February 21, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Robert H. Newhouse
February 21, 1996
Page 1
Robert H. Newhouse
6486 S. Saulsbury Street
Littleton, CO 80123
Roman R. Garcia, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 435
2941 W. 19th Avenue
Denver, CO 80204
Steve Vairma, President
Teamsters Local Union 435
2941 W. 19th Avenue
Denver, CO 80204
David Ring, Vice President
Teamsters Local Union 435
2941 W. 19th Avenue
Denver, CO 80204
Roger Quimby, Trustee
Teamsters Local Union 435
2941 W. 19th Avenue
Denver, CO 80204
Sylvia Salazar
Teamsters Local Union 435
2941 W. 19th Avenue
Denver, CO 80204
Ron Cash
Teamsters Local Union 435
2941 W. 19th Avenue
Denver, CO 80204
Gary Stugart
Teamsters Local Union 435
2941 W. 19th Avenue
Denver, CO 80204
Robert H. Newhouse
February 21, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-388-LU435-RMT
Gentlepersons:
Robert H. Newhouse, a candidate for delegate from Local Union 435, filed a protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”). Mr. Newhouse is a member of the “Teamsters for Justice” slate. His protest concerns campaign literature handed out by members of another slate, called “Teamsters United.”
Robert H. Newhouse
February 21, 1996
Page 1
The protest was investigated by Associate Regional Coordinator Zeik Saidman, who found the following facts.
The protested hand-out is a copy of the draft ballot prepared by the IBT Election Office, with the following alterations:
1) The slate box for “Teamsters United” has been checked.
2) A large box containing text has been pasted over the “Teamsters for Justice” slate and the independent candidates. An arrow in the box points to the “Teamsters United” slate name, and the text in the box includes: “One check mark does it! Watch for your ballot in the mail . . . and when it comes, check only the ‘TEAMSTERS UNITED’ box . . .”
3) A banner across the bottom of the hand-out, in large white letters on a dark background, states: “PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A SAMPLE BALLOT.”
4) Underneath the banner appears: “Paid for by the Committee to Elect ‘Teamsters United.’”
The ground for Mr. Newhouse’s protest is that the words “Official Ballot” appear at the top of the hand-out. These words are obviously text of the draft ballot from the IBT Election Office on which the alterations listed above were made. Mr. Newhouse states that “This is clearly not an ‘official ballot,’ and clearly has been altered to mislead the Local 435 membership.”
The hand-out is not deceptive or misleading because the alterations listed above clearly transformed the draft ballot into campaign literature. The added text alerts the members that a real ballot will come in the mail and asks the reader to mark it as indicated. The hand-out is labeled “sample ballot” and “paid for” by an election committee. The fact that these alterations were made to a draft “official ballot” does not change the conclusion that the hand-out is clearly campaign literature to the reader.
The contents of the hand-out do not violate the Rules. The use of sample ballots was examined by the Election Officer in the last election, and the principles announced in those decisions still apply.
The Rules . . . secure for all candidates the freedom to fully exercise political rights through solicitations, support and the distribution of campaign literature. The Election Officer has consistently applied the Rules so as to safeguard the exercise of these political rights. The Rules neither prohibit nor regulate the content of campaign literature.
Rogers, P-518-LU373-SOU (February 21, 1991). See also Hughes, P-499-LU710-CHI (February 21, 1991); Hammontree, P-530-LU667-SOU (February 25, 1991).
Robert H. Newhouse
February 21, 1996
Page 1
The goal to be protected is free speech. The alterations to the draft marked “official ballot” from the Election Office demonstrate that the literature is not the official ballot. Beyond that concern:
[T]he Election Officer’s duty is to ‘insure fair, honest, open and informed elections.’ This essential goal is achieved by supporting a ‘policy of encouraging free and open debate in internal union affairs’ . . . The model for free and fair Union elections is that of partisan political elections . . . The cardinal principle is that the best remedy for untrue speech is more free speech, with the electorate being the final arbiter.
Landwehr, P-201-LU795-MOI (November 15, 1995) (citations omitted).
Based on the foregoing, the protest is DENIED.
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within one day of receipt of this letter. The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Officer in any such appeal. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing and shall be served on:
Kenneth Conboy, Esq.
Latham & Watkins
885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000
New York, NY 10022
Fax (212) 751-4864
Copies of the request for hearing must be served on the parties listed above as well as upon the Election Officer, 400 North Capitol Street, Suite 855, Washington, D.C. 20001, Facsimile (202) 624-3525. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.
Sincerely,
Barbara Zack Quindel
Election Officer
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master
Zeik Saidman, Associate Regional Coordinator