Huge African American Turnout in Georgia - Might An Upset Be In the Cards?

Georgia, the ninth most populous state in the union, is demonstrating, along with several other states (notably North Carolina, Louisiana and parts of Ohio) , an unusual mix of early voters for the 2008 general election.

Of particular note is the large turnout of African American voters. While 28.7% of the population of Georgia is black, black turnout through Thursday, October 30 reportedly constituted 35.1% of all voters to date. Over 56% of early voters are women. Over 2,000,000 people have early-voted in Georgia; in 2004, somewhat over 3,500,000 voted in total - both early and on election day.

There are at least two significant races in Georgia which may be impacted by this surge of African American voters. Barack Obama, who hasn't led in any significant poll in Georgia this year, and trails by 4 to 6 points in most polls, could do substantially better than suggested by polls which presume a 22 to 28% black turnout. However, Obama has reportedly failed to spend on television advertising in the Atlanta Metro market, home to over half the population of the state.

One writer at a Republican election site quotes the CEO of the Georgia-based polling firm Insider Advantage as saying:

“Obama is doing better among white voters than Kerry did in 2004 (according to exit polls of that race), carrying some 28 percent of the white vote. He’s carrying around 75 percent both of the Hispanic and ‘other’ vote, which makes up between four and five percent of Georgia’s electorate. He is winning among independents, outside of the margin of error of the poll.

“While this is a tight race, the problem for McCain is that all but 3 percent of whites have made their decision and approximately 8 percent of black voters have continued to say they are undecided or voting ‘other.’ This will likely move closer to 95 percent for Obama when all said and done. Obama has room to go up.

“If the race were to remain the way it is today, you won’t see these numbers come to fruition until very late in the night of Nov. 4 or perhaps the next day. The early numbers will likely show McCain ahead, as the counties where Obama is doing best are some of the largest counties and will be the slowest to report.”

However, Towery also writes in a post dated October 28 that Obama, by pulling resources from Georgia, has harmed his very real chances to win the state, and harmed the chances of the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senator from Georgia, Jim Martin:

While both Martin and Chambliss are up in the latest poll, Towery said Martin's gains in past polls showed he was gaining momentum. That appears to have faltered with Obama's redeployment of resources to other states, he said. “Ironically, Obama had a better shot of winning Georgia than North Carolina or Florida but he’s letting it slip away.”

The number of black voters ought to help Jim Martin in his senate race against incumbent senator Saxby Chambliss. Polls in that race have shown a close race without factoring in the larger-than-calculated African American turnout.

Martin is trailing by only 2% in the latest Rassmussen poll in Georgia, which also shows a high (12%) group of undecided voters in the Senate race. SurveyUSA, is showing an undecided rate of 7% among black voters, with only 3% of whites reportedly undecided. Presuming the black undecideds break heavily for Martin, the senate race could be the closest U.S. Senate race in the nation. (Keep in mind that under Georgia law, the winner in the senate race must win at least 50% of the vote +1 to avoid a runoff.)

A final factor to watch on election night is the percentage of the vote Libertarian candidate Bob Barr, formerly a Republican congressman from Georgia, pulls from the Republican ticket. In the latest Insider Advantage poll, conducted yesterday, October 30, reportedly the only one to include Barr in their polling, he was pulling 6% of the vote, giving Barack Obama a 1-point advantage over McCain (well within the margin of error.)

When the higher African American turnout is factored in, Obama may be positioned to surprise some folks in Georgia this Tuesday night (or, more likely, Wednesday morning.) As in other states with heavy early voting by Democrats and/or African Americans, watch for early Obama leads to possibly narrow as the votes from a different mix of voters on election day are tabulated and announced.

Regardless, with all these factors at play, were I a betting man, I'd put my long-shot money on Barack Obama to win Georgia's 15 electoral votes, beating McCain by one to two points in the state.

**

Update: (10/31/08, 6:40 p.m. PDT) Obama campaign manager David Plouffe has announced a decision to launch television ads in Georgia, citing positive early voter turnout numbers. "We're just going to give it a little go . . . and see how close we can get it," said Plouffe. The campaign also plans television ad purchases in North Dakota and in John McCain's home state of Arizona, where polls have shown a tightening of McCain's lead down to 3 or 4 percentage points.


Related posts:

North Carolina Early Voting Appears to Favor Democrats;

Republicans Looking for People Willing To Sue in Nevada As Democratic Voters Surge;

Stevens Falls Behind in Alaska Senate Race - Rassmussen Poll - October 29, 2008



(Map of Georgia, Fulton County / Atlanta highlighted, courtesy Wikipedia Commons.)

North Carolina Early Voting Appears to Favor Democrats

News, analysis

The early (absentee and "one-stop") North Carolina vote is running quite heavily Democratic in voter registration, fairly heavily female, and more heavily African American than most polls had factored, records through October 30 show.

As of October 30, over 2,078,000 voters had cast early ballots in North Carolina, 91.8% of which were cast at "one-stop" polling centers. 52.6% of those voters were registered Democrats. (Last year, 48.6% of voters in N.C. were Democrats.)

56.5% of early voters in North Carolina are female; 26.6% of all early voters are Black. (Most polls in North Carolina have adjusted their sampling assuming that 19 to 21% of the voters turning out would be black.) Of course, it is unknown what the turnout figures of the various demographics will be on election day.

Black voters are also reportedly voting Democratic in substantially greater proportion than they did in 2004, at least one respected polling organization, PPP said this Wednesday, October 29:

The 2004 exit poll showed John Kerry winning black voters in the state 85-15. A private poll we conducted statewide over the last few days showed Barack Obama winning them 95-5. That may not sound like a huge difference, but look at it this way. Kerry won them by 70. Obama's winning them by 90. Let's conservatively put black turnout at 20%. A 20% improvement with 20% of the population is worth an extra four points for Obama statewide.

Most recent polls of the presidential race in North Carolina have the candidates within two or three points of each other. An increased African American turnout of the order suggested above, coupled with the increased Democratic voting of the African American electorate would translate into an additional five percent of the vote for the Democrats (rather than the four percent suggested by PPP, based on a 20% Black turnout), pushing North Carolina into a "lean Democratic" state heading into November 4.

Expect Barack Obama (and Kay Hagan, the Democratic senate candidate against Liddy Dole) to open in North Carolina with a significant lead, which will likely close as the night wears on. If it doesn't close quickly, the race is over.


Related posts:

Huge African American Turnout in Georgia - Might An Upset Be In the Cards?;

Republicans Looking for People Willing To Sue in Nevada As Democratic Voters Surge;

Stevens Falls Behind in Alaska Senate Race - Rassmussen Poll - October 29, 2008


(h/t: United States Election Project.)

