An issue of great importance has come up in sleepy Brown County, one of state and national significance. It is so important it has unified the Republican and Democrat parties of the county! It turns out that there is a statute in Ohio law that says you must reveal for what and for whom you voted for if compelled by a court to do so. The statute is ORC 3515.12:The court with which a petition to contst an election is filed may summon and compel the attendance of witnesses, including officers of such election, and compel the production of all ballot boxes, marking devices, lists, books, ballots, tally sheets, and other records, papers, documents, and materials which may be required at the hearing. The style and form of summons and subpoenas and the manner of service and the fees of officers and witnesses shall be the same as are provided in other cases, in so far as the nature of the proceedings admits. The court may require any election officer to answer any questions pertinent to the issue relating to the conduct of the election or the counting of the ballots and the making of the returns. Any witness who voted at the election may be required to answer touching his qualification as a voter and for whom he voted.(emphasis mine)
Let me give you that last sentence again:
ANY WITNESS WHO VOTED AT THE ELECTION MAY BE REQUIRED TO ANSWER TOUCHING HIS QUALIFICATION AS A VOTER AND FOR WHOM HE VOTED.
That's right. Under Ohio law, if someone challenges an election, voters can be called in and compelled to reveal for whom they voted. And it has been used just this past Friday to determine the outcome of a disputed election.
Here is the background. One of the school districts of the county had a levy up on the ballot. In one township, the district extends into only part of the township, so their were two separate ballots, one for residents of the school district and one for nonresidents. Somehow, some people got the resident ballot who should not have and voted in the levy issue. The levy issue ended in a dead heat. Someone filed a suit in court and used this statute to compell voters in that township to come in and reveal how they voted.
Now, some at our meeting raised up that there is another ORC regulation that provides for revealing for what you voted if you vote illegally. However, that statute has intent to defraud the election in it, and these people did not knowingly seek to defraud the election. They mistakenly received the wrong ballot.
The attorney who called these folks in harassed many of them, including older people who couldn't remember how they voted, forcing them to say, well, if I did vote, I would have voted this way, then putting them down as a yes or no vote, even if they couldn't remember.
A few brave folks stood up to this infringement and refused to divulge how they voted. In this case, the judge did not hold them in contempt, but who is to say another judge in another county may not in a future case? Who knows how some people may have changed how they actually voted under pressure?
This is a very serious issue, so serious many citizens have now hired counsel to put forth a federal suit against the statute seeking to have that last sentence declared unconstitutional. The Democrat Party of Brown County in a majority vote and the Republican Party Central Committee in a unanimous vote have agreed to join the suit and provide assistance.
Remember, the duties of the states under our Constitution:
Must provide a republcian form of government to their citizens. Must conduct honest and fair elections, by secret ballot.
Also, remember one of our rights under the 4th amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures. The ballot box should be private and confidential.
The issue here is not whether or not the levy is good or bad. The issue is this statute is bad.
In addition, the Brown County GOP is contacting State Senator Tom Niehaus and State Rep. Danny Bubp to see about the legislature changing the statute while this suit is ongoing, to possibly avoid hearing the case and actually doing the right thing.
