Thousands of Ohio voters have been falsely notified that they are not registered to vote due to a database error in Ohio’s voter rolls. An Ohio voter advocacy group alerted Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted (R) to this major system problem on October 30. But instead of fixing it, Husted issued a directive instructing local boards to use the same flawed search method to count provisional ballots after Election Day.

Ohio’s computer search of the voter registration database will only find exact matches, meaning that voters could come up as unregistered due to typos, abbreviations, or partial entries. This flawed search mechanism missed huge numbers of registered voters in Franklin and Cuyahoga Counties, incorrectly rejecting 33,000 requests for absentee ballots. These two counties corrected the error, but thousands of others may have slipped through the cracks in the rest of the state. These voters were told they are not registered to vote and may be forced to use provisional ballots at the polls.

But if they do decide to file provisional ballots, along with a growing number of other legal voters in the state, the very same search method could disenfranchise their vote entirely. Husted has ignored warnings that the system is missing large numbers of registered voters. As the Northeast Ohio Voter Advocates, who first discovered the problem, explain:

Worse yet, Sec. Husted last night released a Directive with a proposed search method for Boards of Elections to verify registration status on provisional ballots. Yet Sec. Husted’s latest recommendations for search are entirely inadequate, likely to miss thousands of voters because of mis-spelling of names, variation in form of ID, failure to use all available tools for a reasonable search and other reasons. Once again, our warnings and suggestions, sent this morning, have gone unanswered. Unless this inadequacy is corrected, several thousand provisional ballots could be wrongfully rejected as “not registered.” If the election is close, this could be a source of endless legal battles.

NOVA has outlined an alternative, more accurate search method that will result in far fewer mistakes. Husted’s office has not yet responded.

Husted’s directive also jeopardizes legal ballots by shifting the burden of proof on the contested voter, even though Ohio law requires the poll worker to fill out the form. A federal judge will hear the case the morning after Election Day.

Beyond the federal, state, and local candidates on the ballot tomorrow, voters will consider 174 state ballot questions. While these touch on a wide array of subjects, here are five of the most significant areas of potential policy change:

1. In-state tuition for eligible undocumented immigrants in Maryland. Maryland voters will vote on Question 4, deciding whether a state DREAM Act, passed by the legislature, should go into law. If voters approve the question, eligible undocumented immigrants would be able to to pay in-state tuition at state universities. On the other hand, Montanans will vote on LR-121, a proposal to deny state services to undocumented immigrants — including state permits, licenses, and services for crime victims.

2. Marriage equality could be enacted in Maine, Maryland, and Washington. Voters in Maryland (Question 6), Maine (Question 1), and Washington (Referendum 74) will vote on whether to enact marriage equality for same-sex couples. In Maryland and Washington, the voters would be endorsing bills enacted by the state legislature, while Maine voters will consider the first effort to proactively pass marriage equality by initiative petition. Minnesotans, however, will consider a proposed marriage inequality amendment (Amendment 1). Under state law, opponents of equality will need a majority of all voters who show up — even if they don’t vote on Amendment 1 — to amend the state constitution.

3. Marijuana could be legalized in Colorado, Oregon, and Washington. Colorado’s Amendment 64 and Washington’s Initiative 502 would legalize and regulate sales of small quantities of marijuana to residents 21 years and older. Oregon will consider a less-restrictive Measure 80. Additionally, Arkansas (Issue 5) and Massachusetts (Question 3) will both consider proposals to allow medical marijuana and Montana (Initiative Referendum 124) will vote on whether to allow the state legislature to substitute its own medical marijuana law for one enacted by voters in 2004.

4. Unions in California could lose their power to engage in political activity. California’s Proposition 32 would effectively prevent labor unions from collecting money from their membership to pay for political activities, while doing nothing about corporations which, thanks to Citizens United, can spend as much of their corporate treasury funds on electioneering as they wish. This misleading proposal — dressed up as a campaign finance reform effort — is being pushed by a wealthy Republican activist and the Koch-linked America’s Future Fund. On the other hand, Michigan’s Proposition 12-2 would amend the state’s constitution to protect collective bargaining rights.

5. Extreme anti-tax rules could be enacted in Florida, Michigan, and Washington. Florida voters will decide whether to accept Amendment 3, a so-called “Taxpayer Bill of Rights,” which limits public spending and revenue collection through a harmful proscribed formula. Both Michigan (Proposal 12-5) and Washington (Initiative 1185) will vote on proposals to require a two-thirds legislative supermajority in order to end tax breaks or increase tax rates. Additionally, Oregon voters will decide on Measure 84, which would gradually repeals the estate tax and will cause a $120 million loss in revenue for the state every year.

