Slashdot Mirror
Political Robocallers Indicted In Maryland
sanzibar writes with a llnk to Politico with an object lesson for modern political campaigners: don't harass the electorate with unwanted robocalls. "Ehrlich campaign manager Paul Schurick and Baltimore political consultant Julius Henson were both charged with three counts of conspiracy to violate election laws, one count of attempting to influence a voter's decision and one count of failing to print an 'authorized by' line on campaign material. Schurick was also charged with a single count of obstruction of justice for failing to turn over materials sought by the grand jury."
Any politico worth his salt knows that robocalls, no matter how many and who is talking, do nothing but piss the electorate off at you. They aren't even good at raising awareness because people tune out. It's a waste of time up until the summer before an election anyway, and then it's only any good if you're using volunteers and getting people to turn out. I've run call centers for campaigns before and it's incredible to me that somebody who was affiliated with statewide campaigns, that is someone who has experience winning elections, would be this stupid.
I read a bit of the article, and the calls targeted likely supporters of candidate A, and basically said "You can relax, candidate A has enough votes" the defendant is being charged because he was attempting to deceive voters to influence the outcome of the election.
If only politicians could be charged with something like that for not fulfilling campaign promises.
When robots pass a Turing test, they will get free speech. Not before.
"attempting to influence a voter's decision" ??? wtf? This is a crime?
failing to print an 'authorized by' line on campaign material ??? 1st amendment authorizes free speech.
Democratic Party of Maryland wants a one party state.
Yeah, this was the real story. Considering that the other guy (incumbent Governor O'Malley) was basically the source material for Tommy Carcetti, the fact that Ehrlich is even scummier should be startling.
Sorry? Yes, indeed. Robocalls are a form of trespass. Around these parts, trespassers are usually shot. Survivors are shot again. If you're caught doing Robocalls, make sure you're not in Texas, or much of the rest of the South or Midwest. Keep your gay ass in one of the gay states, like California.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
I'm pretty sure freedom of speech includes the right to say whatever you want on the phone.
But does it really include the right to call and/or harass people by ringing their phone? That doesn't seem like "speech" to me at all.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Isn't campaining a form of influencing the voters?
So, in the context of, say radio broadcasting... would you say:
Then radio receivers and/or receivers pass a Turing test, they will get free speech. Not before.
Using a tool to further disseminate your speech doesn't stop it from being your speech -- the words originated not with the automatic phone bank, but with a lying scumbag campaign operative, who is still a human.
There may be reasonable arguments* why the first amendment does not protect this, but that's not one of them.
*If you do try to propose a reasonable argument, please try to find one that can stand on its own, without the ever-popular crutch of quoting Ollie Holmes's bit about "falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic". Unless, of course, you really do support imprisoning anyone who speaks out against the government (anti-conscription pamphlets in that case). If so, quote away, and we shall all laugh at you and disregard your argument.
Only steers and queers come from Texas, Private Runaway1956. And you don't look much like a steer to me so that kinda narrows it down.
It was fraud. They robo-called predominantly black riding to say the election was over and there was no need to vote which was an out and out lie. Then they attempted to hide the evidence.
This has nothing to do with free speech, it is out and out fraud and is a criminal matter.
Anarchists never rule
Sorry, that's what robocalls are.
But, in this case, it's a form of slander, which isn't protected under the first amendment.
I actually got one of these calls. It was pretty disgusting and obvious to me what was going on, but I'm a born cynic. It would have gotten me out to cast a vote against Ehrlich, if I hadn't already done so for many other reasons earlier in the day.
I'm pleasantly surprised somebody might actually get held accountable for this. (Although we'll probably never have proof one way or another about Ehrlich himself.)
Now if we could just get all the other robocalls made illegal as well...
(anon, well, because)
There were robocallers that were calling people like 3am in the morning...paid for by the opposing party pretending to be the other party here in Canada to piss people off from voting for them.
I'm not that knowledgeable with American politics except to predict that this type of behavior was most likely done by a Republican.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Who's surprised?
Bob Ehrlich won in 2002 by 51% by being the Republican. That was 2002, as in the year after 9/11, running in Maryland as the guy from the same party as the President, who was still being regularly fellated in the media for his decisive leadership following the attacks.
