elections

NM county clerk seeks technician to handle Dominion voting machines

A new job posted last week on GovernmentJobs.com from Democrat Sandoval County Clerk Anne Brady-Romero’s office seeks a voting machine technician who will be trained in “certifying, calibrating, and maintaining the County voting machines (ICE) and (ICC) scanners.”

The job, which is salaried at $32,136 annually, lists the requirement of a GED and “six months of office clerical and data processing experience that includes experience with data entry and retrieval and working with and troubleshooting automated program equipment.”

It further notes, “State of New Mexico Certification of Dominion Image Cast Evolution (ICE) & Image Cast Central (ICC) Voter Assist Terminal required within a specified period of time following hire.”

“Programs, certifies, seals and maintains the County Image Cast Evolution (ICE) tabulator voting machines including running pre-printed Test Decks to verify scanners read ballots correctly in all four orientations; calibrates the machines for time, date, and battery status year round; performs preventative maintenance on voting machines including verification of door, key, panel, and wheel operations; provides voter assistance including inserting blank test decks; manually selecting voting positions to verify selections were marked correctly in all four orientations; maintaining ink cartridges; and using required clean sheet for upper and lower scanners,” are among the other duties required.

Qualified applicants will assist the Bureau of Elections staff “with answering phones, printing ballots, stuffing ballots in packets for mailing; printing labels, entering voter registrations in the Secretary of State voter registration system; auditing and filing of current, changed, [canceled], or deceased ID verifications; daily balancing during early voting; assists with qualifying and disqualifying Provisional  and Replacement Absentee Ballots; canvasses election results for certification of election; helps scan returned ballots; assist in recount and recheck; runner for absentee ballots; and assist in election school and training election poll officials on ICE.”    

The person will assist “in site visits to ensure internet connection; ADA compliance; parking and capacity of poll location” while verifying “all voting materials associated with elections including absentee, early voting, and Election Day; assembles packets associated with absentee voting; stuffs ballot boxes with State required materials for early and Election Day operations.” There are other duties listed in the description.

According to the job posting, it doesn’t appear that any security checks are mandatory for the position. The post indicates that the deadline for applicants to apply is May 10, 2023.

The job application website for the position is linked here. An archived version of the website, if it is removed, is linked here.

According to a previous listing of Sandoval County salaries for the 2019-2020 fiscal year, a person employed at the County under the job title “certified voting machine technician” received a salary of $37,706.66. That person was first hired by the County on July 10, 2006, as reported by Sandoval County.

Despite claims by people such as Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver insisting voting machines do not connect to the internet, NBC News reported in 2020, “The three largest voting manufacturing companies — Election Systems &Software, Dominion Voting Systems and Hart InterCivic — have acknowledged they all put modems in some of their tabulators and scanners. The reason? So that unofficial election results can more quickly be relayed to the public. Those modems connect to cell phone networks, which, in turn, are connected to the internet.” 

However, Toulouse Oliver insists, “Our air-gapped counting systems ensure that vote tabulators are never connected to the Internet.” 

NM county clerk seeks technician to handle Dominion voting machines Read More »

Dems’ extreme election code rewrite heads to governor’s desk

On Monday, the New Mexico House of Representatives voted 42-25 to concur with the Senate’s changes of H.B. 4, an extreme rewrite of many portions of the state’s election code. The bill now goes to the governor’s desk.

Provisions in the bill would erode election security by letting felons vote, mandating a permanent absentee voter list, ballot drop boxes, and mandating voters be automatically registered at the Motor Vehicle Division (MVD), where they would have to opt out by mail.

There were many concerns in committees and during floor discussions about the bill infringing on religious freedoms because some religions do not permit voting. Forcibly registering people to vote would be a violation.

According to the bill’s fiscal impact report, the Taxation and Revenue Department reports that “implementation of this bill will have a high impact on its IT Division. The estimated time to develop, test, and implement the changes is approximately 2,704 hours or 17 months and approximately $717,700 ($567,800 contractual resources including gross receipts tax and staff workload costs of $149,900). The bill will require MVD to partner with [the Secretary of State’s office] to make changes to the interface between the two agencies.”

