South Dakota Suspicions

The National Review ^ | 11-07-02 | Byron York

[jwalburg]

The very last precincts to be counted killed the hopes of GOP Senate candidate John Thune. Was something funny going on?

oday a team of Republican election experts is in South Dakota, looking into the circumstances of Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson's extraordinarily narrow, last-minute victory over Republican candidate John Thune.

While it is certainly possible that there were no significant irregularities involved in the voting, some Republicans are puzzled by the way the vote-counting unfolded. Early Wednesday morning, with 99.65 percent of South Dakota's precincts reporting, Thune held a narrow lead over Johnson. It was only when the last three precincts (out of a total of 844) were counted that Johnson finally edged ahead. What has made some Republicans suspicious is that those final precincts were located in a southwestern county that was in the news for allegations of voting fraud in the weeks leading up to the election.

MINUTE BY MINUTE For most of Tuesday night and Wednesday morning, the election returns looked promising for Thune. At 1:32 A.M. EST on Wednesday, an Associated Press report showed Thune had 134,904 votes to Johnson's 132,648 with 648, or 77 percent, of the state's precincts reporting. At 2.47 A.M., the AP issued another report, this one showing Thune with 153,952 votes to Johnson's 149,789, with 736, or 87 percent, of precincts reporting — a lead of more than 4,000 votes.

At 3:41 A.M., Thune was up 158,331 to 154,602, with 776, or 92 percent, of precincts reporting.

At some point after that, Thune's lead began to shrink. By 6:38 A.M., with 838, or 99.3 percent, of the state's 844 precincts reporting, Thune led Johnson by 166,588 to 165,639 votes. It was close, but Thune was still in the lead by nearly 1,000 votes with just six precincts left to count.

Then the lead narrowed dramatically. By 8:28 A.M., Thune had 166,747 votes to Johnson's 166,559, with 841, or 99.65 percent, of the 844 precincts reporting. Thune was up by just 188 votes with three precincts left to count.

Those last precincts killed Thune's chances to win. At 9:21 A.M., with 843 of 844 precincts reporting, Thune trailed Johnson, 166,707 to 167,252.

Finally, at 10:22 A.M., the last precinct was counted and reported. Thune trailed Johnson 166,954 to 167,481 — a margin of 527 votes. Johnson claimed victory.

It was a stunning finish to a race that was clearly tight but appeared for much of the night to be in Thune's hands. Somewhere in the last five precincts, Thune's Senate hopes disappeared.

QUESTIONABLE PRACTICES The vote counting has attracted the attention of Republicans because the precincts that defeated Thune — the ones that were counted last — were in Shannon County, on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. The county has been the target of intensive get-out-the-vote efforts by Democrats and has reported the largest gain in registrations, 17 percent, of any county in the state. In recent weeks, federal and local authorities have been investigating allegations of fraudulent voting practices related to some of those new voters (along with some in other counties around the state).

In mid-October, the Shannon County auditor said one in ten of the county's new registrations was under investigation for possible irregularities. On October 20, the Sioux Falls Argus Leader reported that, "Auditors in 10 counties, all but one adjoining a reservation, have forwarded questionable registration forms or absentee ballot requests to the sheriff or state's attorney for investigation. Of the nearly 400 questionable documents discovered by the auditors, 338 came from Shannon and Pennington counties, where the two investigations into possible voter fraud are under way."

Shannon County went heavily for Johnson — out of 3,118 votes cast, 2,856, or about 92 percent, went to Johnson, while 248 went to Thune (a third-party candidate received 14 votes). That percentage, in itself, might not be particularly unusual; Native Americans in South Dakota vote heavily Democratic, and Johnson is popular with Native Americans. But one thing that has aroused Republican curiosity is the significant increase in the number of votes cast in Shannon County since the last mid-term election, in 1998, in which Sen. Tom Daschle won reelection.

In 1998, there were just 1,559 votes cast in Shannon (that is precisely half the votes cast this year — a statistical nicety that might signify nothing, but might still catch Republican eyes). Of the 1998 total, 1,228 went to Daschle and 239 went to Republican Ron Schmidt (a third-party candidate won 92 votes).

What some Republicans find interesting about the numbers is that the popular Daschle, who won in a landslide statewide, won just 79 percent of the votes in Shannon County — significantly less than Johnson won this year — while Schmidt, who lost by a huge margin in 1998, received about the same number of votes that the well-known Thune received this year. Even though the total number of voters in Shannon County has gone up dramatically, it appears that virtually none of them chose Thune.

