February 21, 2012

Verifying the signatures on the Scott Walker recall petitions.

According to email from the Verify the Recall effort, "over 13,000 volunteers" — typing in the data from scanned petitions — are "78% of the way through the 152,000 pages."
Scott Walker has signed his own petition 4 TIMES so far!
His wife Karen only signed it twice!
Yes, there will be some fake names on the petitions. (Walker's wife's name is Tonette, and "Karen Walker" sounds like a common name, so I'm presuming the name had Walker's actual address, or that exclamation point is very annoying.)

From the website:
We've built a system that will check the submitted signatures and give a full account of the findings - but first over one million petition signatures must be entered into the database so that the information can be analyzed for duplicate entries, false names or addresses, and other errant data.
I'm surprised they concede there are "over one million petition signatures." That's the claim the signature-gatherers made, but I doubt that anyone has counted the signatures... or even the pages. 152,000 is too round of a number. I'll bet they measured the stacks of pages and multiplied by some number of pages they believed were in any given inch. Moreover, if you divide a million by 152,000 you get 6.58. The individual pages have 10 lines, but not all lines are necessarily filled out. They must have estimated 7 signatures per page and multiplied to get to "over 1 million." I'd like to know how many signatures there really are, first, and then it's a matter of challenging bad signatures. Since only about 540,000 signatures are needed, there's an effort to make us think the exact numbers don't matter, because there are twice as many as needed. But that's propaganda for the recall, and it's important for the people to know that the procedure is fair and accurate. Give us the truth.

Meanwhile:
[Dane County Judge Richard Niess] denied Gov. Scott Walker's second request for more time to review signatures on his recall petitions, leaving a Feb. 27 deadline in place.
That means Walker is getting 30 days to review the material, including keying in the data (with thousands of volunteers).
Walker's attorneys claimed, "the potential margin of error found by the campaign committee to date (excluding the search for duplicates) was between 10 and 20 percent."
That was a statement made after 25% of that data was keyed in.
Judge Niess decided that with that margin of error there is "little likelihood" that enough signatures will be flagged to stop the recall.
Won't the rate of finding duplicates increase as the data entry approaches 100%? And, again, do we  know how many signatures there actually are? I don't believe they've ever been counted. As Democrats used to say during the old Bush v. Gore controversy, "count all the [signatures]."
The state Democratic Party said in a statement that it hoped Niess's ruling would end Walker's "heinous attempt to avoid accountability," and stop the governor's defenders from "smear(ing) what was a miracle of democracy."
Heinous. Smear. Miracle. Here's my advice to the Democratic Party: Don't declare yourself to be a "miracle" and don't call your opposition "heinous." There is a process here, and you want people to respect the steps you've taken in the process. Be circumspect, and do everything you can to convince the people of Wisconsin that the process is sound.

Rushing along the thousands of people who are working at typing in the handwritten names and addresses makes you seem as though you're trying to prevent people from finding errors. You should calmly and virtuously invite the other side to check your work carefully. Portray the petitions as the result of diligent work that realistically demonstrates what the people of Wisconsin want. Not a "miracle."

As you seek to wrest power away from the man the people gave it to in the last election, try to look like competent managers who can be trusted to handle the state's serious business. Not like childish enthusiasts who infuse politics with a misplaced religious fervor.

ADDED: If you live in Dane County, you might want to vote in the primary elections today, which include one circuit judge position. Here's the League of Women Voters website with candidate's answers to various questions.

99 comments:

Matthew said...

"You want people to respect the steps you've taken in the process."

They don't.

"Rushing along the thousands of people who working at typing in the handwritten names and addresses makes you seem as though you're trying to prevent people from finding errors."

They are.

But, maybe they do and they aren't, but they've just done a really, really bad job of convincing me.

cubanbob said...

My oh my! Ms Ann is a pollyanna today. Imagine that, expecting left wing democrats to act honorably. Walker is right to challenge the petitions, just to expose the fraud. I'm not a WI resident but I suspect there are probably enough legitimate signatures to pass the required amount. I'm sure just about every public employee in the state signed it along with family members. But even if it does go to the ballot are there enough public sector employees and family members votes to succeed in the recall?

Matthew said...

If I were Walker, I would just state: "I challenge all of the signatures, as I have not had enough time to verify them, therefore, they are suspect."

You probably can't, but it seems like it would work in TV court.

Triangle Man said...

I'm sure just about every public employee in the state signed it along with family members

Public employees alone would be about 400,000.

Matthew said...

We know that every public employee has not signed the petitions; several public employees have appeared in ads supporting Walker.