These ballot initiatives have a huge potential to shape policy — and possibly the direction the nation will go on those topics.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani this weekend claimed that President Obama’s response to Hurricane Sandy was “worse than Katrina,” the New Orleans hurricane that left thousands dead, injured, and homeless.

But it turns out Giuliani didn’t reserve the “worse than” comparison for a dire situation. The former mayor — who has served exclusively as a partisan attack dog, and not a policy maker, for several years — has an affinity for using that turn of phrase to criticize the Obama administration. Here are five other instances in the last four years where he’s claimed Obama’s policy was in some way “worse than” whatever came before it:

1. Bengazi was “worse than” Watergate
In an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, Giuliani suggested that the murder of US Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens “could be worse than Watergate because it involves very, very sensitive, classified information about which people could be killed and that may be worse than Watergate in terms of, you know, the taking of human life.”

2. Obama as President is “worst” since pre-Carter
Appearing on CNN with Piers Morgan, Giuliani was asked whether he thought Obama was the worst since Jimmy Carter. In his typical inflammatory fashion, Giuliani responded, “I think he’s been the worst president we’ve had since before Jimmy Carter”:

3. The withdrawal from Iraq was “worse than” Vietnam
“There’s an extra danger involved in this that might be worse than Vietnam. And it’s not about scale. Obviously the Vietnam scale is much larger,” said Giuliani. “This is an enemy, the Islamic terrorists, who have proven to be even more aggressive than the Communists were, in the sense that the Communists never attacked within the United States.”

4. Stopping drilling off the gulf coast was “more damaging” the BP oil spill
After the BP oil spill, President Obama issued a moratorium on deep water drilling off the gulf coast. Giuliani, who has ties to the oil industry, told Fox News that, “In the long term, there may be bigger problems than the oil spill with this moratorium… It could be a two year problem. And could be bigger and more damaging than the oil spill itself”:

5. Obama is generally just “worse than” Giuliani thought
After Obama had been in office for just six months, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Giuliani, “Have your worst fears come true, or are you satisfied?” To which he replied, “In many respects, it’s much worse than I thought.”

Giuliani recently called for the resignation of Obama over lagging post-recession growth, and blamed Obama’s “incompetence” for the deaths of the four Americans killed in Libya this September.

Steve Schmidt, a former senior strategist to Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) 2008 presidential campaign, admitted that widespread voter fraud doesn’t exist in the United States and claimed that the GOP-backed voter ID laws are based on “mythology.”

Appearing on MSNBC on Monday morning, Schmidt derided the hysteria surrounding ineligible voters casting ballots:

SCHIMDT: I think that one of the things you always want to be for whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, you want everyone who is eligible to vote to vote. That’s how you want to win elections. I think that all of this stuff that has transpired over the last two years is in search of a solution to a problem, voting fraud, that doesn’t really exist when you look deeply at the question. It’s part of the mythology now in the Republican Party that there’s widespread voter fraud across the country. In fact, there’s not. Both sides are lawyered up to the nth degree and they’ll all posture back and forth on it but it probably won’t come down to lawyers.

Watch it:

Since 2000, there has been about one case of voter impersonation per every 15 million votes cast, according to a report from ProPublica, and even proponents of voter ID have struggled to identify cases of fraud. Meanwhile, state-based efforts forcing voters to produce picture identifications could disproportionately disenfranchise minorities who typically vote for Democratic candidates.

On CBS News Monday morning, Governor John Kasich (R-OH) was asked about Ohio’s impending provisional ballot mess, which could delay election results. By state law, Ohio’s provisional ballots cannot be counted until November 17 — and this year, officials will likely be sifting through thousands of these ballots. Kasich admitted that his own administration’s new policies could lead to “numerous” provisional ballots that could decide the election:

HOST: Are you concerned this may come down to counting provisional ballots in Ohio?

KASICH: It’s possible. Because a lot of people got ballots to vote early and if you don’t turn those in, you know, and then you show up to vote, then you become a provisional ballot operator. And so it is possible, if it’s very very close, that we won’t know the results of this for a while. But again, I’m just not a fortune teller. I can’t predict that. The provisional ballots could be numerous, we’ll see.

Watch it:

Kasich is referring to an initiative undertaken by his Secretary of State, Jon Husted (R), who sent absentee ballot applications to all registered voters. Voters who filled out the application but later decided to vote at the polls will be forced to vote provisional so officials can verify they did not vote twice. As 350,000 absentee ballots in Ohio have not yet been returned, the number of provisional ballots cast Tuesday could be significant, as Kasich explained.

Kasich’s cautious statement is in stark contrast with Husted’s insistence that the state will have enough ballots to call the election on Tuesday. Husted also issued a last-minute directive on Friday increasing the likelihood that these ballots will be thrown out.