The situation might be completely attributable to get-out-the-vote efforts; 17,000 new voters were signed up statewide in recent months, and Democrats were particularly aggressive in Shannon County and on the state's other Indian reservations. But Republicans signed up new voters, too, and now they want to have a look at the county's voting patterns.

Finally, the GOP wants to know more about the timing of the Shannon County returns. Although nothing is set in stone, some observers say it is not usually the pattern in statewide elections for Shannon County returns to be the last counted. Given the fact that the county provided Johnson's winning margin, and given the earlier allegations of corruption, Republicans want to know why Shannon was so late this time.

WHAT TO DO? At this moment, the South Dakota secretary of state's office is finishing its official canvass of the election. That process in effect rechecks everyone's math and comes up with a final vote total for all the races. It is not designed to uncover voter irregularities.

According to state law, Thune is entitled to ask for a recount. On Wednesday, he released a carefully worded statement that suggested he might choose to do so. "If there is a change in the numbers or evidence of irregularities after the official election canvass, I will look at pursuing the next step in the process, which is a formal recount," Thune said:

However, I do not wish to put the people of South Dakota through this process unless it is absolutely necessary. Therefore, if there is no change in the vote totals or any irregularities after the official canvass, we will pursue no further action and the results will stand...No one would be happier than I to see those numbers change as the process continues. However, if the numbers stand, I am prepared to accept the outcome and know that my supporters and all those who have stood with me during this process will accept the outcome as well.

Speaking publicly later on Wednesday, Thune seemed inclined to let the matter drop after the canvass. At this point, it is simply not clear whether he will ask for a recount or take any other action.

Republicans want to be careful in the course they choose. They have already won the Senate, and they do not want to embroil the party in a long, acrimonious fight over a contest that will not affect the balance of power in Washington. In addition, they do not want to embark on a Democratic-style legal battle if there is no solid evidence of fraud. But at this point, they want to know what happened. The circumstances of Johnson's last-minute comeback look a little odd, and Republicans want to learn the story behind the numbers.

[MEGoody]

They should look into it, but quietly.

[truth defector]

The reason this stuff happens the way it does, is because it is timed to happen in the dead of night, while everyone is sleeping. I stayed up watching the returns come in for the Talent v. Demonrat in Missouri. Talent had a 80,000 or so vote lead coming down the home stretch and the next time the numbers came in he suddenly had only a 35,000 vote lead.
Then it was down to 25,000 then down 16,000 until things turned around and I believe he may have won by 30,000 votes or so. It was a nail biter. Votes should not be held back like that in a normal situation, but apparently it is done that way so the dims can figure out how many fraud votes they need in order to pull of the win.

[ninenot]

Thank you for identifying Lott as one of the problems.

Wonder what IS in those FBI files now kept at Hillary's mansion???

[JasonC]

It would certainly be a big deal if they did -both-...

[fooman]

This be nice stuff is nonsense.


We need to widen our majority. We already had Chafee saying last night that making the tax permanent was 'extreme'. Give me a break.

I do not want to be blackmailed. Gore looked stupid because he wanted selective recounting after THREE recounts.


He wanted to keep the fraud votes and toss the military ones.

No equivalence. Sorry.

If we dont defend our base in SD we will lose the Gov and two SEnators for a LONG time.

[JasonC]

It is surprising to an outsider, not from the state, certainly. The turnout % is lowest on the Indian reservations, and the Dem % of vote is highest in the same places. If you look at registrations by party, there does not seem to be any great suppression of potential Thune votes - maybe a few hundred, but not more than that (There were only around 500 voters in the Republican primary, e.g.). The Dem vote is around 85% of active registered Dems.

I would want to check how "clean" the voter rolls are. It is possible there is just a lot of apathy among the Indians there, with some committed Dems but many apolitical. It is also possible there is a lot of "padding" in the registrations, in the form of leftovers still on the rolls. The country certainly stands out as anamolous in the state, but that may reflect genuinely different political behavior by county residents.

It merits a look, but not wild accusations...