Therefore, we can't just instantly credit 400,000 signatures willy-nilly, just because.

MadisonMan said...

I'm sure just about every public employee in the state signed it along with family members

I know public employees who were told by their bosses not to sign the petitions. So I don't know how valid your sure-ness is.

Matthew said...

Of course, if Scott Walker signed four times, it is entirely possible that someone did sign for those other folks too!

pauldar said...

Public Employees - tangled web sort of thingy.

Sure does seem to be a lot of knots in that poor 'ole web.

ALH said...

"As you seek to wrest power away from the man the people gave it to in the last election, try to look like competent managers who can be trusted to handle the state's serious business. Not like childish enthusiasts who infuse politics with a misplaced religious fervor."

i.e., "Don't be yourself. Pretend to be Scott Walker"

Christopher in MA said...

All I can picture is Garage with his pinkie to his mouth like Dr. Evil, chuckling "One MIIIIILLLLION signatures!"

edutcher said...

Ann, you know the Lefties' cause is just and their intentions are good.

That gives them the right to cheat all they want.

Matthew said...

Just as a note:

"Won't the rate of finding duplicates increase as the data entry approaches 100%?"

Not necessarily. There could be no more duplicates (they all happened to be in the first part/sampled part); they could be non-randomly distributed (they increase significantly [6 out of every 10 are now duplicates] or decrease significantly [1 out of every 30,000 are duplicates]).

Sampling works great when things are actually random, these are not. One person could fake hundreds of signatures (theoretically), and screw up a sample of only a thousand or so signatures. Likewise, you could have 1,000 honest signatures to give you a sample rate of no duplicates. Not only that, samples are good for when an estimate is OK (public feeling, how many people like things), but not good enough for when you need an exact count (like elections).

cubanbob said...

MadisonMan said...
I'm sure just about every public employee in the state signed it along with family members

I know public employees who were told by their bosses not to sign the petitions. So I don't know how valid your sure-ness is.

2/21/12 11:05 AM

My point being there are probably enough public employees in the state along with family members to qualify legitimately the numbers needed for the recall. The other chicanery simply mocks the legitimate recall petitioners, but you can't keep a fool from their folly (the petition organizers).

The questions is are there even people in the state with a vested interest to vote to recall the governor?

Original Mike said...

"try to look like competent managers who can be trusted to handle the state's serious business. Not like childish enthusiasts who infuse politics with a misplaced religious fervor."

That ship has sailed.

Original Mike said...

"I'm sure just about every public employee in the state signed it along with family members."

I didn't sign. At least, I don't think I did.

jimspice said...

How certain can we be the data is entered accurately, either through honest mistakes by the "pure of heart" or intentional hijacking of this "volunteer army."

garage mahal said...

Of course, if Scott Walker signed four times, it is entirely possible that someone did sign for those other folks too!

It hasn't occurred to you there might be more than one Scott Walker in the state?

Matthew said...

"How certain can we be the data is entered accurately, either through honest mistakes by the "pure of heart" or intentional hijacking of this "volunteer army.""

You could always check their work. Verify Verify the Recall.

Were you as worried about the GAB's purity of heart or risk of intentional hijacking?

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... All I can picture is Garage with his pinkie to his mouth like Dr. Evil, chuckling "One MIIIIILLLLION signatures!".."

Would that make Alpha as Mini-me?

Thorley Winston said...

I think we should know the names of the circulators who certified the petitions with bogus signatures. It may also be worthwhile to do a comparison (once all of the data has been entered) to see how many of the “valid” signatures appear multiple times on sheets with the bogus signatures in order to identify the likely perpetrators of this fraud.

Alex said...

It's all kosher. /garage

Matthew said...

Garage: Could be! But see, I want the election folks to confirm that; the pro-recall folks want to hand waive it and just say: "Yeah, that's it."

Mark said...

It is funny how we didn't talk about the fully analyzed Senate data.

Guess it isn't a straw man to knock down, as the Walker analysis is public .... only talking points, no evidence.

Alex said...

How much mob money went into the process?

Hoosier Daddy said...

I haven't been paying attention but do the Dems have anyone to challenge him yet?

lawyapalooza said...

Hang on. I know of at least two Scott Walkers who are not the governor, including a realtor who has been adding a sticker to his signs confirming that he is "Not That Scott Walker." I inputed "Karen Walker into CCAP, and found 52 entries. I put in "Scott Walker" and got over 100.


