McCulloch on Brad Johnson's role in Eaton's folly

by: Jay Stevens

Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 09:41:30 AM MST

Naturally I found a statement this morning in my email inbox. I've printed it in its entirety below the fold.

The statement is a couple days old, and doesn't reflect Molloy's suspicion that Johnson -- a Republican -- may have violated federal law by aiding Jake Eaton's "partisan ploy," as Molloy put it.

By the way, jhwygirl caught how wrong Jennifer McKee's claim was on Johnson's role in Eaton's folly -- McKee wrote Johnson "effectively alleviated a crisis that would have required a restraining order," when in fact he balked at the challenge, as Molloy also noted, only after a suit was filed listing out the laws he'd be breaking by allowing Eaton to challenge 6,000 without real cause, and for baldly partisan purposes.

It's true that Molloy said Johnson showed "an effort on his part to avoid partisan decision-making," but the Justice also lists in detail Johnson's confused directives and opened the possibility that he unwittingly violated federal protection laws for voters.

What's clear is that, when faced with the challenge, Johnson's immediate response was confused and compliant. He did not consider voters. He did not fight, as is his role, to protect our rights under Montana and federal law.

Along that line, McCulloch's press release also reminds us of Johnson's incompetence on election day 2006, as described in a legislative audit (pdf), finding, among other things:

"...very little uniformity in how poll workers had been instructed to deal with different (absentee) situations, suggesting there is considerable risk voters in different counties will receive different treatment at the polls and experience different outcomes in terms of the voting process."

And by the way, this is the second time this election cycle that Johnson has tried to carry the state GOP's water for partisan electioneering purposes. Remember his little complaint filed against Brian Schweitzer, for which, he admitted on Fox News, he had no evidence?

Update: You knew I'd try to raise funds over this issue, didn't you!

Apparently you're tapped out on the legislative races. Well, the legislature isn't the only game in town. If this voter suppression p*ssed you off, this is a great way to express your anger.

Update 2 (by Matt) -- In Johnson's defense, Molloy notes in a footnote after beating up on Eaton and the Montana Republican Party that, "Secretary of State Brad Johnson is not included in this reference.  Review of the pleadings and attachments show an effort on his part to avoid partisan decision-making and a good faith attempt at complying with state law." The Secretary of State's office hasn't handled this situation exactly as I would have liked, but I think it is unfair to portray them as villains.

(Helena, Mont.) - Linda McCulloch, the Democratic nominee for Secretary of State, today assailed Brad Johnson's lack of leadership in the face of the largest organized voter intimidation scheme in Montana history.  As the current Secretary of State, Johnson is supposed to serve as Montana's top elections officer.

And, now even the Republican Party is trying to withdraw their challenges, but still nothing from Johnson.

"When it comes to protecting our fundamental right to the ballot, Montanans deserve leadership from their Secretary of State.  They expect their elected officials to stand-up to obvious partisan manipulation of our election laws that jeopardize our right to vote.  Brad Johnson's been silent," McCulloch said.  "The Secretary of State has failed to offer leadership to county election officials and he's neglected to defend federal and state election laws.  Montanans deserve better."

Last week the Montana Republican Party issued a legal challenge to the right of over 6,000 Montanans-who live in areas that generally support Democrats-to vote in the upcoming election based on a change of address.  Outside of vague statements from his staffers and non-binding memos, the Secretary of State's office has been silent.

Calling the challenge a callous political attempt to discourage first time voters in Democratic leaning areas, McCulloch noted three obvious legal barriers to the partisan effort to suppress Montana voters:

Federal and Montana law and rule clearly prohibits systematic purging of voter registration lists within 90 days of a federal election-Johnson's own website declares it. [ARM 44.3.2014(3) and 13-2-220(3) MCA]

The use of the national change of address database is expressly prohibited by the National Voter Registration Act. [42 U.S.C 1973gg-6(D)-6(c)]

Federal law prohibits removing a voter's name from the voter registration list simply because of a change of address-meant to protect the rights of military families, students, construction workers and others who have temporarily changed their mailing address. [42 U.S.C 1973gg-6(D)]

Just a year ago, the non-partisan Montana Legislative Auditor cited 14 critical areas where Brad Johnson failed to do his job.  The audit faulted him for his lack of leadership, voter registration problems and for election system security problems. [Lee Newspapers, 11/10/2007]

"Two years ago, Brad Johnson spent thousands of Help America Vote Act dollars on billboards and radio ads promoting himself.  He should have spent at least a couple of hours reading the law he was elected to enforce," McCulloch added. "The Secretary of State's lack of attention to policies and procedures that affect Montana taxpayers and voters is a sad hallmark of his administration."