Did Brat Win In Virginia?

David Brat's the econ professor at Randolf-Macon College in Virginia who knocked off House Majority Leader  Eric Cantor in the Republican primary in June 2014.

Yes, he defeated his Randolf Mason colleague, Jack Trammell  60.9% - 36.9%.  147,897 to 89,793.  [From Politico]

Someone got to my post on the June upset by googling "Did Brat from Virginia win?" and I realized I didn't know and it was a good question.  So I looked it up.

A lot of people are looking up Sherrill Redmon divorce too, which I mentioned as a side comment at the bottom of another post  in 2009.  It's a little out of date.  She retired in 2013.

By the way, here's some background on the June primary when Brat beat Cantor.

Alaska Election 2014: What Does It All Mean?

Your guess is as good as mine.  I guess in today's internet style I should have titled this "The Ten Takeaways From Yesterday's Election and How You can Lose Ten Pounds (or Organize Your Life, or Become Financially Secure in Two Weeks.)"

This post is just my thinking out loud after the election.  Since my foot is still in a boot I can't go run or bike or even walk too much (trying to just let it relax and heal).  So I'll try to write my way out of this.


1.  Republicans won most offices that were up for grabs.  But there are still absentee and maybe early voters to count.

• Republican Dan Sullivan  is ahead of Democratic incumbent Mark Begich by 48.7% to 45.1% (102,054 votes to 110,203) in the US Senate race.  This morning's ADN headline is "Sullivan holds lead;  Begich won't concede."  Begich was behind Stevens at this point in 2008, but not as far behind.

• Republican incumbent Don Young handily beat Forrest Dunbar by 25,000 votes (51% to 40%, a margin that didn't change all night) in the US House race.

• The so called Independent/Unity Ticket of Walker/Mallot is ahead of Parnell/Sullivan (different Dan Sullivan) by 3,160 votes (47%-46%).  The ADN says "Too close to call."  But even if the Walker/Mallot lead stays through the absentee votes, we'll have a governor who was a Republican until he changed to undeclared before joining up with the Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mallot to run as independents.  

Republicans kept most of their seats and took a few they didn't have in the state house and senate.  They picked up one Senate seat in Anchorage

• (Rep. Mia Costello took Hollis French's seat.  He had originally been the Democratic Lt. Gov candidate before the Unity ticket.) 

The House apparently has one seat switching from Republican to Democratic:

• Democrat Adam Wool beat incumbent Pete Higgins in Fairbanks' District 5 in the House. 

Other House races are still too close to call. 

• Republican Anand Dubey is 35 votes behind Democrat Matt Claman in House District 21, held before by Democrat turned Republican after the 2012 election Lindsey Holmes.
• Independent Daniel Ortiz is 19 votes ahead of Republican Chere Klein in the Wrangell District 36 that was held by retired Rep. Peggy Wilson.  
• Democrat Laurie Hummel is only 167 votes behind Republican incumbent Gabrielle LeDoux in Anchorage District 15.  This one would be a little harder for Hummel to pull off, though LeDoux gained 140 votes over Hummel when the last 20% of the voters were counted.  I don't know how many absentee and early votes are to be counted in this normally low turnout district.

2.  All the ballot measures passed (well sort of because in the wording on Anchorage Prop 1, a no vote was a vote to pass the proposition).  This is noteworthy because while the Republicans did well when their label was on the candidates, the Democrats did well in the ballot measures where there was no party label.

• Ballot Measure 2:  To Legalize Marijuana  - we can quibble if this was a Democratic or Republican cause because both parties had key figures leading both sides.  But the Democratic opposition seemed to be more about the commercialization of marijuana than about legalizing marijuana.   It passed 116,803 to 107179 or 52.15% to 47.85%.  Marijuana got more votes than Dan Sullivan.  But then there was no 'maybe' or other options in this election, but there were third parties in the Senate election.

• Ballot Measure 3:  Increase Minimum Wage
  Yes:  154,516 (68.8%)
  No:    70,082  (31.2%)
  While this is normally a Democratic issue, some of the Republicans supported it on the grounds that states can set minimum wage, just not the feds.  Not sure how much difference that makes with their economic argument that it messes with the free market and causes jobs to disappear. 

