Voting on the Strip a no-no, suit says

[ursi]

Source: Las Vegas Sun

Sat, Jan 12, 2008 (2 a.m.)

The teachers union has drawn knives on the Culinary Workers, deepening the potential political rifts over Nevada’s Jan. 19 Democratic caucus.

A lawsuit filed late Friday in federal court seeks to stop the Democratic Party from holding caucus meetings at nine Strip hotels, which would diminish the influence of casino workers and hamper Illinois Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign. The complaint, with the state teachers union and some party activists as plaintiffs, came as Obama accepted the endorsement of the Culinary Union. The timing seemed designed to cloud the good buzz from his campaign, which could only help Sen. Hillary Clinton’s efforts in the state.

The lawsuit claims that those voting in at-large precincts being held on the Strip would have too much weight compared with those voting at their polling places, violating the equal protection law of the U.S. Constitution. It also claims the at-large precincts violate state statute in the way they were drawn.

State Democratic Party officials disputed the lawsuit’s contentions.




Read more: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jan/12/voting-stripa-no-no-suit-says/

---

I saw this is a case of quick reverse switch or bait and switch. If Hillary had obtained the Culinary Union endorsement in Nevada, this lawsuit would not have been filed because Obama's people are not Nevada State Party insiders. Hillary's people are! They set the rules up for these bogus precincts months ago when they thought she was going to get the culinary union endorsement. It has backfired on her!

I first heard about this new thing that was going to be used to when I attended a Hillary campaign sponsored visit of Joe Wilson (Plame case) in Reno, Nevada.

There stood our Nevada State Party Chair Jill Derby bragging about how they were going to be able to set up special "at large" precincts for casino workers to attend. And next to Ms. Derby was Frankie Sue del Pappa, one of the co-campaign leaders of Hillary's campaign shaking her head in approval about how this was going to be so good since we had already disenfranchised most Nevadans who do shift work in the mines and the casinos.

Remember, in Nevada Senator Harry Reid controls our Democratic Party. Don't believe me, ask anyone. Even Republicans know this.
And his son, Rory Reid, Clark County Commissioner of the county where these "at-large" precincts have been set up has known all along how the bogus delegate formula was going to benefit whomever got the Culinary Union endorsement.

These evil pieces of DLC elites had a plan and it backfired!

BTW, the lawsuit link is here and you can read how these at-large precincts would produce delegates at a rate of ten times the speed that delegates could be formulated in regular county precincts.

Barack Obama's people were not involved in these calculations. They were not even on the ground in Nevada at the time.

Hillary and her people are crying "victim" and "disenfranchised voters" now that their plan has backfired.

http://vegaspundit.typepad.com/vegas_pundit/2008/01/lawsuit-against.html?cid=96840358#comment-96840358

I hope Jill Derby and her insider hacks are subpoenaed on this. I'd also like to hear why it is our State Party is broke.

[thunder rising]

1. It must be the TEACHERS that want their union to file this suit

or the TEACHERS would tell their union to STFU and drop the suit.

[ursi]

3. sorry, teachers were not involved ...this formula was ok with the Clinton team

until they didn't get the Culinary Union endorsement. Clinton insiders drafted these rules and now that the rules might now work for them, they don't want the rules to work for anyone else.

READ THE LAWSUIT, Please, People! It created a forumla that gave the state party 700 extra delegates that wouldn't happen if they followed state law. Obama's people were not on the ground in Nevada when these rules were drafted. Hillary's people are state party insiders. I know, I have been on the inside here.

Thanks for your understanding.

[LiberalFighter]

15. 700 extra delegates? That's almost 18% of ALL delegates.

[ursi]

18. Let's see, 9 casinos with 4,000 workers who can't vote that day ...

that's ...how many people disenfranchised on Saturday just at those casinos ....36,000 people ...sure, let's screw them over. They are just low paid workers ...

[LiberalFighter]

19. Do you understand the assignment of delegates to a convention?

There are only about 4050 delegates to the National Convention.

Nevada will only be sending 33 delegates to the National Convention.

[LiberalFighter]

20. How many of them would normally have voted?

[mike_c]

2. any attempts to limit WHERE people can vote are ultimately attempts...

...to limit the number of voters who go to the polls (or caucus, or whatever). This is distinctly undemocratic, IMO, and a very low tactic. Shame.

[Usrename]

12. It isn't so much about where they cast their vote.

It's more about where, and how many times, each vote is counted.

The "at large" system they are trying to set up looks to be flawed in a lot of ways. One obvious flaw is that you don't have to work in the same precinct you live in. The number of delegates in your "home" district is determined by the number of registered party voters that live there, including you. Now, aren't you being counted "twice" if you are also credited with an appearance at the "at large" caucus? There doesn't seem to be any mechanism to remove you from your "home" caucus when you are added to the "at large" group.

It doesn't seem to be too well conceived. I would have to agree that it was a way to cheat the system, no matter what the motives were of the folks who dreamed it up. At first it looks like that was perfectly Ok with some people, until it was realized that it would work against them instead of for them.

[scipan]

4. I read the first part of the Complaint and it does sound unfair.

It says they treat these at large precincts as separate counties, that go by different rules. See #35": "For example, if an At Large Precinct has 400 participants, it will be entitled to one delegate for each five participants, and would therefore be assigned 80 delegates. In contrast, a precinct anywhere else in Clerk County in which 400 Party voters reside will receive one delegate for each 50 such registrants, and therefore, receive only 8 delegates -- even if all 400 party voters participate in the caucus." So, registered voters vs. actual votes, and 1 delegate per 50 voters vs 1 per 5 voters. That's really, really unfair.

Hillary is my third choice after Obama and Edwards, and I have no problem imagining that her people set this up in the first place thinking the Culinary workers union would endorse her. Now she seems to be hoisted on her own petard.

[ursi]

5. You are correct, it is unfair! But the Hillary people were involved in drafting back when

they thought they had the Culinary Union endorsement in the bag ...

It has backfired on them!

Read this and the comments!

http://www.lasvegasgleaner.com/las_vegas_gleaner/2008/01/well-alrighty-t.html?cid=96873882#comment-96873882

This is about corporations being pissed that their minimum wage employees on the strip (many of them are illegals) will not be voting for Clinton! The wheels are coming off the machine in Nevada!

[scipan]

14. oh, the irony... n/t

n/t

[bagrman]

7. Kind of Rovian isn't it.

[ursi]

8. Definitely Rovian but HIllary forgot, we've gone through two elections with Rove

and we know what it looks like

[martymar64]

6. A blatant atempt to disenfranchise voters

The Teacher's Union there is a hotbed of Clintonistas. The Culinary Workers Union just endorsed Obama. You do the math.

[ursi]

9. the Clinton state party insiders drafted this plan! it has backfired on them

so, like a good Rove imitation, they are now fighting it to look like they are saving voters from being disenfranchised. It was ok to disenfranchise us before the Culinary Union came out in support of Obama.

Bait and switch. Oldest trick in the book.

[martymar64]

10. Thanks for the correction

Whenever I hear of these dirty tricks going, I get more and more ready for a revolution.

[rayofreason]

11. Hoist by her own petard!

How many other setups like this exist in other states I wonder? I guess we will find out when Obama gets additional endorsements (and he will) that Hillary thought she had in the bag.

[ursi]

13. Got it confirmed person by an Obama supporter at my door

He happens to be a person involved in the State Party of the Howard Dean movement. He said that Hillary people were involved in voting this strategy in at the time and now are suing because they don't want those casino workers to have a voice. He said the 5 people to get one delegate comes from the state law for rural county precincts which makes sense now that I hear it. You'd have to live in Nevada to get that.

What is weird about the state teacher's union suing against a strategy they supported while they thought it would work for Hillary is this: teachers don't work on Saturdays and the Janaury 19th caucus is a Saturday so they aren't going to be "disenfranchised". Who is being disenfranchised are the casino workers and gold mining workers and others who can't show up that day due to work or other commitments.

This has so backfired on the state teacher's union in Nevada and it's ticking people off at the rich casino corporations who want Hillary in and their workers to not be able to vote.

I suspect if they "at large" precincts in the 9 casinos are allowed to caucus next week, their corporate employers are not going to let the workers go to their internal caucus sites for one hour off the clock. I see more lawsuits coming!

Nevada ...we can't do anything right or clean.

[Habibi]

17. Ugh, I apologize for being off-topic and this is totally irrelevant, but

I love your Bettie Page avatar!

*slinks off to the corner*

[Skwmom]

21. But in N.H. didn't Hillary say how unfair it was that people who

worked couldn't participate in the Iowas caucus. What a bunch of crap.

[IndianaGreen]

16. This is a Clinton campaign strategy being carried out by surrogates

Union Files Suit Over Casino Caucuses

The suit was widely expected by state party officials as well as Obama's campaign and the powerful Culinary Workers Union 226, which earlier this week endorsed the Illinois senator in advance of the Jan. 19 Nevada caucus. That endorsement had been eagerly sought by Obama as well as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.), and by yesterday afternoon culinary union leaders told the Washington Post they expected an outside group with ties to Clinton to file a motion seeking to quash the casino caucuses.

The Nevada State Education Association, some of whose top leaders have individually endorsed Clinton, filed the suit and is using a law firm with close ties to the onetime front-runner, Kummer, Kaempfer, Bonner, Renshaw, and Ferrario. Former congressmen James H. Bilbray (D-Nev.), a lawyer at that firm, has endorsed Clinton and is stumping for her in the Silver State.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/12/post_271.html?hpid=topnews

[fascisthunter]

22. How Disgusting.. I Hope This Gets Lots of Attention (nt)

[KamaAina]

23. Once again, this is a caucus, NOT an election.

We already established, with respect to Iowa, that election law does not apply to a caucus (specifically, the law allowing workers time off to vote). Thus, the Clinton campaign teachers' union doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.

[AnnieBW]

24. I wonder if the touch-screen voting machines

Look and act like slot machines?

[TankLV]

25. Does that mean I can't vote in the nude if I strip first?

I don't unnerstan...

[AnnieBW]

26. As long as you don't have a "hanging chad"

Or a stiff one, either!