In the recent Iowa caucuses, held January 3, state Republican Party officials effectively excluded Alan Keyes from the electoral process — and, in doing so, deprived voters of the privilege of voting for Alan. The result was not just profound damage to Alan's campaign, but disenfranchisement of Iowa voters, in direct violation, we believe, of Iowa election laws.

The irregular behavior of the party centers in three basic facts:

1. On caucus night, precinct chairs relied on a list that amounted to a "suggested ballot" provided by the state GOP to guide them in conducting the caucuses. In at least one county, precinct chairs photocopied the official list of presidential candidates and distributed it as a ballot that attendees used in casting their votes.
   
   Note that Alan Keyes' name was not on this list, and therefore he was at a distinct disadvantage during the voting. We've learned from numerous witnesses that Alan's name was not even mentioned when precinct chairs guided the voting process. Only if a Keyes supporter spoke out and mentioned that Alan was a candidate did caucus-goers learn that they could cast a vote for Alan.
   
   We know that in at least one instance, a Keyes supporter was discouraged by a precinct chair from speaking in favor of Alan.
   
   Some have pointed out that the behavior of the state party amounts to free promotion of those candidates on the party's list — as well as clear discrimination against Alan.
   
   
2. The party claims it "has no idea how many votes Alan received," despite the fact that state law requires caucus officials "to tabulate and report the number of persons favoring each presidential candidate," and stipulates that "failing to perform those duties, falsifying the information, or omitting the information required to be reported" is "election misconduct in the third degree [and] a serious misdemeanor," subject to "criminal penalty." (See Title II, Iowa Code, attached.)
   
   On caucus night, the results for Giuliani, Huckabee, Hunter, McCain, Paul, Romney, Tancredo, and Thompson were all listed almost immediately afterward at the state GOP website, IowaGOP.net, because the state used an electronic system that relied on telephone calls from precinct chairs. Alan Keyes' name was left off this system's list of names, and therefore the party has yet to release any vote totals for Alan.
   
   When the Keyes campaign contacted the state GOP office the day after the caucuses to find out how many votes Alan received, a spokesperson named John Lund said the state GOP would let the campaign know in a matter of days. The campaign has yet to receive any kind of official tally.
   
   As far as whether Alan actually received any votes is concerned, we have ample evidence that numerous people voted for him. In one caucus alone, Johnston 3, he received 14 votes, according to precinct chair Scott Spray. One Keyes supporter in Texas who was watching C-SPAN saw a C-SPAN crew videotape at least two precinct chairs reporting votes for Keyes to state headquarters by phone.
   
   
3. The state party's explanation for such irregularity and illegality is that it "didn't know Alan was running" — even though many state party officials personally attended the biggest event leading up to the caucuses, a nationally-televised debate sponsored by the Des Moines Register featuring all the major Republican presidential candidates, including Alan Keyes, held December 12 in the Des Moines suburb of Johnston. The unique debate was broadcast by CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, C-SPAN, and PBS.
   
   It's also worth noting that right after Alan announced on September 14 (nine days after Fred Thompson), he went on the most popular radio program in Iowa, WHO's Jan Mickelson show, and publicized his candidacy. Any claim by party leaders that they were unaware that Alan's candidacy during the entire four months leading up to the caucuses is not credible.
   
   

Rather than act as a support to legitimate candidates, the Iowa GOP has acted in this instance as an agent of arbitrary exclusion. Despite any explanation by the state party that we've received so far for its actions and negligence, the most persuasive explanation is bias toward Alan — not anything Alan himself has done or not done.

Recently, we were shocked to learn that the state party told the Fox News affiliate in Des Moines, KDSM, that the reason Alan was excluded from the caucuses was that he "had no office here, no staff, spent little time campaigning in Iowa, and in most pre-caucus polls got less than 1%." (See video: http://www.alankeyes.com/articles/080110iowa.php) Not only is this information inexcusable as a basis for excluding a candidate from the caucuses (and not only does it contradict the party's earlier explanations), but it's incorrect. In order to qualify for the Des Moines Register debate, the Keyes campaign had to demonstrate that it had an office in the state, a paid staff, and at least 2% in state polls. We met this criteria to the Register's satisfaction. It's worth noting that immediately following the debate, a USA Today/Gallup poll reported that Alan was even with Ron Paul nationally at 3%, ahead of Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo.

We believe Alan has been unfairly discriminated against by the Iowa Republican Party. Even more fundamentally, we believe Iowa voters were unlawfully and unethically misled and interfered with at the Iowa caucuses. This kind of fraudulent manipulation of our country's electoral system is un-American, reminiscent of the shallow pretense and deception that characterized elections in the former Soviet Union, where voters' choices were narrowed undemocratically by those in charge of the election process.