• Ballot Measure 4:  Protect Bristol Bay Fish (by making it harder to build the Pebble Mine)
  Yes:  143,287 (65.32%)
  No:     76,062 (34.68%)
  Note again, that Republican Senate candidate Dan Sullivan got 110,203 votes.  Dan Sullivan who vehemently opposes federal regulation, the EPA report that raised major questions about Pebble Mine, and, from what I can tell, has never seen a problematic development project.

• Anchorage Proposition 1: Keep Mayor Sullivan's Draconian Labor Ordinance
  Yes:  41998 (46.17%)
  No:  48961  (53.83%)
  Remember, a no vote essentially approved the proposition because of how it was worded:  Should we keep Anchorage Ordinance 37?  Also, only Anchorage voters had this on the ballot so the numbers are much lower.  This was heavily backed by labor unions and Democrats and opposed by Republicans.  

3.   So, what does this all mean?  Here I'm going to just hypothosize possibilities.  But who knows for sure?  Certainly not me.

• Left leaning issues did well when there was no party label, right leaning candidates did well when there was a label.

• Nationally, the Koch Brothers Party did extremely well.  It's more than money since there were left  leaning PACs as well that poured lots of money in.  

• Who's checking the voting machines?  I have no evidence whatsoever that there was any tampering with voting machines.  However, it's clear that such tampering is possible and has probably happened in past elections.  But we have no systems to vigorously guard against such tampering in each state and nationally.  We know that computer hackers can get into large corporate and government data bases.  The US government has accused China of hacking to get into trade and government secrets.  Yet as we watched the somewhat surprisingly heavy Republican victory nationwide last night, I heard none of the national new media even mention election fraud or hacking of machines in any of their attempts to explain what happened.  They can't, because they have no evidence.  But how would they get any evidence?  They don't have any way of checking except for the most obvious, clumsy attempts.  We need to have serious monitoring of all electronic voting equipment, just as we have monitoring of polling booths and voter ids.  

That's what comes to mind this morning after the 2014 election.  There are plenty of other issues to ponder and this is a quick and dirty post.  Don't take it too seriously.  I have things to do today besides blog. 

Districts 24 and 25 in Ancorage Both Have 100% And Clear Winners

HOUSE DISTRICT 24
		Total
Number of Precincts		7
Precincts Reporting		7	100.0%
Times Counted		7389/13514	54.7%
Total Votes		7058
Fenster, Michael "Mi	DEM	2515	35.63%
Johnson, Craig W.	REP	4512	63.93%
Write-in Votes		31	0.44%

HOUSE DISTRICT 25
		Total
Number of Precincts		7
Precincts Reporting		7	100.0%
Times Counted		6253/12534	49.9%
Total Votes		6045
Millet, Charisse E.	REP	3333	55.14%
Higgins, Patti	DEM	2693	44.55%
Write-in Votes		19	0.31%

mmmmmmmm

Here Are The Districts With 100% Precincts Counted

As of the 10:50pm Election Report.

Although these all have 100% of the precincts counted, there are still absentee and questioned ballots to count.  But none of these look close.

There are three of 20 Senate seats - two went Republican, one Democratic.

There are 14 of forty House seats - fourteen went Republican, four went Democratic

So a lot of the Democratic districts haven't fully reported yet, which might give some faint hope to Mark Begich who is behind by about 5 percent.

The initiatives all look like they are on their way to pass, including the Anchorage Prop 1 where a No vote is a vote to repeal Mayor Sullivan's labor law.    Minimum Wage and the Bristol Bay initiative to protect salmon are both winning big.  The marijuana initiative is also ahead, but not by quite so much.  I'd say it's not certain yet.  [The next report has it about 8000 ahead]

Don Young seems to have retained his seat - he's leading 51% to 40% over Dunbar.

The governor race is tightening with Walker/Mallot less than 2000 votes ahead.

