Pappas Suit Contests 3rd District Election

The Daily Nexus published a far more informative article on what Pappas is trying to accomplish...

http://www.dailynexus.com/article.php?a=...

His point is not that there was *actual* fraud, but that because registration cards were held longer than the letter of the law (even though Holland approved) *VALID* voters votes must be disqualified.

Mr. Pappas needs to read a bit about the Old South, where (in 1950) if you couldn't name the losing party's Vice Presidential Candidate in the 1840 elections ( you were deemed unqualified to vote, well, if you were black, anyway. Don't want uneducated voters!

He and Nancy-Crawford-Hall are conducting the Thor Nis Christiansen Memorial North County annihilation of Isla Vista Voting campaigns. Just give us your money, Isla Vista, and you can live with your 5-year-olds walking in the middle of the street to IV School in the morning, because the County won't spend money on sidewalks.

According to the article in today's Daily Nexus, the basis for the challenge is that (a) (some/many/most?) requests were held for longer than the standard 3 days before being turned in, and (b) box 12 in (some/many/most?) of the voter registration cards was not filled in.

As for the three days, it seems logical to me that if the county voting office allows for an extension, due to the volume, that this would be acceptable. So long as the registration cards are turned in before the registration deadline (they were), then I don't see why this should invalidate the voters. Additionally, the people filling out these cards had nothing to do with the length of time between when they filled it out and when it was turned in -- why would you want to punish well meaning voters, Steve, if you really care about our democratic process?

As far as the box 12 issue, this is from the California Secretary of State's website (http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/guidetov...

Elections Code § 2150 provides that if any person helps a citizen complete a registration form, that person must sign and date the form below the signature of the person registering.

Elections Code § 2159 requires any person who is paid to take back and turn in the completed registration form to sign the card in his or her handwriting.

Addressing these in order, it would seem that code 2150 was not violated unless the person doing the registration assisted the voter in filling out the form -- they gave them the forms and told them how to fill them out. Is this "helping"? My definition would be active helping, not giving one a form and instructions on how to fill it out. As for code 2159, the people performing these registrations were volunteers, and as such not bound to associate their name with each form.

I think it's pretty clear that invalidating votes based on either of these criteria is sour grapes. It also seems clear to me that neither of these criteria were violated, and as such, the votes count. If you ask me, I think Mr. Pappas is frustrated -- he doesn't understand why bottles of water and free food don't inherently translate into votes. Maybe it's because people disagree with your policy, Mr. Pappas, and you can't by their vote, Steve. I should hope this will be laughed out of court, but we will watch this drama unfold in the near future. I personally wish that Mr. Pappas would accept the will of the voters, even by a slim margin of roughly 2%, and return to his civilian life.

Josh:"I personally wish that Mr. Pappas would accept the will of the voters, even by a slim margin of roughly 2%, and return to his civilian life."
My friend, if it were only that simple (& believe me, I wish it were!).
It seems like elections as of 1994 have become subject to legal challenges, overturns, legal ramblings &, well, you get the picture.
It's almost as if to say "well, I don't like the outcome so I'm going to push to get it MY way!"
Why did I choose 1994 as the "moment of inertia"? Simple. That's the year that the majority of CA voters passed prop 187 legitimately & the courts, w/ a little bit of fed pressure overturned it.
In 2000 it was the presidential election & all the legal ramblings. In 2004 the same thing, but not as bad.
Then just recently the prop 8 passage & the challenges to overturn the popular vote results.
These are but a few that immediately come to mind.
There were some legal challenges before (1988 or 1992 I believe), but the most recent & significant are those mentioned.
It's not a question of what 1 is for or against, what is under fire is the word of the people, a.k.a. the vote.
Between all the challenges, recounts, appeals & whatnot, that's a lot of $$$ spent & the process known as the secret ballot being questioned, as well as the competency of the voting public.
True, there are things that constitutionally shouldn't be put on a ballot (such as people's life/bedroom rights/choices), but if they are then it is "public domain" (for lack of a better phrase) & the results may or may not be what you want, left to the people.
I have to say that even in Florida, the MOST screwed up state politically, overturns of election results (w/ the exception of the 2000 presidential race & that was a MAJOR 1) are a rare thing.
This phenomena happens most in CA, but lawyers in other states are starting to catch on. Keep an eye on Minnesota's senate race, that'll be a good example :) henry

Clearly it's not that simple or we wouldn't have this challenge. But hey, a fellow can wish, can't he? :0)

I don't want to turn this into a debate about other challenges (specifically prop 8), so I will agree in the sense that the votes are often challenged, but disagree that prop 8 and the 3rd district race are being challenged on any form of comparable grounds (I support a challenge of the prop 8 vote, for full disclosure).

