In the heat of the Presidential campaign, and with Virginia suddenly up for grabs, Virginia election secretary Nancy Rodrigues and her staff made a little noticed change in election procedures involving college students. This change was done at the behest of the Obama for President campaign. Sources inside the Virginia State Board of Elections tell us that nakedly partisan views of those ordering the change were well known. And ironically, the change may dilute the voting strength of African-Americans in Richmond, Charlottesville and Newport News.
When the policy was changed in 2008, it was an administrative change. But now Nancy Rodridgues has sought to enshrine the change in the SBE regulations. This permanent change potentially invites a lawsuit under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because the change dilutes the votes of African American voters. This change comes from an office which has faced numerous charges of racial discrimination against African-Americans in the last few years.
What is the change? SBE told county voter registrars that they no longer should make any inquiry of college students whether their “domicile” in the college town is bona fide. Instead, they should just take a college student’s word for it that they live there. SBE Policy 2009-005 relaxes the residency requirements for voting that were set forth in prior statutes and regulations. Those regulations were in place for decades, and enforced by local and county registrars without any significant problems. The policy was upheld repeatedly in cases like Kegley v. Johnson and Alami v. City of Williamsburg.
University students, under the State Board of Elections’ new regulation, would be allowed to vote in their college district even if they do not have intent to remain in that area indefinitely, which, until SBE Policy 2009-005, was considered a Constitutional requirement to vote in Virginia.
Before the change, all voters were asked a series of questions about their domicile. These questions were perfectly legal and proper. They did not offend any provision of the Voting Rights Act. The questions involved “financial independence, business pursuits, employment, income sources, residence for income tax purposes, residence of parents, spouse and children, if any, leasehold, sites of personal and real property owned by the person, motor vehicle and other personal property registration, and other factors reasonably necessary to determine the qualification of a person to register or vote.”
The changes abandoned any inquiry into where a person really lives. Living at home all summer? No problem. Claimed as a dependent on daddy’s taxes? Who cares. You car is registered in Arlington? No big deal. Sign here.
How did this change have a partisan effect? Well in the fall of 2008, the Democratic Party was desperate to tinker with the electoral rules to maximize turnout of college voters. So eventual DNC Chairman and Governor, Tim Kaine, through Larry Roberts, asked Nancy Rodrigues, whom Kaine appointed to the position when he was governor, to implement this change. It meant that college students, many of whom lived at home, found themselves at college where their votes were suddenly important. They were too busy with classes and football on weekends to go home to register to vote, or to vote. So making this change allowed a last minute wave of college student registration among a population notoriously hard to motivate. Nancy got it in place just in time for the Presidential election. Governor Tim Kaine must have been very pleased with her efforts.
We will have a more detailed report in the future about the efforts by Governor Kaine and Larry Roberts to influence the policy of the SBE on behalf of a partisan political campaign. We have emails and internal documents regarding this coordination. Stay tuned.
And Governor Bob McDonnell’s administration doesn’t think there is any harm in keeping a partisan like Nancy Rodrigues and her staff in place running the machine for the upcoming midterm. More on that in a future article somewhere.
Sources tell Election Law Center that on election night, cheering erupted from the offices of the top officials in the SBE when the election was called. Nothing is wrong with personally held political beliefs. But I served in an office where integrity and impartiality were part of the job duties. One would never openly cheer an election result in that office. If they did, they would loose credibility. People I knew to be democrats and people I knew to be liberals understood you don’t express political views, you don’t shame your reputation by taking sides in the course of your duties.
Again, it is folly to think openly partisan bureaucrats can run the midterm elections without harming the process. Something could be done about it, Tuesday.
So how does eliminating an inquiry into true residency have a partisan impact? It opened the floodgates on college campuses. And it paid off. Charlottesville, for example, became a waterfall of support for the Democratic ticket. Remember, there is nothing wrong with students voting and they certainly could have registered and voted at home. But to alter the process late in the game when a state suddenly falls into play implicates the credibility and impartiality of the office.
Whether you are a democrat or a republican, we should all be concerned. Elections should be impartial. Your ox may be gored next.
