic.

NBA did try to appeal the SOS's decision. It is relevant information. It didn't make it to the ballot because the appeal process in AZ isn't adequate. Please don't delete referenced info from the page that I post it.

Also, the adjoining paragraph from which you delete isn't clear at all. It talks about an invalidity rate, but doesn't explain the jurisdiction of the invalidity. I tried to add in the jurisdiction to clear it up, and Diane deleted that also.

-- Diane Farsetta 10:37, 4 February 2009 (EST)

Tight time frames. State and county officials have trouble meeting the deadline to verify signatures. Early voting means ballots must be printed earlier than ever. That leaves almost no time for judicial review. It's almost impossible to appeal a decision disqualifying petitions.[1]
  1. Ballot Fraud - Arizona