[EL] NJ's Approach to Displaced Hurricane Sandy Voters?

[Lillie Coney]

Thank you for the detailed reply. I have absolutely no objection 
to the work by New Jersey's Secretary of State to make sure 
that voters can vote on Tuesday. This is very important to making
people feel reconnected to the broader society and community after 
a catastrophic event.  It was an issue post Katrina and there was a 
lot of push back on making voting accessible to people who though 
no decision of their own were evacuated outside of their state. 

Voting and re-connecting people who are victims of major natural or 
man-made disasters to the democratic process should be a priority, 
which is what the state of New Jersey is doing with their proposal. I 
also strongly believe that their should be a permanent staff person at 
FEMA who is tasked with election continuity when they are called in 
to assist during major events like post-Sandy and post-Katrina--if an 
election will be disrupted due to the event.

Elections for voters impacted by major disasters are very important 
because the decisions made by elected officials will have an immediate 
and lasting impact on their ability to return to their homes and businesses 
as well as decisions about resource allocation that will assist them through 
a recovery. 

My questions were prompted by the contentious nature of US politics, I would 
hope that no one would challenge what New Jersey and other states impacted 
by Hurricane Sandy will be doing to make sure voters can cast votes on Tuesday. 

Unfortunately, images of post General Election 2000 made me pause--to think 
how can the ballots cast be protected from unwarranted challenges. I do think the 
state had to work with what it had and the time it had to work with--and the solution
suggested is about the best anyone could have come up with, my only thought was
the disparate treatment issue.  If that is not an issue and the interpretation is broad 
enough then it should not be a problem.  In any case I wish them well and applaud 
the effort by the state to make sure their citizens can vote in Tuesday's election.  It 
says a great deal about how important voters see their vote when they are asking 
for a solution to vote under hardship circumstances. I am glad that voters casting 
ballots on Tuesday was a top priority. 

Thank you for the feedback,

Lillie



On Nov 4, 2012, at 4:39 PM, Flavio Komuves wrote:

> Some thoughts and comments on the New Jersey Secretary of State directives:
> 
> 
> 1. The NJSOS' directives state that "[a]ny voter who has been displaced from their primary residence because of" Sandy can apply for and return a ballot by fax and email just as overseas voters can. 
> 
> 2. Perhaps more importantly, a second directive, not as well covered in the media, reads that "[a] displaced voter may vote by provisional ballot at any polling place in the State."  "Displaced voter" is not defined in this directive but surely it must mean a broader class of people than those named in the other directive, i.e., greater than those displaced "from their primary residence" and greater than those displaced "because of" Sandy.
> 
> 3. In addition, the press release cited below says that the ability to vote by provisional ballot at a polling place other than one's own also extends to "first responders."  The press release does not qualify that by saying it only includes first responders absent due to Sandy.
> 
> 4. To me, allowing these categories of voters to vote at any polling place in the state by provisional ballot is perhaps just as important, if not more important, than the extension of fax and email balloting.  With the electricity outages (which limit fax and email access), the ongoing displacement of people, and the lack of any central registry of email addresses for county officials that I have been able to yet find, this second directive which extends to more people and gives more options may end up being more protective of people's rights that than the fax and email extensions.  And, while provisional ballots have their own set of risks and benefits, none of the secrecy, privacy, and integrity concerns that are endemic to fax and email voting apply.
> 
> Flavio Komuves
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Lillie Coney wrote:
> 
>   http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552012/approved/20121103d.html 
> 
> 
> 
> Any process that may allow voters to be identified or their 
> votes known prior to being counted is a problem.  Unfortunately, 
> FEMA does not have a specific focus on election continuity as 
> part of their recovery program. They should have plans for 
> election continuity during major events, and this may be an 
> important contribution USACM can make.
> 
> 
> New Jersey's approach creates a new category of voters--
> Hurricane Sandy displaced voters and makes them equivalent
> to "overseas voters".  Are the quote marks around "overseas
> voters" because they are defined by law. Hurricane Sandy
> displaced voters are not defined by law which is where I think
> a problem rests. Another question is does the Secretary of 
> State have the power from the State legislature to create a new
> category of voters if so this is not going to create new issues.
> Finally, does this approach create a disparate treatment issue for 
> New Jersey voters who may have other emergencies that take them 
> away from their voting location but are not Hurricane Sandy related? 
> My concerns are the disparate treatment issue and one that if 
> challenged could raise questions about the state's federal election. 
> 
> 
> All Hurricane Sandy impacted states need a solution to allow voters
> to vote--I think that solution has to apply to all state residents
> regardless of their situation.  The state does not have the
> resources to fight a post election constitutional challenge 
> around whether the Senate can accept its electors. Elections 
> are driven by law and not good intentions, and based on my 
> understanding of Bush v. Gore--states have to treat voters equally 
> which means they have to make whatever arrangements available 
> to one group of voters available to every voter in the state. 
> 
> 
> Is it possible to create a new class of voters--in this case Hurricane
> Sandy displaced voters and they would be safe from having their 
> participation in the election challenged?
> 
> 
> Every state impacted by the storm must deal with the problem 
> of displaced voters on Tuesday. They should make decisions
> based on making voting available to as many voters as possible
> in an equal way, which may make their decision easier to defend
> if there is a legal challenge. 
> 
> 
> I hope that the election is not close in popular or electoral votes 
> because there would be no value in filing a legal challenge against
> any state, but the storm impacted 63 million people.  It may be
> easy to make the case that a state or several states' decisions on 
> the election was unfair to other voters in the state.
> 
> 
> Lillie
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election 
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20121104/fec4f4c7/attachment.html>