Imagine the outcry if an SBE altered the residency rules of a bastion of transients, say at Ft. Belvior or the navy base in Norfolk. Imagine if it was done a few weeks before the election at the request of Republican National Committee Chair Jim Gilmore when he served in that position. Imagine if Gilmore had asked a Secretary whom he appointed to change the policy on military residency. The dying dead trees media in the Commonwealth would have rightfully exploded. But not a peep from our newspapers on Tim Kaine doing the same thing.
Now Nancy Rodrigues wants to enshrine this corrupt and corrosive change to electoral credibility. The citizens of Virginia should oppose her change so their elections are not gamed in the same way Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner allowed her elections to be gamed by phony transient registrations and voting (on the same day no less) during the 2008 election.
There is also a good chance this change by Secretary Rodrigues dilutes African-American votes. Sure, the change was precleared but no serious analysis was conducted. It will be different this time when she submits the regulation to the Justice Department, and it must be submitted because it alters an existing regulation. When a regulation is changed, it must be submitted. Even if it is precleared, plaintiffs may sue.
Why? Because it makes it harder for African-American candidates to win local and state elections. It dilutes the votes of African-American voters in and around college towns.
For example, the African-American voting strength in the 71st House district could drop a full 10 percent from 52 percent to 42 percent if this change takes full effect. Without question, such a drop would constitute a change justifying an objection under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act as well as a lawsuit under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The same impact repeats itself throughout the Commonwealth in a myriad of state and local races.
A great deal more data exists beyond House-71, but is beyond the scope of this posting.
Promoting voter participation for young voters throughout our state is commendable. But the students should vote where they live. This should not be done, however, by substantially decreasing the voting power of long-time African American residents in jurisdictions that are predominantly inhabited by African Americans, but that just happen to have a predominantly white university within their borders.
This change demonstrates a number of important issues. First, the State Board of Elections is willing to use the office to obtain partisan ends. It is a cautionary tale for the few people left in the administration defending the tenure of Nancy Rodrigues and her executive director. She isn’t worth defending, and with an upcoming midterm, blind faith isn’t worth the risk. The sun won’t necessarily come out tomorrow.
Second, the SBE doesn’t care about perceptions of bias, and this is a dangerous thing for fair elections. Swiftly implementing a policy at the request of the national DNC or RNC chairman on the eve of an election is completely out of bounds. Open displays of enthusiasm inside the office serve as a warning to the defenders of the office – what will they cheer next?
Third, even if you decide to rig the electoral system as the SBE is doing, you better not do it at the expense of African-American voters. Federal law has something to say on the issue. The Federal law even allows for attorney’s fees. Instead of the SBE sending police officers to roam the office or collect cell phones at home from employees, if they implement this policy, they might need the money to pay plaintiff’s lawyers.
I have been following the SBE story since it was written at this blog in July. More and more, Ms. Rodrigues is exposed for the corrupt government official that she is. Now, the diluting of the minority vote but it was done for the Democratic Party to win in 2008. Ms. Rodrigues was quoted in the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner as saying, “I believe elections have changed forever since, first 2000 in Florida, but most recently, in Virginia in 2008.” Was she referring to the change involving the college students in Virginia? It has been well documented about Ms. Rodrigues’ embattled tenure at the SBE. She has used her position and that office to perpetuate a very toxic environment. What I am not sure of is why the continued support from an Administration which has not been served well by this public official. Look at the situation with the former voter register in Suffolk, Virginia; dismissed for poor performance. The same swift action should have been taken against Nancy Rodrigues. There is overwhelming documentation to support her poor performance, corruption, illegal procurement activity, abuse of office, malfeasance, racial disparity and questionable firings, terminations and layoffs. Now we have situations coming to light about partisan politics carried out by Ms. Rodrigues. I am a voter first and I cast my ballot based on issues; not a Democrat or a Republican. However, if Virginia can’t get this mess cleaned up then how can you trust the current Administration to get anything else right for the citizens of Virginia now or in the future.
If this situation doesn’t resolve, the Nancy Rodrigues Albatross is going to be hung around the Bob McDonnell Neck.
