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

[Mark Rush]

all--

I think the different experiments are a necessary and logical response to
lines, living overseas, etc.  But, it seems that in light of FL 2000 and
the looming possibility that litigation and counting could have held up OH,
the more diversity of voting options that we have, the more likely a
challenge could arise concerning inconsistent clarity of the voting
mechanism, inconsistency in counting accuracy, etc.

Could Congress not--under the 14th amendment--essentially require the
following in the name of protecting the right to vote:

elections to be held on a weekend or declare election day a bank holiday,
one, consistent, easily obtained and verifiable method of ID that would
speed registration and actual voting on voting day (the rest of the world
manages this and liberty has not disappeared)
minimize ballot and voting machine/method variation from one polling place
to another

I suppose there are many other possibilities.  But, it seems that long
lines, faulty machinery and inability to establish identification are
pervasive enough that some sort of homogenization is warranted.

cheers

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Dan Meek <dan at meek.net> wrote:

>  Thomas,
>
> What you describe is very close to the Oregon system:  Every voter gets a
> ballot in the mail, about 13-17 days before election day, without
> requesting it.  It can be returned by mail, as long as it is actually
> received by the county elections office by 8 p.m. on election day.  It can
> be deposited into a locked drop box.  Multnomah County, which includes
> Portland and has a population of 750,000, had 26 drop boxes this year, most
> of them at county library branches.  But in much of the state's land area,
> drop boxes can be 50 miles apart.  See
> http://progparty.org/Oregon%20Ballot%20Drop%20Sites%202012.htm.
>
> So, for permanent vote-by-mail voters in California, depositing a ballot
> on election day is far more convenient than in Oregon, because Oregon has
> done away with what used to be thousands of precincts (replacing them with
> about 150 drop boxes statewide).  Then again, the Oregon system is no doubt
> cheaper than California's.
>
> There was also controversy when the State Director of Elections requested
> that the U.S. Postal Service not deliver ballots mailed with insufficient
> postage.  See
> http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2012/11/in_oregon_secretary_of_states.html
> .
>
> So the Oregon system needs some fixes, including
>
>    1. The State should contract with the U.S. Postal Service to deliver
>    all ballots without need for affixing postage (as I proposed in 2009).
>
>     2. The deadline for mailing should be an election day postmark (which
>    is the Washington system), thus allowing voters to hear the last-minute
>    arguments and still cast their ballots without driving 50 miles.
>
>
>   Dan Meek
>  503-293-9021 dan at meek.net 866-926-9646 fax
>
> On 11/8/2012 2:03 PM, Thomas J. Cares wrote:
>  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
>>
>>
>>
>
>  d
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>



-- 
Mark Rush
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20121109/433303e6/attachment.html>