My biggest argument here is the grounds for the challenge don't appear to hold water in my oh-so-unprofessional opinion, and as such should not be used to take away the votes of thousands of students. Would he have contested the voting registration if he had won the elected office? No. Would Doreen have challenged the voting registration had Pappas won? I must say, I do not believe she would. I guess we will see what happens next.

Josh, oh-so unprofessional opinion or not, you're right, the data doesn't hold up for Pappas.
But I think Farr not challenging should it be the other way around, well, we'd have to leave it up to human nature & it's unpredictabilities for an answer.
Look @ the Strickland/Jackson race. The difference was <1%, but she conceded w/ no challenge to the results.
That's the way it should be :) henry

"( you were deemed unqualified to vote, well, if you were black, anyway. Don't want uneducated voters!" -snugspout-

Yes snugspout, we know that ALL southerners (and rural people) are racists and still pray for the days of slavery, and ALL Yanks and Libs are loving people.

He and Nancy-Crawford-Hall are conducting the Thor Nis Christiansen Memorial North County annihilation of Isla Vista Voting campaigns" -snugspout-

OK snugspout, I give up, you're right, and you've "outed" us. We all think of Thor Nis Christiansen as our own version of Horst Wessel. We sing songs about him and his picture hangs on the walls of most Solvangians homes. If only those Isla Vista people hadn't tormented him into doing what he did with their Lib ways he might be alive today.

(Disclaimer: This post is merely sarcasm directed at the blogger known as "snugspout" and is not intended to imply that Nancy Crawford-Hall or any other Santa Ynez denizen is a murderer, nor does it imply that the general populace worships mass murderers, although some up here may be swindlers, blackmailers, and possibly, Republicans)

Geez, billclausen, the incredibly high hurdles put up to keep black Southerners in the past from registering to vote are a fact. Your exaggerations are absurd.

Here is what Nancy Crawford-Hall says...

``What business do they [IV Residents] have “stuffing the ballot boxes” in an area they don’t live in and should not have any input into local decisions?''

http://www.santaynezvalleyjournal.com/ar...

Here is another quote from Steve Pappas:

``Pappas said that his concern is to make sure all the votes are legal, even if votes for him end up being thrown out in the process. ''

http://www.santaynezvalleyjournal.com/ar...

If he really believes that, why is he only challenging votes in Isla Vista/UCSB precincts, and not the whole County?

The analogy with disenfranchisement in the Old South is accurate. Thor Nis Christiansen, the Solvanger who murdered IV students is an appropriate symbol. I remember quite clearly the slant of the media and Sherriff's department in those days... they blamed those murders on hitch-hiking and loose IV morals. The real cause was criminal behavior by someone from north of the mountains.

Here again is an issue where northerners are accusing IV residents of illegal and/or immoral behavior. I think exactly the reverse is true.

snugspout, I share your perspective in terms of Pappas and his recount, but don't you think saying "exactly the reverse is true" completely undermines your whole point? You're saying there's this horrible bias from the northern part of the third district toward the southern part, but it sounds like the bias is returned in kind by you. Additionally, I don't see how one psychopath from Solvang is somehow related to Pappas' attempt at taking away voters' votes.

Couldn't it be less indicative of the north district's "hatred" for the south district, and more about this one particular person who is trying to overturn his missing out on being elected? This says everything about Pappas and Crawford-Hall, who both clearly do not respect students or their ability to vote in the district, but doesn't represent anything about either portion of the district. I think the focus should be on them, instead of some pseudo-deep-seeded "disrespect" for the southern part of the district.

For the record, I live in Goleta.

Hmmm, joshanders_84, you have some good points.

There is most definitely a sense of righteousness in the north, that they are `true' County residents and students in IV are `false'. They see themselves as champions of what is good and American, and IV as opposed to all that. This attitude survived all sorts of wild swings in IV's true political nature... so it seems deep seated in the north.

