[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 50 (Wednesday, April 29, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E712-E714]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     GRAND JURY REPORT ON THE 1993 SPECIAL ELECTION FOR THE SECOND 
                        SENATORIAL DISTRICT SEAT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. JOSEPH R. PITTS

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, April 29, 1998

  Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to submit into the record 
the findings of the Ninth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury's Report 
relating to the 1993 Special election for

[[Page E713]]

the Second Senatorial District Seat in Pennsylvania.
  This election case serves as a grotesque example of the potential for 
voter fraud and abuse in our election system. This Grand Jury has taken 
an indepth look at voter fraud in Pennsylvania and its report should 
compel us to review voting practices and affirm voter protection and 
fairness across the country.
  As the attached information discloses, voter fraud can have broad 
abuses in the areas of PAC activities, false voter registration, 
absentee ballot irregularities, election certification processes, and 
candidate activities at the polling place.
  Mr. Speaker, in every elective office of the United States, from 
President to Township Supervisor, we must maintain the integrity of the 
voting booth. If the voting booths cannot be a place of integrity and 
if Americans cannot cast their ballots knowing that the winner will 
ultimately be one who has garnered the most votes in a fair 
competition, then our democracy is in danger.

                                         House of Representatives,


                                 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,

                                        Harrisburg, April 6, 1995.
     SUBJECT: Public Hearing on the Ninth Investigating Grand 
       Jury's Report Relating to the 1993 Special Election for the 
       Second Senatorial District
     TO: Members of the House State Government Committee
     FROM: The Hon. Paul I. Clymer, Chairman, House State 
         Government Committee
       The following is an overview of the Ninth Investigating 
     Grand Jury's report relating to the 1993 special election for 
     the Second Senatorial District seat. This overview includes a 
     summary of the major issues reviewed by the Grand Jury, as 
     well as findings and recommendations for legislative, 
     executive and administrative action. You may want to pay 
     particular attention to the recommendations. I've also 
     enclosed a copy of the original text of the grand jury's 
     recommendations.
       As you know, the grand jury's report is the subject of the 
     State Government Committee's April 10 hearing, scheduled for 
     10 a.m. in Room 140 of the Main Capitol Building. Please 
     bring this information to the hearing with you. If you have 
     any questions in the meantime, do not hesitate to contact 
     Susan Boyle at 772-3465 (2-3465).


The Ninth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury's Report No. 2 Relating to 
   the 1993 Special Election For the Second Senatorial District Seat


                              Introduction

       In December 1993 the Ninth Statewide Investigating Grand 
     Jury began its investigation of allegations of criminal 
     activity with regard to the special election for the Second 
     Senatorial District seat held on November 1, 1993. The 
     investigation began with an inquiry into reports and 
     complaints of allegedly widespread illegalities in absentee 
     voting. Those allegations involved: 1) improper distribution 
     of absentee ballots where no application for such ballot had 
     been made; 2) the distribution of absentee ballots to 
     individuals not entitled to them; 3) use by these individuals 
     of these ballots; and 4) forgery of absentee ballot related 
     documents.
       During the course of the investigation, other matters of 
     concern came to light. They included: 1) allegations of 
     questionable political action committee (PAC) activities; 2) 
     allegations that WAM grant checks were provided to one of the 
     candidates for distribution during campaign appearances; and 
     3) allegations that arrangements were made to have one of the 
     candidates travel to Harrisburg to be sworn in before the 
     election board even certified his victory.
       The grand jury investigated each of these matters. In some 
     instances, where the grand jury found criminal conduct and 
     was able to identify the persons responsible, it recommended 
     the initiation of criminal proceedings. In other instances, 
     the grand jury recommended legislative, executive or 
     administrative action to correct certain problems or 
     perceived problems.


