Reporters have attempted to call him "a conservative activist". Really!? I find no record of any cause he is active in (other than himself.)
Greenwood is well known in the state's political circles all right--as the guy that got caught trying to walk out the door with an illegal, secret $7,000 golden parachute from the State of Montana after his former patron Brad Johnson was voted out of office after serving only one term (h/t.) So much for responsible budgeting!
Oddly, he said he doesn't plan to give up his own campaign for legislature. Can you say "conflict of interest"? He now has free reign to raid the GOP cookie jar to help his own race.
Hilariously, his campaign theme is "Restoring Responsibility to Government."
Ask, and ye shall receive, eh? Yesterday I criticized Linda McCulloch for not stepping up and releasing a statement about Brad Johnson's involvement in Eaton's folly -- his and the state GOP's bald attempt to disenfranchise Western Montanans in the 2008 election.
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.
Now that the Schweitzer story has sunk to a new low and landed on Fox News as part of their mission to drum up anxiety for non-existent voter fraud, it's time for the grownups to stop and reflect on the "scandal."
Where's the crime? If the joke was about murder, there'd be no body. There'd be nobody missing. Mike McGrath: "the accusations contain no allegation supported by fact." Those who are demanding for investigation need to do one thing: find someone -- anyone! -- who was victimized by the kind of action described in Schweitzer's jokes.
H*ll, even Brad Johnson admits this on his 15 minutes of fame in the Fox News segment:
Fox News: ...the Attorney General Mike McGrath turned your request for an investigation down. He said there was no allegation supported by fact. Do you buy that, or do you think there could be wrongdoing here?
Brad Johnson: Well...you know...I'm not judge and jury, Eric. Uh, it's, it's my job to see to it that we get to the bottom of this and, uh, the authority I have in that regard is to formally refer this matter to the Attorney General, and the fact is that he rejected the request.
The shorter Brad Johnson: "No, I have no facts to support my allegations."
This is electioneering, this is political. If Schweitzer had said he framed Roger Rabbit, the usual gang of bloggers and brainiac Republican officials would fall over themselves demanding an investigation.
And remember, Johnson is the man who crowed after the legislative audit of the 2006 election showed no voter fraud, "This audit is a victory for Montanans. It's a victory for the dedicated county elections officials around Montana who make this system work. We protected the integrity of our electoral process, and it shows."
Johnson sure has a funny idea of what victory means. The audit is an obvious criticism of the failures of his office and a refute of his claims that same day voter registration increased 'fraud'. The audit is a clear indication that Johnson "fumbled" the 2006 election.
So, since sports are a metaphor for life. So we're having a contest for the best sports metaphor that describes how Johnson bungled the 2006 elections in Montana. The winner receives $100 and of course, fame and glory.
Example: Johnson saying the fact that no dead people or felons voting was a "victory" is like a coach saying "You know, we lost every game this season, but we kept the uniforms clean.
You, the reader, submit your metahpor to us. A select panel of completely impartial judges will select the winner. Entry must be received by Friday, August 24, 2007 by 10:00a.m. MST. Any U.S. resident age eighteen or older can enter (exclucing of course dead individuals or incarcerated felons).
Send your sports metaphors in an email info@mtdemocrats.net with "Sports metaphor contest" in the subject line if you want to play. Entries should include the name, address, and phone number of the contest participant. Email submissions only, please. You may enter as many metaphors as you like.
More evidence that morale in Brad Johnson's operation is awful and that respect for him is low among Republicans. He is forced to advertise for politically appointed positions. This may not be a bad plan -- clearly, Johnson needs to cast a wider net to find some strong staff. But it's indicative of a shallow talent pool that in a position where Johnson is free to appoint at will that he has no natural choices.
Deputy, Elections and Government Services Manager
Montana Secretary of State's Office. Position oversees Montana elections systems and programs, serves as a member of the Secretary of State's appointed personal staff and management team, and is responsible for strategic planning, policy development, elections administration, public education, outreach programs, and staff management. Salary $60,000 - $65,000 DOQ.
To apply, send letter of interest and current resume, copy of college transcripts, and references to the Montana Secretary of State's Office, Human Resources, PO Box 202801, Helena, MT 59620-2801.
Wow -- there's some anger and disappointment among the Republican base toward their lone Montana statewide elected official (as opposed to federal). In the comments to one of Jay's posts regarding Johnson's utter inadequacy, this comment from 'Interested' appears:
Maybe Johnson will take a hit in the primary from his own party....