Also, you are not reporting accurately (shocking, I know). Fitzgerald is the one who originally made the claim that there was a 10-20% "flag rate" from reviewrs. When the Journal Sentinel investigated that claim, they found out that the "flags" were caused by Fitzgerald's supporters literally lying about the addresses and names on the petitions, and then saying "there is no such address." Well, yeah. That's because they did not correctly input the address on the petition. And many of those "errors" are grossly apparent, and not just an innocent typo of a number or name.

Want to be honest? Then report that. There is no question that they have far more signatures than necessary. The recall organizers already inputted all the info in their databases as they were received, and double checked as best they could before the petitions were submitted. If they found questions, they contacted the petitioner to follow up. I'm sure that there will be some duplicates they missed, and some they can't verify (or that are difficult to read), but anyone who thinks that a recall election is not happening is delusional.

jimspice said...

There are ways to prevent this, such as entering each signature multiple times by multiple volunteers and then comparing them against one another. Bad entries can be flagged, and corrupt volunteers identified. It doesn't appear they are doing this, and if they were, Mr. Walker would be asking for more time even more frequently. Plus, the organization behind this, True the Vote, does bit seen like an outfit where accuracy is priority one.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Speaking of the mob, I watched Goodfellas last night for the 4,765 time and it still doesn't get old.

Funny? Funny how? Like a clown?

Matthew said...

"There is no question that they have far more signatures than necessary."

-- So, that's how elections get handled now? Let's just call it because it looks like there's a lot more votes for A than B, no need to actually verify it. Good system.

"The recall organizers already inputted all the info in their databases as they were received, and double checked as best they could before the petitions were submitted."

-- Then why are some of the petitions filled with inaccurate information, clearly fake information (Hitler/Jesus), no addresses, wrong years, wrong dates, etc.? If that was their job checking the best they can, then... yeah. No cookies for them.

"If they found questions, they contacted the petitioner to follow up."

-- Who called Hitler?

"I'm sure that there will be some duplicates they missed, and some they can't verify (or that are difficult to read), but anyone who thinks that a recall election is not happening is delusional."

-- It doesn't matter on its inevitability. You want a recall, prove and earn it. That includes suffering the indignity of democracy making you suffer through such a horror as making sure the signatures are legit.

Because, if we can just make the government surrender to the whims of a group because it is logistically hard to verify something, then we've lost real democracy.

This ugly, gritty process involving checks and balances? This is what democracy looks like.

Matthew said...

"There are ways to prevent this, such as entering each signature multiple times by multiple volunteers and then comparing them against one another."

Not their fault they have a time restriction to pull it off. They asked for more time to be more thorough and were denied. Take it up with the courts.

Bill Harshaw said...

Anyone who's done genealogical research is sadly aware of the same name being used for different people. I wonder how the software will handle multiple John Joneses--run against a database from Whitepages?

Original Mike said...

"I haven't been paying attention but do the Dems have anyone to challenge him yet?"

The SEIU just endorsed Kathleen Falk. That's enough for me. I'm voting for her in the primary.

Brian Hancock said...

I was just telling my mom about Walker signing his own recall petition four times . . . she said when she was at the UW Hospital for a cancer check-up a few months ago (she's in remission), someone came up to ask her if she would sign the petition.

She asked if they should be doing this inside a hospital and within the cancer unit. And that people have other things on their minds when they are in that place. And told the person she would not sign the petition.

I would like to see at least one political party try to be the 'bigger person', if you will, during this time in Wisconsin. Glad I'm not holding my breath to see it.

Larry J said...

Take it up with the courts.

What do you do when the judges don't follow the law?

More and more, I'm believing that a lot of judges are little more than failed lawyers with the political connections to get appointed to the bench.

roesch/voltaire said...

Well Alex I not sure what "mob" you are talking about but there were mobs of ordinary Wisconsin citizens who gathered these signatures, most of them unpaid, and so far there have been less then 100 of them challenged. Now if the Koch brothers count as a "mob" they have committed millions to slowing down the process and supporting Walker.

Chuck66 said...

If the checkers keep checking after the deadline, and then find far more fraudulent/duplicate signatures, won't that lead to possible legal action?

Good point on how the duplicate rate will increase as they get deeper into the list. If 1 in 5 signers is bad, that is 20%. But if that 1 person signed 25 times.....

Matthew said...

"But if that 1 person signed 25 times....."

And there are 400,000 signatures, the bad signature rate actually drops. Remember the denominator!

Chuck66 said...

"I haven't been paying attention but do the Dems have anyone to challenge him yet?"

