election laws shall be liberally construed so that the will of voters is not defeated
Dear Friends,
I’ve significantly revised my argument below, in light of a ruling on manual counting by AG Peterson that I read last night, sent to Senator Erdman:
What follows is my argument for County sovereignty in our elections, in contradiction to the tyranny of the machines (and Evnen) that Peterson argues for.
Please prepare yourself first by reading this very short article.
….
Now then, having read Marbury v Madison, keep in mind, as you continue reading here, that the compound checks and balances built into our system of government don’t function automatically. We must have people in office with courage (and discernment) to ACT when a check and balance is called for. If someone doesn’t have that courage, they aren’t worthy of public service. It goes without saying that a huge part of elected office is keeping one’s oath and defending the rights of those they serve when those rights are under attack from others in office. That requires courage.
Also keep in mind that there is no supremacy in our three branches of government. They are equal. Judicial supremacy is a myth. The Dred Scott decision, declaring a man to be a piece of property, proved that. The judiciary is not infallible.
The power resides in the sentiment of the People, and the way to marshal that power is by making a convincing argument, which anyone may do. (Nevermind that the People reserve the God-given right “to alter or to abolish,” per the Declaration.)
Now then, with regard to elections. We’ll begin with the US Constitution, followed by our State Constitution, followed by an analysis of certain NE state election statutes.
US Constitution, Article I, Section 4
“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives (federal offices only), shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”
—>Take Away: Nothing in our federal Constitution gives the federal government any authority in or over State and County office elections. That is State and County business. Our federal Constitution, created by the States, only asserts that, when it comes to State representatives IN the federal government, State Legislatures have the power to prescribe the times, places and manner of holding elections for those representatives.
So much for HAVA.
Nebraska State Constitution Article I, Section 22
”Elections to be free.
All elections shall be free; and there shall be no hindrance or impediment to the right of a qualified voter to exercise the elective franchise.”
—>Take-away: The Nebraska State Constitution is the supreme law of Nebraska. When it refers to an elective franchise, it is inherently, and of necessity, referring to a real, honest, transparent, verifiable elective franchise. The People cannot have confidence in anything less, and the People must have confidence that their public servants are chosen by the People.
Nebraska State Constitution Article III, Section 18
“Local or special laws prohibited.
The Legislature shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following cases, that is to say:
…
- Providing for the election of Officers in Townships, incorporated Towns or Cities.
…
- The opening and conducting of any election, or designating the place of voting.
…”
—>Take-away: “Local” elections belong to local people…i.e., to our Counties and lower. They therefore remain under the control of the local people in those jurisdictions.
The Legislature CANNOT write laws that are repugnant to the Constitution. Nor can they delegate power to the Secretary to write administrative law that is repugnant to the Constitution. If they do, those laws are void. The Legislature and Secretary cannot usurp local control.
Our Counties must assert their Sovereignty.
(Our State Constitution says a few other minor things about elections, including when State office elections will be held, and how they will be canvassed. But that’s it.)
Moving on to legislative acts, as they pertain to our elections, namely, the Election Act (Chapter 32 of our Revised Statutes).
Nebraska Revised Statute 32-102
“Act; applicability; how construed.
The Election Act shall apply to all elections held in the state unless otherwise specifically provided. The act shall be liberally construed so that the will of the registered voters is not defeated by an informality or a failure to comply with the act with respect to the giving of any notice or the conducting of any election or the certifying of the results of the election.”
Let’s make it more readable: “The Election Act shall be liberally construed so that THE WILL OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS IS NOT DEFEATED BY ... the conducting of any election or the certifying of the results of the election.”
—>Take-away: Our tyrannical executive branch is in violation of this principle. The fact of the matter is, the will of registered voters is being defeated by the way in which our “elections” are being conducted.
The will of registered voters is to KNOW (not believe, but know) that their election results are the real election results, with no hanky-panky involved.
The will of registered voters has been defeated, 1) by the fact that the election process is not transparent, and 2) by the fact that we aren’t allowed to verify results.
Nebraska Revised Statute 32-207
“Election commissioner; counties having over 100,000 inhabitants; appointment; term; vacancy; duties; oversight.
The office of election commissioner shall be created for each county having a population of more than one hundred thousand inhabitants. The election commissioner shall be appointed by the Governor and shall serve for a term of four years or until a successor has been appointed and qualified. In the event of a vacancy, the Governor shall appoint an election commissioner to serve the unexpired portion of the term. In order to further the purpose of fair and open elections free from outside influence, the election commissioner shall have the duty of operational and administrative oversight over the business of the office, subject to review by the Secretary of State.”
—>Take-away:
The county election official has a duty. That duty is to conduct FAIR and OPEN election FREE FROM OUTSIDE INFLUENCE.
An election where the vote-counting is done in secret, behind the closed doors of a tabulator, by someone who we don’t know who wrote software we can’t look at, is NOT an OPEN election. Nor is it a FAIR election. Nor is it an election FREE FROM OUTSIDE INFLUENCE.
If the county election official is not conducting fair and open elections free from outside influence, he/she is breaking the law. Every election official in the state who is using private secret software—that is closed to the public—to count our votes, is allowing outside influence and therefore breaking the law.
Nebraska Revised Statute 32-218
“County clerk perform duties of election commissioner; when; deputy county clerk for elections.
(1) The county clerk shall have the powers and perform the duties assigned to the election commissioner except in those counties which have an election commissioner as provided by section 32-207 or 32-211. The powers and duties assigned to the county clerk in the Election Act relating to the registration of voters and the conduct of elections shall only apply to county clerks in counties without an election commissioner. The county clerk may hire additional personnel to perform the duties assigned under the act.”