The GOP has to recognize they have a real problem on their hands, the thoughts of Joe Lamson appointing the next Chief Election Deputy has to make Erik Iverson and the GOP break out in a cold sweat. If Iverson is worth his salt at all he'll go find someone to take Johnson on in the primary and rid himself of this embarassment. Mark Simonich is currently unemployed, maybe Janice Doggett, the current Chief Legal Council? Show us your stuff Erik, or Linda McCulloch is going to show you the door.
Johnson is inept. He is arrogant. He seems to think that 'elected' and 'anointed' are synonyms. He is an abject failure as secretary of state, and has no skills or experience to recommend him for further public office. (The 'Peter Principle' applies here). Johnson is disdainful of the legislature and legislators, and thinks the workings of government as a whole are a waste of time. He loves paid junkets, however. Such 'perks' of public office are reason enough for Johnson to seek renewal of a privileged place at the head table of what he obviously considers the public trough. Johnson is not highly regarded among 'his own,' however, so it would not be surprising if he faced a Republican primary contest in June 2008. Another possibility is that the Republican Party will let Johnson 'twist in the wind' as they concentrate on political contests for the legislature.
Different commenters and, I should note, different IP addresses. Based on what I can tell, these are neither 'sock puppets' nor 'concern trolls' for Republicans.
So here's a good question: is Johnson facing a primary?
And, whether he does or not, can the Republicans beat back a campaign from Linda McCulloch, a strong campaigner with a sharp team alongside her?
Update -- RW and Interested are objecting to my characterizing them as Republicans, preferring to call themselves independents. Sure, whatever. All indications are that they are plugged into conservative rumor circles. I could be wrong, but I know at least one of them -- and that individual is definitely not a Dem and this person does have some pretty clear GOP credentials.
Same Day Registration Mismanaged by Johnson's Office
42% of county election supervisors say the SOS Office did a "poor" or "very poor" job providing guidance for late registration
[snip]
Poorly Trained Staff Fail to Exclude Felons and the Dead from Voting Rolls
Our analysis identified exceptions including 223 eligible voters who were considered incarcerated felons and 36 eligible voters who are deceased. Further analysis showed these numbers were not accurate because the data from the DOC and DPHHS was outdated. The felon data had not been updated since August of 2006, nearly three months prior to the last general election and the deceased data had not been updated since November of 2005, a year prior to the last general election.
We notified the SOS office its data was not current. According to the SOS office, the staff members who were most familiar with SVRS operations left the office without documenting instructions on how the system data is updated.
[snip]
SOS Error Delayed Voters at Registration
On November 7, 2006, Election Day, another outage occurred. This outage could have been prevented by ITSD installing a network patch released in August 2006, but the patch was never installed. As with the previous outage, ITSD also did not implement the backup system. This outage likely affected some of the hundreds of voters waiting in line at county courthouses around the state. In our survey of county election officials we asked several questions relating to system outages on or around the 2006 General Elections. Around 64 percent of county election officials reported these outages had a negative impact on their operations.
Did I say that, "clearly, the audit is a rebuke of Johnson"? Boy, was that an understatement.
Geez, even if you're a diehard Republican, this report has got to make you feel uncomfortable. It's not same-day voter registration that's creating a danger for voter fraud in Montana, it's our Secretary of State...
Secretary of State Brad Johnson hailed the audit as a victory, saying it found no fraud and showed his office "protected the integrity of our electoral process."
Wait! Wasn't Brad Johnson one of the biggest critics of same-day voter registration? Why, yes he was!
The secretary of state's office is supporting a measure to do away with same-day voter registration in Montana, arguing it could help prevent a repeat of problems that occurred during the state's 2006 election.
Republican Secretary of State Brad Johnson is in favor of a bill that would require voters to register before Election Day, his chief of staff, Mark Simonich, said Thursday.
Simonich said Election Day 2006, the first year in which same-day registration was allowed in the state, was "somewhat chaotic" because county election officials were required to simultaneously register voters and run elections.
But what the audit found concerning was that there was
"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 urged Johnson's office to "lead the way to mitigate problems caused by same-day voter registration, such as long lines." (Johnson's preferred method is to eliminate same-day voter registration altogether.)
Clearly the audit is a rebuke of Johnson, who's responsible for the elections process in the state. Clearly, Johnson and his staff should have anticipated that there'd be confusion about the new rules and worked to educate poll workers. And clearly the Secretary of State's office does need to "lead the way" on elections.
But remember, instead of doing the task he was elected to do, Johnson spent taxpayer money pasting his mug on billboards around the state.
This is probably a good time to again mention that Linda McCollough is running for Johnson's office. Maybe McCollough might actually take interest in ensuring Montana's elections run smoothly.