Angry Kathleen Vinehout said she is running for Governor. Hey, question....I was visiting family in western Wisconsin this weekend and notice Vinehout still have her free column in the local paper. If she is running for office, does she get a free column? Doesn't the newspaper have to offer equal time to her opponent?

Her weekly column is 100% political. She uses it to bash Republicans. This past week it was a rant against private schools.

Original Mike said...

"...she said when she was at the UW Hospital for a cancer check-up a few months ago (she's in remission), someone came up to ask her if she would sign the petition."

Bastards.

coolkevs said...

I have been participating in the Verify the Recall effort the past couple of days. One thing not mentioned in Ann's post is that there are 2 types of petitions - one with 5 signatures, the other with 10 signatures. Why? I do not know, but it adds to the confusion. And in entering 200 or so names, there were quite a few of the 10 signature petitions that had only 2 or 3 names on them. Another thing I noticed is the circulators filling in information because the petitioners were either too lazy or cold to fill the rest in?? And quite a few people obviously signing for their husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, etc.
Yes, I know it's a small sample size, but I'm still sticking with a 800,000 ish final number - enough to recall the governor, but not enough for the left to say "1 in a million" as their badge of honor.
Anybody on here want to participate - (yes, even you garage!) can go to verifytherecall.com

MadisonMan said...

If my name is on the petition, I'd be curious to know the name of the signature-gatherer who affirmed that I indeed signed. Especially if it's someone who knows me.

Kansas City said...

Good point about the language used by the democratic party statement. I often think official statements by parties and politicians sound juvenile and overstated. I don't know if it is because they drafters live in a buble of like minded people or if there is some legitimate political reasons for sounding that way. It even extends to national political campaigns. Ann's advice seems exactly right to me, but politicos must think the extreme language helps them more.

Original Mike said...

"Ann's advice seems exactly right to me, but politicos must think the extreme language helps them more."

I don't think they can help themselves. They're obsessed.

Chuck66 said...

Matthew.....I have to think how the math works.

Good Bad
5 0 0%
9 1 10%
13 2 13%
17 3 15%

This assumes that 1 in every 5 is bad, and that 1 bad person signed several times.

Chuck66 said...

coolkevs.....that is what I hear happening (including reported in the Racine Journal)...one family member signing the names of other family members, whether they wanted their names on there or not.

lawyapalooza said...

"-- Then why are some of the petitions filled with inaccurate information, clearly fake information (Hitler/Jesus), no addresses, wrong years, wrong dates, etc.? If that was their job checking the best they can, then... yeah. No cookies for them."


Provide proof. You are buying into the Republican propaganda campaign. Do you think that if they found petitions "filled" with Hitler, Jesus, etc. it wouldn't be splashed all over the internet and the Fitzboys wouldn't have a press conference? Do you think Meade isn't spending his vast free time scrolling through the petitions to ignore the hundreds of thousands of legit signatures to try to come up with the document that shows an Adolf and a Jesus, much less petitions "loaded" with those names? The fact is that there is very little--if any-- actual "fraud" with the exception of Firtzgerald's efforts, but there will certainly be some mistakes that will result in a signature being rejected.

This was a massive grassroots campaign, and some people did not completely fill out the petitions. I know that I personally turned in several dozen petitions, and they called me because I didn't notice that one of the signers forgot to fill in the date of signing, though everything else was there. The correct process then is for that person to add and initial the date, and for me to make myself available if anyone has questions as to the authenticity.

Unless you can come up with proof that there are loads of Hitler signatures or Jesus signatures, stop repeating the propaganda. As I said, the only fraud that has been detected so far is from teh Fitzgerald camp. Interesting that none of you are commenting on that little nugget.

Jay said...

This was a massive grassroots campaign

IF by "grassroots" you mean funding from WEAC and national labor groups and the most intense support by public sector union members, then yeah.

lawyapalooza said...

coolkevs: how many Hitlers did you see?

lawyapalooza said...

Jay, you're buying into the Republican lies too. I'm not a union member, nor have I ever been one. Same for my mother, most of my friends. We all volunteered to circulate them. Fun fact, people in northern Wisconsin jumped at the chance to sign, including a card-carrying NRA member. Also, the husband of a friend of mine who has voted Republican his entire life, including for Scott Walker. When Walker supporters called him to donate again, he told them he was going to sign a recall petition and wanted to tell them why. They hung up on him.

garage mahal said...

Jay, you're buying into the Republican lies too

Nah, Jay invents and spreads lies.

Jay said...

Jay, you're buying into the Republican lies too. I'm not a union member, nor have I ever been one. Same for my mother, most of my friends.