According to the New Mexico Sun, “The New Mexico Business Coalition (NMBC) strongly opposes HB 4. NMBC President Carla Sonntag published a letter arguing that the legislation would endanger both voting rights and voting system integrity in many ways, including automatically registering voters without their consent, increasing the likelihood of non-U.S. citizens being registered to vote and giving full voting rights to felons prior to completion of parole/probation.”

Provisions on the Senate side that were amended in include giving county clerks the opportunity to get waivers from the Secretary of State’s office to opt out of ballot drop boxes and clarifying language regarding prisons and detention facilities.

The bill now goes to Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s desk for a signature.

Dems’ extreme election code rewrite heads to governor’s desk Read More »

An election integrity expert’s response to ‘Stolen election vs. unfair election’

This opinion piece by former US Senate candidate Mick Rich asks the question: “Was the 2020 Presidential election stolen from Donald Trump, or was the 2020 presidential election unfair to Donald Trump? There is a difference between the two, and that difference is essential for Americans in future elections.”  This premise presents a false dichotomy that assumes that the election can be unfair or stolen, but not both. In reality, an election can be both unfair and stolen.

Acknowledging the election was unfair is itself an acknowledgment that it was stolen if the party that played unfairly was given the victory on a razor-thin margin, as occurred in the 2020 presidential election. Trying to separate fairness from theft is a dangerous attempt to force Americans to accept unfair elections as legitimate elections. No election based on censorship, fake scandals propped up by corrupt government actors and the media, and hundreds of millions of dollars of private money being used to influence how we vote should be viewed as legitimate. Using the words “stolen election” under such circumstances is completely appropriate.

Mr. Rich inaccurately describes the people who believe elections are being stolen as “Trump supporters.” Multiple polls have shown that between 60 and 70 percent of Americans believe our elections are affected by widespread cheating, and not all those people are Trump supporters. In fact, it was Democrats who attempted to blow the whistle for many years on the vulnerability and hackability of the black box electronics that comprise our election system.  Many of these same Democrats are strangely silent on this topic now, but that doesn’t remove the fact that those who believe there is no widespread cheating are in an ever-shrinking minority.

Mr. Rich points to an AXIOS article that predicted a “false election day Trump win” as proof that the slow chipping away of Trump’s significant election night leads over days and weeks was somehow honestly done. Is Mr. Rich forgetting that the Twitter Files and recent US House hearings proved that the mainstream media has been colluding with leftist organizations and government agencies to manipulate the beliefs of Americans about COVID, the corruption of the Biden family, and the 2020 election? People who are powerful and corrupt enough to do those things are certainly smart enough to know they needed to establish primacy in the narrative by predicting what they were going to do in the swing states to make it appear normal and expected. In fact, they brazenly admitted that they were “working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information” in a  February 2021 Time Magazine article.  

There are plenty of eyewitness testimonies and video, mathematical, and statistical evidence that prove that Trump’s election day win was not honestly erased as AXIOS would have us believe. I suggest starting with this website, which contains a wealth of information on the massive amount of evidence that points to widespread fraud in elections all over the country, particularly in the swing states. Anyone who is intellectually honest and wants to continue denying that the 2020 election was stolen must deal with the substance of this evidence because they can’t honestly continue to parrot that it doesn’t exist.  

This statement in Mr. Rich’s article was an odd one: “Trump supporters believe there were enough close states that illegal activity associated with ballot harvesting could make a difference. However, without knowing which states will be ‘close enough,’ millions of ballots would have been created, destroyed, or changed across many states, and there is no evidence that happened.” This is a straw man. Anyone who has run for federal office is aware that tracking and predicting elections is big business. Any moderately competent campaign adviser will have reams of historical trends and current polling data to help their candidate target exactly which voters they need to contact to win the right precincts, to win the right counties, to win their election. It is known ahead of time exactly which counties any election will hinge on and by approximately how many votes. 