Brian Schweitzer has over $500,000 in the bank and over $600,000 raised (he raised about $1.5m in his successful '04 race). That's an intimidating number for potential opponents (and that's a great argument for clean election public financing alternatives). Back of the envelope calculations reveal that about .8% of the voters in the state have now contributed to his re-election campaign. By Election Day, expect that to be a much higher figure at his fundraising clip.
Steve Bullock's fundraising has continued at a monster clip, with his total being $77,500 and change raised ($12k online, good enough to make a top 10 list of state candidates on ActBlue). He's banked $65k of that. Mike Wheat is only down by about $500, but nearly half his money is self-financed. John Parker of Great Falls got a later start, but my understanding is he raised close to $30,000 this quarter (his numbers weren't available yesterday) -- an impressive showing. Meanwhile, the two Republicans running for AG are sitting about about $2k raised each. They both got a much later start, but are clearly behind in the money chase.
Monica Lindeen has $20k in the bank for her Auditor race -- formidable for this early with no opponent. Brad Johnson, by comparison, has $15k banked for his as yet uncontested re-election campaign for Secretary of State.
Denise Juneau has nearly $15k in the bank in her OPI bid. Holly Raser has raised a bit over $2k.
Democrats shot out of the gates faster and are raising far more money. Indication of things to come?
A while ago, an article hit Montana's newsstands about a group suing state officials over alleged voter fraud on the Crow Indian reservation:
The lawsuit contends Crow tribal members formed a slate of candidates "based on race" and violated state and federal election laws governing political campaigns. The suit also charges that reports of "double-voting" by tribal members in the November election were not thoroughly investigated by federal officials.
Among the plaintiffs is the Citizens Equal Rights Alliance, a South Dakota-based group that contends tribal governments should be abolished and the U.S. Constitution should trump American Indian law.
The lawsuit contends that as a result of the alleged irregularities, nontribal members in Big Horn County were denied equal voting rights. Big Horn County includes much of the Crow Reservation. Elections for more than a dozen county positions were included on the November ballot, according to plaintiff's attorney, Richard Stephens.
Defendants of the suit include Deputy Secretary of State Elaine Graveley, Big Horn County Clerk Cyndy Maxwell, and old pal Brad Johnson, the same fella who wanted to abolish same-day voter registration because of non-existent voter fraud.
I suspect there's never been anyone happier to be sued than Mr. Johnson.
Here's some hilarity: Brad Johnson has taken issue with Brian's recommendation that BBI go "ride a kangaroo" after getting 86ed by the Public Service Commission. Such rhetoric could scare off foreign investors, who apparently can't take a joke.
A few thoughts on this:
Even Johnson is basically supportive of the PSC's decision, so why is he worried we'd scare away more people like BBI?
The Australians laughed at the line according to the AP reporting, noting they've got a better sense of humor than our secretary of state.
Picturing someone riding a kangaroo is funny.
Meanwhile, in an article dealing with some business woes of Mike Lange's, I thought the end of the piece was worth highlighting:
And the recent troubles aren't curbing his ambitions to seek higher office next year - by running against Schweitzer or Democratic U.S. Sen. Max Baucus.
"Absolutely, I am. I will run," he said.
When asked for which which position, he said "Which race?" with a laugh, "You'll find out when I file. Read it in the paper."
That's right. He told a reporter to read about his announcement in the paper. hmmm....
I'm not really sure what the effect of Brad Johnson's new anti-voter-fraud scheme would be. Basically, election officials would be able to work with the DMV to verify that a small number of voters registering (around 2 percent) are who they say they are.
To be fair to Johnson, this isn't asking for a picture ID or some other scheme that would effectively bar a number of legitimate voters from the polls. But it does reinforce the government's habit of using SSN for a national identifier, which I'm not keen about.
But the last paragraph featuring old friend Bowen Greenwood is the most interesting:
Spokesman Bowen Greenwood said the office has yet to uncover a verified case of voter fraud. But he said the latest verification procedure, required under federal regulations, will help make sure it doesn't happen.
First, if there's been not a single case of voter fraud, why all the fuss about same-day registration?
Second, if there's no voter fraud doesn't that mean the system works fine? Why even bother with something like this?
Not long after the election, Brad Johnson came out against Montana's same-day voter registration. It was a surprising stance then, because he cited his own office's difficulties dealing with the process as the reason it should be scrapped - kind of like spilling a drink and blaming gravity. (Whatever happened to individual responsibility?)
Now, in the wake of the prosecutor purge, it's obvious that "voter fraud" is a Republican invention aimed at suppressing minority votes.
when it comes to voter fraud in America, there's no there there. Voter fraud is a myth -- not an urban or rural myth, as such, but a Republican one....
