Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

State elections officials unsure how long recall signature review will require
Wisconsin State Journal ^ | 1-18-12

Posted on 01/18/2012 5:49:36 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic

Wisconsin's chief elections official says he doesn't know how long it will take to review roughly 1.9 million signatures that have been submitted to recall Gov. Scott Walker and five others.

The law requires the review to be done in 31 days, but Government Accountability Board Director Kevin Kennedy said Tuesday it will take longer than that.

Kennedy says the board will go to court soon to seek the delay and ask that all six elections be held on the same day.

Democrats who spearheaded the recall say the review should be done as quickly as possible.

Kennedy says it will take several days just to scan in the signatures for the review. The petitions will be posted on the GAB website once they are scanned.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: gab; kennedy; recall; verufy; wisconsinshowdown

1 posted on 01/18/2012 5:49:41 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic; Hunton Peck; Diana in Wisconsin; TaMoDee; P from Sheb; Shady; DonkeyBonker; ..

Wisconsin Signature Verification Ping

If you want on, or off, this Wisconsin interest ping list just FReep Mail me.


2 posted on 01/18/2012 5:51:55 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

isn’t the “GAB” a bunch of leftists?

who’s checking their work?


3 posted on 01/18/2012 5:56:00 AM PST by WOBBLY BOB (Congress: Looting the future to bribe the present.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

It vote fraud were made a Class A felony, boards would have a lot less checking to do.


4 posted on 01/18/2012 5:56:21 AM PST by mewzilla (I'll vote for the first guy who promises to mail in his SOTU addresses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

1.9 million. Wow!

So, after getting rid of the fraud, you have what, 20-30 signatures?


5 posted on 01/18/2012 5:56:54 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (Most Conservative in the Primary, the Republican Nominee in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

My last name is too Mouse!!!


6 posted on 01/18/2012 6:02:34 AM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
The judge on FOX yesterday said that they can stop checking the names after they reach the actually number that is required.
7 posted on 01/18/2012 6:10:53 AM PST by ladyvet ( I would rather have Incitatus then the asses that are in congress today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WOBBLY BOB
who’s checking their work?

The GAB is comprised of retired judges. I think most of them are leftists. VerifytheRecall (an independent group) will be checking their work, as will each of the candidates' campaign organizations. VTR has more than 8500 volunteers poised to enter names into a Data Base via computer as soon as they are released. They will be sorted and checked for duplicates, missing info, etc. The candidats' campaigns will be handling actual ccopies of the petitions and checking for irregularities.

VTR says that they can check the million+ signatures in 2 days. The Walker staff is planning on checking the paper recall petitions in 5 days.

Of course the GAB wants a big budget and 60 days to check the petitions. And the kicker? The GAB is hiring 50 people who have neither signed a petition, nor given a campaign contribution to either side. I think they'll have a hard time finding 50 people in this state who are skilled enough to hire who have not done at least one of those things.

8 posted on 01/18/2012 6:17:48 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; ...
I am not finding the POTUS race very encouraging so far but I will definitely be donating $$ to Walker's (campaign) against his recall by the leftist union goons. MSNBC is covering this much more than FNC and is playing a Air America type political cheer leading squad against Walker.
9 posted on 01/18/2012 6:18:12 AM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Scott Walker is in a pprotected period right now where there is no limit on his contributions. Send him money because he’s using it wisely, and this is ground zero on turning the country around. If the unions toss him from office, I think that we’ll also lose the presidency in November.


10 posted on 01/18/2012 6:21:57 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Last weekend the number was just over a half million. Yesterday it went to just over a million. Today, it’s two million signatures. Sounds like the ‘RATS are playing “Fun with Numbers” again.


11 posted on 01/18/2012 6:22:37 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer ("Climate Change" my a.... All weather is local.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Scott Walker is a hero. He stood up to the bullying obnoxious thug municipal unions. We must contribute to him to help him.


12 posted on 01/18/2012 6:24:47 AM PST by juliej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ladyvet

Reaching the actual number needed is not so important as a cut off because all of the signatures that are questionable will be challenged. When/if they reach the required number after the cahllenges are over is when the cut off will occur.

This data base will be searched 6 ways from Sunday to try to identify bogus signatures.

Everyone who did NOT sign a peition is encouraged to submit their own names to VerifyTheRecall.com and they will also be sorted and cross matched by name and address to make sure that nobody just signed their name to a petition.