SENATE DISTRICT A
		Total
Number of Precincts		13
Precincts Reporting		13	100.0%
Times Counted		8305/23296	35.6%
Total Votes		8030
Kelly, Pete	REP	4902	61.05%
Kruse Roselius, Tama	DEM	3088	38.46%
Write-in Votes		40	0.50%

SENATE DISTRICT O
		Total
Number of Precincts		17
Precincts Reporting		17	100.0%
Times Counted		10994/27367	40.2%
Total Votes		10509
Treider, Eric D.	NA	2313	22.01%
Micciche, Peter A.	REP	8134	77.40%
Write-in Votes		62	0.59%

SENATE DISTRICT Q
		Total
Number of Precincts		18
Precincts Reporting		18	100.0%
Times Counted		13998/28622	48.9%
Total Votes		13613
Egan, Dennis	DEM	9734	71.51%
Williams, Tom	REP	3817	28.04%
Write-in Votes		62	0.46%

HOUSE DISTRICT 1
		Total
Number of Precincts		9
Precincts Reporting		9	100.0%
Times Counted		5019/12150	41.3%
Total Votes		4917
Bringhurst, Gregory	REP	2241	45.58%
Kawasaki, Scott J.	DEM	2662	54.14%
Write-in Votes		14	0.28%

HOUSE DISTRICT 2
		Total
Number of Precincts		4
Precincts Reporting		4	100.0%
Times Counted		3286/11146	29.5%
Total Votes		3145
Thompson, Steve M.	REP	2129	67.69%
Murakami, Larry	DEM	1005	31.96%
Write-in Votes		11	0.35%

HOUSE DISTRICT 3
		Total
Number of Precincts		5
Precincts Reporting		5	100.0%
Times Counted		5445/12683	42.9%
Total Votes		5293
Hunter, Sharron J.	DEM	1047	19.78%
Wilson, Tammie	REP	4219	79.71%
Write-in Votes		27	0.51%

HOUSE DISTRICT 4
		Total
Number of Precincts		7
Precincts Reporting		7	100.0%
Times Counted		7577/13749	55.1%
Total Votes		7315
Blanchard, Joe II	REP	3129	42.78%
Guttenberg, David	DEM	4140	56.60%
Write-in Votes		46	0.63%

HOUSE DISTRICT 5
		Total
Number of Precincts		9
Precincts Reporting		9	100.0%
Times Counted		6032/12565	48.0%
Total Votes		5836
Higgins, Pete B.	REP	2788	47.77%
Wool, Adam	DEM	3011	51.59%
Write-in Votes		37	0.63%

HOUSE DISTRICT 7
		Total
Number of Precincts		7
Precincts Reporting		7	100.0%
Times Counted		5866/12668	46.3%
Total Votes		5603
Rupright, Verne	NA	1964	35.05%
Gattis, Lynn	REP	3605	64.34%
Write-in Votes		34	0.61%

HOUSE DISTRICT 9
		Total
Number of Precincts		11
Precincts Reporting		11	100.0%
Times Counted		5487/13439	40.8%
Total Votes		5234
Colver, Jim	REP	3003	57.37%
Goode, Pamela	CON	1509	28.83%
Wimmer, Mabel H.	DEM	691	13.20%
Write-in Votes		31	0.59%

HOUSE DISTRICT 11
		Total
Number of Precincts		9
Precincts Reporting		9	100.0%
Times Counted		6475/13477	48.0%
Total Votes		6301
LaFrance, Pete P.	DEM	1858	29.49%
Hughes, Shelley	REP	4428	70.27%
Write-in Votes		15	0.24%

HOUSE DISTRICT 28
		Total
Number of Precincts		9
Precincts Reporting		9	100.0%
Times Counted		8983/15175	59.2%
Total Votes		8596
Combs, Samuel Duff	DEM	3207	37.31%
Hawker, Mike	REP	5349	62.23%
Write-in Votes		40	0.47%

HOUSE DISTRICT 29
		Total
Number of Precincts		11
Precincts Reporting		11	100.0%
Times Counted		5530/13570	40.8%
Total Votes		5231
Chenault, Charles "M	REP	4013	76.72%
Knudsen, Rocky	DEM	1175	22.46%
Write-in Votes		43	0.82%

HOUSE DISTRICT 30 Total Number of Precincts 6 Precincts Reporting 6 100.0% Times Counted 5464/13797 39.6% Total Votes 5249 Thornton, Shauna L. DEM 1352 25.76% Olson, Kurt E. REP 3869 73.71% Write-in Votes 28 0.53%

HOUSE DISTRICT 31
		Total
Number of Precincts		9
Precincts Reporting		9	100.0%
Times Counted		5853/14583	40.1%
Total Votes		4907
Seaton, Paul	REP	4769	97.19%
Write-in Votes		138	2.81%

