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

Fri Nov 9 07:38:29 PST 2012

To Mark's point regarding Congressional action, this past Tuesday Reuters
published an Op-Ed of mine suggesting that Congress adopt "Election Week"
for our national elections, as opposed to "Election Day."  See here:
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/11/06/a-vote-for-election-week/

Josh

-- 
Joshua A. Douglas
Assistant Professor of Law
University of Kentucky College of Law
620 S. Limestone
Lexington, KY 40506
(859) 257-4935
joshuadouglas at uky.edu

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Mark Rush <markrush7983 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20121109/de20c655/attachment.html>