13 posted on 01/18/2012 6:27:05 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Thanks for detailing that. :)


14 posted on 01/18/2012 6:34:47 AM PST by ladyvet ( I would rather have Incitatus then the asses that are in congress today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
Democrats who spearheaded the recall say the review should be done as quickly as possible.

I'm sure they do.

Has anyone other than a Democrat ever been convicted of some sort of election fraud or tampering with an election?

15 posted on 01/18/2012 7:00:26 AM PST by VeniVidiVici (Obama's War on Prosperity is killing me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici
Has anyone other than a Democrat ever been convicted of some sort of election fraud or tampering with an election?

It may happen, but the odds are probably 100-1 demonRATs over pubbies.

16 posted on 01/18/2012 7:24:56 AM PST by USS Alaska (Nuke The Terrorist Savages)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

Long enough to verify all of the fake signatures.


17 posted on 01/18/2012 7:33:23 AM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

The one million is just for Walker. The .9 million is for the senators.


18 posted on 01/18/2012 7:50:00 AM PST by Bob Buchholz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

We need a FR contest..guess the number, or the %, or signatures that are disallowed.


19 posted on 01/18/2012 8:23:22 AM PST by ken5050 (The ONLY reason to support Mitt: The Mormon Tabernacle Choir will appear at the WH each Christmas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

I can hear the media meme now.

“this loose band of unqualified,partisan, bitter clingers dare challenged the scrupulously detailed work of our fine, unbiased judges...!!”


20 posted on 01/18/2012 9:02:29 AM PST by WOBBLY BOB (Congress: Looting the future to bribe the present.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Good point. I saw Walker on FoxNews this morning, and he represented himself well. The state was $3.? brillion upside down, and they’re now running a $300 million dollar surplus. They have given home owners property tax relief also. He was also saying they had given more funds to the schools.

I’m thinking this guy is going to win his recall. I sure hope so.


21 posted on 01/18/2012 9:02:53 AM PST by DoughtyOne (This administration is Barawkward... yes lets try everything that failed in the 20th Century. NOT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

I’ve been donating what I can monthly for the past 6-8 months.

WI really is ground zero for the fiscal soul of our country.

Gubmint unions will tilt our debt over the point of no return if they’re allowed to.


22 posted on 01/18/2012 9:04:52 AM PST by WOBBLY BOB (Congress: Looting the future to bribe the present.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VeniVidiVici

kind of like the NFL version of getting the play off before the refs can make up their minds and blow the whistle.

only this ‘free play’ has the potential to cost taxpayers billions later downt the road.


23 posted on 01/18/2012 9:07:36 AM PST by WOBBLY BOB (Congress: Looting the future to bribe the present.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
RE :”I’m thinking this guy is going to win his recall. I sure hope so.

They tried to recall six Republican Senators but were only able to pickoff two of them.

I wouldn't underestimate the libs, they are really motivated to get out the vote and Republicans need to do the same. They got twice as many signatures as they needed although it sounds like many are due to fraud or paid for. They have the enthusiasm factor and Walker needs lots of ads and good PR/spin.

On the bright side it looks like WI Republicans got a voter ID law passed that keep some Dems from being able to pull funny business and may (Democrats claim anyway) keep some riff-raff from voting too.

If Dems lose this there will be outright weeping on MSNBC, that in itself is worth paying $$$ for me to see.

24 posted on 01/18/2012 9:17:58 AM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

I agree that Walker has work to do, but I do think he can do it.

I do think we should support the guy.

It would be great to watch MSNBC, but beyond that, I’d like to see it shown that the unions are not the power base they think they are.

I don’t see how any proud Wisconsin person could cast a vote in support of the folks who trashed their state executive office building like they did.

I’d be angry, and loaded for bear.


25 posted on 01/18/2012 9:32:53 AM PST by DoughtyOne (This administration is Barawkward... yes lets try everything that failed in the 20th Century. NOT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; NFHale; Impy; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; org.whodat; Pan_Yans Wife
RE :”I don’t see how any proud Wisconsin person could cast a vote in support of the folks who trashed their state executive office building like they did.

The Democrats/gov unions convinced many voters that Walker took away the ‘unions right to collective bargaining’ even if its not a right and they didnt lose it completely. So they get voters to relate to the poor victim unions as if its 1964 in the South.