HOUSE DISTRICT 33
		Total
Number of Precincts		11
Precincts Reporting		11	100.0%
Times Counted		6494/14803	43.9%
Total Votes		6242
Dukowitz, Peter	REP	1491	23.89%
Kito, Sam S.	DEM	4719	75.60%
Write-in Votes

HOUSE DISTRICT 34
		Total
Number of Precincts		7
Precincts Reporting		7	100.0%
Times Counted		7504/13819	54.3%
Total Votes		7359
McGuan, George	DEM	2774	37.70%
Muñoz, Cathy E.	REP	4565	62.03%
Write-in Votes		20	0.27%

As Of 10:16 Report - Democrat Adam Wool Ahead of Incumbent Pete Higgins

District 5 race in Fairbanks, Dem. Adam Wool is leading incumbent Pete Higgins by 276 votes with 66% of precincts reporting.

District 15 Democratic challenger has moved up in the latest report to within 30 votes.  She was 95 votes behind in the earlier reports.

The initiatives continue to be well ahead.

Begich continues to be 5% behind Sullivan.

Early Results - Tammy Wilson in District 3 Is A Winner

Most races have from 0% to 50% of precincts reporting.

The initiatives - marijuana, minimum wage, Bristol Bay, and repeal of Anchorage's Labor Ordinance -  are ahead.

It says that 100% of the precincts are in.  There's 5030 votes.  And Wilson has 79%, so this one looks like a wrap.

UPDATE:  9:35pm they've put up another set of results and despite having 100% in the race, they added about 260 votes.

 Another race that looks like it's over is Fairbanks District 1.  Scott Kawasaki, with 90% of precincts reported looks comfortably ahead by percent, but he's only.

[I'm having trouble with feedburner, so I'm reposting this.  I'm seeing if I change the images from .png to .jpg it will work.] [It didn't.]

An Explanation for Nancy Dahlstrom's Harsh Response To National Guard Complaints

Let's connect some dots.

Among the many emails released by Gov. Parnell over the weekend in response to a court order was this one from Rep. Nancy Dahlstrom quoted in part in the Alaska Dispatch News Monday:

“Your statements are reckless and have the potential to cause irreparable damage to these fine officers,” Dahlstrom said in an email dated Aug. 25, 2009, to Debra Blaylock, a just-retired lieutenant colonel in the guard. “I take great offense to your statement that it is a ‘good old boy’ network with corrupt leadership. I believe the current leaders are outstanding and have made tremendous advancements in improving the overall morale, day-to-day operations, direction, and relevancy of the organization. I have never seen it function better. As a citizen of Alaska, I am truly proud to call them my National Guard.”

 Laura Pierre and Rules Chair Nancy Dahlstrom (Image Source)

Dahlstrom concluded her email with even stronger language: “There is no room for mean spirited, unsubstantiated, and malicious correspondence targeted towards the undermining and destruction of the excellent reputation and character of Alaska’s leadership.”

This is pretty harsh.  Not the kind of letter that legislators usually write to the public, even if they aren't their constituents. 

I have a strong suspicion why this email supported the Guard so strongly and so meanly chastised Debra Blaylock:  Laura Pierre.

 
Who is Laura Pierre?


Laura Pierre is the wife of McHugh Pierre.

McHugh Pierre was,  until his recent forced resignation, Civilian Deputy Commissioner for the Alaska Department of Military and Veterans Affairs.  This is the state department that includes:

• US Property and Facilities Office,  
• Alaska Aerospace Commission 
• Army National Guard 
• Air National Guard 
• Homeland Security and Emergency Management
• Alaska Youth Academy
• Veterans Affairs
• Alaska State Defense Force
• Alaska Naval Militia, 
• Office of Facilities Management.

The ADN, in a long article on McHugh Pierre's forced resignation wrote that investigators found

"Pierre had also inserted himself into the efforts of whistle-blowers who were working to alert Parnell to serious concerns about how sexual assault cases were being managed. "

Source

While McHugh was working in the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, his wife Laura Pierre was on Nancy Dahlstrom's legislative staff.