Actually, I'm not as those are all facts.

And your ancedote doesn't really disprove those facts.

Matthew said...

http://www.wirecallfail.com/

Just as, you know, a place to see some of the more egregious/funny examples of messed up petitions.

Chuck66 said...

lawya.....did any of your family members say what they want the Democrats to do with the budget? What solutions did they offer that is better than what Governor Walker has done?

Matthew said...

Lawya -- My position is we should verify the petitions to prove there are not any that should not be there. Your position seems to be... hey, we tried to screen out the bad ones, some may have gotten through, no way to know how many -- let's just move on.

Frankly, one bad signature is loads too many.

Pastafarian said...

Althouse: "Won't the rate of finding duplicates increase as the data entry approaches 100%?"

Yeah, this does sound right. If there are many instances of one name/address signing multiple times, then this should be true.

Let's use round figures and assume that 20% of this first quartile of signatures was found to be bad.

Let's suppose that half of those, 10% of this quartile, were bad because they were "Mickey Mouse, 101 East Fuckyou Avenue."

And the other half were bad because they were duplicates; and for the sake of simplicity, that each had just one duplicate, in this quartile. So 5% were duplicated by another 5%.

But isn't is true that three times as many "valid" signatures in this quartile could then be expected to have a duplicate in one of the other three quartiles?

So I'd guess that this would mean that about 35% of all of the votes would be fraudulent.

Now, this is based on huge assumptions, about the number of signatures that are "Mickey Mouse" type versus the number that are duplicates, and about the number of copies that each duplicated signature has. I'm a little too tired and distracted to determine if we might approach 50% fraudulent by tweaking these assumptions.

But 35% is already getting pretty close to that magic 500,000 valid signatures number. It appears to me from this as though they should count them all.

Not that it matters, Walker will easily win.

coolkevs said...

law - I saw no Hitlers, nor do I expect to see any of those. I did see one with a PO Box (which is not valid) and a mysterious place called Poy-sippi which made me scratch my head.

Ann Althouse said...

1. The names appear with addresses, so for example if there's a real Scott Walker who isn't the governor, it should have an address somewhere else. Presumably this can be checked.

2. There will be a process to the challenges. The governor will present his challenges to the court. If there aren't enough total challenges to get below the number needed to certify a recall, then it just won't matter. The recall will be certified. If not, let's say it falls 10,000 short, all that will be needed is to verify 10,000 of the challenged names. See?

3. Assuming there is a recall, the challenges still have some political weight. If Walker can say: they said they had over a million, but they only had 600,000 or they turned in a million and we were able to detect 100,000 examples of fraud, that will be used against the recall effort along with whatever else makes the Democrat look deceitful, incompetent, etc.

4. If there really are over a million good signatures and the search for bad signatures comes up nearly empty, then it will burnish the reputation of the Democrats and will be used to leverage their case to the people. This many of your fellow citizens cared enough to sign the petition, so don't you want to join these good people?

lawyapalooza said...

Want to talk fail? The wirecallfail.com site is a ridiculous fail. The "evidence of massive fraud" appears to include some signatures that thye can't read well, and an absolutely false position regarding one person writing in the addresses and date of signing with several independent signatures. For example, it is 100% legal, and practical, for one person in a household to write the address for three different signators, and the signators themselves make the signature. Other "evidence" includes the dummy not recognizing cursive writing, allegations that addresses don't exist, and claims that minors signed it. Guess what? This was the source of the Journal Sentinel investigation that determined the morons behind the postings were typing the wrong address into their search, typing the wrong names into their searches, and so on. And still, where's all of the Hitlers????

I did see one Scott Walker. The address was not the governor's mansion, but thanks for trying.

garage mahal said...

Fitzgerald only challenged one fake signature, and the only "fake" signature challenged out of 86,000+

Timothy P. Sucker. Turns out it's Timothy P. Suckow, a real dude who signed.

Matthew said...

It's Fitzgerald's fault if he didn't object to all the signatures that should have been. Sort of like the recount in Minnesota; lots of ballots went in that should have been rejected (and sometimes had inconsistent application of what would be accepted).

It is the person's job to object to protect their own interests. However, anyone who honestly stamps their feet to insist we not adhere to some laws and review the signatures is acting in a way I find suspiciously at odds with actual democracy.

jimspice said...

"...the only fraud that has been detected so far is from teh Fitzgerald camp."

Not true. There was a plot uncovered in Racine, I believe, where a conservative signed his and his buddies' names so they could later challenge them. He should have filled his buddies in on this though, because it was their complaints that were his undoing.