(Map courtesyNational Atlas.gov)

Republicans Looking for People Willing To Sue in Nevada As Democratic Voters Surge

The Washington Independent reports that Republicans are looking for people willing to sue in Nevada over surge in Democratic voter registration.

In Washoe County [ed. note: including Reno; Washoe County highlighted in red on accompanying map], 68,250 early ballots cast have been cast through through Tuesday, and Democrats have widened their lead to 7,300 voters. Democrats cast 31,900 votes, while Republicans cast 24,560.

***

The strong Democratic turnout has Republicans mulling possible legal challenges. “We question whether these are valid registrations,” said Smith, the Washoe County GOP chairwoman.

While talking to Smith, she was interrupted by a cell phone call, which she inadvertently put on the speakerphone. It was the state GOP executive director Zachery Moyle, and the two discussed what could be done about the tsunami of Democratic Party registrations.

“I’m looking for people to sign on to a lawsuit,” Moyle said to Smith, who fumbled with the phone while turning off the speaker. “You didn’t hear that,” she said glancing in my direction.

(Emphasis added.)

53% of the 241,861 early votes cast in Clark County (including Las Vegas) through Tuesday have been by Democrats, while only 30.1% of those early voters were Republicans (with the balance being independent or others.)

Democratic turnout for early voting in Clark County in the 2004 general election was 46% of early voters; the 7% increase in turnout percentage of Democrats over 2004 figures suggests that the 2004 Republican victory in Nevada, by 20,000 votes, will not easily be repeated.

Yet, The Washington Independent reports, there are ongoing efforts to decrease the Democratic vote in the state:

Democratic Party leaders said the only evidence of voter fraud so far in Nevada was a series of phone calls made to Democratic Latino voters telling them they could vote by phone and didn’t have to go to the polls. “The Republicans who are complaining about voter fraud are doing it simply to scare people,” contended Kincaid, the Democratic Party spokesman.

The earliest election returns from Nevada next Tuesday evening should primarily consist of the votes of these early voters; those first vote totals should lean Democratic significantly. How steeply, if at all the vote totals move toward the Republican ticket as later returns come in will indicate how late a night those following the Nevada race will have to "look forward to."

**

Related posts:

Huge African American Turnout in Georgia - Might An Upset Be In the Cards?;

North Carolina Early Voting Appears to Favor Democrats;

Stevens Falls Behind in Alaska Senate Race - Rassmussen Poll - October 29, 2008

(Interactive map of Nevada available here, from the Keck Library at University of Nevada, Reno.)

(Map illustration, above, courtesy Wikipedia Commons.)

Stevens Falls Behind in Alaska Senate Race - Rassmussen Poll - October 29, 2008

Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, who was convicted of seven felony counts (arising out of his acceptance of $250,000 in unreported gifts) in his federal corruption trial just this Monday, now trails in his reelection campaign behind the Democratic candidate, Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich. According to the Rassmussen Reports polling release today, Begich now leads Stevens by eight percentage points, 52% to 44%, with 3% supporting the Alaska Independence Party candidate, Bob Bird, and 2% undecided.

While a majority of Republicans in the survey say they still plan to vote for Stevens, some 21% plan to vote for Democrat Begich.

A majority of Alaskans say that Stevens should resign his seat in the U.S. Senate. Numerous Republican leaders, including John McCain and Sarah Palin (who was formerly a major supporter of Stevens) have called on Sen. Stevens to "do the right thing" and resign. However, the Alaska Republican Party continues to support Stevens reelection, hoping, should Stevens later resign, to have the seat filled by a Republican.

According to the Rassmussen survey:

Stevens is now viewed favorably by 43% of Alaska voters, down from 54% before the trial began. Still, even after the guilty verdict, 52% of voters say Stevens is about as ethical as most politicians. Fifteen percent (15%) say Stevens is more ethical than most of his peers while 31% say he is less ethical. These reactions say as much about perceptions of politicians as they do about Stevens.

Before the trial, the race between Senator Stevens and Mayor Begich had been rated a toss-up. Begich took a slight lead in some polls during trial, but the lead was generally within the margin of error.

Some had speculated that Alaskans would rebel against the determination of a Washington, D.C. jury regarding their senator; this polling suggests that most Alaskans have not embraced that attitude.

Rasmusen further reports regarding this and other senate races that:

McCain continues to hold a strong lead over Barack Obama in Alaska’s presidential race. The latest poll will be released today at 5 p.m.

Rasmussen Markets data currently gives Stevens a 7.5 % chance of retaining his seat in the Senate. Numbers in this paragraph are from a prediction market, not a poll.

Stevens is far from the only Republican senator in trouble, and Democrats are likely to pick up several Senate seats next Tuesday. Other Republican seats are at risk in Virginia, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Colorado, New Mexico, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi and Oregon.

See results from recent polling on Senate races.

**

Related post:Sen. Ted Stevens, (R-AL) Indicted on Seven Counts

(Photo via Wikipedia.)

(Correction made 2:07 p.m.: Begich percentage in poll corrected to read 52% rather than 53%.)

McCain Health Insurance Plan - Much Worse Coverage Than What You're Getting Now, Says Senior McCain Economic Adviser

News, commentary

According to Sen. McCain's Senior Economic Policy Adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin (photo), insurance to be made available under the McCain health insurance plan would be much worse than what is currently available under employer-based plans.

The comments by McCain's Senior Advisor came in response to criticism that the McCain health insurance plan would lead to younger, healthier workers leaving their employers plans, leaving only older and less healthy employees behind, leading to major insurance premium increases on both employers and the remaining employees -- and ultimately a total loss of health coverage.

Holtz-Eakin argued that younger and healthier workers wouldn't leave the employers plans in favor of the tax credit:

"Why would they leave?" asked Holtz-Eakin said. "What they are getting from their employer is way better than what they could get with the credit."
(Emphasis added.)

Experts in the economics of health care fear that the McCain plan will cause the loss of coverage for millions - much of which may be replaced (by the inferior plans), but only after a great deal of turmoil and pain -- and no increase to the number of people insured. As discussed in the CNNMoney article:

Experts, however, fear that eliminating the tax advantage of employer-based coverage would prompt younger, healthier workers to leave their office plans. If that happened, costs for the remaining workers could skyrocket. Companies may drop coverage altogether.

"If companies know their employees have the tax credit, it relieves them of the burden of providing coverage," said Sara Collins, who directs a health insurance program at the Commonwealth Fund. McCain's plan "moves people out of the employer system and to the individual market."

Some 74% of companies said that eliminating the tax exclusion would have a "strong negative impact on their workforce," according to a September survey by the American Benefits Council.

Estimates vary, but the Tax Policy Center estimates that 20 million people would lose their employer-based coverage by 2018. Roughly the same number would gain insurance through other means. But, overall, McCain's plan would do little to reduce the number of uninsured.

