Voters sue over lack of Garland County polling sites

[deminks]

Source: Arkansas Democrat Gazette

LITTLE ROCK — A Hot Springs attorney representing three Garland County voters has filed a lawsuit against the county’s Election Commission, claiming it violated the law when it opened only two polling places for Tuesday’s runoff election.

The lawsuit filed Tuesday in Garland County Circuit Court seeks to nullify and not certify the county’s election results.

The commission held elections at its customary 36 polling places during the May 18 primary but opted to open only two - at the Election Commission’s office in Hot Springs and at a site in Hot Springs Village - for Tuesday’s runoff election. The county, anticipating light turnout, made plans in March to open only the two sites to save money.

The plan prompted earlier criticism from Lt. Gov. Bill Halter, who was in a runoff against U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, and Pulaski County Clerk Pat O’Brien, who was in a runoff for secretary of state against Mark Wilcox.

Read more: http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2010/jun/09/voters-sue-over-lack-garland-county-polli-20100609/

[fasttense]

1. When I heard this rigging of polling places was going on I knew Blanche Lincoln

would win. And I was right.

In America, if you cheat you win. Because god knows we can't look back.

[EJSTES2005]

2. +1

Whats the old saying......."if your not cheating your not trying hard enough"..........Sad how far we have come :(

[Freddie Stubbs]

3. Why the hell didn't these people complain in March, rather than now when it is too late?

[rpannier]

4. Actually people did... Especially the Halter campaign

Proving disenfranchisement is not easy.
Quite often it has to wait until after the election to prove it
That's what this guy is suing over

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. Why didn't he file a suit then to prevent this from happening?

[rpannier]

16. Most likely

1. Because there was no guarantee there would be a run-off
2. To prove that there is disenfranchisement before the run-off is very difficult because you have to provide proof that it will
i.e. You can't get most courts to acknowledge that it disenfranchises the poor, elderly, etc without actually being able to prove that it does/will.
That would require proof.
Proof comes from showing that it did in an election.
So, you have to wait until after the election
A statistical model (something provided before the election) is not necessarily proof. And is often viewed as a guess by many (most) judges because they are hesitant to interject themselves in an election as it is a states prerogative to run them

[CanonRay]

6. How to Drive People Out of the Democrtaic Party

a how to book by Blance Lincoln. Forward by Bill Clinton.

[Jefferson23]

8. lol, good one. n/t

[dgibby]

11. Endorsement by WH. nt

[Peace Patriot]

7. Why bother with polling places? Just ask ES&S who won. nt

[glinda]

9. Glaring difference between 36 and 2.

[Hestia]

10. Garland County were huge supporters of Halter - my sis in the party there kept telling me to just

wait, there will be someone running against Blanche, and she was right. Also, they didn't announce the polling closures until last week, Thursday maybe? People aren't going to drive 20 miles to vote, though I would if it came down to it, but nobody should have to.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. 36 then 2?!?!?

Wow, just glaring, isn't it?

[Lasher]

13. How does this compare to polling places in the rest of the state?

Were there similar reductions in counties where Lincoln had more support?

[Art_from_Ark]

14. Hot Springs Village is a gated community

At least, it was when I was down there.

If it's anything like its sister development, Bella Vista Village (which isn't gated), then it will have a disproportionate share of conservative voters.

[Dinger]

15. Good (nt)