Keeping it honest…

Below, you will find a series of emails I exchanged yesterday.  In short, I realized the non-incumbent and endorsed Democrats were wearing name badges that appeared to violate Ohio election laws.  Rather than filing a formal complaint, I just thought to send the Democrats an email, asking them to stop.  Because it involved the race, I copied the other candidates for whom I had an email address.  For some reason, the Republican school board candidate came running to their defense - but by the end of the day the Democrats appeared to have changed their badges due to my concerns!

Incumbency can be a powerful force in winning election to any office.  That’s why Ohio law prohibits candidates from doing anything to suggest they already hold a particular post, and that’s why I sent the initial email below.  Watch how my afternoon of online correspondance unfolded…

(The following have been edited to remove long email headers, campaign disclosure statements, and other non-essentials.)

from Jason Haap
date Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 11:03 AM
subject Potential Name Badge Violation

Dear Democratic Candidates for School Board:

According to Ohio Revised Code 3517.21 -

(B) No person, during the course of any campaign for nomination or election to public office or office of a political party, by means of campaign materials, including sample ballots, an advertisement on radio or television or in a newspaper or periodical, a public speech, press release, or otherwise, shall knowingly and with intent to affect the outcome of such campaign do any of the following:

(1) Use the title of an office not currently held by a candidate in a manner that implies that the candidate does currently hold that office or use the term “re-elect” when the candidate has never been elected at a primary, general, or special election to the office for which he or she is a candidate;

The non-incumbent candidates endorsed by Hamilton County Democrats each have name badges which suggest the candidates are already members of the Cincinnati Board of Education.  As only Catherine Ingram currently holds a board seat, the name badges might be in flagrant violation of Ohio Revised Code 3517.21(B)(1).

For example, Joyce Hook’s badge reads:  “Joyce Hooks, Endorsed Democrat, Cincinnati Board of Education.”  Without the word “for” indicating she has been endorsed “for” that position, the badge suggests she already has a seat on the school board.

As the other Democratic challengers have matching name badges—Ceair Bagget and Lisa Schare—this appears a concerted effort to mislead voters into thinking the Democrats already hold the position they seek.

I hereby request formally that the candidates immediately cease and desist from wearing these name badges in public—including Monday’s AFL-CIO picnic.  Additionally, I request the candidates issue a public apology for engaging in behavior that appears to violate state election law.

Respectfully,

Jason Haap
Endorsed Green Party Candidate for Cincinnati Board of Education

One thing I found noteworthy in the first response below was how the Republican candidate accused me of taking a focus off the issues.  As best I can tell, I am the only candidate who has been in public pushing issues, featuring things like this very web site—which outlines a detailed plan and which documents all my campaign activity.

from McDowell, Christopher
date Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 1:32 PM
subject RE: Potential Name Badge Violation

To All:
Are you kidding me?!  Is this a joke?  I can officially say that I could care less about the name badges and actually think they are quite nice.  For reasons unknown to me, this e-mail was sent to me even though I do not have a nice name badge like the endorsed Democratic candidates - apparently the Grand Old Party did not think to give me one (or perhaps I’m just not in on the alleged plot to mislead voters).  Does anyone really think this election will be won or lost by virtue of an index sized name badge?  This is silly.  I sincerely hope this election will not degrade into bickering over picayune matters such as this.
The non-incumbent Democratic candidates have my strong support on this matter as I very seriously doubt that anyone would intentionally masquerade as an incumbent of this particular School Board in the belief that doing so would garner votes.  In my opinion, no apology is necessary.  I hope that you will all wear your name badges to the picnic and that you enjoy the food and the words of our President.  Have a nice weekend with your families.
Sincerely,
Christopher R. McDowell
Endorsed Republican Party Candidate FOR Cincinnati School Board

I found his attitude to be a bit shocking.  I don’t take election law lightly, particularly as it exists to make sure people run fair and transparent elections.  And I also thought it strange that he seemed interested in actually encouraging the Democrats to break the law.

from Jason Haap
date Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 1:52 PM
subject Re: Potential Name Badge Violation

Dear Mr. McDowell, et al:

Since you are a lawyer who claims to have passed the bar on the first try, I’m surprised at your attitude towards Ohio Revised Code.

I see no language in ORC that indicates it is okay to promulgate false information so long as the medium maintains certain size restrictions.  Can you point me to such an exception?  Thanks for your help with that.

Without such an exception, it appears, from your message, that you have actually encouraged the Democrats to wear their name badges to Monday’s picnic.  I sent this request, out of respect, to our colleagues so that they would not potentially violate the law.

If there is not a size exception, does that mean you are encouraging these candidates to break the law?  Please explain.

Cheers!