Some Background

When I went down to Juneau to be a volunteer staffer for Max Gruenberg in 2010, the Rules Committee was telling Max Gruenberg that he could not have a full time volunteer staffer.  I didn't know this until the afternoon of the day of new staff training.  At the end of that session - there's a description of the panel with a photo at the bottom of this 2010 post -  I asked one of the panelists a question.  She asked me which office I was going to be a staffer in.  I answered I would be a volunteer for Rep. Gruenberg.  At that point Laura Pierre jumped into the discussion and, in a very forceful voice, said something like, "There will be no volunteer staffers."  I was taken aback not only by the message, but even more by the vehemence of her tone. And it was the first time that I realized that my volunteer position was in jeopardy.

I had introduced myself to Nancy Dahlstrom during the break that morning and she had been very polite and cordial.  Rep. Dahlstrom also treated me warmly when the final decision came down that Rep. Gruenberg could not have a full time volunteer staffer.  She welcomed my proposal that I would stay in Juneau as a blogger and told me that if I needed anything to let her know.   Later we did have a long, very friendly, and interesting discussion in her office.

Finally, Connecting The Dots

All this background causes me to suspect that Dahlstrom's view of the Guard and  Lt. Blaylock was strongly influenced by her staffer, Laura Pierre, who was in turn influenced by her husband who the investigators said, as quoted above, "inserted himself into the efforts of whistle-blowers who were working to alert Parnell to serious concerns about how sexual assault cases were being managed."  And since staffers often draft communications for their legislator bosses,  I wouldn't be surprised if Pierre drafted the email in question.

If that is the case, then Dahlstrom's response and apology reflects well on her professionalism and leadership.  She took full responsibility for the email without a hint that someone else might have written it.  And, of course, as the boss whose name was on the email, that's how she should respond.  But there are other legislators who would have shifted the blame to a staffer, even if the staffer hadn't written it. 

Pennsylvania Computer Nerd Claims Berkowitz Lost Because of 2008 Election Fraud

With the 2014 election climaxing tomorrow, it seems appropriate to look at John Foelster's claims about the 2008 election in Alaska.  Foelster left comments on some Alaska blogs, including this one, last week, with a link to his website  [UPDATE Nov 23, 2016: his website now has restricted entry]  where he spells out the data that underlies his assertions. He writes

The fraudulent vote count would have resulted in Don Young being wrongly seated in a House seat actually won by his Democratic opponent Ethan Berkowitz, and would certainly have changed the outcome of the District 7 Lower House Race so that Democrat Karl Kassel would have beaten Republican Mike Kelly. [Note Kassel lost by four votes.] Democrats Andrea Doll of the 4^th lower House District and Val Baffone of the 28^th Lower House District were also likely the actual winners of the races they officially lost.

At what point do we take assertions seriously?  After all, I had had emails about the National Guard scandal as far back as 2010 and I'd seen Blaylock's long list of allegations on line.  But I didn't write about it for lack of further information and lots of other things to do.

My experience with the 2012 Municipality of Anchorage election (see list of posts at bottom of this post) showed me how vulnerable the voting machines are.  While I tend to think the problems in that election were more related to incompetence and not tampering with the voting machine software, the situation exposed the many vulnerabilities of the procedures and the machines.

I've read Foelster's claims.  They represent a lot of painstaking work, not only in gathering and interpreting the data, but also in how to present it.  He has a series of video tapes that walk you step by step through his hypothesis and the evidence backing it up.  While the conclusion is sensational, his presentation is not.  It's painstakingly detailed, self aware and self effacing, and outlines exactly how he went about getting to his claims.

I've sent the information to a couple of good data people and got a long response from one who knows a lot about elections and the computers. While this person didn't read it all, and raised some questions here and there, he allowed it was a possibility and was concerned about the greater environment of election fraud vulnerability of the nation as a whole.  I've also had some email exchange with Foelster to follow up with questions I had.

Problems with Reporting Computer Crime

Manipulating computer data is the kind of crime that doesn't emotionally effect people like murder, armed robbery, kidnap, and rape.  Television footage of computer code just isn't compelling. Computer crime is all hidden in 1's and 0's inside the computer, in computer code that most people don't understand.  It's also something we don't want to believe is happening because it violates our sacred belief in American democracy.  There are lots of websites that give details on how the voting machines can be hacked.  Bradblog covers all sorts of voting issues including problems with voting machines.  Here are some others.

• Votescam -  large overview of electronic voting issues
• What Really Happened  
• There's a great video - Hacking Democracy - but when I tried to look at the video just now on their site it said it "The uploader has not made this video available in your country."The website is still worth visiting. 
• Even conservatives are now using voting machine fraud arguments.
• How Many Ways Are There To Steal An Election? And Why Doesn't Anyone Care?
  This is a post I did in 2012 when I was covering the Anchorage Municipal election problems. 