          Findings--The Stinson Campaign and Absentee Ballots

       The grand jury found that the campaign of candidate William 
     Stinson made a concerted effort to generate absentee ballots. 
     The campaign's strategy involved the extensive handling of 
     both absentee ballot applications and ballot packages by 
     campaign staff and volunteers. The ultimate goal was to 
     generate a large number of ballot applications and submit 
     them to the Philadelphia Board of Elections immediately prior 
     to the deadline so that the Bruce Marks campaign would not 
     have time to mount its own absentee ballot effort.
       Individuals, many of whom were in dire need of money, were 
     recruited by campaign staff and volunteers to go door to door 
     and solicit ballot applications. They were paid $1.00 per 
     application generated. Many voters were told that, in filling 
     out the applications, they were signing up for a ``new way to 
     vote.'' A number of the applications generated through this 
     drive were not filled out properly and thus were rejected by 
     the Board of Elections. Because of the sheer volume of 
     absentee ballot applications generated and the fact that most 
     of them were submitted either on or very close to the 
     application deadline, many applicants were never made aware 
     that their applications were rejected by the Board of 
     Elections and thus were disenfranchised. Even more startling, 
     is the fact that Stinson volunteers also rejected absentee 
     ballot applications that were improperly completed.
       Stinson campaign workers also obtained absentee ballot 
     packages for delivery to applicants. Despite a 1978 memo from 
     then-DA Ed Rendell to City Commissioner Marge Tartaglione 
     indicating that such a practice violates the Election Code, 
     all of the City Commissioners and many of their staff 
     confirmed that the hand delivery of absentee ballots to 
     applicants was a common practice.


             Findings--Other Absentee Ballot Irregularities

       The grand jury found that lies and misrepresentations were 
     used by Stinson campaign volunteers, as well as by others who 
     were not affiliated with the campaign, to entice voters to 
     sign absentee voter applications. Many voters who signed 
     applications were not even told why they were doing so. 
     Others were not even asked if they met the qualified absentee 
     elector criteria set forth in the Election Code. Some voters 
     allowed campaign workers to fill out portions of their 
     absentee ballot and/or declaration envelope. In fact, some 
     campaign workers went so far as to tell voters how to vote. 
     Even more disturbing, a number of registered voters indicated 
     that their signatures--on either the absentee ballot 
     applications or the ballots themselves (or both)--had been 
     forged.


                   Findings--False Voter Registration

       The grand jury found instances in which individuals who did 
     not live in the Second Senatorial District were registered to 
     vote there. In a number of cases, these voters used the 
     registration address of the home of the judge of elections or 
     committee person.


     Findings--Effects of Fraudulent Activity on the Voting Process

       The above-referenced fraudulent activities had a 
     significant impact on the electoral process, according to the 
     grand jury. The most egregious effects include:
       * voters were, at best, mislead, at worst, disenfranchised;
       * fraudulent votes were cast and counted;
       * by personally delivering ballots to voters, campaign 
     workers were able to accompany the absentee voter into his 
     personal voting space.


                Findings--Election Certification Process

       The grand jury found that, although the Philadelphia City 
     Commissioners and the State Senate did not violate criminal 
     law in their certification and swearing in of candidate 
     Stinson, the handling of these processes was rather 
     ``unusual.'' Candidate Marks' absentee ballot challengers 
     were not permitted to testify before the City Commissioners 
     during their certification meeting. The challenges, said 
     Commissioner Talmadge, should have been made by poll watchers 
     at the polling place, as required by the Election Code.
       The Commissioners apparently certified Stinson first, after 
     hearing only one witness. In the meantime, Stinson had been 
     instructed to go to Harrisburg the night before so that he 
     would be readily available to be sworn in. In fact, Marks was 
     in the process of appealing the Commissioners' ruling when 
     Stinson was sworn in. The grand jury suggested that this 
     chain of events might lead one to believe that everything was 
     prearranged and that the various decisions made in the 
     certification process were based on partisan politics.