Nancy Rodrigues was quoted as saying SBE is facing the challenges that a lot of government is facing, “dwindling resources.” She went on to say “budget cutbacks have resulted in a redistribution of staff.” Let’s talk about those dwindling resources. The Manager of Election Services retired in December 2009 and that position has yet to be filled. This is a critical position in the agency. The unit was severely understaffed prior to the retirement of the manager with only 3 full-time employees; now 2 are left. This unit handles petitions for candidates, proofing ballots, canvass of election results, which is an arduous task in and of itself, along with other tasks performed by this unit. Then there is the UOCAVA Coordinator who resigned the position in January 2010 which continues to remain unfilled. Another critical position in the electoral process. This position is responsible for military and overseas voters who vote absentee. These two positions were not a result of budget cuts and play key roles in the upcoming November election. The dwindling resources are because of the dereliction of duty by Nancy Rodrigues. Now, why is it that Nancy Rodrigues in all her preparedness and wisdom not consider how these tasks would be completed leading up to the November election? Poor planning, lack of strategic planning and insufficient analysis of how these gaps in services would be provided to the citizens of the Commonwealth were an afterthought for Rodrigues. Contracting with people at the 10th hour does not decrease the likelihood that the upcoming election is not going to be problematic. Virginia use to enjoy the prestige of other states looking to it as a model to develop and implement its requirements and processes. The decline in SBE’s ability to be visionary, proactive and a trend setter can be laid at the feet of Nancy Rodrigues. Her ineptness to be a viable leader has really crippled the agency and has been reflected in poor decision-making and mismanagement at the highest level. The other dwindling resources was the firing of the Campaign Finance Manager, the layoffs of the Supervisor of the Processing Center and the Contracts and Services Coordinator and the firing of the Business Manager. The lost of these current FTEs to the agency were not because of budget cuts to the agency but because of Nancy Rodrigues’ inability to co-exist with employees and her utter lack of integrity. Readers, just the facts and that’s my truth.
It was reported in the Washington Post on September 9, 2010, that an audit report is to be released on September 22, 2010, about findings at the VDOT which is damning. Governor McDonnell commissioned independent audits of VDOT in a Press Release dated April 19, 2010. Current Secretary of Transportation, Sean T. Connaughton, went on to say the results of the audit will show serious mismanagement within VDOT and it will make national news as to what we found. Now, I am not certain I understand all of this. Whether it is a 100 pound gorilla in the room or a 25 pound gorilla in the room, serious mismanagement is serious mismanagement, whoever the culprit is. With all the things reported here which were carried out by Nancy Rodrigues, why has there not been a call for a thorough and independent audit at SBE rather than an internal inquiry conducted by the Governor’s Office where they talked about things amongst themselves. What a miscarriage of justice. How can you justify not having an independent body look at the reported violations and illegal activity carried out by Nancy Rodrigues which can be substantiated by documents showing her ill conceived practices? The only reason that comes to mind is that there is no interest or stomach for this truth. Well, you can’t cherry pick the truth. You can’t insist to people that you throw your full support behind an Agency Head who is not worth defending before you have full knowledge of who and what you are defending. Ms. Rodrigues has boasted about her ability to be an incredible and convincing person who is capable of fabricating the truth. She always wants to give you the correct spelling of her name, Rodrigues with an “s” when she wants to make a point. A major change in how SBE does business is way overdue and for all of you who have concerns about Nancy Rodrigues and SBE, your concerns are valid and now is the time to sound off.