(Emphasis added.)

**

Holtz-Eakin had been Director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for the Republican Congress in 2003 - 2005; he was known for speaking his mind even when what he said didn't fit the political needs of his benefactors.

An article in The Washington Note called him "A Thorn in the Side of the Bush Administration", for doing such things as saying that the Bush tax and spending plans wouldn't substantially stimulate long term economic growth, and that Bush's tax cuts "were heavily skewed in favor of the wealthiest Americans."

Quoting from the New York Times, The Note says that the CBO under Holtz-Eakin:

raised doubts about proposals to partly privatize the Social Security system, concluded that abolishing estate taxes would reduce charitable contributions and calculated that allowing same-sex marriages would slightly increase federal revenues.

And now, it seems, Holtz-Eakin gets to be a bit of a thorn in the side of John McCain. There is no hiding that those who are left to rely upon the McCain health plan -- those who cannot obtain employer-based policies, those who are self-employed, those who have preexisting health conditions -- will be left with the admittedly inferior coverage to be available to those faced with what the McCain health plan will offer.

The "lucky" few will emerged unscathed - only if the employer health insurance plans survive.

At last, a bit of straight talk from the McCain camp!

Let's watch as the campaign scrambles to distance John McCain from Holtz-Eakin's remarks and the honest evaluation they reflect.


(Photo from Maxwell school at Syracuse University.)

Senator Diane Feinstein Speaks Out Against Proposition 8 - Video, Text, Analysis

U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein, who had not previously vocalized her position on Proposition 8, and who had in 2004 come out against same sex marriage, saying it was “too much, too fast, too soon,” today came out strongly against Prop 8, and in favor of marriage equality. She released a video statement which will reportedly run as a "No on 8" ad throughout California.



The text of the Senator's video statement is as follows:

"In my lifetime, I've seen discrimination. And I see it again in Proposition 8. Proposition 8 would be a terrible mistake for California. It changes our Constitution. Eliminates fundamental rights. And treats people differently under the law.

"Proposition 8 is not about schools or our kids. It's about discrimination and we must always say NO to that.

"No matter how you feel about marriage, vote against discrimination.

"And vote NO on 8."

Feinstein, a moderate Democrat who became mayor of San Francisco upon the assassination of Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk, one of the first openly gay elected officials in the U.S., in 1978, was elected California's first female U.S. Senator in 1992, and has been easily re-elected since then. Feinstein has attracted moderate and conservative support over the years, and has been less than a favorite of the progressive community in California, all of which makes her overt endorsement more significant.

In addition to her statement on Prop 8 contained in the video, Sen. Feinstein issued a broader statement in support of the right of the right to marriage for all, regardless of gender:

“Proposition 8 would eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. I oppose it as a matter of equality and fairness.

The right to marry is fundamental. It provides social stability, economic equality, and the ability to make decisions for a spouse in a time of crisis.

If Proposition 8 were to pass, not only would it eliminate the right to marry for gay and lesbian couples, but it would also create a complicated legal quagmire for those who have exercised this right under the California Constitution, as adjudicated by the Supreme Court of the State.

The views of Californians on this issue have changed over time, and as a State, I believe we should uphold the ability of our friends, neighbors, and co-workers who are gay and lesbian to enter into the contract of marriage.

Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has previously stated his opposition to the proposed same-sex marriage ban.

Obama Rallies in Albuquerque, Denver October 25, 26, 2008 - Photos, Video

Here are links to photos and video from major Obama rallies held this weekend in Albuquerque, New Mexico (45,000+) and Denver, Colorado, (100,000+.) Includes reporting from Albuquerque rally.

Additional reporting, photos at This Week With Barack Obama.


(Photo: From Daily Kos.)

Locate Your Polling Place; Los Angeles County Online Application for "Vote-By-Mail" Ballot

As requested, this tool from Google will locate and provide a map to your polling place. Enter your registered addressed where indicated.



Additional voting information is likely available through your local registrar's office.

In response to a request by several people, here's some specific information on applying for a vote-by-mail ballot online in Los Angeles County. Applications for a vote-by-mail (absentee) must be received by the Registrar-Recorder in Norwalk by midnight on Tuesday, October 28. That deadline applies to applications filed by mail, in person, or online.

Here's the link to the Los Angeles County online application for vote-by-mail ballot.

View the sample ballot for your precinct in Los Angeles County here.

Ron Howard (Opie, Richie Cunningham), Andy Griffith (Andy Taylor), & Henry Winkler ("The Fonz"): "Ron Howard's Call to Action" Video for Barack Obama

This "cute idea" may be enough to push Obama over the top in North Carolina, home to Andy Griffith and "Mayberry." Griffith's endorsement may quietly be a big deal in much of the rural south and Midwest, and nowhere more than in his home town of Mt. Airy, North Carolina. Can't imagine how many rural voters may feel, after watching this, that it really is okay to vote for someone from a much different background than theirs. (Polling has shown that Barack Obama has recently pulled even with John McCain among presidential preferences of rural voters in 13 swing-states.)

See more Ron Howard videos at Funny or Die

California Proposition 8 Supporters Seeking "Money by Threat" From Supporters of Marriage Equality : Is It Extortion?

Senior employees and/or representatives of "ProtectMarriage.com" - the leading force behind California Proposition 8, have threatened those who have contributed against that Proposition: give a comparable amount to us, or we'll publicize your opposition to traditional marriage.

The threats were contained in certified letters sent by the Yes on 8 campaign to significant business-related contributors against Prop 8, and contained the following language:

Make a donation of a like amount to ProtectMarriage.com which will help us correct this error. Were you to elect not to donate comparably, it would be a clear indication that you are in opposition to traditional marriage. ... The names of any companies and organizations that choose not to donate in like manner to ProtectMarriage.com but have given to Equality California will be published.

According to an AP article in the San Francisco Chronicle, the letter was signed by four members of the pro-Prop. 8 group's executive committee:

campaign chairman Ron Prentice; Edward Dolejsi, executive director of the California Catholic Conference; Mark Jansson, a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; and Andrew Pugno, the lawyer for ProtectMarriage.com. A donation form was attached.

One of the threatening letters was sent to San Diego businessman Jim Abbott, owner of a real estate company and a member of Equality California's board of directors. Abbott, who married his same sex partner this past August, had contributed $10,000 towards the underwriting of a San Diego-area event to raise funds for the campaign against Prop 8.

Sonya Eddings Brown, a ProtectMarriage.com spokeswoman, estimated that 36 companies were targeted for the letter and said those that do not respond with a contribution would be highlighted in a press release and on the campaign Web site.

Several websites have referred to the acts of ProtectMarriage.com in sending their threatening letter as "blackmail." In fact, the potential crime involved, if any, would appear to be extortion.

