Where are the military voting "agreements" - Part 2.
Earlier today we asked the question “Can we see the military voting settlements?” The DOJ said it entered into agreements with Kansas, Nevada, North Dakota and Mississippi to protect military voting rights. These “agreements” were done in lieu of filing a lawsuit. In a lawsuit, a Court oversees compliance and can find a party who fails to mail ballots in contempt of court. In an agreement, it is a contract and not as easy to enforce.
The previous posting confessed that the inability to find the agreements may result from shoddy internet research skills. The DOJ Press releases don’t help because they don’t provide any agreements to read. The public has a right to know the terms of the agreements, the enforcement mechanisms, the scope of responsibilities and what happens if the state fails to honor the terms and mail military ballots. In other words, what are the terms, what do the words SAY?
Election Law Center has learned that there is a possibility that there are, in fact – no agreements. At least not written ones. The closest to a writing may be a letter from Nevada, North Dakota, Mississippi and Kansas promising to do something, and DOJ thanking them for the promise. If so, this would mark the strangest settlement in a contested election matter that has come out of the Voting Section for at least a decade.
But various sources tell Election Law Center that the “agreement” with Mississippi and Alabama may be even more amorphous, and really doesn’t even relate to military voting protections.
Of course we reserve the right to be entirely wrong, and so plainly state.
But let’s recap:
In a press release about Kansas, the Department of Justice announced:
“Under the agreement, the state will take actions to ensure that counties provide at least 45 days for the transmission, execution and return of ballots to all qualified UOCAVA voters who requested absentee ballots on or before Sept. 18, 2010, and will extend the receipt deadlines in those counties as commensurate with the delay in each of those counties in sending ballots.”
Where is this “agreement?” We will be glad to post it here if such a contract between the DOJ and Kansas is made available.
In a press release about Nevada, the DOJ announced:
“The Justice Department today announced that it has reached an agreement with Nevada officials to help ensure that military service members and U.S. citizens living overseas have an opportunity to participate fully in the Nov. 2, 2010, federal general election. This agreement was necessary to resolve a violation of the 2009 Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE Act).”
Where is the document revealing the terms of this agreement? We will post it here upon receipt. Let’s hope this is just an oversight and an actual contract placing clear obligations on the states can be reviewed by the public – and most of all – by military voters so they know what the terms are that govern whether or not their votes will count.
Posted by Christian Adams at October 19, 2010 
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: Military Voting Justice Department
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: Military Voting Justice Department
Comments