—>Take-away: When it comes to elections, the county clerk has the same obligations as the county election commissioner (see commentary on 32-207 above).
Nebraska Revised Statute 32-901
“Ballots; voting procedure.
(1) To vote for a candidate or on a ballot question using a paper ballot that is to be manually counted, the registered voter shall make a cross or other clear, discernible mark in the square opposite the name of every candidate, including write-in candidates, for whom he or she desires to vote and, in the case of a ballot question, opposite the answer he or she wishes to give. Making a cross or other clear, discernible mark in the square constitutes a valid vote.”
—>Take-away: This statute recognizes the legitimacy of manually counting ballots. The fact is, there is nothing in Nebraska law that expressly prohibits the manual counting of ballots/votes. (Nor can there be.) Evnen’s will isn’t law. If there is a process to manually count ballots that secures transparency, verifiability and integrity in the results, he can not have any legitimate objection to that process, especially when it requires no outside financing.
Nebraska Revised Statute 32-1012
”Centralized location; partial returns; when; designation of location; counting procedure.
(1) In counties using optical scanners to count the ballots at a centralized location, the election commissioner or county clerk may arrange to have partial returns delivered, properly locked or sealed, to the centralized location or locations at any time desired after the opening of the polls if at least twenty-five ballots have been cast since any prior delivery of ballots. The election commissioner or county clerk shall designate the location or locations for counting the ballots and may designate a location or locations in any county. Upon completion of the count, the ballots shall be conveyed under supervision of the election commissioner or county clerk to the office of such official. If for any reason it becomes impracticable to count all or a part of the ballots with optical scanners, the election commissioner or county clerk may direct that the ballots be counted manually following as closely as possible the provisions governing the manual counting of ballots.”
—>Take-away: The election commissioner or clerk has the power to direct that ballots be counted manually.
For all intents and purposes, it has become “impracticable” to use the machines. They cannot be trusted. We have no obligation to trust them. It has been proven over and over that they can very easily be hacked and used to cheat. We can’t afford to take chances with our elections. There is too much at stake.
Nebraska Revised Statute 32-1201
”Costs of election; payment; county expense.
The county board shall draw warrants in payment of all bills submitted by the election commissioner or county clerk related to the cost of any election conducted by the office of the election commissioner or county clerk. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (4) of section 32-1203, the initial payment for bills submitted to the election commissioner or county clerk for the cost of preparing for and conducting elections shall be a county expense. The compensation of the election commissioner or county clerk, the deputy election commissioner or deputy county clerk for elections, and all permanent employees of the election commissioner or county clerk, the expenditures for the rental, furnishing, and equipping of the office of the election commissioner or county clerk, the expenditures for necessary office supplies, books, documents, and appurtenances relating to or used in performing the duties of the election commissioner or county clerk in relation to elections, and the cost of elections for county, state, and federal governments shall be an apportioned county expense and shall not be chargeable to other political subdivisions.”
—>Take-away: The obligation of each county to pay for their elections can only exist if each county own their elections.
The fact that our SoS has partially relieved our counties of that obligation by “giving” them very expensive tabulators—at the expense of the rest of the state—doesn’t change that.
Closing
It is absurd to say that the manually counting of ballots is illegal, as AG Peterson has, when the SoS conducts audits (allegedly) by manually counting ballots. The manual count is the gold standard. The manual count is used to audit the machine count, not the other way around.
Centralized power is a very bad idea. Go back and read our founders. They created a compound republic with checks and balances at multiple levels precisely because men are not angels.
Power comes from elections. Nothing centralizes power like centralized elections. It therefore stands to reason that centralized elections are a very bad idea, especially when that centralization is so centralized that all of our votes are potentially being counted by one person who wrote some code…code that no one is allowed to look at. (Such is the case in Nebraska. One person is counting all our votes with secret code. Prove I’m wrong.)
Our Counties are sovereign. They constitute a decentralized political subdivision that serves to give the People a voice in who governs them. Some say “all politics is local,” but that’s only true if we make it so.
We are a government of laws, not men. (Evnen should read the Constitution.) The Secretary is not a king. The Secretary’s office is not a dictatorial office. It’s not even a managerial office for our elections. If anything, he is just supposed to make sure our county elections are conducted openly, fairly and without outside interference. Sadly, he is the source of outside interference.
Any “law” passed by our legislative branch, any “EO” passed by our executive branch, and/or any administrative “law” passed by Evnen’s office, is VOID, if it is repugnant to to our Constitution and compromises our elections.
All it takes to make it void (even in the face of judicial activism) is for someone with courage to stand up, declare it so, and make a convincing argument as to the People of the state as to why. The Power resides in the sentiment of the People (something neither Ricketts nor Evnen, nor Pillen, understand).
Certain office holders (including Evnen) think they are the law (or above it) and can do whatever they please. Obviously, they cannot, as long we are watchful. Otherwise, they will try.
It’s time for the rest of us to stand up and say NO MORE OF THIS NONSENSE.
I hope this helps the efforts of those who are trying to convince their County election officials that they have nothing to fear by eliminating ES&S from your elections.
On the contrary, they have everything to gain…i.e., the trust and praise of those they serve—their fellow citizens.
If they won’t listen, perhaps we need to “unelect” them with a recall.
Sincerely,
Robert J. Borer
Whooooo!!! On fire!!!
I say no more of any of this nonsense. We have a Constitution. We need to adhere to what is fair, right, and just! These politicians think they rule over us!!! They are being paid by us to serve in our best interest!!! They all need to be removed and true patriots need to be elected fairly! Thank you Bob