California Penal Code section 518 defines extortion:

Extortion is the obtaining of property from another, with his consent... induced by a wrongful use of force or fear....

To constitute "fear" sufficient for a finding of extortion, a jury must find a threat to do one of the following:

1. To do an unlawful injury to the person or property of the individual threatened or of a third person; or,

2. (To accuse of a crime)...; or,

3. To expose, or impute to him or them any deformity, disgrace or crime; or

4. To expose any secret affecting him or them.

(Penal Code section 519.)

Sending a letter "expressing or implying" any threat set forth in Section 519 may expose the person sending the letter to the same penalties as if money were actually obtained through such threat. (Penal Code sec. 523.) Other attempts to extort may be punished as a misdemeanor.

The key issue regarding potential criminal liability for extortion here is whether the threats made by the individuals constitute the "wrongful use of... fear." To determine that, a prosecutor will need to determine whether the threatened acts fall within the acts prohibited by Penal Code sec. 519.

Specifically, did the letter's authors threaten unlawful injury to property (category one?) I'm getting a bit out of my comfort area on this, but many acts of boycotting or blacklisting of a business can be legal, while threatening those acts unless the business pays money may cross the line to illegality. The prospective prosecutor will want to determine: was this threat made as part of a criminal or racketeering enterprise? For a wrongful purpose?

If not within category one of Penal Code sec. 519, do the threatening acts of the Yes on 8 forces constitute a threat to expose or impute a "disgrace?" While those making the contributions toward the defeat of Prop. 8 would likely not find their position on marriage equality to be disgraceful, the proponents of that proposition appear to hold that belief, and would apparently be spreading that information to others who would find the acts of the Prop. 8 opponents to be "disgraceful." Further, to claim that opponents of Prop. 8 who fail to contribute to the Yes on 8 campaign are "in opposition to traditional marriage" could be found to expose to or impute a "disgrace", and a cause of action for extortion may stand.

Category four "expose any secret" would not seem to apply, as significant campaign contributions are not secret, but are in fact public record. Publicizing information which is on the public record would not likely be the basis for a prosecution for extortion.

While the acts of the proponents of Proposition 8 were clearly outrageous, and apparently made with the intent to cause fear of loss of business to those to whom the letter was addressed, they may or may not fit within the legal definition of extortion.

Caution ought be exercised in using terms such as "extortion" or "blackmail", lest one be facing a possible defamation action for accusing another of a crime. Definitely something best to be avoided.

By the way, if the elements of extortion can be proven against the Prop. 8 supporters: the penalty for violation of Penal Code section 518, as set forth in section 520, is generally two to four years in state prison.

Racism Won't Be a Major Factor in Presidential Election - But Dirty Tricks Might: Verner

Guest Commentary


Jimmy Verner, a Board Cerified family law specialist in Dallas, Texas saw a recent article about racisim and the vote in West Virginia, which moved him to write about the topic of race in the 2008 presidential election, and specifically on how racism might impact the election:
**

By Jimmy Verner

What I find naive (about the Baltimore Sun article linked above) is the idea that racism isn't much of an issue in places other than West Virginia. I'm here to tell you it is, but at the same time, I don't think it will have much of an impact on the vote for Obama.

I live in Dallas County which is one of the few blue parts of Texas.
But even here in Dallas, and especially once you get to more rural
areas, there is substantial racism. I'm not talking about the "let's
lynch 'em if they look at the white women" type of racism but instead
the sense, among some white people, that black people are different
from whites and generally inferior - the black stereotype some whites
hold that black people are not as smart as white people, that they are
lazy, that they are preoccupied with fornicating, and so forth. It's
the diffuse notion that blacks don't value the White Anglo-Saxon
Protestant virtues as much as they should.

Now how would I, as a white man, know that racism exists? I know
because I see how some whites treat blacks and the subtle differences
in treatment. For example, a black man who walks into a convenience
store seeking directions might well be treated differently by a white
clerk than a white man with the same request. The black man would be
greeted with a slightly strained smile and accorded a little less
patience if he didn't understand the directions the first time
around. Body language would say, "I've told you, now get on your way."

But mostly I know that racism exists because of the things I sometimes
hear. If you are a white man, you will hear comments from other white
men that you will not hear when persons of color or women are
present. It's rare to hear a white man use the N-word, but you do
hear things like "Joe, he just doesn't get it - what do you expect
[from one of them]?" or "Those people who take welfare ought to get a
job" or "I wish they'd their keep pants zipped and then there wouldn't
be so many of them."

This is sad, but it won't materially affect the election. Your
average otherwise goodhearted but racist white guy is a whole lot more
worried about his job, his house and his family than he is about what
color the President is in far, far away Washington, D.C. Barack Obama
won't be his neighbor and won't be wanting to be friends with his
daughter. He's not really all that black anyway, come to think of it,
not only in his color but in how he talks. If you didn't know he was
black, you couldn't tell just by listening to him. Plus he did go to
Harvard so he must be pretty smart. And God knows George Bush has
driven the country into a ditch. McCain might be white, but he's old,
he sounds a little crazy sometimes, and he really wouldn't change
things much from what they're like right now.

So I'm not worried about racism affecting the election. What I am
worried about is Republican dirty tricks. To the extent that overt
racism exists in this country, dirty-trickster Republicans embody it.
Their mantra: If you keep the black man from voting, then McCain
might just win.


(Editorial note: We thank Jimmy Verner, of DeSoto (Dallas) Texas, for granting us permission to publish this article at CowHen.Net. Mr. Verner retains the copyright to this article, but grants right to republication if published in full, without modification, and with credit to Jimmy Verner, and citation to this post at CowHen.Net.

Jimmy is a family law appellate attorney, Board Cerifed in Family Law and Civil Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Sepcialization. He is also licensed to practice law in New Mexico.)

Greenspan Concedes Philosophy Wrong - Regulation of Markets Needed

"I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms.”

In remarkable testimony before the House Government Oversight Committee, Alan Greenspan, celebrated former Federal Reserve chairman and champion of a vastly deregulated free market system admitted in congressional testimony this morning that he “made a mistake” in trusting that free markets could regulate themselves without government oversight"

In his 18 years as head of the Fed from 1988 to 2006, Greenspan constantly pushed for deregulation of the financial market. He had faced recent criticism for having failed to adequately oversee credit derivatives, an unregulated portion of the financial market "whose excesses partially led to the current financial crisis", according to the New York Times.

Greenspan, who admitted to the House Committee of Government Oversight and Reform that he was “partially” wrong for not having sought regulation of the market for credit default swaps, admitted to " a more serious flaw in his own philosophy that unfettered free markets sit at the root of a superior economy." In response to questioning by committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles), Greenspan admitted:

“I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms,” Mr. Greenspan said.