Rusty said...

As you seek to wrest power away from the man the people gave it to in the last election, try to look like competent managers who can be trusted to handle the state's serious business. Not like childish enthusiasts who infuse politics with a misplaced religious fervor.



In any political canvass, historically there have been about 10% of fraudulent responses. Having lived and worked in a predominately democrat state I know that traditionally you can count on about 20% fraudulent responses.
Since the progressives in your state have decided to challenge the legal election of your governor, and since in the progressive playbook the ends always justify the means, there will be a minimum of 20% fraudulent responses.



garage mahal said...
Jay, you're buying into the Republican lies too

Nah, Jay invents and spreads lies.


The irony is thick. Like treacle.

damikesc said...

lawya, can you give us a reason to trust your word on this?

And no concerns that the choices your side has presented are laughable?

Also, what would your side do differently than Walker? Give MORE money to unions and guarantee layoffs of teachers, etc?

Matthew said...

Jim:

Are you referring to this fraud? http://www.journaltimes.com/article_bc9ad83c-5123-11e1-8138-001871e3ce6c.html

The story you are telling sounds sort of like what happens to this story if you play telephone with it through people who want the other side to be at fault.

garage mahal said...

Not true. There was a plot uncovered in Racine, I believe, where a conservative signed his and his buddies' names so they could later challenge them. He should have filled his buddies in on this though, because it was their complaints that were his undoing.

Yea that was a Walker recall petition. So much fail.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... Also, what would your side do differently than Walker? Give MORE money to unions and guarantee layoffs of teachers, etc?.."

Layoffs would not be necessary if you just raise taxes high enough to offset the increased wages. Considering the obvious overwhelming support for regime change in Wisconsin, getting tax increases passed should be a shoe in.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

Voter ID should be law of the land.

GASP!!!!

Before all you lefties get the vapors, remember this next time you go to the package store for alcohol, or the bank to open an account.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

"Nah, Jay invents and spreads lies."

Liberal Projection 101

MadisonMan said...

Voter ID should be law of the land.

What's the point of signing? Is there someone actually comparing signatures from when I registered many years ago?

That sounds like a complete waste of money to me.

(My reaction from voting this morning)

Matthew said...

MadisonMan: I think the signing is so that they have an action by someone who would commit fraud other than just voting. They could easily deny voting, or deny casting a fraudulent vote. The signature acts as a paper trail that can be audited.

Sort of like the deliveryman. He has no way to know you are you, but if he gets a signature, if you were not you, he can say, well, someone else said they were you and answered your door, see, here's the signature.

Or it might just be a force of habit. We like making people sign for things.

MadisonMan said...

Well, they just said sign here (there was a little box on the voter roll). Nothing about the signature being legal or anything. Maybe they're trying to see if it matches the ID, but I had put my ID away by then (anyway, the person behind the table was a neighbor....)

Now that I think about it, it's probably to match the ID you present.

lawyapalooza said...

What would "our side" do differently? First of all, stop lying to the public. The dismantling of unions did not have anything to do witht he budget, as Walker and cronies finally had to admit. It has everything to do with dismantling a traditional democratic base. Another lie? How about the signed secrecy pledges required of all Assembly Republicans to explicitly require them to not question or respond to public remarks by their leadership about redistricting, and instead to believe what is said behind closed doors. Not only have the Democrats never made such a stupid move, neotehr had any prior Republican regime. Another thing we would do differently: stop giving huge amounts of tax money for secret corporations, only to find out it was also a total lie. CAse in point: $4,000,000 given to Spectrum Brands, posing as an out of state company looking to move to Wisconsin if they could get a tax deal in advance. They are in Wisconsin, and announced after getting $4,000,000 in tax dollars, the "move" is about 10 miles away. Also, a handful of execs at Spectrum were given about $20,000,000 in bonuses this year. Did they really need tax money to stay in Wisconsin? I don't think so.

The John Doe investigation is moving up the food chain, like all similar investigations. Now we have learned of a secret wireless system located something like 10 feet away from Walker's office. The purpose of the system was to violate laws prohibiting campaigning on the public dime, and to eliminate lts of communications from disclosure in response to public records requests. If Walker thinks the lower level folks are going to turn against him, he should look at the number already taking plea bargains in return for "cooperating with the State."

I've never been one to believe that one party is immune from the stench of corruption, and there is no question that Democrats have been guilty of corruption. But right now, it is Walker and his cronies for whom the ends justiofy the means. By the way, they just got theor 4th official smackdown from the federal court panel reviewing their secret redictricting activities. 2 out of 3 of the panel members were appointed by Republicans.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

"That sounds like a complete waste of money to me."