I list all these sites just to remind people that there are legitimate and serious issues with voting machines that should be understood by everyone.  Citizens United is one issue, but the vulnerability of the voting machines may be an even bigger one.

So, back to Foelster's allegations.  Here, from his website, is the outline of his evidence:
[UPDATE Nov 23, 2016: his website now has restricted entry]

"The lines of evidence are as follows:

1. The polls in 2008 indicated that the Democrats in Alaska would do much better than they did in the reported results.
2. In 2012, there was a large swing to President Obama, one that was too large to have been caused by Governor Palin no longer being on the Republican ticket.
3. The number of Democrats in the electorate in 2012 was significantly lower than the number in 2008.
4. The report on electorate composition this information can be found in appears to have been reformatted in an attempt to draw attention away from it.
5. The 2008 results are unique in recent Alaska history for having very Democratic Absentee results and very Republican in precinct results.
6. A variation on a known technique for compromising AV-OS machines would have produced the effects described above, and this hack could have been introduced by one person working in Juneau.
7. The size of the above anomaly varies from district to district based on the number of registered Democrats in precincts with AV-OS voting machines.
8. The State Review Board’s Hand Count Audit of the paper ballots could also have been compromised by this same single person."

Each item links to further information.  

As I read this, I see him taking two main approaches:

1. Technical:  The data show anomalies that indicate votes in 2008 were tampered with.
1. In 2012 there was a significant boost in votes in Alaska for Obama than in 2008.  This runs counter to every other state where the support for Obama went down in 2012. This happened because in 2008, a large number of Democratic votes in Alaska were switched over to Republicans. 
2. How the voting machines work and how to hack them to get the results he thinks happened
2. Human:  The narrative of who might have been involved, how, and why

For me, the human narrative part is weak.  But that doesn't really matter.  He doesn't have to prove who did this.  What he has to demonstrate is the problem with the data and technically how votes could have been manipulated.   And that part I think he's done - at least to the point that others with the appropriate expertise should follow up and determine if his allegations have merit.  It may lead to a dead end, but even then it would help expose the vulnerabilities of the process and technology further.

The technical part isn't necessarily flawless.  Perhaps other explanations would account for what he found.  For example, if enough Democrats switched parties to vote in the Republican primary race between Murkowski and Miller, would that accounts for the dip in Democrats that 2008?  I don't know. 


Who Is John Foelster?

Foelster identifies himself as a 'nerd' who lives in Pennsylvania and has never been to Alaska.  He also has Aspbergers. And experience in computers and voting technology. I don't see that he has any particular interest in Alaska politics other than he saw this inconsistency and then obsessively pursued it. My sense of Foelster is that this anomaly caught his attention and he ran with it.    I don't believe he works for any party or has any particular personal interest in Alaska.  It's just a puzzle that came his way and he got deeply into it.  I understand that.  I did something similar with the redistricting board.

Computer crimes are hard to prove - first that they happened and second who did them - without lots of access, patience, and savvy.  

Even if all his allegations proved to be correct, I don't see Ethan Berkowitz being retroactively sworn in to the House of Representatives.  But if this really did happen, we ought to know about it and take steps to do something to protect us better in future elections.  And if it didn't happen here the way Foelster says, there are other possibilities where it might have happened.

Can it happen in tomorrow's election?  Yes, but there were patches made, according to Foelster, in 2011 that would preclude the particular hack he describes as for 2008.


What Next?

I see two things that should be done here:

1. We need a technical election committee that reviews every election in Alaska.  It looks at the hardware, the software, and makes a statistical analysis of voting results to find any suspicious anomalies.
2. That committee could start by reviewing Foelster's work.

I would note that the Municipality had such a committee - though its charge was not quite this thorough - but it was abandoned before the 2012 election.

I would also note that in that election there were lots of sloppy practices - plastic seals on ballot bags that easily broke off, voting machines and ballots being taken home by election workers overnight - that opened up many opportunities for fraud.  Barb Jones, the new municipal clerk (after the 2012 election) and the election official Amanda Moser, have eliminated some of these practices and have been accessible to me as a blogger to exactly how each step of the process works.  But we're still too much in the small town, we trust each other, level that our procedures originally came from.  We're still leaving a lot of windows open and doors unlocked.