Referring to his free-market ideology, Mr. Greenspan added: “I have found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I have been very distressed by that fact.”

Mr. Waxman pressed the former Fed chair to clarify his words. “In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working,” Mr. Waxman said.

“Absolutely, precisely,” Mr. Greenspan replied. “You know, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.”

Emphasis added; full story at the New York Times.

Video: Greenspan Discusses 'Credit Tsunami'

(Photo credit - U.S. Congress, from prior testimony before House Financial Services Committee)

Bin Laden May Try to Swing Election to McCain: LAPD Chief Bratton

Current Los Angeles Police Chief and former NYPD Chief William J. Bratton writes that Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden may carry out a terror attack or some other action in an attempt to influence the November 4 U.S. presidential election.

Writing in the New York Daily News, Bratton and former R.P. Eddy, a former director of counterterrorism at the National Security Council write that "[w]ith so much at stake in these elections, Bin Laden will probably attempt to make his opinion count.... If history is any guide, we should expect to see more terror in the coming weeks."

U.S. intelligence is worried. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate said that Al Qaeda has reconstituted and may again be capable of hitting the U.S. mainland. U.S. intelligence agencies have also recently warned of Al Qaeda using "European-looking" operatives. Though trained in places like Pakistan, they may well have European passports and clean records - meaning they can enter the U.S. without a visa andwon't be on any customs or police watch lists.

The Los Angeles Times reports on Bratton and Eddy's suggestion that Bin Laden is pushing for a McCain victory:

Bratton and Eddy speculated that Bin Laden is looking to sway the election in favor of Republican Party candidate John McCain, since McCain "is more likely to engender Muslim anger and resentment than would his opponent.

"Put simply: Bin Laden probably realizes it could become markedly more difficult to paint the United States as the 'Great Satan' with a new president who is admired internationally," they wrote. "The remaining 14 days before the elections should be seen as a time of high threat, and state and local police should be on high alert."***
(Emphasis added)

Related post: Al Qaeda-related Groups Support McCain for President, Suggests Terror Attack Would Assist His Presidential Bid

(Photo: Chief William Bratton (via Wikipedia).)

London Rebukes U.S. Approach to Terrorism

October 22, 2008

LONDON: Two senior British counterterrorism officials have in recent days criticized the United States for what they described as its overly militaristic approach to fighting terrorism and warned of a further erosion of civil liberties.

One of the officials, Dame Stella Rimington, a former head of the country's domestic intelligence agency, said that she hoped the next American president "would stop using the phrase 'war on terror."' She also said there had been a "huge overreaction" to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

The other official, Sir Ken MacDonald, the country's top prosecutor, who has overseen the country's terrorism trials for the past several years, rejected what he called "the Guantanamo model," in which the rights of defendants are severely curtailed or eliminated by governments in search for a response to the terrorism threat.

Differences between the British and American approaches in the fight against terrorism have been expressed before, but rarely by officials of such stature and background.

Complaints were also aired regarding interference with civil liberties and excessive militarism within Britain in response to the September 11 attacks.

Complete article available here.

(Photos: Dame Stella Rimington, Sir Ken MacDonald. Not for republication or commercial use.)

Al Qaeda-related Groups Support McCain for President, Suggests Terror Attack Would Assist His Presidential Bid

The Washington Post is reporting that known Al-Qaeda-related groups are expressing jubilation over the U.S. financial crisis, support for the election of Sen. John McCain, who "would continue the 'failing march of his predecessor', President Bush.

"Al-Qaeda will have to support McCain in the coming election," said a commentary posted Monday on the extremist Web site al-Hesbah, which is closely linked to the terrorist group. It said the Arizona Republican would continue the "failing march of his predecessor," President Bush.

On the financial crisis, some Al-Qaeda leaders are pointing to those difficulties as signs that their strategy of dragging the U.S. into an unending "war on terror" on far-flung foreign fields of battle and at great financial cost to the U.S., is having its intended effect.

"Al-Qaeda will have to support McCain in the coming election," said a commentary posted Monday on the extremist Web site al-Hesbah, which is closely linked to the terrorist group. ***

The Web commentary was one of several posted by Taliban or al-Qaeda-allied groups in recent days that trumpeted the global financial crisis and predicted further decline for the United States and other Western powers. In language that was by turns mocking and ominous, the newest posting credited al-Qaeda with having lured Washington into a trap that had "exhausted its resources and bankrupted its economy." It further suggested that a terrorist strike might swing the election to McCain and guarantee an expansion of U.S. military commitments in the Islamic world.

The al-Hesbah website suggests the benefit of such a pre-election strike, presumably directly against the U.S.:

"It will push the Americans deliberately to vote for McCain so that he takes revenge for them against al-Qaeda," said the posting, attributed to Muhammad Haafid, a longtime contributor to the password-protected site. "Al-Qaeda then will succeed in exhausting America."

It is not clear that the commentary reflects a broad consensus among Al-Qaeda groups or cells, and some experts suggest that the postings could be an attempt to harm McCain's candidacy, due to a greater fear of a McCain presidency.

However, according to Adam Raisman, a senior analyst at SITE Intelligence Group which monitors Islamist web sites, "the comments summarized what has emerged as a consensus view on extremist sites:"

"The idea in the jihadist forums is that McCain would be a faithful 'son of Bush' -- someone they see as a jingoist and a war hawk," Raisman said. "They think that, to succeed in a war of attrition, they need a leader in Washington like McCain."

Islamist militants have generally had less to say about Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois. Leaders of the Iranian-backed group Hezbollah expressed a favorable view of Obama during the primary campaign but later rejected the Democrat after he delivered speeches expressing support for Israel.

According to the Associated Press, the web message was evidently posted by a well known and "respected" contributor to the site: Muhammad Haafid:

Haafid is not believed to have a direct affiliation with al-Qaida plans or knowledge of its operations, according to SITE.

SITE senior analyst Adam Raisman said this message caught SITE's attention because there has been little other chatter on the forums about the U.S. election.

SITE was struck by the message's detailed analysis — and apparent jubilation — about American financial woes.

"What we try to do is get the pulse of the jihadist community," Raisman said. "And it's about the financial crisis."

Neither candidate for president has suggested in any way that the financial burden of fighting Islamicist terror will factor into any decision about how such terror shoud be fought. From the Washington Post story:

Both (candidates) have advocated expanding the size of the U.S. military overall, but neither has explained in detail how to pay for it.

Al-Qaeda has acted to affect a U.S. election at least once before:

Bin Laden released a video message Oct. 29, 2004, days before the U.S. presidential election, warning of plans for further attacks on U.S. targets. Some strategists for Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), the Democratic nominee, have said the timing of the message tipped the balance toward Bush, who defined himself as the anti-terrorism candidate.