Before 2020, most of us assumed that this campaign targeting was typically being conducted in a fair and legal way, but now we are certain it is not. The tiny margins of “victory” in the handful of swing states that swung 2020 in favor of Biden do not amount to millions of votes, as Mr. Rich stated, but rather a few thousand. Could a few thousand votes have been inserted illegally in each of these swing states, either through ballot stuffing or digital manipulation? Yes, they could have. And the evidence suggests that’s exactly what happened. 

I would remind the readers that mainstream media has staunchly insisted over the last several years that conservative viewpoints were not being censored on any platform. They claimed no evidence existed to believe such a thing. They called in their experts and sponsored studies to make the people who knew their voices were being silenced look crazy. But Elon Musk’s Twitter Files and recent US House hearings have proven the media lied about censorship just like they lied about the Biden laptop and Russia collusion. It’s only a matter of time before they will be shown to be lying about widespread election fraud.  

In closing, I reject the false dichotomy of an unfair versus a stolen election. Unfair is stolen. But that’s not even the fundamental issue. The fundamental issue is that the vast majority of Americans believe the current electronic election system is not trustworthy and leaves the door open to widespread fraud. This is reason enough to reform our elections in a way that restores confidence. That means voter ID and a return to paper ballots that are hand-counted with bipartisan oversight at the precinct level. It means full transparency and accountability in every step of the process and the rejection of electronic black box voting machines.  

Wife, mother, engineer, and election integrity activist. You can find reports on elections in New Mexico written, in part, by Mrs. Clements here and here

Opinions expressed by Piñon Post contributors do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the publication or its editorial staff. Submit an op-ed to the Piñon Post at news@pinonpost.com.

An election integrity expert’s response to ‘Stolen election vs. unfair election’ Read More »

Stolen election vs. unfair election

Big Gov, Big Tech & Big Media put their thumb on the scale for Big Dems

Was the 2020 Presidential election stolen from Donald Trump, or was the 2020 presidential election unfair to Donald Trump? There is a difference between the two, and that difference is essential for Americans in future elections. 

Stolen Election

Donald Trump led by wide margins in multiple states on election night, only to lose by large margins the following day or days. Trump supporters believe this indicates that Joe Biden and his supporters manufactured millions of votes. However, this “false election day Trump win” was predicted in the AXIOS article, “Exclusive: Dem group warns of apparent Trump Election Day landslide.” Because the Democrats’ strategy was for Democrats to vote early or by mail which takes longer to tally, at the same time, the GOP’s strategy was to get Republicans to vote on election day, which takes substantially less time to add. These two strategies caused the lead to switch from Trump to Biden.

Joe Biden Democrats collected ballots before they reached the voters, filled in the votes, coerced voters, or destroyed Republican ballots.  Trump supporters believe there were enough close states that illegal activity associated with ballot harvesting could make a difference. However, without knowing which states will be “close enough,” millions of ballots would have been created, destroyed, or changed across many states, and there is no evidence that happened. 

Democrats are said to have changed votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden by hacking Dominion Software. Do Trump supporters believe that since software/websites/databases are susceptible to being hacked by evil characters of the world, why couldn’t voting tally software by Dominion be any different? Changing a few hundred votes could occur unnoticed, but not millions of votes. 

Unfair Election

Big Tech Companies solely censored Trump. Media Research Center headline on October 19, 2020,” Twitter, Facebook Censored Trump, Campaign 65 Times, Leave Biden Untouched” NPR on December 8, 2020 headline, “How Private Money From Facebook’s CEO Saved the 2020 Election, their $400 million to Democratic strongholds got out the vote for Biden. Fortune headline on October 22, 2022, “The RNC is going to court to prove it. 

Big Government fabricated the Russian Collusion that hamstrung the Trump presidency and hobbled the 2020 campaign. The November 5, 2021, National Review article headline, “Durham Is Steadily Exposing the Real “Russia Collusion” Scandal.” Clinton’s campaign team must have been shocked by their Trump opposition research; the FBI and NSA used the Steele Dossier to justify investigating Donald Trump and Trump Presidency.  

