| Subject: Electionlawblog news and commentary 7/4/06 |
| From: DANIEL TOKAJI |
| Date: 7/4/2006, 6:16 AM |
| To: election-law |
So says this editorial in the Corvallis Gazette Times, in response to an analysis of voting in Oregon's may primary. That analysis, described at greater length in this AP report, showed that over two-thirds of those voting were over 57, even though that age group is only around one-third of the population. Could Oregon's all-mail system be partly responsible for these differences?
However you choose to celebrate Independence Day, make it a great one!
Felipe Calderon holds a slim lead over Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador in tallies released yesterday (36.38% to 35.34%), the Washington Post reports, but litigation is brewing: "Teams of lawyers are girding for a massive challenge of the results, threatening a crisis reminiscent of the disputed 2000 U.S. presidential election." The Federal Judicial Electoral Tribunal has until September 6 to certify a winner.
That according to Todd Gillman of the Dallas Morning News, who writes: "With the Supreme Court giving its OK to mid-decade redistricting, momentum may be growing a bit for a ban on redrawing House lines more than once after each census. A key Republican, House Government Affairs Chairman Tom Davis of Virginia, joined a chorus of Democrats last week in saying the time may have come for Congress to clarify the rules." On the other hand, the AP reports here that at least one state, Mississippi, is unlikely to change its historical practice of redistricting once a decade. The AP cites Rick Hasen as saying he doubts that states will be in a rush to change their practices.
Arizona opthamologist and activist Mark Osterloh proposes to increase voter participation, by having the state provide $1 million prize to a randomly selected voter in every general election. According to this AP report: "Osterloh's initiative, the first initiative to be certified by Arizona election officials for the November general election ballot, would use unclaimed Arizona Lottery prize money to provide a $1 million reward to one randomly selected voter after each general election. A voter would get one entry in the drawing for voting in either the primary or general election or two if voting both times." There's reportedly some difference of opinion as to whether such an inducement is consistent with federal law.
FairVote's blog offers a "clear explanation" of the decision here.
Sadly for election officials in Yuba County, California, they're going to have to count them, according to this report in the Appeal-Democrat. A recount has been requested in a supervisorial race where the incumbent defeated the challenger by a 676-639 margin. There weren't that many votes cast, just a little over 1300, but the recount of the paper strips that constitute the electronic voting machine's "voter verified paper audit trail" (VVPAT) is expected to last several days according to elections supervisor Donna Hillegass. Why? Take a look at the accompanying photo of the VVPATs and you'll get an idea.
The big question that this raises is this: Will it really be feasible to conduct automatic audits of a sufficient number of VVPATs on a routine basis, to get an adequate level of confidence in election results? That entails two subsidiary questions. The first is a math/statistics question: What percentage of randomly selected ballots (or precincts) will have to be recounted to get a adequate level of confidence? The second is a manpower question: How long will it actually take to count that many ballots?
The Wall Street Journal offers this report (subscription required) on opposition by some Republicans to legislation that would restrict 527s. According to the WSJ: "In the 2006 campaign so far, it is right-leaning 527s that are most active. The Club for Growth, a conservative economic-issue group, is leading the charge to kill the Republican bill that would shut down 527s. The Club for Growth received $8 million in donations during the 2004 cycle; for this cycle, its donations as of May tally $5.1 million." (Thanks to Tova Wang for the pointer.)
The NY Times has this report and Reuters this one on Sen. Joe Lieberman's plan to run as an independent, in the event he's defeated in the August 8 Democratic primary by liberal challenger Ned Lamont.
Bob Bauer offers this insightful and favorable review of Spencer Overton's new book Stealing Democracy: The New Politics of Voter Suppression .
The LA Times has this report.