The deadly train bombings in Spain that year were seen as an attempt by al-Qaeda to bring down then-Prime Minister José María Aznar, who had sent troops to Iraq. Aznar lost his reelection bid three days after the bombing.

Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent reports on a McCain campaign conference call held, evidently, to head-off an uproar over the Al-Qaeda expression of support:

I just got off a conference call held by the McCain campaign to deny that Al Qaeda, contrary to reports in the AP and the Washington Post, is rooting for their man. To describe the call as panicked would be an understatement.

Jim Woolsey, the former CIA director who publicly connected Iraq to the 9/11 attacks without any evidence in 2001, and senior foreign-policy adviser Randy Scheunemann spent more time (complaining) about the Washington Post’s standards of fairness than on the logic of why Al Qaeda might prefer Sen. John McCain. *** Woolsey, for his part, peered into the mind of what he called “one individual Islamist blogger from one terrorist Islamist blog” and determined that he was “clearly trying to damage John McCain” and “not speaking from his heart.”

What was absent from the call... was any discussion about why Al Qaeda might want McCain to win. And there the case is simple enough. Al Qaeda prefers an indefinite U.S. occupation of Iraq and a bellicose U.S. all across the Muslim world to radicalize Muslims to its terrorist cause and drain the U.S. of its financial wealth — what Osama bin Laden calls his “bleed to bankruptcy” strategy. Hence, the reason why, as the CIA eventually concluded, Bin Laden tried to help George W. Bush’s reelection in 2004 by releasing a late-October tape. McCain pledges basic continuity with Bush on the Iraq war. As Scheunemann put it, “John McCain will spend what it takes to win.”

Some claim that the U.S. under Ronald Reagan used similar tactics - ramping up research and development into the "Star Wars" missle defense shield at least in part in an attempt to cause the Soviet Union into vastly increased military spending, leading to bankrupting the Soviet Union. (Others argue that other internal factors lead to the Soviet collapse.)


The Obama campaign has declined to comment on the expression of support for McCain on the radical Islamicist website.


Addendum: Headline changed from suggesting the planning of a terror strike to a suggestion by the radical Islamicist site that such a strike would assist McCain's campaign, more accurately reflecting the statements reportedly contained on that site. (10-22-08, 7:25 p.m. PDT.)

(Photo source.)

ACLU Seeks Information on Deployment of 3rd Infantry, 1st Brigade Combat Team to NorCom (United States)

According to the Military Times, the ACLU has today filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for any and all documents related to the decision to deploy the 3rd Infantry, 1st Brigade Combat Team (BCT):

under U.S. Northern Command, which is responsible for homeland defense of the U.S., and the “ongoing and possible use” of the unit, “including but not limited to contemplated functions; duties; surveillance activities; and relationship to existing civilian agencies or personnel or the National Guard.”

The assignment of the 3rd Infantry, 1st BCT to the North America command, first reported here at CowHen.Net on September 24, 2008, is the first time such U.S. military unit has been so assigned on U.S. soil.

NorCom (Northern Command), established in 2002, is responsible for the defense of the U.S. from attack by any means, and leads forces "operating within the U.S. in support of civilian authorities", according to the Military Times article.

The American Civil Liberties Union expresses concern about the use of active military forces within the borders of the U.S., suggesting that the assignment violates the separation within our government between military and civilian forces.

From the ACLU press release regarding their FOIA request:

"The military's deployment within U.S. borders raises critical questions that must be answered," said Jonathan Hafetz, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. "What is the unit's mission? What functions will it perform? And why was it necessary to deploy the unit rather than rely on civilian agencies and personnel and the National Guard? Given the magnitude of the issues at stake, it is imperative that the American people know the truth about this new and unprecedented intrusion of the military in domestic affairs." ***

Civilian authorities, not the military, have historically controlled and directed the internal affairs of the United States. This rule traces its origins to the nation's founding and has been reaffirmed in landmark statutes including the Posse Comitatus Act, which helps preserve the foundational principles of our Constitution and democracy.

"This is a radical departure from separation of civilian law enforcement and military authority, and could, quite possibly, represent a violation of law," said Mike German, ACLU national security policy counsel and former FBI Agent. "Our Founding Fathers understood the threat that a standing army could pose to American liberty. While future generations recognized the need for a strong military to defend against increasingly capable foreign threats, they also passed statutory protections to ensure that the Army could not be turned against the American people. The erosion of these protections should concern every American."

According to the Army Times (opens in pdf), the 1st BCT’s soldiers have learned to use:

“the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.

“It’s a new modular package of nonlethal capabilities that they’re fielding. They’ve been using pieces of it in Iraq, but this is the first time that these modules were consolidated and this package fielded, and because of this mission we’re undertaking we were the first to get it.”

The package includes equipment to stand up a hasty road block; spike strips for slowing, stopping or controlling traffic; shields and batons; and, beanbag bullets. “I was the first guy in the brigade to get Tasered,” said Cloutier, describing the experience as “your worst muscle cramp ever — times 10 throughout your whole body. “I’m not a small guy, I weigh 230 pounds ... it put me on my knees in seconds.”

Col. Cloutier denied any nefarious intent behind the homeland deployment of the unit:

“I can’t think of a more noble mission than this,” said Cloutier, who took command in July. “We’ve been all over the world during this time of conflict, but now our mission is to take care of citizens at home ... and depending on where an event occurred, you’re going home to take care of your home town, your loved ones.” While soldiers’ combat training is applicable, he said, some nuances don’t apply.

“If we go in, we’re going in to help American citizens on American soil, to save lives, provide critical life support, help clear debris, restore normalcy and support whatever local agencies need us to do, so it’s kind of a different role,” said Cloutier, who, as the division operations officer on the last rotation, learned of the homeland mission a few months ago while they were still in Iraq. Some brigade elements will be on call around the clock, during which time they’ll do their regular marksmanship, gunnery and other deployment training. That’s because the unit will continue to train and reset for the next deployment, even as it serves in its CCMRF mission...

The ACLU FOIA request is available online here, or as a pdf download here.

**

Related post (September 24, 2008): U.S. Army Brigade to Be Deployed Within U.S., Starting October 1

(Photo credit.)

Obama to Visit Ailing Grandmother in Hawaii This Thursday

An aide to Barack Obama has announced that Sen. Obama will fly to Hawaii on Thursday to visit his ailing grandmother, Madelyn Dunham. Dunham, who raised Obama, would be 86 years old this Sunday. She is reportedly very ill. From Reuters:

"Recently his grandmother has become ill and in the last few weeks her health has deteriorated to the point where her situation is very serious," said Obama aide Robert Gibbs.

A Thursday noontime rally featuring Sen. Obama in Madison, Wisconsin has been canceled, as has an event in Des Moines, Iowa to allow Obama to travel to spend time with his grandmother.