Big Government with Big Media & Tech Companies censored negative stories about Joe Biden. In the New York Post story “Revealed: Ukrainian exec thanked Hunter Biden for “opportunity to meet’ veep dad,” the underlining premise was that Hunter and Joe Biden used the office of the VPOTUS to enrich themselves. This story had the potential to keep Trump in the White House is why Big Government, Big Media & Tech Companies squashed the story. The Associated Press, “The FBI is investigating whether emails published by the Washington Post… connected to a possible Russian influence operation…”. The Hill headline, “50 former intelligence officials warn NY Post story sounds like Russian disinformation”, Recent Insider headline, You may think Twitter was wrong to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story, but it wasn’t a violation of the First Amendment.

Moving Forward

When you are asked, “Do you believe the 2020 Election was stolen?” respond with, “Evidence shows Big Gov, Big Tech & Big Media covertly supported Democrats and silenced Republicans. As a result, those organizations made the 2020 election unfair to Donald Trump and Republicans. 

You can call out the media when they propagandize and do not report the news. An example is the Albuquerque Journal’s article by Elise Kaplan, “Trump lawyer’s ties to NM run deep,” in which the reporter used others to slander John Eastman. Kaplan quoted individuals who described Eastman as “a prick,” “He was a jerk, he was arrogant,” Mr. Traitor.” “This is not reporting; this is propagandizing. You can email the Albuquerque Journal’s managing editor at kmoses@abqjournal.com AND demand that they correct the story. 

You can file a complaint with the Federal Election Commission that Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Pricilla Chan, should be prosecuted for manipulating federal elections. Click on the link to learn How to file a complaint with the FEC.  You can also file a complaint when Federal Government employees abuse their office to favor one party or candidate at Where to Report Fraud, Waste, Abuse, or Retaliation.”

Your Independent media are working to report the real news. That is what Mick Rich 2 the Point is about. As well as… Harvey Yates with the Artesia and Espanola newspapers, Mary Alice Murphy with the Grant County Beat, John Block with the Piñon Post, Dinah Vargas with ABQ Off the Cuff, Carla Sontag with New Mexico Sun. Support these independent voices.

Being a Republican in New Mexico is difficult, especially on voting day. To stop voter intimidation of vulnerable Republicans, the NMGOP should assist those Republicans to vote by mail and help them mail their ballots. For the remaining Republicans, encourage Republicans to vote early or by mail to foil the Democrat’s strategy of hindering Republican voters.

In 2020 I stood before five hundred people and announced my four goals, one of which was to bring conservatives together under the broad tent of the Republican Party. The first step of uniting Conservatives was our event in January. Next week I will report my progress in uniting conservatives and the challenges ahead.  

Host, “To the Point with Mick Rich.” 2018 Republican nominee for U.S. Senate (NM). Founder & CEO, Mick Rich Contractors. Husband, father, grandfather. Read more from Mick rich at MickRich.substack.com.

Opinions expressed by Piñon Post contributors do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the publication or its editorial staff. Submit an op-ed to the Piñon Post at news@pinonpost.com.

Stolen election vs. unfair election Read More »

Extreme abortion, ‘gender-affirming care,’ election bills to have Tues. House votes

On Tuesday, two extreme Democrat proposals to weaken New Mexico election laws and force state entities to facilitate abortions and “gender-affirming care” will face final consideration on the state House floor during the evening session starting at approximately 4:30 p.m. 

H.B. 4 is a major elections measure sponsored by Speaker Javier Martínez (D-Bernalillo) and House Majority Floor Leader Gail Chasey (D-Bernalillo), among other Democrats from both chambers. 

The bill would create an automatic absentee voter registry and automatic registration at the Motor Vehicle Division (MVD) without customers’ consent and allow felon voting, among other measures that would be ripe for fraud. 

H.B. 7 by Rep. Linda Serrato (D-Santa Fe) would force public bodies to facilitate abortions and transgenderism, dubbed “gender-affirming care,” or face lawsuits. 