2012 Municipality Election Posts To Show Where My Concerns Come From

I have put together a list of posts I did on the 2012 Municipal election.  (The posts were not well labeled and I had to poke around to find them.)  I offer this list to help readers understand my experience with elections and why I'm willing to give John Foelster some attention here. 

The Myth of the Big Election Turnout 

Guadalupe Marroquin, Former Anchorage Election Chief Talks About The Election... (10 minute video on how to tamper with the machines and how they work from the previous election chief)

What Do The Election Percentages and Numbers Tell? Maybe Nothing

Polling Gap - Dittman Confirms It's the Biggest 

Brad Friedman Rips Apart Election Commissioner's Testimony 

Jacqueline Duke, Elections Chief, Fired by Assembly

What's Happening With The Anchorage Election? 

Assembly Exchanges Barbs: Barbara Jones To Replace Barb Gruenstein.

Citizen Group on Election Meeting Now with Assembly Attorney

Hensley Report on Election Now Available - Form Over Substance 

141 "Potentially Uncounted Ballots" Found July 11 (From April Election)
(August)

How Many Ways Are There To Steal An Election? And Why Doesn't Anyone Care?
(This is marginally about Anchorage - trying to link us to bigger national issues)

Alaska Election Through Spanish Eyes

"Alaska es tres veces más grande que España, pero tiene menos población que la ciudad de Zaragoza. Para salir elegido senador en ese estado bastan 151.767 votos, que es los que sacó Mark Begich en 2008. Por comparar, Diane Feinstein necesitó 7,7 millones de papeletas en 2012 para renovar su escaño por California. Paradojas de los sistemas electorales.

Pero hacer campaña en Alaska es mucho más difícil que en California. En el caso de Begich, mucho más. En 2008 ganó por los pelos: menos de 4.000 votos de diferencia frente a su rival, el senador Ted Stevens, que estaba procesado por corrupción. Solo ese escándalo permitió a Begich derrotar a la formidable maquinaria política que Stevens había construido en sus 40 años de senador. El demócrata le derroto, además, con una innovadora estrategia: se fue a buscar votantes al Polo Norte."

My high school Spanish gets me more than I would expect - the first sentence is clearly "Alaska is three times bigger than Spain, but has a smaller population than the city of Zaragoza."  But  Bing translator fills in the blanks I can't quite make out, and does it with a distinct computer accent.

Alaska is three times larger than Spain, but has less population than the city of Zaragoza. To exit elected Senator in that State are sufficient 151.767 votes, which is what Mark Begich released in 2008. By comparison, Diane Feinstein needed 7.7 million ballots in 2012 to renew his seat to California. Paradoxes of electoral systems.

But campaigning in Alaska is much more difficult than in California. In the case of Begich, much more. In 2008, won by a whisker: less than 4,000 votes against his rival, Senator Ted Stevens, who was prosecuted for corruption. Only that scandal enabled Begich to defeat the formidable political machinery that Stevens had built in their 40 years of Senator. Democrat defeated him, also with an innovative strategy: went to find voters to the North Pole.

Here's a little more:

. . . Ahora, en 2012 [sic], la historia se está volviendo a repetir. Solo que más intensa. El republicano Dan Sullivan ha decidido disputar a Begich el voto rural. O, más bien, remoto. Y se ha ido, por ejemplo, a Barrow, un pueblo a 2.100 kilómetros del Polo Norte geográfico en el que el 56% de la población es esquimal. Solo hay 10 núcleos urbanos situados más al Norte en el mundo. Canadá, Noruega y Rusia tienen cada uno tres, y Dinamarca oros dos, en Groenlandia. Por su parte, Begich ha reforzado su campaña entre los pescadores, una comunidad extremadamente importante en Alaska.
Así es como los candidatos al Senado se dedican a celebrar reuniones con los patriarcas de las tribus y a aceptar banquetes tradicionales de carne de ballena en pueblos en cuyos basureros no merodean ratas, sino osos polares. Lo que está en juego, sin embargo, es mucho más. Lo más obvio es el control del Senado. Con las elecciones legislativas más inciertas en décadas, todo puede acabar dependiendo de quién gane en Alaska, y eso, a su vez, puede acabar siendo determinado por cualquier pueblo como Barrow.

