[EL] Line Standers --not just heroic but Hiatoric

[Thomas J. Cares]

Dan, Salvador, and all,

While I'm familiar with Oregon's system, I was thinking you could take what
California has, but, simply, instead of every voter getting a "sample
ballot" in the mail, they can get an actual ballot.

As someone who opted to be a permanent vote by mail voter in 2009 (and has
never missed an election since - including local-only elections), I feel
like I get a very unfair advantage - with no drawbacks - just because I
(like many - but not most - others) requested it.

I get a ballot in the mail, and I can return it by mail up until the Friday
before election day. Alternatively, I can bring it to any polling place in
my county on election day, and not have to wait at all (when I voted in
person in 11/08, I waited about an hour). And, if I lose the ballot, or
spill a drink on it, I can still vote in person. It gives me more options,
providing for less burden, without me having to concede anything; it seems
unfair that many voters have this advantage, while most don't, just because
they didn't take the affirmative steps to opt for it.

When I ran for office 3 years ago, I was astonished at how favorably
disproportionate absentee votes were in prior primary and low-turnout
elections in my districts. I don't remember the exact data, but I sent out
emails with the following quote, advising non-absentee voters to request
absentee ballots (it was a special election with an inevitably-low
turnout). I'm sure this paragraph in the email was an honest reflection of
the data I had reviewed:


I'm writing you, this early morning, specifically, to let you know that,
>> while the election is still about a week away, there's A DEADLINE, TONIGHT
>> (11:59 pm, 8/25/09), to very-easily ask the County to send you a ballot in
>> the mail, through a convenient online form -
>> https://LaVote.net/SECURED/AV
>
>
>>   I really wouldn't want you to be without a voice in this election, and
>> so I didn't want you to unwittingly miss a deadline to vote in a way that
>> might be far more convenient. While only about 10 percent of voters choose
>> to receive ballots in the mail, those 10% traditionally end up casting
>> about two-thirds of the total votes cast in special elections like these.
>> Even if you don't actually mail your ballot back, being a vote-by-mail
>> voter gives you the advantage of be able to return your ballot, on election
>> day, to ANY polling place, without any waiting (instead of having to cast a
>> vote at your one assigned location).
>
>


Thomas Cares

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Dan Meek <dan at meek.net> wrote:

>  Thomas Cares may assume that in a vote-by-mail system there would be
> ballot drop boxes conveniently located for all voters.  That is not the
> case in Oregon, where in rural areas drop boxes are often 50 miles or more
> apart.
>
> And why have special ballot drop boxes, when there are hundreds of
> millions of regular mail drop boxes in America, including one at virtually
> every residential and business address?  A better solution would be
> Thomas's recommendation of free postage for all ballots, along with the
> Washington approach of counting every ballot that is postmarked on or
> before election day.
>
>   Dan Meek
>  503-293-9021 dan at meek.net 866-926-9646 fax
>
> On 11/8/2012 11:21 AM, Salvador Peralta wrote:
> Tom describes exactly the process that exists with respect to vote by mail
> as it is presently conducted in Oregon.
>
> Starting in 2012, the USPS is obliged by its own policies to deliver
> ballots regardless of whether the ballots have sufficient postage.
>
> Ballots may be returned via the mail or in person to ballot drop sites
> located in the counties in which voters reside.
>
> Voters who lose their ballots may request a provisional ballot at their
> local county clerk's office.
>
> On the question of fraud or potential fraud, I would hope that some of the
> academics on the list will consider conducting a serious study on the
> strengths and weaknesses of VBM as it is conducted in Oregon and
> Washington.  A study recently posted to the list that touched on VBM versus
> in-precinct voting struck me and several of the folks I shared it with as
> being remarkably short on actual data.
>
> After reading about the various problems around the country -- long lines;
> faulty touchscreen machines; poorly trained poll workers; potential voter
> initimidation; voters missing from the rolls in their precinct; ad hoc
> policies with respect to the handling of provisional and absentee ballots,
> etc. -- I imagine that more states will look toward vote by mail as an
> alternative, particularly since the cost of VBM is substantially less than
> in-precinct polling.
>
>
>   ------------------------------
> *From:* Thomas J. Cares <Tom at TomCares.com> <Tom at TomCares.com>
> *To:* Election Law <law-election at uci.edu> <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 8, 2012 10:36 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Line Standers --not just heroic but Hiatoric
>
> I have doubts that any of the five ideas in the WaPo article Rick link<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/11/08/five-ways-to-cut-long-election-lines/>ed
> to would *dramatically* improve wait times.
>
>  I wonder if we could do something bigger, like just mail everyone a
> vote-by-mail ballot, and have the federal government fully subsidize return
> postage for all VBM ballots. Voters could discard the ballots and vote at
> the polls as if they'd never received them, or mail them, or return them to
> any polling place in their county.
>
>  With this, I'd bet less (maybe a great deal less) than one-third of
> ballots would actually be filled out at polling places, and that the
> overwhelming majority would either mail their ballot or simply drop it off
> at a polling place on election day (with the convenience of being able to
> go to one near their job, or favorite grocery store, and not necessarily
> the one in their home precinct - and not having to wait!).
>
>  I suspect the argument against this would be the potential for fraud
> (I'm not sure that's meritorious though; diligent implementation could
> probably prevent fraud).
>
>  There's a good argument for better early voting policies, but a
> disadvantage to early voting is that something may happen in the last days
> of the campaigns that could cause an (objective) voter to change their mind
> on at least one thing on their ballot (I'm a permanent vote by mail voter,
> but whenever I'm certain I'm going to be in LA County on election day, I
> hold my ballot until the election to allow for that contingency). It would
> certainly seem helpful if all voters had the automatic option to fill out
> their ballot at home and quickly drop it off on election day.
>
>
>  Thomas Cares
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Roy Schotland <schotlan at law.georgetown.edu
> > wrote:
>
>  We haven’t sung enough about the Line Standers, who stand among the
> all-time proof of how much people –as grass-roots as can be-- care about
> the Right to Vote.
>
>  Roy A. Schotland
> Professor Emeritus
> Georgetown Law Center
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing listLaw-election at department-lists.uci.eduhttp://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/20121108/3c687b6a/attachment.html>