The bill also explicitly bans municipalities and counties from passing local laws to protect children in the womb from being aborted, meaning places like Roosevelt County would be banned from enforcing their ordinances.

The bill would “prohibit public bodies from discriminating against persons based on their use or non-use of reproductive or gender-affirming care,” meaning it could push teachers and any other public workers to support body mutilation for all ages, including children, as well as abortion, according to the bill’s fiscal impact report. 

So-called “gender-affirming care” means “psychological, behavioral, surgical, medication, and other medical services to support a person’s gender identity,” while “public bodies” are defined as “state and local governments, commissions, or boards established by the state and any branches of state government, such as school districts and universities, that receive state funding.” It would also open up conscientious objectors to civil suits.

On Monday, pro-lifers rallied at the Capitol to support the right to life and parental rights while rejecting the extreme H.B. 7, which would harm children inside and outside of the womb.

The bills will be a major test of how moderate Democrats vote regarding abortion and weakening New Mexico elections. All legislators’ contact information can be found here

Extreme abortion, ‘gender-affirming care,’ election bills to have Tues. House votes Read More »

House committee tables bill to let 16 and 17-year-olds vote

On Saturday in the House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee, a bipartisan group of representatives tabled H.B. 217 by Reps. Christine Trujillo (D-Bernalillo) and Christina Ortez (D-Taos). The bill would have allowed 16 and 17-year-olds to vote.

The bill also notes that 17-year-olds would be allowed to vote in state primaries if they are 18 by the time the primary election is over. “For the purposes of a political primary, 17-year-olds may also currently vote if they will turn 18 on or before the general election immediately succeeding that primary election,” reads the fiscal impact report (FIR) for the bill, which implies that even in federal elections the minor could vote.

The FIR further notes that this move could likely increase Democrat voter turnout, according to Tufts University.

It reads, “[I]t should be noted Tufts University’s Tisch College of Civic Life find that 63 percent of voters aged 18 to 29 nationally voted for democratic candidates in the House of Representative elections, so it is possible that allowing 16-year-olds to vote as provided for in HB217 could result in a disproportionate increase in turnout for democratic candidates. However, it is unclear whether this is because 16-year-old Democrats are more likely to turn out to vote or that 16-year-olds are more likely to be Democratic-leaning. Further, data does not indicate whether the turnout from youth voters (ages 18 to 29) effectively changed the results of prior elections.”

Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo) noted a scientific study by Tak Wing Chan, Ph.D., and Matthew Clayton, D.Phil., which read, “research in neuroscience suggests that the brain, specifically the prefrontal cortex, is still undergoing major reconstruction and development during the teenage years.” He said he was going to be “following the science” and reject the bill.

The bill ultimately died on a tie 4-4 vote, with Reps. Block, Bill Rehm (R-Albuquerque), D. Wonda Johnson (D-Rehoboth), and Martin Zamora (R-Santa Rosa) all voting against the bill. 

Similar bills in the past have shared similar fates, with science proving that 16 and 17-year-olds would not be appropriate qualified electors. 

House committee tables bill to let 16 and 17-year-olds vote Read More »

Dem bill to let 16 and 17-year-olds vote scheduled for Saturday hearing

On Saturday, a bill by Reps. Christine Trujillo (D-Bernalillo) and Christina Ortez (D-Taos), H.B. 217, would make 16 and 17-year-olds “qualified electors” will be heard in New Mexico House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee. 

The bill also notes that 17-year-olds would be allowed to vote in state primaries if they are 18 by the time the primary election is over. “For the purposes of a political primary, 17-year-olds may also currently vote if they will turn 18 on or before the general election immediately succeeding that primary election,” reads the fiscal impact report (FIR) for the bill, which implies that even in federal elections the minor could vote.

The FIR further notes that this move could likely increase Democrat voter turnout, according to Tufts University.