Senator Obama will reportedly return to campaigning on Saturday.

Breaking: General Colin Powell, Former Republican Secretary of State, Endorses Barack Obama for President

According to a breaking news alert from the New York Times, former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell has endorsed Senator Barack Obama to be the next President of the United States.

The Powell endorsement, which had been much speculated about, came during a Sunday morning appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Update: Video of Powell endorsement:

Online Vote By Mail Applications, Emergency Vote By Mail, Voter Registration, Inmate Voting, Polling Place Location, Los Angeles & All of California

Addendum: We've now added a resource which provides links and/or other contact information for the county registrar's office in each of California's 58 counties. See below for that link.

Below are resources and links to those who wish to vote by absentee ballot in the November 4, 2008 elections, provided by the Los Angeles County Registrar - Recorder or California Secretary of State. They are for use only in California, and only in Los Angeles County where indicated.

Los Angeles County links:

Vote by mail / Absentee Voting:

Vote by Mail - Apply Online! (Deadline October 28, 2008 for November 4 election.) Los Angeles County residents only.

Emergency Vote By Mail Application (For emergency use to obtain absentee ballot from October 28 to November 4. Voted ballot may be dropped at any polling place.)

Overseas Voters - Forms & Instructions

Vote by Mail - Mail-in Application. (Must be received by Registrar by October 28, 2008.)

Vote by Mail Instructions.

Confirm Voter Registration Status (L.A. County only.)

Online Voter Registration (Deadline passed: Must have been postmarked or received by October 20, 2008.)

Inmate Voting Guide.

Dude, Where's My Polling Place? (Enter your street number, then street name. That's it.)

Los Angeles County Election Results.

Links and/or other contact information for the county registrar's office in each of California's 58 counties. Info is provided by the California Democratic Party, but the information is non-partisan. Some of the counties provide links to allow you to track your voter registration status, your vote-by-mail status, or other important data. Listed county-by-county below:

County Registrars:

Alameda County
1225 Fallon Street, Room G-1, Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 272-6933 / (510) 272-6982 Fax
Hours: 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.acgov.org/rov/index.htm

• Check your voter registration status

Alpine County
99 Water, Markleeville, CA 96120
(530) 694-2281 / (530) 694-2491 Fax
Hours: 8:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. / 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.alpinecountyca.gov/departments/county_clerk

Amador County
810 Court Street, Jackson, CA 95642-2132
(209) 223-6465 / (209) 223-6467 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.amador.ca.us/depts/elections/index.htm

Butte County
25 County Center Drive, Suite 110, Oroville, CA 95965-3361
(530) 538-7761 / (800) 894-7761 (Butte County Only) / (530) 538-6853 Fax
Hours: 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://clerk-recorder.buttecounty.net

Calaveras County
891 Mountain Ranch Road, San Andreas, CA 95249
(209) 754-6376 / (209) 754-6733 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
http://www.co.calaveras.ca.us/departments/recorder.asp

Colusa County
546 Jay Street, Suite 200, Colusa, CA 95932
(530) 458-0500 / (530) 458-0512 Fax
Hours: 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.colusacountyclerk.com

Contra Costa County
555 Escobar Street, Martinez, CA 94553
(925) 335-7800 / (877) 335-7802 (Domestic) / (925) 335-7842 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.cocovote.us

• Check your voter registration status
• Contra Costa County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Del Norte County
981 H Street, Room 160
Crescent City, CA 95531
(707) 464-7216 / (707) 465-0383 / (707) 465-0321 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.del-norte.ca.us

• Del Norte County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

El Dorado County
2850 Fairlane Court, Placerville, CA 95667
(530) 621-7480 / (530) 626-5514 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.el-dorado.ca.us/elections

Fresno County
2221 Kern Street, Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 488-3246 / (559) 488-3279 Fax
Hours: 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.co.fresno.ca.us/DepartmentPage.aspx?id=14199

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

Glenn County
516 W. Sycamore Street, Willows, CA 95988
(530) 934-6414 / (530) 934-6485 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.countyofglenn.net/Elections/home_page.asp

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot
• Glenn County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Humboldt County
3033 H Street, Room 20, Eureka, CA 95501
(707) 445-7481 / (707) 445-7204 Fax
Hours: 8:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. / 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.humboldt.ca.us/election

Imperial County
940 West Main Street, Suite 202, El Centro, CA 92243-2865
(760) 482-4226 / (760) 337-4182 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.imperialcounty.net/Election

• Imperial County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Inyo County
168 North Edwards, Independence, CA 93526
(760) 878-0224 / (760) 878-1805 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. / 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.countyofinyo.org/Recorder/RecorderElectionsWebsite.htm

• Inyo County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Kern County
1115 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661) 868-3590 / (800) 452-8683 / (661) 868-3768 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://elections.co.kern.ca.us/elections/

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

Kings County
1400 West Lacey Boulevard, Hanford, CA 93230
(559) 582-3211 Ext. 4401 / (559) 585-8453 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.countyofkings.com/acr/elections/index.html

Lake County
255 North Forbes Street, Lakeport, CA 95453
(707) 263-2372 / (707) 263-2742 Fax
Hours: 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.lake.ca.us/Government/DepartmentDirectory/Registrar_of_Voters.htm

Lassen County
220 South Lassen Street, Suite 5, Susanville, CA 96130
(530) 251-8217 / (530) 257-3480 Fax
Hours: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. / 1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.
http://www.lassencounty.org/govt/dept/county_clerk/registrar/registrar_of_voters.asp

Los Angeles County
12400 Imperial Hwy., Norwalk, CA 90650
(562) 466-1310 Phone / (800) 815-2666 (LA County Only) / (562) 929-4790 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.lavote.net

• Check your voter registration status

Madera County
200 W. 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637
(559) 675-7720 / (559) 675-7870 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.madera-county.com/countyclerk/index.html

Marin County
3501 Civic Center, Room 121, San Rafael, CA 94903
(415) 499-6456 / (415) 499-6447 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
http://co.marin.ca.us/depts/RV/main/index.cfm

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

Mariposa County
4982 10th Street, Mariposa, CA 95338
(209) 966-2007 / (209) 966-6496 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.mariposacounty.org/index.asp?nid=87

• Mariposa County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Mendocino County
501 Low Gap Rd., Room 1020, Ukiah, CA 95482
(707) 463-4371 / (707) 463-4257 Fax
www.co.mendocino.ca.us/acr/elections.htm

Merced County
M. Stephen Jones, County Clerk/Registrar
2222 "M" Street, Room 14, Merced, CA 95340
(209) 385-7541 / (209) 385-7387 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.co.merced.ca.us/elections/