                 Findings--Political Action Committees

       The grand jury examined the activities of both the FDR 
     Federation PAC and the Committee of 17 PAC. The FDR 
     Federation PAC put out a brochure which was targeted to 
     Jewish voters in the Second Senatorial District and which 
     featured a number of Jewish candidates, including Bruce 
     Marks. Witnesses involved with this PAC admitted that it was 
     established specifically for the purpose of putting out the 
     brochure. The PAC had two members, neither of whom played an 
     active role in making policy decisions relating to the 
     brochure. Decisions relating to the PAC and the brochure were 
     made by Senate Republican campaign staff. The grand jury did 
     not consider the FDR Federation PAC a true PAC as defined in 
     the Election Code. Rather, its members agreed, the PAC served 
     as a front for the Senate Republican Campaign Committee.
       The Committee of 17 PAC was created by William Stinson. Not 
     only did the PAC's officers fail to register the PAC and file 
     campaign expense reports in accordance with law, but 
     Stinson's wife forged a number of checks by signing the PAC 
     treasurer's name. The grand jury compared this PAC to the FDR 
     Federation PAC, in that no one associated with the PAC had 
     any idea what its purpose was and that it was controlled by a 
     third party; in this case William Stinson.


         Findings--Candidates' Activities at the Polling Place

       The grand jury learned that candidate Stinson was involved 
     in a number of questionable activities on election day. Not 
     only did he open and close voting machines for his mother, 
     who is the judge of elections for the 33rd Ward, 13th 
     Division, but he allegedly opened and read a number of 
     absentee ballots. The grand jury asserted that these 
     activities are prohibited by the Election Code and, thus, 
     recommended that Stinson be charged with certain violations 
     of the Code. He was subsequently tried and found not guilty.

[[Page E714]]

  Recommendations for Legislative, Executive and Administrative Action

       The following is a list of recommendations for legislative, 
     executive and/or administrative action made by the grand 
     jury. The recommendations are based on the findings 
     summarized above.
       1. The Office of Attorney General should continue to 
     investigate the allegations brought to light in the grand 
     jury report.
       2. The Election Code should be amended to specifically 
     prohibit the payment of monetary incentives to individuals 
     who solicit absentee ballot applications and/or distribute 
     absentee ballots.
       3. The elected office of City Commissioner of the City of 
     Philadelphia should be abolished. The ``ministerial acts'' of 
     registering voters, approving applications for absentee 
     ballots and counting votes should be performed by civil 
     service employees, not partisan politicians.
       4. The Election Code specifically provides that any elector 
     whose absentee ballot application is rejected by notified 
     immediately of such action. To the extent that there is any 
     ambiguity in the language of this section of the Code, the 
     grand jury recommends that the Election Code be amended to 
     require that this notification be made directly to the 
     elector.
       5. The Election Code should be amended to prohibit anyone 
     other than employees of the City Commissioners' office from 
     delivering absentee ballots to voters and delivering 
     completed ballots to the Board of Elections.
       6. The Election Code should be amended to establish a 
     procedure whereby an absentee elector could designate an 
     ``agent'' to deliver his or her absentee ballot application, 
     obtain the absentee ballot from election officials, return it 
     to the elector and/or return the completed ballot to election 
     officials upon its completion.
       7. The General Assembly should review existing classes of 
     absentee voters and determine if additional classes of voters 
     should be permitted to vote by absentee ballot.
       8. The General Assembly should review the laws relating to 
     challenges to absentee ballots and consider establishing a 
     procedure for dealing with allegations of massive or 
     organized absentee ballot fraud. Present law provides 
     adequately for individual challenges but not for allegations 
     of mass fraud.
       9. The grand jury asserts that, under no circumstances 
     should a candidate or members of his or her immediate family 
     be involved in the opening/closing of polls or the canvassing 
     of votes, and recommends that the General Assembly amend the 
     Election Code to specifically criminalize such activities.
       10. The General Assembly should amend the Election Code to 
     ``better define'' the terms ``political committee'' and 
     ``political action committee'' and to make it a crime to use 
     one political committee or PAC to hide the activities of 
     another political committee or PAC.
       11. The General Assembly should be amended to more clearly 
     provide for the duties and responsibilities of PAC officers, 
     particularly the chairman and treasurer. In particular, the 
     Election Code should identify the officer responsible for 
     registering political committees and for filing all of the 
     reports required of such committees.
       12. The General Assembly should enact legislation 
     prohibiting governmental officials or employees from 
     requesting that their subordinates engage in political 
     activity.
       13. The four caucuses of the General Assembly which 
     distribute WAM grants should take steps to prohibit the 
     distribution of such monies by non-incumbent candidates for 
     public office for political purposes.

                          ____________________