MM

Do you mean money that would be spent on a voter ID?

It could be money well-spent. Tie each ID card to a database and it could help limit vote fraud. Just like any other ID you might need for say, opening a bank account, can limit bank fraud.

Why are there so many that have this seemingly cavalier attitude towards one-person one-vote? What are we afraid of?

I think I know the answer, and it can often be found in car trunks/favoring democrat candidates.

Mike said...

This is the most fun available on the Web, for people like me that drop in and observe flame wars. The article about Racine signatures is just as Matthew said it was -- the circulator putting phony names on a recall petition for a Republican State Senator.

Which is the exact opposite of what both Jimspice and Garage indicated. Exactly 100% ass-backwards! Not saying that their Liberal tendencies overpower their ability to t3ll the truth, but really, guys, read the damn article before you turn on Matthew and flame him.

Every step of the way the professional agitators and big-mouthed lefties put their worst foot forward. Get a clue, Wisconsin, these people are telling you -- hell, showing you -- they can't be trusted and that they want your vote!

Matthew said...

Republicans -- the appearance of impropriety means we should recall them.

Democrats -- escaping the state to avoid your voting responsibility is the highest form of patriotism.

Do I have it about down Lawya?

Mike said...

Lawya, name one union that has been "dismantled" by Walker.

You can't even get your topic sentence into the box before you start exaggerating and lying!

Don't Tread 2012 said...

In the town I live in here in NY State, each voter prior to a primary or an election is mailed a post card detailing the polling place, district you live in/vote in, and your unique voter ID #.

Its not free but we don't have all the caterwauling and carrying-on that we see in Wisconsin.

Where there are no voter ID requirements or controls, it is rife for fraud. Period.

garage mahal said...

By the way, they just got theor 4th official smackdown from the federal court panel reviewing their secret redictricting activities. 2 out of 3 of the panel members were appointed by Republicans.

I wonder if the WIGOP will take the deal to rework the maps? I think not, they appear much too emotionally stunted to admit they were wrong, or willing to compromise. Now almost every single member of the Republican legislature gets to go back to their districts and explain why they signed secrecy oaths to withhold public information from their constituents. #owngoal

Jay said...

Which is the exact opposite of what both Jimspice and Garage indicated.

Stick around a while, that type of thing goes on every day.

MadisonMan said...

It could be money well-spent.

I'm picturing some bureacratic lackey deep in the bowels of GEF-II or GEF-III poring over voter rolls with signatures and then comparing them to signatures on file. That's what I think would be a complete waste of money. Or do you think it would be $50K+ annually well spent?

As my later comment said, I think the signature is to be compared to the ID you present, but that wasn't done in my case (maybe since I knew the person behind the table). And I don't have anyone to compare it to because I was the only one voting at the time.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

MM

The way it works in NY is we have voter 'rolls' that are essentially books by district of voters in alphabetical order.

Each primary/election there is a new 'roll' issue...when you show up to vote, you have to report to your correct district/alpha listing with proper NY ID. You then have to sign a blank box which is directly next to a scanned image of your signature used prior/or from the first time you voted.

I find it completely backwards and prime for fraud if there are no controls in place. A 'wild west' approach that seems to exist in Wisconsin should be very disconcerting any voter that is concerned about 'fairness'.

Just sayin'.

JAL said...

heinous attempt to avoid accountability

And refusing the governor the right to verify the signatures on the petition is ____?

Talk about disenfranchising voters anyone?

I am doing some of the data entry.

There one variation of the petition pages has only 5 lines. So that factors in.

I have seen some signatures, not that I think are fabricated, but which make me wonder if the signers are indeed American citizens registered to vote.

But another thing -- I have a sense that politics aside (I can do that) -- this is a very privileged thing one is looking at -- that in America we have the right to petition the government.

Those people that signed -- some partisan, some union people pissed that the rules were changed, some woefully ignorant, some perhaps really stupid entitlers, some math challenged -- have the right to sign their names and need to be respected for that.

Now the ones that were paid ... :-) (Just kidding, of course.)

JAL said...

cough cough

garage mahal said...

And refusing the governor the right to verify the signatures on the petition is ____?

Is......not happening.

MadisonMan said...

You then have to sign a blank box which is directly next to a scanned image of your signature used prior/or from the first time you voted.

Maybe my signature will be there next time, as this was the first time IDs have been required.

lawyapalooza said...