So much as been written and made known about the sad, improper, biased, even tortuous, and more than likely illegal activities at SBE. If any watch group, civil rights group, human rights group, justice group, news on your side, or any semi-intelligent person or group who cares about human beings and good government is reading about this issue, why hasn’t there been more response, inquiry and probes into this issue. The things happening at SBE are sad, sickening, dishonest, and more than likely illegal. Where is the attorney anxious to prove himself… the journalist willing to make the spotlight… where is the NAACP… where is the ACLU… where are all the government watch groups… Any even slightly below the surface inquiry or investigation beyond Rodrigues’ personal accounts will reveal a plague of actions made solely on personal prejudice, bias, and cover your rear agendas. For example, the report of police being sent to an employees home to transport a laptop and blackberry. This particular incident is soo ridiculous it boggles the imagination. This is a veteran, 20+ year staff member who has devoted her life to serving SBE and VA voters who has worked countless extra time hours at the office and at home; who is authorized to take her computer and blackberry home to work. In short, this staff member was at home on medical leave and 3 armed police officers, including state police were sent to her home as a PERSONAL FAVOR (one officer specifically said he was a friend of hers) to Rodrigues. This point must be extremely clear—this staff member had and has done nothing wrong; was home on medical leave and took her laptop home to keep up with work issues; without Rodrigues or her supervisor/manager contacting her, Rodrigues sent the police to her house to pick up the laptop and blackberry. Why in the world would any agency head to that except to harass, intimidate, and torture an employee. Granted—a staff member from HR went to the staff members home after hours—without an appointment to get the equipment and have the member sign a document. Note–no appointment and the document was not necessary—it was just an excuse to go to the staff members home. The staff member does not work for HR; HR did not issue the equipment, nor did the HR person have any documentation from SBE that they were directed to collect the equipment. Why would any sane person relinquish the equipment under those circumstances???? The inescapable point is why would sending the police to the staff members home even occur to any sane person before contacting the staff person???? It was obviously an attempt to harass, intimidate, and torture this staff member for personal reasons. There is no explicable reason for such an action in this situation and—add to it that the supervisor/manager wasn’t even aware of the action!!!!! I ask again… where are all the watch, civil, equal rights, justice groups… And this is the kind of conduct the Gov endorses
Latest workforce tragedies at SBE. It seems as though employees are subject to ever-changing work tasks being assigned on the fly. Because of the lack of staffing resources, which were created by Nancy Rodrigues, employees are now having to perform tasks outside of their scope of work. Let’s face it, everyone in the workforce understands today’s economy and will go beyond what is expected when it comes to sustaining their employment but no one wants to be bullied. For example, because the processing center was turned over to the State Mail Service (SMS), pollbooks and voter cards now have to be shipped by one individual and that is the person who generates the request. Previously, the processing center staff of three, would perform this task. That staff was familiar with the shipping equipment and UPS manifest. This change was announced in the agency’s newsletter. Another example, an employee who previously worked in one department at SBE and who is now working in another department, had been asked by the former supervisor to review work in that department. At that time, the work which was reviewed was outside of the employee’s scope of work and continues to be outside the employee’s scope of work. However, the employee has been told the work is now the employee’s responsibility. Another example, SBE relied on Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to keep the work processes documented and updated which relate to the Virginia Election and Registration Information System (VERIS). With the departure of the SMEs in Election Services and UOCAVA (Absentee Voting), one employee has been directed to keep the work processes documented and updated for all areas. The employee was also directed to learn those areas outside of the employee’s purview. Another example, with the pending departure of the employee at the SBE Help Desk, other staff have been directed to assume these responsibilities in addition to their current core responsibilities. Any good Agency Head, worth the salt in the earth, would have strategically planned for the scenarios cited above and would have seen to it and insisted that the agency had adequate staffing levels. With the Mid-Term Elections looming, Nancy Rodrigues has placed SBE in a precarious situation. I applaud the worker bees at SBE and admonish Nancy Rodrigues. What a disgrace to those honorable people who serve admirably and who have a passion for public service.
Allowing employees at the State Board of Elections who have political affiliations and those in appointed positions access to valuable data at the State Board of Elections has become very questionable under the leadership of Nancy Rodrigues. Before Paul Stenjborn was hired at the State Board of Elections, he had access to the voter registration database and, with the approval of Nancy Rodrigues, he created a portal that allowed the Democratic Party to retrieive absentee data for the November 2008 General Election instead of contacting the 134 localities for the data.
During Paul Stenjborn employment at SBE, he constantly acknowledged and made the statement that he was a political junkie. James Alcorn is a polictical appointee by the former Governor Timothy Cain. Both Paul and James provided the Democratic Party of Virginia with free polling place and precinct data that they should have paid for. When a staff member asked if the data was also provided to the Republican Party of Virginia at no cost, James Alcorn stated they didn’t ask for it.
Nancy Rodrigues has the fire under her feet. You will have to answer questions the Governor’s Office upheld you on.