Is it hatred? Darned close in my experience. We'll have to wait and see if in the end COLAB, Cattleman's, SB Taxpayers, etc end up supporting Pappas' suit.

Are the Northerner's feelings so strong they want to act out Christiansen's behavior? I don't think so. That has never been my point.

My point is that the whole Christiansen case... that he was overlooked because of a feeling of righteousness and rectitude relative to IV... is analogous to the Pappas/Crawford-Hall viewpoint. The sense of righteousness and rectitude causes a blind spot in evaluating northerners' own behavior.

IV does it too.. they feel righteous in environmental issues, but they love their cars, and sometimes *drive* the 1/2 mile to west IV to surf. Good Grief. But I don't think anyone in IV has sued to disqualify 18 precincts of north-of-the mountains voting.

Geez, billclausen, the incredibly high hurdles put up to keep black Southerners in the past from registering to vote are a fact. Your exaggerations are absurd. -snugspout-

snugspout: This is really getting quite boring so I'll just say a few things and let you go on with your obsession about a serial killer from over thirty years ago.

As for my remark about Southerners, you either didn't get the sarcasm, or you have a strange sense of humor. OK, for all the brilliant intellectuals who might be inclined to blog and tell us about the evils of racism--and how all that don't adhere strictly to the Santa Barbara "progressive" agenda are either racists--or simply "don't get it", I assure you that we DO know about slavery, racism, and so forth, but we choose to live in the present and deal with issue of today--while snugspout mitigates his/her argument with references to things of the past.

I have always been suspicious of people who bring up such issues of race because I wonder what skeletons THEY have in their closets. I got news for you snugspout: I'm from Chicago (born in 1961) which is a good ol' working-class bastion of left-wing Democratic Party politics and moved out in '73 and I can assure you that there was a LOT of racism back there--a LOT. It's easy to pick on the south but trust me, there was and might still be plenty of it in the North, but the south and rednecks make easy targets don't they? Methinks thou protesteth much.

As for the issue at hand, there IS a difference in the politics of north county and south county, and Pappas is simply challenging what he feels is an unfair election. It's up to the courts to decide whether or not he has a case, and hopefully whatever they rule is the right decision. You claimed on the last blog that you feel if I.V. residents can't vote, then they should not pay taxes, and I agree with you on that. Too bad your other prejudices cloud some otherwise good ideas.

Coming back full circle (that is, back to the purpose of the article), the only reason Pappas feels it's unfair is that he didn't win. It's only fair if he wins! If he actually cared about the democratic process, he wouldn't try to strip voters' votes for actions they did not have control over. Also, why stop in IV? Why not try to find all the other places in the district where a registration card was held for more than three days? As far as box 12, I already addressed that, but can he really think it's "fair" to strip people of their votes because the person collecting them didn't turn them in within the requisite three days (despite having permission to do so)?

Well... I haven't claimed that North County folk are racist, or serial killers, or whatever. Just because someone disagrees with me doesn't make them a racist or a serial killer.

Let's remember, Steve Pappas and Nancy Crawford-Hall are trying to disenfranchise thousands... maybe even 10,000... voters. That action is the core problem. And their actions are consistent with literally hundreds of comments I've heard over the years from North County folk.

Sure I'm angry about it, and sure, it makes all sorts of old grievances float up to the surface. And I'll do everything I can to keep pushing IV residents to never forget what Pappas and Crawford-Hall are trying to do.

Further, the Christiansen case really should never be forgotten. Local law enforcement could never catch the guy, and the blame was really put on IV, wrongly. billclausen, you steadfastly refuse to absorb that point, and how it relates to the electoral politics. It is not that northern county folks are serial killers, but that they can't imagine that they are wrong, or so self-interested they pass into immorality, or that IV has a legitimate reason to vote.

I sure wish IV residents cared a lot more about the taxes they pay. All sorts of absurd things happen in IV with public money... but when you are 20 you just don't care.

"Let's remember, Steve Pappas and Nancy Crawford-Hall are trying to disenfranchise thousands... maybe even 10,000... voters. That action is the core problem"

As such it would be good to focus on that and not on ol' Thor N.C.

By the way snugspout, you and I made the readers comments section of the print version of The Independent for this week.

We're on page 21.