Tulsa World on OK Vote Totals: We Have No Idea

On November 3, the Tulsa World reported that Sen. John Kerry was winning in 57 Oklahoma counties with 70% of the vote counted. But, by the time the rest of the votes were added in (or subtracted out, as the case may be), George W. Bush carried every county in Oklahoma, one of only two states where he managed that feat. It was a simple case of the Bible Belt voting for yet another Republican Presidential candidate, just as we have every year since 1980 (maybe longer, but you get the point). Or was it?

Why then did the Tulsa World report that Kerry was leading in 57 counties, and why then did Kerry actually lose in every one of those counties when the final vote was tallied? Because when the final votes were tallied, Kerry actually LOST votes in all 57 counties, 37,9982 to be exact, while Bush GAINED an incredible 393,825 votes in the same counties. That's right, as the Oklahoma Independent Media Center put it, "Voting Machines Count Backwards in Okla". http://okimc.org/newswire.php?story_id=344

For example, with 70% of the total vote counted in Bryan County, the Tulsa World had Kerry leading Bush by a whopping 4,016 votes, with 6,864 votes to Bush's 2,848. But, after the official vote was tallied, Bush had 8,615 votes (a gain of 5,767 votes), while Kerry ended up with 5,745 votes (a LOSS of 1,119 votes). In Carter County, Kerry led by 2,947 votes with 70% counted, 7,955 to 5,008, but once again, when the "official" vote was finalized, Bush won with 8,615 votes (a gain of 5,767 votes), while Kerry ended up with only 5,745 votes (again, a LOSS of 2,210 votes). It truly appears as if the voting machines counted backwards....but only for Kerry. This pattern is repeated in all 57 counties. Kerry lost votes, while Bush gained massive amounts of votes.

Now, truthfully, I'm as skeptical as the next guy (provided the next guy isn't a neocon) about our current system of voting, especially when the votes are tallied by EE&S Corp, who have clear ties to numerous ultra-right individuals and organizations, and have already been implicated in several other voter fraud investigations. But let's be honest about this - why would anyone waste their time rigging the election in a state that Kerry didn't even bother to campaign in, and that Oklahoma Democratic Party officials conceded to Bush without even a semblance of a fight?

There had to be a simple explanation. A phone call to the Tulsa World would clear this right up. On Sunday night, I spoke to reporter Mike Decker, who sounded a bit surprised by the vote total discrepancy. It seemed like a simple question: "What was the source of the information that you printed in your newspaper....in other words, where did you get your numbers?" He had no idea.

Could I call back on Monday and speak to Randy Krehbiel, who handles their election reporting? I could. According to Krehbiel, "On election night, things get very hectic. My recollection is that we used AP results, because it's faster than State Election Board numbers." Except, umm, Krehbiel had the night off, so he wasn't around when the story was printed, so he really didn't know where they got their vote totals from.

I really needed to speak to Executive Editor Joe Worley, who was just walking out the door. Could I call and leave a message for him, and he'd call me back Monday afternoon? No problem. I left a message Monday morning.....and waited. I left another message Monday afternoon....and waited some more. Then, on Tuesday morning, I left another message....and waited again. And yet one more on Tuesday afternoon.

While I was "busy" waiting, I called the Oklahoma State Election Board, and spoke with Vada Holstein, who had a simple explanation for all the fuss. "Apparently, the Tulsa World inadvertently added the straight party vote total to the numbers that they got from the State Election Board, who had already included the straight party vote totals in their figures, which inflated both candidates vote totals." In other words, the straight party votes were added in twice. It made perfect sense, except for one thing. If they added the straight party totals to both candidates' totals, why then did Kerry's vote total actually drop by over 37 thousand votes, while Bush's vote total gained 393 thousand votes. I did the math on a handful of the counties, using the numbers provided on the State Election Board website. It didn't add up. She was wrong.

Then, finally, on Tuesday afternoon (actually Tuesday evening), Worley called me back. Now we would put an end to this mini-voter fraud scandal once and for all. Simple question: "What was the source of the information that you printed in your newspaper....in other words, where did you get your vote totals from?"

"Actually, we've spent a good part of our day looking into that very issue. We subscribe to the AP wire service, and that's where those numbers usually come from, where they're supposed to come from. However, as of right now, we have no idea where we got our numbers from. When we do find out, we'll make a statement in the Tulsa World newspaper, and I'll answer any other questions at that time."

Wait a second here.....let me get this straight. The Tulsa World printed the election totals from what many considered the most important Presidential election of the last forty years, and they don't know where those numbers come from? They had Kerry leading in 57 counties with numbers that actually went in reverse from their published figures, and after two days of looking, they still can't figure out who gave them those numbers?

In the end, the "voting scandal" in Oklahoma might turn out to be nothing, but that's not the real issue here. The real issue is the pattern of deceit, confusion, and misinformation that this election has spawned, not just in Oklahoma, but nationwide. Unless we demand a full and thorough accounting of all the votes that have been miscounted, lost, stolen, or simply misplaced, we can never be certain whether our most important right as an American, our right to vote, is still intact. In Oklahoma, we still have our paper ballots, and they don't have "hanging chads". We can, and should, demand a full recount. Unfortunately, many states don't have that luxury, if we allow our entire voting system to be taken over by an electronic voting system controlled by a few questionable companies, our vote won't matter, and our elections will become nothing more than another commodity to be bought and sold by those in power.

To see the Tulsa World vote totals published on Nov. 3, go to:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/TWPDFs/2004/Final/A_10_11_3_2004.pdf

And compare them to the Oklahoma State Election Board totals at:

http://www.elections.state.ok.us/04gen_co.pdf

ENDS

Mark Faulk
info@FaulkingTruth.com
www.FaulkingTruth.com

© Scoop Media