It reads, “[I]t should be noted Tufts University’s Tisch College of Civic Life find that 63 percent of voters aged 18 to 29 nationally voted for democratic candidates in the House of Representative elections, so it is possible that allowing 16-year-olds to vote as provided for in HB217 could result in a disproportionate increase in turnout for democratic candidates. However, it is unclear whether this is because 16-year-old Democrats are more likely to turn out to vote or that 16-year-olds are more likely to be Democratic-leaning. Further, data does not indicate whether the turnout from youth voters (ages 18 to 29) effectively changed the results of prior elections.” 

The committee will consider the bill on Saturday, February 11, 2023, at 1:00 p.m. in Room 317 of the state Capitol. To join the meeting via Zoom, the instructions are below:

Please click the link below to join the webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88261854647 Or One tap mobile : US: +12532158782,,88261854647# or +13462487799,,88261854647# Webinar ID: 882 6185 4647 International numbers available: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kqF4xwnAY 

Below, find the contact information for the members of the committee:

  • Chair: D. Wonda Johnson (D). District 5 (McKinley & San Juan). Room 413D, 986-4236. Email: dwonda.johnson@nmlegis.gov
  • Vice Chair: Natalie Figueroa (D). District 30 (Bernalillo). Room 203AN, 986-4255. Email: natalie.figueroa@nmlegis.gov
  • Ranking Member: Martin R. Zamora (R). District 63 (Curry, DeBaca, Guadalupe, Roosevelt & San Miguel). Room 203EN, 986-4211. Email: martin.zamora@nmlegis.gov
  • Member: Janelle Anyanonu (D). District 19 (Bernalillo). Room 203BN, . Email: Janelle.Anyanonu@nmlegis.gov
  • Member: John Block (R). District 51 (Otero). Room 202B, 986-4220. Email: John.Block@nmlegis.gov
  • Member: Gail Chasey (D). District 18 (Bernalillo). Room 134C, 986-4777. Email: gail@gailchasey.com
  • Member: Dayan Hochman-Vigil (D). District 15 (Bernalillo). Room 312A, 986-4327. Email: dayan.hochman-vigil@nmlegis.gov
  • Member: Charlotte Little (D). District 68 (Bernalillo). Room 203CN, 986-4254. Email: Charlotte.Little@nmlegis.gov
  • Member: William “Bill” R. Rehm (R). District 31 (Bernalillo). Room 201B, 986-4214. Email: bill.rehm@nmlegis.gov

Dem bill to let 16 and 17-year-olds vote scheduled for Saturday hearing Read More »

Last NM House recounts completed

On Wednesday, the state’s canvassing board certified the remaining legislative elections that resulted in automatic recounts.

The results of both recounts had the same individuals winning. Republican Jenifer Jones of Deming Defeated incumbent Democrat Rep. Candie Sweetser in District 32. Jones has a 46-vote lead, which is unchanged from the initial results.

In the Albuquerque-based District 68, Democrat candidate Charlotte Little defeated Republican Robert Moss by 35 votes — a difference of one vote from the initial 36-vote lead.

The news now affirms that Democrats will officially control the state legislature with 45 seats to Republicans’ 25 seats. 

The board, comprised of Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, and Supreme Court Chief Justice Shannon Bacon, all Democrats, certified the election. Bacon was not present at the certification.

Now, the House will officially have 16 new freshman legislators (* indicates previous legislative service):

Mark Duncan (R-District 2)

Tanya Mirabal Moya (R-District 7) 

Cynthia Borrego (D-District 17)

Janelle Anyanonu (D-District 19)

Alan Martinez (R-District 23)

*Eleanor Chavez (D-District 26)

Jenifer Jones (R-District 32)

Tara Jaramillo (D-District 38)

*Joseph Sanchez (D-District 40)

Kathleen Cates (D-District 44)

Reena Szczepanski (D-District 47)

John Block (R-District 51)

Harlan Vincent (R-District 56)

Andrea Reeb (R-District 64)

Jimmy Mason (R-District 66)

Charlotte Little (D-District 68)

Last NM House recounts completed Read More »

Toulouse Oliver praises COVID for creating ‘great turnout’ in elections

On Tuesday, the Bipartisan Policy Center held its 2022 Elections Summit in Washington, D.C., where Democrat New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver was a panelist. Toulouse Oliver joined moderator Carrie Levine, a story editor at election reporting site Votebeat.org, as well as Philadelphia City Commissioner Seth Bluestein, Nevada County, CA Clerk-Recorder-elect Natalie Adona, and U.S. Election Assistance Commissioner Ben Hovland. 