And a little more humor from Bing translate:

Now, in 2012 [sic], the story is becoming to repeat. Only that more intense. The Republican Dan Sullivan has decided to contest the rural vote to Begich. Or, rather, remote. And a town 2,100 kilometers from the geographic North Pole in which 56% of the population is Eskimo has been, for example, Barrow. There are only 10 cities located more to the North in the world. Canada, Norway and Russia have each three, and Denmark two gold medals, in Greenland. For his part, Begich has strengthened his campaign among fishermen, an extremely important community in Alaska.

So as candidates to the Senate are devoted to meetings with the Patriarchs of the tribes and to accept traditional banquets of whale meat in peoples in whose garbage dumps do not roam rats, but polar bears. What is at stake, however, is much more. The most obvious is the control of the Senate. With legislative elections more uncertain in decades, everything can be finished depending on who wins in Alaska, and that, in turn, can end up being determined by any people as a Barrow.

El Mundo (The World) is Spain's second biggest print newspaper and biggest online paper according to Wikipedia.

The whole article is here.

The Ebola Volunteer Watch Resort

Medical volunteers are desperately needed to help with Ebola patients.  But long quarantine periods are making it more difficult to get volunteers. From the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM):

"Médecins sans Frontières, the World Health Organization, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and many other organizations say we need tens of thousands of additional volunteers to control the epidemic. We are far short of that goal, so the need for workers on the ground is great. These responsible, skilled health care workers who are risking their lives to help others are also helping by stemming the epidemic at its source.

But many people and politicians are fearful that returning medical volunteers will spread Ebola in the US.   This worry is overblown as the NEJM article also says:

"Health care professionals treating patients with this illness have learned that transmission arises from contact with bodily fluids of a person who is symptomatic — that is, has a fever, vomiting, diarrhea, and malaise. We have very strong reason to believe that transmission occurs when the viral load in bodily fluids is high, on the order of millions of virions per microliter. This recognition has led to the dictum that an asymptomatic person is not contagious; field experience in West Africa has shown that conclusion to be valid. Therefore, an asymptomatic health care worker returning from treating patients with Ebola, even if he or she were infected, would not be contagious. Furthermore, we now know that fever precedes the contagious stage, allowing workers who are unknowingly infected to identify themselves before they become a threat to their community. This understanding is based on more than clinical observation: the sensitive blood polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) test for Ebola is often negative on the day when fever or other symptoms begin and only becomes reliably positive 2 to 3 days after symptom onset. This point is supported by the fact that of the nurses caring for Thomas Eric Duncan, the man who died from Ebola virus disease in Texas in October, only those who cared for him at the end of his life, when the number of virions he was shedding was likely to be very high, became infected. Notably, Duncan's family members who were living in the same household for days as he was at the start of his illness did not become infected." [emphasis added]

The NEJM argues that adding lengthy quarantine periods for returning volunteers simply makes it that much harder to recruit volunteers.

Thus, I offer an alternative:  The Ebola Volunteer Watch Resort.

 Locate or build isolated resorts where Ebola volunteers will be sent to relax and enjoy a vacation while they are watched for symptoms before returning to their home country.  The resort will offer options for various outdoor and indoor activities while the volunteers' temperatures are checked regularly.

Those who get a fever would be immediately moved to an isolated medical ward so they do not infect the others at the resort and so they can be treated. 

Volunteers could work on personal Ebola volunteer observation reports and work together with other medical volunteers to develop plans, based on their experiences, for improving the response to the Ebola outbreaks now and in the future.  This would allow Ebola medical volunteers to get some needed rest AND to have time to reflect on their experiences alone and with others and develop programs that would help with the Ebola situation and future health emergencies.

I suspect that much of the work needed does not necessarily require highly trained Western experts and that much of the volunteer work should be spent on training Africans how to do their work, thus eliminating the need for so many out-of-country volunteers.  The resorts could also be used for this sort of training.

The costs of the Watch Resorts could be born by those states that would prefer not to have Ebola volunteers return without a strictly enforced quarantine.  Or the people of those states could just read the medical literature and be more rational. 

Notes:
I tend to be a skeptic about most things, including claims of medical science.  But skeptic doesn't mean rejecting out of hand.  It means asking for detailed explanations and then deciding.

The  pictures are original to this blog and are just examples.