Modoc County
204 S. Court Street, Alturas, CA 96101
(530) 233-6200 / (530) 233-6666 Fax
Hours: 8:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. / 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.modoccounty.us/

Mono County
Annex I, School Street. (Library Building)
Bryant Street, Bridgeport, CA 93517
(760) 932-5537 / (760) 932-5531 Fax
Hours: 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.monocounty.ca.gov/departments/elections/elections.html

• Mono County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Monterey County
1370 S. Main St # B, Salinas, CA 93901
(831) 796-1499 / (831) 755-5485 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://MontereyCountyElections.us

• Check your voter registration status
• Monterey County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Napa County
900 Coombs Street, Room 256, Napa, CA 94559-2946
(707) 253-4321 / (707) 253-4390 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.napa.ca.us/Gov/Departments/DeptDefault.asp?DID=13600

• Napa County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Nevada County
950 Maidu Avenue, Nevada City, CA 95959
(530) 265-1298 / (530) 265-9829 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://new.mynevadacounty.com/elections/

• Nevada County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Orange County
1300 South Grand Ave., Bldg. C, Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 567-7600 / (714) 567-7556 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.ocvote.com

Placer County
2956 Richardson Drive, Auburn, CA 95603
(530) 886-5650 / (530) 886-5688 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.placer.ca.gov/elections

Plumas County
520 Main Street, Room 102, Quincy, CA 95971
(530) 283-6256 / (530) 283-6155 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.countyofplumas.com/clerkrecorder/elections/index.htm

Riverside County
2724 Gateway Drive, Riverside, CA 92507-0918
(951) 486-7200 / (951) 486-7335 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.voteinfo.net

• Riverside County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Sacramento County
7000 65th Street, Sacramento, CA 95823-2315
(916) 875-6451 / (916) 875-6228 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.saccounty.net/elections

• Sacramento County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

San Benito County
Courthouse, Room 206, 440 Fifth Street, Hollister, CA 95023-3843
(831) 636-4029 / (831) 636-2939 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.sbcvote.us/

San Bernardino County
777 East Rialto Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0770
(909) 387-8300 / (909) 387-2022 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.sbcounty.gov/rov/general_info/default.asp

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot
• San Bernardino County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

San Diego County
5201 Ruffin Road, Suite I, San Diego, CA 92123
(858) 565-5800 / (800) 696-0136 / (858) 694-2955 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.sdcounty.ca.gov/voters/Eng/Eindex.html

• Check your voter registration status

San Francisco County
City Hall - 1 Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place, Room 48, San Francisco, CA 94102-4635
(415) 554-4375 / (415) 554-7344 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.sfgov.org/site/elections_index.asp

• Check your voter registration status

San Joaquin County
212 North San Joaquin Street, Stockton, CA 95202
(209) 468-2885 / (209) 468-2889 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.sjcrov.org

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

San Luis Obispo County
1055 Monterey Street, Room D-120, San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
(805) 781-5228 / (805) 781-1111 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.slocounty.ca.gov/clerk.htm

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

San Mateo County
40 Tower Road, San Mateo, CA 94402
(650) 312-5222 / (650) 312-5348 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.shapethefuture.org

• Check your voter registration status
• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

Santa Barbara County
130 E. Victoria St., Suite 200, Santa Barbara, CA 93101
(805) 568-2200 / (800) SBC-VOTE / (805) 568-2209 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.sbcvote.com

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

Santa Clara County
1555 Berger Drive, Bldg. 2, San Jose, CA 95112
(408) 299-VOTE / (866) 430-VOTE / (408) 998-7314 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.sccvote.org

• Check your voter registration status
• Track Vote by Mail Ballot
• Santa Clara County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Santa Cruz County
701 Ocean Street, Room 210
Santa Cruz, CA 95060-4076
(831) 454-2060 / (831) 454-2445 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.votescount.com

• Santa Cruz County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Shasta County
1643 Market Street, Redding, CA 96001
(530) 225-5730 / (530) 225-5454 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.elections.co.shasta.ca.us/

• Check your voter registration status and track Vote by Mail Ballot
• Shasta County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Sierra County
100 Courthouse Square, Room 11, Downieville, CA 95936-0398
(530) 289-3295 / (530) 289-2830 Fax
Hours: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. / 1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.
www.sierracounty.ws

Siskiyou County
510 North Main Street, Yreka, CA 96097 - 9910
(530) 842-8084 / (530) 842-8093 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.siskiyou.ca.us/clerk/index.htm

Solano County
675 Texas St, Ste 2600, Fairfield, CA 94533
(707) 784-6675 / (707) 784-6678 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.solanocounty.com/depts/rov/default.asp

• Check your voter registration status

Sonoma County
435 Fiscal Drive, Santa Rosa, CA 95403
(707) 565-6800 / (707) 565-6843 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.sonoma-county.org/regvoter/index.htm

• Check your voter registration status
• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

Stanislaus County
1021 I Street, Suite 101, Modesto, CA 95354-2331
(209) 525-5200 / (209) 525-5210 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
http://stanvote.com

Sutter County
1435 Veterans Memorial Circle, Yuba City, CA 95993
(530) 822-7122 / (530) 822-7587 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.sutter.ca.us

• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

Tehama County
444 Oak St, Room C
Red Bluff, CA 96080
(530) 527-8190 / (530) 527-1140 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.co.tehama.ca.us

• Tehama County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Trinity County
11 Court Street, Weaverville, CA 96093
(530) 623-1220 / (530) 623-8398 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://www.trinitycounty.org/Departments/assessor-clerk-elect/elections.htm

Tulare County
5951 South Mooney Blvd, Visalia, CA 93277
(559) 733-6275 / (559) 737-4498 Fax
Hours: M-Th 7:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m., F 8:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
www.tularecoelections.org

Tuolumne County
2 South Green Street, Sonora, CA 95370-4696
(209) 533-5570 / (209) 694-8931 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://portal.co.tuolumne.ca.us/

Ventura County
800 South Victoria Avenue, L-1200, Ventura, CA 93009-1200
(805) 654-2781 / (805) 648-9200 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://recorder.countyofventura.org/elections.htm

• Check your voter registration status and track Vote by Mail Ballot
• Ventura County vote-by-mail (absentee) ballot requires 59 cents postage.

Yolo County
625 Court Street, Room B05, Woodland, CA 95695
(530) 666-8133 / (530) 666-8123 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
www.yoloelections.org

• Check your voter registration status
• Track Vote by Mail Ballot

Yuba County
915 8th Street, Suite 107, Marysville, CA 95901-5273
(530) 749-7855 / (530) 749-7854 Fax
Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
http://elections.co.yuba.ca.us/

Let us know if there are other links you're looking for, and we'll try to update our selections.

("Vote"Graphic from Olmstead County, Mn.)