During the panel, Toulouse Oliver repeatedly took sly jabs at county commissioners, such as those in Otero County, who audited votes and also decertified potentially fraudulent election results and then were forcibly mandated to go back and certify upon the threats of removal.

She also spoke about the close relationship between her office and the media to “pre-bunk” so-called “election myths.” 

“The field of election administration, over time, has just become incredibly more professional, incredibly more diverse. It used to be, you know, whoever sort of the local political favorite was got the job of being election administrator in a jurisdiction,” she said.

Regarding her campaign to try and quell supposed misinformation, Toulouse Oliver said, “I’ll also add I think we started doing this pretty darn well in 2020: foreseeing the post-election challenges. We didn’t know exactly what they were going to be, but we did a good job as a community of ‘pre-bunking,’ if you will, some of the things we could see coming down the pipeline of, you know, ‘We’re not gonna know on election night, you know, because we have all of these critical states that are still gonna have ballots to count and this is how the process works.’ I think we did an even better job of that, and that isn’t just the work of election administrators.”

She then praised the media, telling the panel, “I think we did an even better job of that, and that isn’t just the work of election administrators. It’s also the work of the media, which has really invested incredible amounts of time and effort working with offices like mine and local election offices to get information — how does this actually work? — because the media wants to be good partners and helping us pre-bunk or debunk some of the election myths that are out there. As a result, I think the electorate, whether they want to be or not, is much more informed about how the election process works, and I think that significantly contributed to the success of the 2022 election and to the fact that we didn’t see as much strife, or we’re not seeing as much strife – We’re still immediate post-election 2022 — than we did in 2020.”

Then, Toulouse Oliver attacked citizens who asked for public records from her office, claiming their requests for data were political. She said, “When we’re dealing with not the normal level, I mean, any government office should expect and anticipate public records requests, and we should be responsive to them. That is not the question we are talking about here. We are talking about this coordinated, weaponized effort to make it so hard for us to fulfill those requests that we can’t do the rest of our job properly or we can’t fulfill the record requests properly. And that’s intentional. That is a tactic, and it is intended to keep us from being able to do our jobs properly.”

She added on that note, “like many states, we’re looking at how we can better craft our public records laws. For example, one thing we want to make sure, in my state, that we aren’t doing is giving away the keys to the castle, right? What is a public record that anybody should be able to just take a look at whenever they want, and what is something that is, you know, what we need to keep internal so that we can keep hackers from getting into our system, right? So we are taking a look at that, and I think those are conversations that are happening in legislatures throughout the country. But again, I don’t want to be a broken record, but as Ben said, it’s resources, resources, resources.  We do want to be able to give out this information, but we need to make it so we can all have an office that functions like Seth’s where they can focus on their work. We can focus on the work and not on fulfilling records requests.” 

Toulouse Oliver bashed local leaders who defy her edicts, saying, “I think county government is sort of the most obscure to folks. And I would like to start with just my commissioners understand what their job is. I don’t think they want me coming to their county telling them how to do dogs, dumps, and driving. Likewise, I don’t want them making election policy because that’s not their job.”

She concluded in her commentary on the panel, “So I think just demystifying local government is important. One thing I think was good about COVID — many bad things — is that I think that was part of the reason we did have such great turnout in 2020 because people really started to realize the impact that state and local government had n ther daily lives. And so whatever we can do… to continue to sort of expand that understanding is a plus.” 

Watch her remarks on the panel below: 

Toulouse Oliver praises COVID for creating ‘great turnout’ in elections Read More »

Reports of voter intimidation in NM: What you need to know for Election Day

Tuesday is Election Day, and there are some reports already of voter intimidation during early voting that concluded on Saturday. 