You keep accusing the courts of limiting the right to review the signatures. The judge tripled the time allowed by law to review and challenge signatures. Say we have a million signatures. Both sides allege they have 1,000 or more volunteers checking signtures, not to mention Meade. That's 33 signatures per person, per day. Assuming you have staffers and some volunteers who put in an 8 hour day, they can review hundreds. Several places, including the Milwaukee GOP, announced that they have already gotten through the review of petitions (January 29) and had moved to the second stage of identifying which they would like to send to their attorneys (want to guess, Michael Best & Friedrich) for legal challenges. Let's hope this time their lawyers don't get sanctioned for frivolous arguments and obvious attempts to delay proceedings.

The fact is that the petitions are being adequately analyzed (and based on the dumb-ass "questionable" petitions listed on the website, one might argue over-analyzed). Some will be tossed. 800,000+ will stick. 540,000 needed.

With regard to dismantling unions, obviously it is all public unions. Establishing extroardinary restrictions on their right to bargain and their ability to automatically collect fees (before you all jump on that, individuals acan and do opt out of that contribution) was an obvious act to disable the unions.

How else do you explain the provisions added to a so-called "budget repair bill" that the Republicans finally admitted did nothing to repair the budget? Arguments to the contrary are specious. You know exactly what they were doing and why.

Original Mike said...

Do employers in the private sector collect union dues from their employees? Don't know the answer; just asking.

Oshbgosh said...

The recall process is not a natural phenomenon where responses will be randomly dispersed. There will be a non random distribution of irregularities due to the human nature of the input.

Petunia said...

I just skimmed the comments so someone else might have pointed this out: that email is the form VTR has used for awhile and maybe they haven't changed it.

I don't think anyone who's actually looked at the petitions and entered signatures believes the "1,000,000 signatures!" claim that the media just accepted uncritically and publicized.

Over 1,000,000 signatures and other info ARE being entered, however, because each is being entered multiple times.

Whitney Houston signed one of the petitions I screened. I'd be interested to know how old she is, and whether she was named after the singer. I also found a very prominent local politician who failed to date his signature. I'll be interested to see if that gets publicized.

andy42302 said...

Not to worry. The Koch boys said they'd take care of it. They said something about already having too much money invested in WI to back out now.

Original Mike said...

"Establishing extroardinary restrictions on their right to bargain and their ability to automatically collect fees (before you all jump on that, individuals acan and do opt out of that contribution) was an obvious act to disable the unions."

I'm still askin'. Why should the state be the union's collection agency?

walter said...

I thought the grandstanding at the Special Olympics bit was beyond the pale until this account of the oncology waiting room troll. Hey, maybe they found a person with a developmental disability and cancer to sign.

Harold said...

Since it will be an open primary/recall, I like the idea that's been floating around for Repubicans to flood the polls and write in Scott Walker, so he can run against himself....

walter said...

If folks could always opt out of dues, then disabling automatic dues would in theory have little effect on the unions. Instead, WEAC axed 40% of its staff before the workers could show or not show their support.

Original Mike said...

"Instead, WEAC axed 40% of its staff before the workers could show or not show their support."

Pretty telling.

Original Mike said...

"I thought the grandstanding at the Special Olympics bit was beyond the pale until this account of the oncology waiting room troll."

I use that waiting room. If he'd approached me, he'd have been trolling the emergency room.

Unknown said...

Donald Duck has beenthe found and posted.

I have personally observed bogus addresses, out of area signatures and circulators not providing addresses and municipalities. There will be tens of thousands of challenges.

coolkevs said...

From tonight's Verify the Recall e-mail, for Walker's recall, over 4000 duplicates (which were allowed but people are idiots to do) and over 4300 out-of-state signers. So, FRAUD is indeed happening, maybe not at the grand scale Walker backers would hope, but it is there for those who are denying it.
I probably entered over 150 or so names this evening. I came across 2 petitions with just 1 name on them, and others partially filled out. Also, the signatures I've been getting are very front-loaded to the mid-November timeframe. Pretty much an even mix between the 5-signature and 10-signature variety. If these signatures are anywhere representative of the rest of them 1,000,000 is a pipe dream - 800,000 seems more realistic even before Walker challenges anything!

Steve_Roberts said...

"Won't the rate of finding duplicates increase as the data entry approaches 100%? "

Yes, the rate of duplicates in the whole set wil be - assuming randomness and independence - approximately N times the number in a one-N th sample. So a rate of 10-20% in a sample of one quarter gives a rate of 40% + in the whole set. It could be very close !