Ark. Senate panel opens hearing on disputed 2006 runoff election

LITTLE ROCK A former lawmaker who is challenging his loss in a 2006 primary runoff for the Arkansas Senate told a legislative panel Tuesday that the election was "un-American" and marred by fraud and manipulation.

The Senate opened a hearing in which it is being asked for the first time in its history to resolve a disputed election and consider whether to oust a sitting senator over claims of voting irregularities. Testimony will continue Wednesday in the proceedings at the state Capitol.

The Senate State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee will recommend to the full Senate whether Sen. Jack Crumbly, D-Widener, can remain in his east Arkansas post despite the allegations from former Rep. Arnell Willis of Helena-West Helena. Senate District 16 serves parts of Crittenden, Lee, Phillips and St. Francis counties.

Crumbly was declared the winner in the 2006 Democratic primary runoff through a recount after initial results showed Willis the victor.

"What happened to me on June 13, 2006, was un-American. It was downright shameful," Willis said during testimony before the panel. "This is not a third-world banana republic. This is the United States of America."

There was no Republican running for the Senate seat and Crumbly was sworn in last year. Removing a sitting senator requires a 23 vote of the Senate.

Willis attorney Mike Easley said in opening statements that the chairman of the St. Francis County Election Commission acted as Crumbly's "de facto" campaign chairman and stuffed ballot boxes to ensure Crumbly's victory in the runoff. Easley said the hearing would reveal widespread instances of voter fraud and ballot manipulation.

"These people do these things in the light of day without any fear of investigation," Easley said.

But Easley said he couldn't provide undeniable proof of the ballot-stuffing accusation.

"We don't have a video of him doing that. I wish we did," Easley said. "But sometimes when a rabbit runs across your front yard in the snow, you don't have to see the rabbit to know a rabbit ran across your yard. All the tracks are there."

Robin Carroll, Crumbly's attorney, said Willis had plenty of allegations but few facts to back up his claims. Carroll said Easley was relying on "overcooked" claims of voter fraud to make his case. All the witnesses Willis' attorneys planned on calling were either on the payroll of the Willis campaign or Easley's, Carroll said.

"Senator Crumbly won the race fair and square," Carroll said. "He deserves to remain in his seat."

Frederick Freeman, the St. Francis County election commission chairman, said Tuesday he never served as Crumbly's campaign manager and did not promote Crumbly's candidacy. He acknowledged, however, that he forwarded an e-mail in 2005 about Crumbly forming an exploratory committee for the Senate race in which he praised Crumbly as a "true public servant."

Dawn Reed, a forensic document examiner hired by Easley to examine absentee ballots, said she found numerous discrepancies between signatures and the election roster. Reed described the absentee ballots as a "forgery frenzy."

"The discrepancies in this case were extremely significant," Reed said.

Carroll, however, noted that Reed previously has testified that of the 40 suspect handwriting samples she found in the voting rolls only five were in the strongest categories indicating fraud.

Other than the panel's seven members, at least a dozen senators attended Tuesday's hearing in the old Supreme Court chamber at the state Capitol. Attorney General Dustin McDaniel also attended part of the hearing.

The contest landed in the Senate after a special circuit judge ruled in February that the Legislature, not the courts, should decide who is the seat's proper occupant. Easley initially said he would appeal but changed his mind and said he wanted the hearing before the Senate.

The proceedings took on the feel of a cross between a court trial and legislative hearing, with the committee acting as a jury but also questioning lawyers in an hour-long session late Tuesday. Under rules drafted for the hearing, the committee members cannot question witnesses.

"It's not a situation we find ourselves in very often, to have a colleague and a former colleague at odds with each other and having to be the decision makers," Sen. Randy Laverty, D-Jasper, said during the question-and-answer session with Carroll and Easley.

Sen. Bobby Glover, D-Carlisle, indicated that his decision will ultimately come down to whether there were enough instances of fraud that would have changed the outcome of the election. Crumbly was declared the winner by 68 votes.

"When it's all said and done, I want to know how the votes stack up," Glover told the attorneys.

The panel will deliberate privately before making a non-binding recommendation to the 35-member Senate for its vote. Sen. Steve Faris, the committee chairman, said deliberations could begin as early as Wednesday afternoon.