Yesterday,
5 June 2016, the Puerto Rico Democratic Party may have committed the greatest
voter suppression of the 2016 election cycle.
Start
with the most egregious: in the week before the primary, the party slashed the
number of polling
places from 1510 to 432. As a comparison, in 2008, there were 2306 polling
places, and slightly under 400,000
people voted. According to one source, local officials estimated that up to
700,000 people might show up to vote. So why did the party reduce the number of
polling places?
Ostensibly,
there was a shortage of volunteer poll workers, since the local primary was
being held on the same day, and they had been committed to the local campaign.
And why were the national and local primaries being held on the same day?
According to the party, it was a means of containing costs.
And
so it was uncertain, in many people’s minds, exactly where they were to vote.
In fact, I received an email from the Sanders campaign that allowed me to enter
my electoral card number. I then received the information: I am 59, 6’2”, male,
blue eyed. Oh, and I was to vote a mile or so away from my home in Old San
Juan. So my husband and I planned to take the bus, zip into the polling place,
vote, and enjoy the rest of the afternoon.
In
fact, we arrived and found that the local primary had at most a line of ten or
fifteen people. The Democratic Primary, in contrast, had a line of about 100
people. In addition, there were only two people with the list of registered
voters. And so we began a long wait.
We
had arrived at 1:45; I voted at 3:15. At that time, the line was essentially
the same length as it had been when we arrived: it was going to be a long time
before the poll workers could start counting the votes.
Elections
in Puerto Rico historically have been comparatively clean, since up until now,
we have chosen low-tech versus high. Which means that both parties (or all
parties) have a representative working the polls, paper ballots are used,
voters mark an “X” for their party or candidate, and the votes are counted
manually and verified by all parties. As deeply green as I am, this is one use of
paper that is completely justified.
Our
line was one of two: we were the “orphans” from other polling places. And so
there was a much shorter line of fifteen or twenty people voting in their usual
polling place. So what was the final vote, and how many voters were able to
cast their ballot? Well, here are two screens shot of the State Elections
Commission, posted as of 1 AM this morning, ten hours after the polls
closed.
Second,
Clinton has “won” by a nearly 60% lead. But that’s 36,000 votes: some 70% of
the total. I admit it: I am math-challenged. Still, even I can tell you that if
that 36,000 votes were from 50% of polling stations, then you would
reasonably expect 72,000 votes for Clinton. So in 2008, almost 400,000 people
voted: now, Clinton is winning with 60% of the vote, with almost 70% of the
vote counted, and that’s only 36000 votes? These numbers don’t add up.
Third,
there were irregularities at
the polls. In regular elections, there are cardboard voting booths—flimsy
affairs, yes, but they do assure privacy. There was none of that here, and so I
calmly observed my brother-in-law as he voted for Sanders (easy—Sanders was on
the right margin of the ballot). In addition, the finger-marking ink was not
used (the ink is visible only to ultra-violet light).
As
well, the polls were open only from 8 AM to 3 PM. Puerto Ricans are religious:
we go to church. So if mass ends around 11 AM, you need to eat lunch, you want
to vote in the local primary, and then you have to go to possibly another
polling place to vote in the Democratic Primary—well, that’s a scramble. Oh,
and where is that polling place? Because in the space of a week, the number
went from 1510 to (apparently) 335.
Nor
was this all. In Puerto Rico, prisoners can vote. They do so, and then their
votes are sealed in locked boxes to be counted with the non-prisoner votes. But
the Sanders campaign is alleging that the Democratic Party didn’t certify their
delegates to go into the prison: they had to use a well-known local lawyer,
Manny Suárez, to get their way into the prison. Nor was that all: Suárez
stated:
el pasado jueves “se celebraron sorpresivamente elecciones
de las primarias presidenciales en forma adelantada para la Policía de Puerto
Rico y nunca nos avisaron”.
(Last Thursday, the presidential primaries were held
by surprise in advance for the Police of Puerto Rico and we were never
notified.)
Worse,
Suárez alleges that the Ñeta gang, which controls many of the prisons, had
threatened any members with death if they voted for anyone other than Clinton,
as well as the NPP, or statehood party.
The
result?
“Vamos a radicar un recurso legal en el Tribunal Federal
pidiendo la anulación de todas esas papeletas. A nosotros nunca nos avisaron y
cada una de esas papeletas es nula porque no tiene nuestra firma. En adición a
eso, hay otros funcionarios del Gobierno que también votaron por adelantado y
que entiendo que son los que van a estar activados el domingo”, apuntó.
(We’re going to file a legal suit in Federal Court
requesting the annulment of all these ballots. They never notified us, and
every one of these ballots is void because they don’t have our signature. In
addition to that, there are other government official who also voted in
advance, and who will be active on Sunday (ed. the day of the primary).
In
addition, Suárez alleges that a local politician prominent in the Democratic
Party, Kenneth
McClintock, tweeted on Thursday that the prison vote was favoring Clinton.
Given that the votes are supposed to be sealed unseen, how would he know?
Well,
I though about all this as I waited in line, since I had quite a bit of time to
occupy. And where, I wondered, was the press? Because there we all were,
enjoying or not the unique pleasure of having our vote suppressed, and
shouldn’t somebody be noticing? Ah, and then the televisions news appeared, and
began filming people voting; as well, they interviewed several officials. It
was WAPA television, and can I find their clip? No, though I did get the clip
of the results of the primary. Unfortunately, the clip failed to load: you
try it.
According
to the print edition of the largest paper on the island, El Nuevo Día, the local Democratic Party president is well
satisfied with the primary, although he admitted there were long lines. (You
can read the electronic version here.)
He is upset, however, by the allegation of one of Sander’s staff, Betsy
Franceschini. Here’s what
he said:
I am appalled at the
remarks. Ms. Franceschini is playing a preemption game because she knows of a
potentially serious issue regarding one of their poll workers who took two
boxes full of cast ballots from one of the prisons and later that evening
delivered them to a regional elections committee center, claiming she did not
know what to do with them. The matter is under investigation.
To
my knowledge, El Nuevo Día has said little about this, though in
one story, they reported that it was the Sanders campaign that requested
the reduction of polling places by two thirds. A photo of the long lines at the
polls also
appeared. The Sanders campaign responded:
Some Puerto Rico Democratic officials are claiming
that the Sanders campaign requested fewer polling places in today’s primary
contest. That’s completely false. The opposite is true. In emails with the
party, Sanders’ staff asked the party to maintain the 1,500 plus presidential
primary locations promised by the Puerto Rico Democratic party in testimony
before the DNC in April, when the party was asking to have its caucus changed
to a primary. They cannot blame their shoddy running of the primary on our
campaign. This is just one example of irregularities going on in Puerto Rico
voting today. We are the campaign that has been fighting to increase voter
participation.
So what happened yesterday? Perhaps nothing tells the story
better than the last line of today’s electronic report from El
Nuevo Día:
En estas elecciones demócratas, participaron alrededor
de 100,000 electores.
The
lines were huge, the wait was long, and in the end, only 100,000 votes were
cast. That’s 300,000 less than 2008. I was there, I saw it, and I can call it.
So
I will!
Voter
suppression!