According to elections expert Erin Clements, Otero County Clerk Robin Holmes “is telling her poll workers that if voters want to use their own blue pen to fill out their ballots… to WRITE DOWN THEIR NAMES AND REFER THEM TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY,” adding, “That’s  VOTER INTIMIDATION from a public official!”

According to NMSA 1-12-57, “After marking and preparing a paper ballot in a polling place, the voter: A. shall not show it to any person in the polling place in such a way as to reveal its contents; And B. shall feed the paper ballot into the electronic vote tabulator.” 

Therefore, the poll workers should not be able even to know if the individual used a blue or black pen to fill in the ballot.

The state statute affirms in NMSA 1-12-59 that such activity “may constitute the crime of offering a bribe, coercion of employees, coercion of voters, intimidation or conspiracy to violate the Election Code.” 

According to a guide promulgated by the New Mexico Secretary of State’s Office, “A ballot properly marked with any device other than the marking device provided to the voter shall be counted,” no matter what color or type of utensil was used to fill it out.

After this revelation from Clements, Professor David Clements wrote, “I personally reached out to the Otero County Sheriff and District Attorney this evening and demanded assurances that they would take no part in the corrupt Otero county clerk’s scheme to threaten voters.” 

The Clements and others are informing voters that they should fill out their ballots on Election Day with blue ballpoint pens instead of those provided at the precinct. This will leave an indentation on the ballot that cannot be replicated by printing mechanisms in the machine, which cannot leave such a mark. Many legal documents are signed with preferably blue ink, and ballots are no exception. The machines do not have the capability of printing in blue ink.

What you need to know before you vote on Election Day:

  • To prepare to vote, you can view your sample ballot by searching your voter registration here. It is advised to print out a copy of your sample ballot and fill it in or to write down what/who you would like to vote for so that when you get to the polls, you will be prepared. 
  • There will be multiple bond issues, constitutional amendments, and judicial retentions on the ballot. All the judges up for retention are Democrat judges. All the constitutional amendments will result in either higher taxes or an increase in government overreach. All bond issues will either extend or increase taxes, while millions in tax revenue from the previous bonds have not even been spent yet. Take this into consideration before voting. 
  • All voting locations for Election Day can be found by visiting your local county clerk’s website or by searching by your address here. Polls are open Tuesday between 7:00 am and 7:00 p.m. If you are in line to vote before 7:00 p.m. and while you are waiting, the time goes past 7:00 p.m., you are still allowed to vote. Stay in line. 
  • Voting does matter. For people who say their votes don’t count, many elections across the state have been determined by a handful of votes. Every single vote counts, especially for the statewide races.
  • If told at the precinct that you already voted, voters are advised to call the sheriff. Call the sheriff if any other issues of voter intimidation or potentially illegal activity arise. All sheriff offices’ phone numbers across New Mexico can be found here. It is advised you have your local sheriff’s phone number saved on your phone for easy access.
  • If election workers try to take away your writing device or attempt to stop you from voting with it, call the sheriff. That is voter intimidation. You can vote with a blue ballpoint pen, and your vote is legally required to be counted.
  • If you spoil your ballot at the voting location (such as voting incorrectly and wanting to fix it or any other incident), please make sure your ballot reads “SPOILED” on the ballot itself to indicate it has been rejected and you are issued a new one.
  • If you have an absentee ballot and it has not been returned yet, DO NOT PUT IT IN THE MAIL. Hand-deliver it to a voting precinct on Election Day to make sure it is counted. If you put it in the mail at this late date, your vote will not count.
  • New Mexico has same-day voter registration. If you are not registered to vote yet, YOU CAN STILL VOTE. At the polling location, you can register to vote on Election Day by bringing a form of identification, such as a driver’s license and a utility/phone/mortgage bill to register. 

For any other information about voting, New Mexicans are urged to visit NMVote.org. The phone number for the New Mexico Secretary of State’s Office is 505-827-3600 (Option 2).

Reports of voter intimidation in NM: What you need to know for Election Day Read More »

Scroll to Top