Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

No Clearance for von Spakovsky

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Melissa G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-01-08 09:05 PM
Original message
No Clearance for von Spakovsky
No Clearance for von Spakovsky

Yesterday’s Washington Post story by Matt Mosk that former FEC Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky had been “cleared” of undue influence by an Election Administration Commission IG Report is misleading at best. At the outset, it seems odd that an article like this appeared almost three weeks after it was released. It hardly seems like news at this point in time.

In any event, the article’s conclusion that the Report “cleared” von Spakovsky of any attempts at influencing EAC Commissioners is contrary to the facts set forth in the report. In fact, the report indicated on several occasions that he in fact did make attempts at influencing EAC commissioners for political reasons. In the report former EAC Commissioner Paul DeGregorio is quoted as saying that “too many of decisions are clouded by his partisan thinking.” DeGregorio also said that von Spakovsky “certainly tried to influence” him, adding: “There’s no question about that.” Finally, the report stated that “according to DeGregorio, von Spakovsky thought he should use his position (on the EAC commission) to advance the Repuublican Party position.” So it is clear from this report that von Spakovsky did try and influence DeGregorio for political reasons, but it concludes that such efforts were in the end unsuccessful. Mosk’s story quotes von Spakovsky as saying that the report’s conclusions “represented a personal vindication.” This is a vindication? It sounds more like an illustration of incompetence or ineffectiveness at influencing a commissioner for improper reasons.

Of equal concern is von Spakovsky’s justification for his actions. In the mosk story, he is quoted as saying that “the Justice Department was supposed to serve the in an advisory capacity.” He added: “The purpose of the advisers is to provide advice. I was entirely within the scope of my job<.>” Actually, that’s not true, and neither the Inspector General nor Mosk ever bothered to see if it was true. In fact, according to a statement provided to Congress by seven former Justice Department attorneys and staffers, von Spakovsky “usurped” the role of the Voting Section chief during his time at DOJ (from 2003 through December 2005) specifically with regard to his pressuring the EAC. According to one letter, von Spakovsky

assumed the role of de facto Voting Section Chief replacing the career Section Chief in most of his statutory responsibilities and traditional duties managing the Section. Mr. von Spakovsky assumed a position on the EAC Advisory Board that was reserved explicitly by Section 214(a)(13) of the Help America Vote Act for the ‘chief of the Voting Section or the chief’s designee’” even though the Section Chief had never designated Mr. von Spakovsky for this position<.>

http://www.clcblog.org/blog_item-221.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC