Counting Electoral Votes--Joint Session of the House and Senate Held Pursuant to the Provisions of Senate Concurrent Resolution 1
COUNTING ELECTORAL VOTES--JOINT SESSION OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE HELD PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 1 (HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--JANUARY 6, 2005) -- (House of Representatives - January 06, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, functional democracy requires that the citizens have confidence in an election process and of course confidence that all legitimate votes will be counted. Clearly the State of Ohio is not able to provide such confidence.
First, there is a significant unexplained, uninvestigated difference in exit polling results and the reported election results. There are specific unresolved allegations of other election problems, particularly the long lines in some precincts that were caused not because of an unanticipated voter turnout but because of insufficient voting machines in the precinct. Other allegations were widespread and none of these allegations was investigated.
I know, Mr. Speaker, that this objection is somewhat awkward because it does not have the apparent support for the candidate involved, but I believe it is our responsibility to ensure that election results meet the spirit and letter of our Constitution and that we have confidence in the process by demonstrating that voting schemes and irregularities are not ignored.
Mr. Speaker, I would hope that we would take this in consideration as we review this election return so that this does not happen again.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, a functioning democracy requires that the citizens have confidence in its election process, and of course confidence that all legitimate votes will be properly counted. We saw the importance of this principle in the recent Ukraine national election and in the Washington State Governor's election.
Clearly, the State of Ohio is not able to provide such confidence. First there is a significant, unexplained and un-investigated difference in exit polling results and the reported election results. Then, there are many specific, serious, unresolved allegations of voting irregularities in Ohio. For example, strong evidence exists to indicate that in some predominately Black precincts, voters had to stand in line to vote for as much as 10 hours due, not to an unanticipated voter turn out, but to a clearly insufficient number of voting machines at the precinct.
Other allegations include evidence that numerous requests for provisional ballots were improperly denied, that the counting of provisional ballots violated the Help America Vote Act and that there were over 90,000 ballots cast which were set aside as spoiled ballots without justification. Not one of these allegations was officially investigated.
Now I know that this objection is somewhat awkward because it does not have the apparent support of the candidate involved, but I believe it is our duty and responsibility to assure that election results meet the spirit and the letter of our Constitution and that we instill confidence in the process by demonstrating that voting schemes and irregularities are not ignored.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov