New York state held a special election on March 31 to fill the vacant U.S. House seat, 20th district. About half of the absentee votes still haven’t been counted. But so far, the results are: Murphy and Tedisco each have 77,225 votes. The election board hasn’t released the number of blank votes, or write-in votes, or absentee ballot votes cast for Eric Sundwall, the Libertarian who was on the absentee ballots but not the regular ballots.
The breakdown by party so far is: Murphy, Democratic line, 66,648; Independence Party line, 6,902; Working Families line, 3,675. Tedisco, Republican line, 65,967; Conservative line, 11,258. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for these figures.
I spoke this morning with the lawyer who represented the LPNY committee in 1994
Schulz v Williams (Berman) ballot access case. He said he did not understand
why the 20th CD libertarian candidate did not appeal/ challenge the denial of
the petitions lacking residential versus mailing address.
Based upon Schulz v Williams the case difficulty would have been “like a walk in
the park”. (i.e. an easy win)
Bill,
It had to do with the situation in court in Poughkeepsie (which all media and accounts missed), not whether or not we might have beat the BOE ruling. We were basically being accused of fraud and felt that the risk of taking the stand was too great given the lack of time we had to prepare for it (about 15 minutes).
Had the court declared our situation moot there (our expectation after the BOE ruling), we would have made our way back to Albany to fight it. The fix was in and it was potentially a nasty mess, given the fact that the top GOP election law lawyer would be hounding us. Our time and money had also run out. If we had twenty grand in the bank we might have been all right . . .
Sincerely,
Eric Sundwall
well first file complaints with the NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct regarding the judge(s) and the Professional Conduct board(s) 3rd and 9th JDs for the attorney who violated you. It is standard procedure for these political suits to attempt to imtimidate you — especially in the context of a Dutchess County hearing.
I and perhaps others will decide this weekend regarding an attempt to revive your litigation using the federal court perhaps motioning to reactivate the case using the 1994 Schulz v Williams (Berman) decision.
You should of course also consider filing formal complaints against all the subject attorneys (and judges) with the DOJ/FBI public integrity divisions (and the civil voting rights section) in Washington (and perhaps not locally in NY — too conflicted if not overtly corrupt)
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/pin/
NOT having ALL of the candidates on ALL of the ballots is one more NO BRAINER Bush v. Gore type case.
Bring down the HAMMER on the STATE M-O-R-O-N-S in a federal court.
Result – a new LEGAL election.
Supposedly the Democrat is ahead in some kind of unofficial count, but that was disputed by the Republican’s campaign.
Nice, they spoiled eachother.
This election is truly one for the history books.
There’s a town in South Dakota where they decide a tie in local races by a round of Black Jack.
Wouldn’t it be cool if Tidesco and Murphy did something like that?
Do we know if any absentee ballots were cast before Mr. Sundwall was disqualified?
If so, and if the margin of victory is equal to or less than the number of absentee ballots that are marked for Mr. Sundwall, then this race could present an opportunity for a legal challenge from any absentee voters who, in good faith and with due diligence, cast ballots that were voided, but that could have decided the outcome of the election.
No matter what the outcome of this race is I’ll bet it ends up in court.
I’ll send out the T-1080 motion form tonight to the 2nd Circuit via email and tomorrow over night the hard copy. I serve the original attorney(s) from Schulz v Berman (Williams) as well as Loeber v Spargo plaintiffs and state defendants. Bob Schulz is in Alaska today and I left a message stating that I would like him to fill the ballot petition as candidate for US House of Reps for the 20th CD of NY. Several co-plaintiffs from Loeber have expressed interest in the petitioning and voting standing issues in the current controversy. Richard sent his interest in the challenge via private email. I also already have a prior mandamus comming out of Loeber which may prove to be a vehicle for certain issues in this controversy.
Dondero, there’s also a town in CO (Guffey) whose mayor is always a dog or a cat, which is even better. The dog’s platform is a bone in every supper dish and the cat’s platform is a scratching post in every house. The mayor’s office is the General Store, and the people like it that way–probably because the mayor is smarter than most politicians and very libertine in their outlook.
I agree with vanallen, but it would have taken money, and legal help. members of the bar just love helping us resistance types, trust me I know. Carl
this race is Tediscos to lose, if hes treated fairly hes a winner, somthing that we can help with, if your an attorney, show up tommorrow and help…you want a golden invitation, carlgottstein@yahoo.com ill forward it to you.
USCA 2nd Circuit Motion to remove 20th CD case to special 3 judge district federal court.
The current controvery (20th CD speccial election) case has statewide and national significance requiring a special three judge distrct court.