[TeleStraightShooter]

Shannon County, 1998 Senate:
1559 votes cast
1228 Dem candidate {78.8%}
0239 Rep candidate {15.3%}
0092 3rd candidates {5.90%}

Shannon County, 2002 Senate:
3118 votes cast
2856 Dem candidate {91.6%}
0248 Rep candidate {7.95%}
0014 3rd candidates {0.45%}

Shannon County, 2002 vs 1998:
1559 more votes were cast {exactly 2 times more}
+ 1628 Dem candidate {132% increase}
+ 9 ..... Rep candidate {3% increase}
- 78 .... 3rd candidates {84% DECREASE, the war paty must have chased them off the reservation!}

[AmishDude]

Sorry if you've seen this before.

The 1990 Census says that there are 5462 voting age people. 94.6% of total population is "Native American".

The 2000 Census says that there are 6819 voting age people. 94.2% of total population is "Native American".

That's over 10 years. Democrat registration increased 89% while voting age population increased 24%. The raw numbers are more striking.

(Before you discount census numbers, remember that the 2000 census at least had a huge minority voting effort, emphasizing Federal giveaways and the welfare numbers on reservations generally are staggering.)

Voter registration in Shannon county, from here:

Year	R registrants	D registrants	Other	% voted
1988	679	3073	328	36%
1990	663	2936	476	27%
1992	680	3142	582	37%
1994	461	2613	514	35%
1996	623	3817	783	43%
1998	526	3731	705	31%
2000	563	3909	866	37%
2002	505	5556	929	44%

Note that the jumps in registration numbers occur during years when Johnson is running for Senate. Hmmm...

From SoS website, Shannon county results:

Year	Office	R	D	Others
1988	President	256	1206	17
	US House	250	1167	N/A	Tim Johnson (D)
1990	US Senate	433	579	69
	US House	304	720	N/A	Tim Johnson (D)
	Gov./Lt. Gov.	630	430	N/A
1992	President	225	1267	159
	US Senate	165	1416	52
	US House	130	1373	102	Tim Johnson (D)
1994	US House	159	973	102	Tim Johnson (D)
	Gov./Lt. Gov.	46	985	102
1996	President	253	1926	105
	US Senate	348	1949	N/A	Tim Johnson (D)
	US House	364	1843	96	John Thune (R)
1998	US Senate	239	1228	92
	US House	623	912	96	John Thune (R)
	Gov./Lt. Gov	182	1137	99
2000	President	252	1667	34
	US House	619	1285	55	John Thune (R)
2002	US Senate	248	2856	14	Tim Johnson (D) John Thune (R)
	US House	208	2857	46

By numbers alone, I'd suspect at least 800 illegal votes. Common sense says that a mid-term election for Junior Senator from a county where the returns came in late with over 1150 more votes for the Democrat than usual but the same number for the Republicans more than smells fishy. It needs tartar sauce.

[AmishDude]

Thanks Fred. I put my info on this thread, too. Maybe people are sick of seeing it by now, but it did take some effort. :)

[AmishDude]

Do not compare the votes to registration. That's where the fraud is. Once you get the people registered, filling out an absentee ballot in their name is easy. I want to know what the absentee ballot numbers were and the SoS doesn't put that data on his website.

[Leto]

There was another thread last night that had correlated information about the 2000 census and the 2002 registered voters. In a number of counties there were more registered voters and adults >18 yrs, not good.

In one county when you look at the results of the 2000 presidental election GWB got >65% of the vote and Algore 30 something %, In this election the rat got 92% of the vote.... this seems VERY ODD.

[RobFromGa]

bump to read later...looks interesting

[Pushi]

I'm with you 100%. Voter fraud should be considered and prosecuted on the same level as murder.

[TeleStraightShooter]

Votes for Thune in Shannon County:
364 in 1996 {43% turnout}
623 in 1998 {31% turnout}
619 in 2000 {37% turnout}
248 in 2002 {44% turnout}

Thune must of done something really bad to lose 371 {60%} of his votes between 2000-2002!

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

A despicable voter fraud reference bump.

[AmishDude]

Well, with Daschle as majority leader, you expect his party to get a boost in little South Dakota. Truth is, if SD had to vote again, Thune would win by double-digits. Now the whole state is irrelevant. If you notice, Thune got a boost by being an incumbent when he ran for the house. It seems that 248 is a to-be-expected number for a Republican in a Senate race in Shannon county.

[AmishDude]

There may be fraud in several counties, but Shannon is the most suspicious because (a) there was already fraud found there before the election and (b) the returns came in late -- standard Cook County, IL tactics.

[Pushi]

I sent this entire thread to Trent Lott.

[Irish Eyes]

Where was it that the computers broke down and another "chip" was driven up from Nebraska? I am sure this has been stated before but I can't find it.