December 31, 2004

Message from Coalition Against Election Fraud

good morning, dear all,

i hope you will come to an event on monday, jan 3, sponsored by the coalition against election fraud (

beneath the announcement about the event, below, you will find a wonderful letter john conyers sent to all the senators yesterday, sent to me via rainbow push.

some of us from caef are leaving for dc next week to talk with senators and ask them to object to the electoral college vote of ohio. (remember they could not find one in 2000) if you or anyone you know knows senators on our dream list, (boxer, byrd, biden, wyden, lautenberg, nelson, graham, obama, harkin, kerry, kennedy, dayton, jeffords, leahy, levin, lieberman, snowe,schumer,feingold ((yes we have added some since we put the petition out and we cannot change tha)) please contact me asap. if you know people from states where senators we are focusing on live and who might meet us in d.c to go with us to visit their senator, please let me know that too, asap.or if you have any personal kind of connection with any of these senators.

if you have not yet signed our open letter to the senators/petition, it is not too late. you can click the link below and sign right now.we will bring hard copy of it when we visit with them.

Sign our petition to the Senators:

if you can send some money for expenses for this trip, not only for me, but for several of us, also please contact me asap.

happy new year to you, yours and our beautiful planet earth. wishing for all of us a year of change, internally and externally here in our country and inr the world. only you can make both happen. if not you, who? if not now, when?




Massachusetts Elector Tom Barbera and local activists with the Coalition Against Election Fraud (CAEF) will call on Senators to take action in response to election fraud at a Rally for the Republic, to be held inside of Faneuil Hall on Monday, January 3 at 7:00 p.m. Organizers invite all those concerned about preserving our voting rights to gather at 6:30 p.m. at the State House entrance to Boston Common for a march to the indoor Rally at Faneuil Hall.

The Coalition is part of a nationwide grassroots movement to urge Senators to join with John Conyers and Maxine Waters to object on January 6 to the Electoral College vote from states such as Ohio, Florida and New Mexico, where mounting evidence of election violations has resulted in questions about the outcome of the 2004 presidential election. This event coincides with Rallies for the Republic planned for early next week in cities across the country, including Columbus, Ohio, Washington, D.C. and San Francisco. Organizers aim to influence members of Congress to vote NOT to certify the Electoral College votes from states where the election results are in question, and/or to delay the vote certification entirely due to the need to complete investigations and recounts currently underway.

Coalition members are currently lobbying a national list of Senators, including Massachusetts Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry, to urge them to vote against certification of Electors' votes from states such as Ohio, where the election results are being challenged in court. Several Coalition activists will head to the U.S. Capitol early next week to present their case in person to Senators before Congress reconvenes on January 6. Congress-woman Maxine Waters of California, Chair of the Democratic Caucus Special Committee on Election Reform, stated this week that she, along with other members of the House of Representatives, will be challenging the seating of the Ohio electors.

The Monday Rally, the D.C. Delegation, and a daily vigil outside of the Boston home of Senator John Kerry are among the Coalition's strategies to mount a Constitutional Challenge to the Electoral College vote in response to increasing evidence of election fraud. They cite concerns about discrepancies between vote tallies and the number of registered voters in specific precincts; inequities in the number of voting machines available at highly Democratic polling places; and widespread disenfranchisement of voters through vote suppression tactics targeted largely at African Americans and college students.

David Lytel organizer of redefeat bush campaign will speak at the rally

Also to speak at the Rally are John Bonifaz, General Counsel of the National Voting Rights Institute and Co-counsel for Presidential Candidates David Cobb and Michael Badnarik in their demand for a meaningful recount of all of the votes cast for President in Ohio; Jonathan Simon, a political survey research analyst who collaborated with U. Penn. professor and statistician Steven Freeman, PhD on exit poll analysis of the 2004 election; Tom Barbera, a Waltham Elector whose motion asking for the investigation and remedy of election violations was passed unanimously by all twelve Mass. Electors; Faye Morrison, an Ayer Selectwoman who spent six months campaigning and working with Election Protection in several states; and Donna Palermino, a local attorney who will speak on the legal aspects of the challenge. Local citizens who campaigned in Ohio, Florida and other states will also share their own observations of vote suppression during the 2004 election. Musical entertainment will be provided by area folk musician Greg Greenway.


Heleni Thayre (617) 232-8180 or Robin Weingarten (617) 325-8224

Coalition Against Election Fraud,

Letter from Congressman Conyers to US Senators

Calling for Congressional Debate on 2004 Elections

December 30, 2004

Dear Senator Boxer (sent to all US Senators),

As you know, on January 6, 2005, at 1:00 P.M, the electoral votes for the election of the president are to be opened and counted in a joint session of Congress, commencing at 1:00 P.M. I and a number of House Members are planning to object to the counting of the Ohio votes, due to numerous unexplained irregularities in the Ohio presidential vote, many of which appear to violate both federal and state law. I am hoping that you will consider joining us in this important effort to debate and highlight the problems in Ohio which disenfranchised innumerable voters. I will shortly forward you a draft report itemizing and analyzing the many irregularities we have come across as part of our hearings and investigation into the Ohio presidential election.

3 U.S.C. §15 provides when the results from each of the states are announced, that "the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any." Any objection must be presented in writing and "signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received."1. The objection must "state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof."2 When an objection has been properly made in writing and endorsed by a member of each body the Senate withdraws from the House chamber, and each body meets separately to consider the objection. "No votes . . . from any other State shall be acted upon until the [pending] objection . . . [is] finally disposed of."3 3 U.S.C. §17 limits debate on the objections in each body to two hours, during which time no member may speak more than once and not for more than five minutes. Both the Senate and the House must separately agree to the objection; otherwise, the challenged vote or votes are counted.4

Historically, there appears to be three general grounds for objecting to the counting of electoral votes. The language of 3 U.S.C. §15 suggests that objection may be made on the grounds that (1) a vote was not "regularly given" by the challenged elector(s); and/or (2) the elector(s) was not "lawfully certified" under state law; or (3) two slates of electors have been presented to Congress from the same State.

Since the Electoral Count Act of 1887, no objection meeting the requirements of the Act have been made against an entire slate of state electors.5 In the 2000 election several Members of the House of Representatives attempted to challenge the electoral votes from the State of Florida. However, no Senator joined in the objection, and therefore, the objection was not "received." In addition, there was no determination whether the objection constituted an appropriate basis under the 1887 Act. However, if a State - in this case Ohio - has not followed its own procedures and met its obligation to conduct a free and fair election, a valid objection -if endorsed by at least one Senator and a Member of the House of Representatives- should be debated by each body separately until "disposed of".

Please contact me at 225-5126 to appraise me of your thoughts on this important matter. If your staff has questions, that may be forwarded to Perry Apelbaum or Ted Kalo of my Judiciary Committee staff at 225-6504. Thank you.


John Conyers, Jr.

No comments: