BuckeyeBlog

Today, the Ohio Supreme Court issued an opinion unanimously overturning a directive from Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner instructing county boards of elections to reject absentee ballot applications that have an unmarked check box next to the applicant’s statement that the person is a qualified elector. One of the people bringing the case (the relator) had her absentee ballot rejected because she did not mark the box on the McCain application form next to the statement that she is a qualified elector. Apparently, many registered Ohio voters did not check the box when filling out the absentee ballot applications distributed by the McCain campaign. The applications were otherwise accurate, complete and signed by the applicant. According to the Ohio Supreme Court, more than 3,500 absentee-ballot applications have been rejected by certain boards of elections because of the applicants’ failure to check the box next to their qualified-elector statements. Justices Evelyn Lundberg Stratton and Maureen O’Connor did not participate in the case as they are both up for reelection in the November 4 election. Two appellate court judges participated in their place.

The court held:

No vital purpose or public interest is served by rejecting electors’ applications for absentee ballots because of an unmarked check box next to a qualified-elector statement. There is no evidence of fraud. As relators persuasively assert, the ‘only reason to complete the form was to obtain an absentee ballot for the November 4, 2008 election,’ and signing it necessarily indicated that the applicant represented, ‘I am a qualified elector and would like to receive an Absentee Ballot for the November 4, 2008 General Election,’ regardless of whether the box next to the statement was marked.”

It is interesting that Secretary Brunner favored a liberal interpretation of Ohio law to permit early voting but chose to direct boards of elections to reject absentee ballot applications for not having a box checked even though there is no evidence of fraud involved. Could it be because the applications were from likely McCain voters?

Old Del Latta, excuse me, Bob Latta (who says we don’t have royalty), thinks “It’s very important that we thank farmers in this district and in this state right before people cast votes for me.”

Maybe I paraphrased that last bit.

Okay. Farmers feed us. Less than one percent, feeding the world, etc. But what about the bolt manufacturers? I bet it’s way less than 1 percent of the population working in the bolt industry, and what if we lost them tomorrow? All our tractors would fall apart, not to mention everything else. Everybody’d be sitting on their arses on the Interstates, like in one of those insurance and/or global warming commercials, pretending to drive a car the way a six-year-old might, but not having any car to drive.

Do you want that? Do ya? Huh? Let’s hear it for the bolt manufacturers, and maybe give them a little subsidy, what?

(I think the Blade just wanted an excuse to use the phrase, “cleans teats” in a news story. But give them kudos for the closing sentence: “Farmers know when manure is being spread by politicians.” Only, I don’t think it means what the farmers think it means.)