[snip]
...with the nation becoming steadily less white, Republican survival depended on winning a greater share of black and Hispanic voters. That, of course, was just one way to address the party's electoral problem. The other, in close races, was to suppress black and Hispanic turnout -- a task that would become far easier if the airwaves were buzzing with news of voter-fraud indictments. It was a task that required federal prosecutors who would indict first and ask questions later.
Rep. Mike Lange was just knocked out of leadership. Ostensibly this was done because of his outburst on YouTube, but the timing seems off for that to be the reason. Might this have more to do with the fact that Mike Lange had a hell of a tongue, but also ultimately cut a deal with the Gov.? This looks like the Republicans trying to punish moderation again to me. This strange 'graf in the story sums it up:
But others said the profanity-laced tirade from Lange was too much to overcome. It was obvious in recent weeks that House Speaker Scott Sales was not on the same page with Lange.
A lot of these same legislators defended the "profanity-laced tirade." The second sentence of the paragraph is a completely different reason for making the move. I'd like to see the roll call for that particular vote.
Mark Simonich left the Secretary of State's office in a hurry. I've heard a lot of chatter from folks wondering what the story is here. For the record, I have no clue. Off the record, I have no clue. But a resignation effective the day it was made in order to "pursue other opportunities" is downright strange. We'll see what happens here.
I wrote last week about how Election Day Registration (EDR) is under attack in Montana from Republicans who basically argue that it is really difficult. They don't agree in Wyoming, where they have precinct level registration. Moreover, Wyoming has partisan voter registration, but allows for same-day changes to partisan registration. Here's what Michael Shay, of the excellent Wyoming blog hummingbirdminds, has to say:
The process works well in Wyoming, if my experience at the polls during the past two election cycles are any measure. In 2004, I volunteered as a pollwatcher for the Democratic Party. In 2006, I worked as an election judge. This past November, with five precincts in the Lions Park Community House in Cheyenne, I saw no problem with walk-in registration. In Wyoming it gets even more complicated during the primaries as we allow people to switch parties to vote on that day and even switch back once they've finished. So, fellow Democrats who wanted to see Barbara Cubin go down in flames to her Republican challengers went over to the dark side for a few minutes.
If Wyoming can handle that level of complexity, are we really saying Montana can't?
Brad Johnson today went to bat for a bill to make it a felony for an undocumented immigrant to register or vote in a Montana election. Why the bill singles out undocumented immigrants is beyond me. No unnaturalized immigrant should be voting and one would think that a resident alien would be better able to understand registration laws and how to comply with them (thus making registration of an undocumented immigrant more likely to be inadvertent and less likely to be malicious). Still, his testimony on the subject is simply too great to not reproduce:
My name is Brad Johnson (B-R-A-D J-O-H-N-S-O-N). It's my honor to serve
the people of Montana as Secretary of State. It's a pleasure to be here
today.
I'm here today to speak in support of Senate Bill 260. I'd like to
thank Senator Shockley for bringing this piece of legislation forward.
Madam Chair, as Montana's chief elections officer, citizen participation
is fundamentally important to me. All of us, as Montanans, want to do
everything possible to make sure that as many citizens as possible cast
an informed vote.
Equally, we guard vigilantly against citizens being deprived of their
right to vote - being disenfranchised.
But there's a crucial point we must understand.
If my own vote is devalued by someone voting who has no right to vote,
that, too is disenfranchisement.
If illegal aliens vote, that reduces the value of my own vote.
And if a chicken were to register to vote, that would be an affront on my vote -- for I am not a chicken.
Brad, I'm hardly going to get real nervous about the dilution of my vote by 1/250,000. Like I said above, I think we should enforce voting laws. But to pretend that vote dilution and vote suppression are on par is like comparing murder and a paper cut. A paper cut inflicts minor wound on the body. Murder destroys it. Vote dilution -- which happens even when more legal voters take part in their right as Americans -- inflicts minor harm on the vote. Vote suppression destroys it.
Oh, and Brad, thanks for spelling your name. I hadn't figured out that it wasn't Jhonson yet -- the billboards clearly aren't doing their job.
Brad Johnson apparently thinks that Sam Kitzenberg shouldn't be allowed to switch parties. Note, of course, that we never really discuss what this means. And what does it mean for Kitzenberg to switch parties? It means, functionally, that he'll vote for the Democratic choice for President of the Senate and for Democrats for committee chairs and to have majorities on the committees. It's a procedural vote. After that, he's free to vote however he wants.
Want to know a dirty little secret? He's even free to split with the party on those votes. He could, say, talk to a couple other Democrats and the Republicans and they could run their own person for President, just like three Democrats and fifty Republicans did in the House two years ago.
A party label is a public label to offer an explanation of where one's values lie. Kitzenberg no longer feels that the Republican label properly explains his values.