He then lost in 2006, and in 2010. It's not clear he ever knew how to win an election, but it's quite clear he knew how to lie and flirt with violations of election law. Bob Ehrlich#Misleading voter guides and campaign mailers
Robocalls aren't free speech - it's speech forced down someone's throat without asking for it during dinner time causing indigestion.
I would say that if robocalls for a political campaign is done against someone's will that party should be banned from participating in the election for the next 4 years. That would be a clear enough statement to say that it has to be entirely clear that robocalls aren't wanted.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Please mod parent as "Funny", it was awesome! :D
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
I'm pretty sure you cannot legally shoot someone simply for trespassing in Texas, in fact I've read about people being prosecuted for doing just that. Read Texas PC 9.41 - 9.42. The key word in there is "reasonably".
http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/9.41.00.html
http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/9.42.00.html
I helped a couple campaigns get a correcting message out in the last federal election when someone dialed a bunch of homes with the lie: "This is elections Canada, there has been a change in your polling station, please go to X to vote". Typically the fake poll was in the middle of a crowded mall or some other difficult to reach place, I'd assume the goal being to dissuade the voter or delay them until voting ended.
Politics in close ridings can be dirty business, and it's ultimately the Candidate and their Campaign Manager's responsibility to choose the tone of their campaign. It's not a partisan thing, I've been told by friends on other sides of the fence that this happened to their candidates in other ridings too.
My hope is that this crap gets enough press to inform the electorate so they don't fall for these again.
-Matt
--- Need web hosting?
Political Robocallers Indicted In Maryland
Now for the robowalkers!
Every end has half a stick.
it doesn't compute.
There's a difference between influencing the voters how to vote (legal) and influencing the voters not to vote (illegal).
No, Canada does not register voters to parties, however, if people who vote at a station that votes 'the wrong way' can be discouraged from voting, it can effect an election. See the 'hanging chads' problem in the US for another way this tactic shows up.
It is legal to shoot and kill someone if they break into your house, but not trespassing unless it's trespassing onto restricted military grounds. Robocop will come and get you if you shoot someone without a permit.
I have a suggestion: stick with the only 2 things you are good at: fucking whores in the ass and eating shit out of a toilet. Now THAT is free speech.
the defendant is being charged because he was attempting to deceive voters to influence the outcome of the election.
All candidates in all races always attempt to deceive voters to influence the outcome of the election.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
There is a difference between "free speech" and "protected speech". Google the words "firehouse" and "fire", together, for the grounding in First Amendment law that you appear to lack. Then we can move on to the finer points...
Robocalling and various forms of "voter suppression" are most certainly not protected speech. Granted, anyone dumb enough to change his mind about voting after receiving an unsolicited robotic phone call, suggesting that he should stay home because his candidate has the election in the bag, probably deserves what his apathy/stupidity gets him, but that doesn't change the fact their are indeed some rules about what one can say and how they say it.
Not very many months ago, there was a story of a woman in Houston, who looked out her window to see someone breaking into her car. She blew the joker away. No charges were filed. Anywhere you go in Texas, it is "open season" year round on thieves and other lowlifes. A trespasser is not on safe ground, period. You do realize, after he's been shot, it's the shooter's word against - uhhhh - NOBODY'S word! Or, as ye olde pirates would have said, "Dead men tell no tales!"
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
The right to freedom of speech applies to people, not robots!
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Are you sure? What's your phone number?
Free speech doesn't include the right to use MY resources for YOUR speech. That is, MY phone and the phone service I pay for. That also includes MY time to see who's calling and hang up. The least you could do is the courtesy of having an actual human being call. If you'd care to make a speech on the steps of the courthouse or buy some ads, I'm fine with that. You can also put up a website and tweet to your heart's content. You can put flyers in my mailbox if you'd like.
Beyond that, it's (unfortunately) not about the calls themselves, but that they attempted to influence the election by telling supporters of his opponent that their candidate won. In the process, implying that the call came from a supporter of his opponent. We do not have an inalienable right to lie.
You can say what you want to convince people to vote for you, but attempting to obstruct the election process itself is off limits.
Did you even read the laws I linked to? Protection of property "during the night" is one of the circumstances that allows for the use of deadly force.
If someone cares to pay for a telephone line into my house, they can robocall me on it all day long. The line that I do have is paid for by me, and I control who gets to talk on it.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!