Jason

In this next response, the Republican references a message from David P. Little that I did not receive. 

from McDowell, Christopher
date Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:34 PM
subject RE: Potential Name Badge Violation

Mr. Haap:
The key wording is “shall knowingly and with intent to affect the outcome of such campaign.”  The mens rea element cannot be shown.  Perhaps you should focus your efforts on real issues of concern to the voters.  I believe that Mr. Little has adequately addressed the remaining issues (if there ever were any real issues to address) in his posting.  I have nothing further to say on this topic.
Christopher R. McDowell
Endorsed Republican Party Candidate FOR Cincinnati School Board

As I’ve mentioned above, I am the only candidate to have a detailed public platform.  I have also advocated successfully to change CPS board policy on “anti-harassment,” helping it become more inclusive for the benefit of all CPS students.  I don’t really understand the Republican’s position towards me here.  I also think some voters are concerned about having clean and honest elections.

from Jason Haap
date Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:47 PM
subject Re: Potential Name Badge Violation

Mr. McDowell,

I have not seen any messages from Mr. Little.  Perhaps you can forward his remarks if he made a relevant point.  Or perhaps Mr. Little will be willing to share them with me. (I’ve copied him on this reply.)

Are you suggesting the Democratic candidates did this accidentally, on all their name badges, which were apparently produced professionally for the Democratic campaign?  If they did not wish to knowingly affect the outcome of their campaigns, why is this so apparently coordinated between all of them?

The issue regarding the word “for” has come up each City election cycle I can remember.  It dogged David Pepper running for Mayor in 2005.  I believe it came up with some council candidates in 2007, and Charlie Winburn recently issued an apology for the same reason this cycle.  In fact, when I saw him a few weeks ago by chance, he had actually written the word “for” onto his polo for precisely this reason.  (So some of your GOP counterparts are more concerned about this law than you!)

In any event, if they did not “know” prior to my email that this badge was a problem, they have been notified per my original email.  If they are not attempting to affect the outcome of their campaigns, [then] why are they including these badges as part of them?

I have not filed a complaint at this time.  I trust the Democrats will do the right thing, and they will not present themselves as if already members of the Board of Education through their deceptive name badges - including at the upcoming AFL-CIO picnic.

Regards,

Jason

In this final piece of the email strand, I got a reply from David Little:

from DPLITTLE
date Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 6:22 PM
subject RE: Potential Name Badge Violation

Jason,

In response;

All badges were purchased by the candidates and not by the campaign or myself meaning there was no intention or orchestration of their creation or exact wording. They have now added a numeric 4 on each of them thereby definitely indicating that they are Running as Candidates for the Board—as was always the clear intent.

All our literature, banners, and shirts are clearly marked ‘for” school board and the only exception is of course where Incumbent Catherine Ingram is clearly identified as an experienced, savvy 16 year incumbent. We will all be at the picnic—but no where will there be any written word that could possibly be misconstrued as a claim of incumbency.

My best to you.

David Little

If I had been wrong on this issue, then why would the Democrats have done anything to modify their badges?  Some may find this an obscure issue, but it is an issue and it is a matter of law.  Remember, I did not file a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission, as would have been my right—instead, I sent my colleagues an email and resolved the matter in one day’s time.

from Jason Haap

date Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 9:54 PM
subject Re: Potential Name Badge Violation

David,

Thanks for the clarification.

Just so I’m clear, it is your position that the individual candidates all bought name badges individually, that just so happen to have the exact same design, and wording, with no coordination?  That does seem like quite the coincidence!

Regardless, I’m glad to hear they have all “added a numeric 4” to provide the clarity I sought with my initial email.  I’m curious about why you chose the number “4” instead of the word “for,” but I’ll look into that later and see what the rules are.

If any of the candidates are at the picnic Monday, I will be looking forward to seeing the amended name badges.  Thank you for helping to make sure the candidates conform to Ohio Revised Code!

I don’t know what earlier email you may have sent to Republican candidate Christopher McDowell, but I do want him to know that your candidates have amended their badges as a direct result of my advocacy.

As you know, I am always an advocate for transparency and democracy.

Onward!

Jason Haap
Endorsed Green Party Candidate for Cincinnati Board of Education

I’ll update this strand if more messages become available.

NEW!  Labor Day updates:

Jason,

Let me assure you that that there is nothing curious about our selection of the numeral 4 on the candidate identification badges. They are a staple of any good campaign and the number 4 highlights the fact that the four endorsed by the Democratic Party are indeed a Team of 4 and running together to promote positive change on the CPS Board of Education.

We too are completely in favor of genuine transparency and happen to be part of strengthening democracy and as such we will be aggressively visible at this years Labor Day picnic at Coney Island. Perhaps we will see you there.

Sincerely,

David P. Little

My response:

David,

Thanks for the note.  I guess I’ll need to see them to understand.  It sounds like you have, for example, “Endorsed Democrat #4” instead of an “Endorsed Democrat running for” an office.  I know the pound sign and the word “running” are not involved, but it seems that may be the linguistic effect.

But like I said, I’ll surely run into some of your candidates today, while distributing my own flyers, encouraging people to “Haap on Board!”

Jason Haap
Endorsed Green 4
Cincinnati Board of Education

-or-

more clearly denoted as

Jason Haap
Endorsed Green for Cincinnati Board of Education