Alternatively Walker must make the case to voters that they are better off now and that he acted in THEIR best interest. From what I can tell Walker is doing good job at doing that, he is certainly much better at it than what we have in congress. They don't seem to have a clue.

26 posted on 01/18/2012 9:49:44 AM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
(2) Petition requirements.
(a) Every recall petition shall have on the face at the top in bold print the words "RECALL PETITION". Other requirements as to preparation and form of the petition shall be governed by s. 8.40.
(b) A recall petition for a city, village, town, town sanitary district, or school district office shall contain a statement of a reason for the recall which is related to the official responsibilities of the official for whom removal is sought.
(c) A petition requesting the recall of each elected officer shall be prepared and filed separately.
(d) No petition may be offered for filing for the recall of an officer unless the petitioner first files a registration statement under s. 11.05 (1) or (2) with the filing officer with whom the petition is filed. The petitioner shall append to the registration a statement indicating his or her intent to circulate a recall petition, the name of the officer for whom recall is sought and, in the case of a petition for the recall of a city, village, town, town sanitary district, or school district officer, a statement of a reason for the recall which is related to the official responsibilities of the official for whom removal is sought. No petitioner may circulate a petition for the recall of an officer prior to completing registration. The last date that a petition for the recall of an officer may be offered for filing is 5 p.m. on the 60th day commencing after registration. After the recall petition has been offered for filing, no name may be added or removed. No signature may be counted unless the date of the signature is within the period provided in this paragraph.
(e) An individual signature on a petition sheet may not be counted if:
  1. The signature is not dated.
  2. The signature is dated outside the circulation period.
  3. The signature is dated after the date of the certification contained on the petition sheet.
  4. The residency of the signer of the petition sheet cannot be determined by the address given.
  5. The signature is that of an individual who is not a resident of the jurisdiction or district from which the elective official being recalled is elected.
  6. The signer has been adjudicated not to be a qualified elector on grounds of incompetency or limited incompetency as provided in s. 6.03 (3).
  7. The signer is not a qualified elector by reason of age.
  8. The circulator knew or should have known that the signer, for any other reason, was not a qualified elector.
9.10(2)(em)
(em) No signature on a petition sheet may be counted if:
  1. The circulator fails to sign the certification of circulator.
  2. The circulator is not a qualified circulator.
(f) The filing officer or agency shall review a verified challenge to a recall petition if it is made prior to certification.
(g) The burden of proof for any challenge rests with the individual bringing the challenge.
(h) Any challenge to the validity of signatures on the petition shall be presented by affidavit or other supporting evidence demonstrating a failure to comply with statutory requirements.
(i) If a challenger can establish that a person signed the recall petition more than once, the 2nd and subsequent signatures may not be counted.
(j) If a challenger demonstrates that someone other than the elector signed for the elector, the signature may not be counted, unless the elector is unable to sign due to physical disability and authorized another individual to sign in his or her behalf.
(k) If a challenger demonstrates that the date of a signature is altered and the alteration changes the validity of the signature, the signature may not be counted.
(L) If a challenger establishes that an individual is ineligible to sign the petition, the signature may not be counted.
(m) No signature may be stricken on the basis that the elector was not aware of the purpose of the petition, unless the purpose was misrepresented by the circulator.
(n) No signature may be stricken if the circulator fails to date the certification of circulator.
(p) If a signature on a petition sheet is crossed out by the petitioner before the sheet is offered for filing, the elimination of the signature does not affect the validity of other signatures on the petition sheet.
(q) Challenges are not limited to the categories set forth in pars. (i) to (L).
(r) A petitioner may file affidavits or other proof correcting insufficiencies, including but not limited to:
  1. Failure of the circulator to sign the certification of circulator.
  2. Failure of the circulator to include all necessary information.
(s) No petition for recall of an officer may be offered for filing prior to the expiration of one year after commencement of the term of office for which the officer is elected.

27 posted on 01/18/2012 11:18:40 AM PST by jellybean (Bookmark http://altfreerepublic.freeforums.org/index.php for when FR is down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jellybean

At training the other night, I was surprised to learn that ditto marks are not allowed. I can’t tell you how many petitions have passed through my hands where addresses and dates were duplicated by ditto marks. I also cannot tell you the number of times I’ve seen the petition circulator fill in information that was not supplied (such as city).

On the other hand, zip codes are not required. In any case, I can’t wait until Sunday when I can get my hands on these.


28 posted on 01/18/2012 2:57:31 PM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson