The Capitol Fax Blog » Has Kass found the coffin nail?

* John Kass’ column yesterday was the talk of the town. It’s been pretty much ignored by the rest of the media, but Kass was fed some info that casts serious doubt on whether Rahm Emanuel was legally restored to the voter registration rolls after being purged twice. Kass sums up the gist of yesterday’s piece in today’s column. What follows is from a late October exchange between city elections chairman Langdon Neal and Ald. Ed Burke…

Without once mentioning Emanuel by name, Neal admitted to Burke that it would be a violation of procedure to reactivate a hypothetical purged voter unless that hypothetical fellow came in and presented two pieces of identification to election officials.

“Unless there was some other reason that we restored that voter internally,” Neal said in the transcript, which did not record whether Burke smiled like the Cheshire cat.

Internally? So I called Neal to ask him about this “internally” business.

“John,” Neal sighed, “the one thing that’s real clear is that I’ve answered one too many hypothetical questions. And I think I should stop answering any hypothetical questions and wait for the case to be filed.”

Here’s the full exchange between Neal and Burke about what happens after a voter is purged…

Burke: What evidence do I have to produce to show I am indeed registered at that address?

Neal: Two pieces of ID.

[later]

Burke: I don’t have two pieces of evidence, I call you and I say, I want to be restored, Is that possible under your procedures?

Neal: No. No. You have to —

Burke: So whoever has been rendered inactive must come in with two pieces of identification. To whom do those identification pieces go?

Neal: The judges of election at the polling place.

Burke: What about the Board of Election Commissioners?

Neal: Certainly. They can come to us at any time.

[later]

Burke: If it was restored without producing two pieces of identification, is that a violation of your rules; is it a violation of the law; is it a violation of procedure?

Neal: It would be a violation of procedure, unless we — unless there is some other reason that we restored that voter internally —

Burke: Well, you just told me they have to have two pieces of identification.

Neal: That’s the procedure, correct. That’s the procedure.

Burke: So if it was done without the voter producing two pieces of identification, it would be a violation of procedure?

Neal: Yes, it would be a violation.

* The reason this is so important is any irregularities in Emanuel’s voter registration could very well undermine his qualifications to run for office. From the state’s municipal code…

(65 ILCS 5/3.1‑10‑5) (from Ch. 24, par. 3.1‑10‑5)
Sec. 3.1‑10‑5. Qualifications; elective office.
(a) A person is not eligible for an elective municipal office unless that person is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the election or appointment

If he’s not properly registered to vote, he can’t run for office.

* More Emanuel problems from the Sun-Times…

“The issue is not that he left town — it’s that he rented out the house,” said Adam Lasker, who chairs the Chicago Bar Association’s Election Law Committee and has no clients running for mayor.

“I have yet to have anyone cite to me any kind of case or law that would have support for Rahm,” Lasker said. “He’s not supposed to be on the voter rolls if he doesn’t have residency. You can come back to your home in Chicago that you can live in, but if you can’t come back and live in the house, then you can’t vote.” […]

What makes Emanuel’s case unique and possibly a “case of first impression” in Illinois law is his squabble with his tenant who would not allow him to break the lease and move back in to run for mayor. Odelson, Jim Nally and some other attorneys argue that Emanuel must have access to the house for it to qualify as his residence.

Mike Kreloff, the election lawyer provided by Emanuel’s campaign, said the Illinois Election Code makes clear that people who leave for government service do not forfeit their voting rights.

“I think the challenge is bogus,” election lawyer Michael Dorf agreed.

But election lawyer Andrew Raucci argues, “I don’t think it’s a frivolous issue.”

The legal issue may come down to whether the stricter language of the state’s municipal code trumps the state’s election code.

As with everything else in Chicago, the outcome will probably depend on the judge he draws.

* The rest of the political commentariat was much impressed with the explanation from Emanuel’s attorney about why he is qualified to run for mayor. Here’s Greg Hinz…

State election law clearly allows someone to temporarily relocate for “business with the United States” without losing their local residency, Mr. Kreloff said. Beyond that, the candidate kept “personal possessions” in the Ravenswood house he rented out while in D.C., regularly has voted absentee from the Ravenswood address, and kept his driver’s license registered to that address, Mr. Kreloff said.

The whole flap, in his view: “Political games.”

All in all, a pretty strong argument, I thought. But we’ll see what the lawyers say.

* Mark Brown…

The Emanuel campaign argues that renting out the house did nothing to change his residency, citing a provision in Illinois law that specifically holds no voter “shall be deemed to have lost his or her residence in any precinct or election district in this State by reason of his or her absence on business of the United States, or of this State.”

While my own sense of fair play suggests Emanuel deserves to run and my experience with residency cases leads me to think he has a strong case, I certainly would enjoy seeing the arguments aired out in court — if a challenge is indeed filed by the Nov. 30 deadline.

Brown’s column focused mainly on Emanuel’s new “residence,” which is a plain Jane condo at Milwaukee and Ogden. Not addressed, however, is whether Emanuel’s family actually lives there. Check out the end…

Through his spokesman, Emanuel declined my generous offer to drop by with a six-pack — and a photographer — for a quick tour of the new residence.

“He doesn’t spend much time there,” LaBolt said.

Surprisingly, there were no questions about where Emanuel’s family is currently living.

* Related…

* Mayoral campaigns battle over Rahm Emanuel’s eligibility to run

* Rahm puts a brick on selling Midway Airport

* Emanuel, Meeks vow to stop Midway deal if elected next mayor

* Gery Chico makes his case for mayor: experience

via thecapitolfaxblog.com

Posted via email from Brian's posterous