Trib editorial: Bogus absentee ballots revealed days before the election |

Trib editorial: Bogus absentee ballots revealed days before the election

Just days before Tuesday’s election we learn that, for years apparently, Westmoreland County has been sending out absentee ballots based solely on age when age alone isn’t a legally qualifying reason for an absentee ballot.

And now that it’s too late to correct the error, according to Beth Lechman, director of the county’s election bureau, voters older than 65 who mailed in absentee ballots — based on no other criteria except their age — will be allowed to vote in person on Election Day; the illegitimate absentee ballots will be discarded, she said.

Pass the antacids.

Those absentee-ballot applications based solely on age were granted “based on past procedure,” Ms. Lechman said — regardless of state law.

This proverbial fly in the ointment turned up when Democrat officials reviewed absentee ballots in Monessen. Out of 300 absentee ballots requested by Monessen voters, about two-thirds were requested by voters citing only the age “consideration” — which legally isn’t a consideration, according to party lawyer David Millstein. The Westmoreland County Democratic Committee wants to have those absentee ballots disqualified.

Mr. Millstein says he finds it “highly questionable” that the elections bureau would even accept those ballots. No less questionable is how these unqualified absentee ballots could affect the outcome of a referendum in six Westmoreland communities concerning a new 1-mill property tax to support the Greensburg Hempfield Area Library.

It’s a mess, to be sure, that could have been avoided if election officials simply followed the law, which is their mandate — not their option.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.