READER COMMENTS ON
"Other Than That, Mrs. Lincoln, How Was the Play? - LA Times Reports 'Few Election Glitches, Except for Independents'"
(10 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 2/6/2008 @ 3:10 pm PT...
Peter the Poll Worker in that video was wrong. The first poll worker was correct. It's perfectly OK to film inside a polling place, as long as voters are not being intimidated or made to feel uncomfortable during voting, or when they are preparing to vote. In other words, you can't go into a polling place and film the voters. That's the kind of voter intimidation that the Jim Crow South used to inflict on Blacks.
So, the voter with the camera in this video was walking a fine line. I can understand why Peter became angry and defensive, but he was wrong.
However ... since the voter informed us that after he got home and called the ROV to find out why he wasn't registered as a Repub, he discovered he was. So ... there was a problem with the roster. So ... what should have happened when the voter was instructed to go to Peter the Problem-Solving Poll Worker, Peter should have called the Registrar's office himself on his handy-dandy Election Assistant Cell Phone, discovered that the voter was indeed a Repub, and then instructed the voter to vote on a provisional ballot, noting the reason for using the provisional ballot on the back of the ballot envelope, so that the ROV could verify the reasons back in their office.
I can understand the voter's concerns that his provisional ballot will not be counted, but the system of provisional ballots should not be problematic when instituted and executed correctly.
Provisional ballots ARE counted, when it is determined that the voter did not double-vote, or was indeed unable to vote on a regular ballot (as this voter clearly was), or attempted to vote provisionally so that someone else could come into the polling place who was not registered to vote or who had voted under his own name and then voted as if he was this other voter.
What is the most disturbing to me about this video are the discrepancies between the polling place roster and the computer database of voters back at the ROV. Now THAT is something that needs to be investigated fully! Don't scapegoat provisional ballots or misinformed/poorly trained poll workers!
What comes up as another area of concern is exactly what is the process that the people back at the ROV use when reviewing provisional ballots and making the determination as to their legitimacy. It should NOT be a judgment call for some official. The whole process should be objective, very clearly defined, with guidelines exactly spelled out, and with enough people doing the reviewing and determining process as to disallow any provisional ballot shenanigans.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 2/6/2008 @ 3:38 pm PT...
Perhaps the LA Times folks should go down to the polling places some times, stand in line for an absurdity, and try it themselves.
Oh ... I forgot ... the writing is out sourced ... ... raise those purple fingers ... "it went great praise holler" !!!!
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 2/6/2008 @ 3:47 pm PT...
Or perhaps the LA Times was talking about the vote that just happened in the Senate.
The republicans filibustered the economic stimulus package. Sixty votes were needed but only 59 would vote for it.
The nostalgic desirer of another 100 years war, McCain, was not there to vote. The "6 or 7" republicans that switched over will be waterboarded later ...
Is that the vote the LA Times thinks went ok?
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 2/6/2008 @ 4:30 pm PT...
Linda is correct. That is the exact protocol used in our county. We were even issued a PDA device that contained all the registered voters and polling locations in our county called AskED plus a seperate eligibilty printout. I used the PDA device a few times and the voters I worked with seemed to like the process. Infact, we were instructed to issue a provisional ballots to any voter who didnt appear in the books or on the database and informed them that their vote would be counted if it was determined that this was the correct location for them to vote. This situation occured only 3 times out of 730 ballots cast and each time is was a husband/wife situation - one was registered the other was not.
If the poll register had errors, the problem's root cause(s) lies soly with the county election agency who generated that register, not the folks running the polling place.
Our register books had a few dead people in it, but with 3 exceptions, everyone who showed up appeared in our register or we were able to re-direct them to the correct polling location. Our books contained about 2,200 registered voters.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 2/6/2008 @ 4:38 pm PT...
...he should have called the police on the spot. They are itty bitty lawyers by trade, they would know the law. I have a funny feeling they will do the same crap here to me, I got a call from a Democratic something or other asking me if I was going to vote in the primary (Kansas) Tues. but the republican isn't until feb 9.
I will throw the biggest shit fit you have ever seen if someone tells me I am a registered democrat. They will see Cleveland justice in Wichita.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 2/6/2008 @ 4:51 pm PT...
...another little tidbit.
Now to what happened last night for the actual Ron Paul supporters:
76 year old woman goes to vote in afternoon at Giblyn School in Freeport, Long Island. Is told that Ron Paul is not on the ballot. His name is crossed out. She is upset that she can't vote for Ron Paul.
She goes home and tells her son, Gabe. A Delegate for Ron Paul. He goes to the voting poll to find out what she is talking about. He is told that Ron Paul dropped out and is no longer on the ballot. His name has been locked the entire day. There are 2,100 voters in this voting district who did not have the choice of Ron Paul for the entire day. He calls the police.
The police come down to find out what the problem is. Gabe tells them and one of the two police go out to the car to speak to the Sargent of Freeport Village police. The officer comes back in only to tell Gabe that Sargent Essex does not understand what the problem is since Ron Paul dropped out of the race.
News 12 was called and The Daily News was informed. ABC news was too busy to take this story.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 2/6/2008 @ 5:51 pm PT...
Brad, it looks like you and we have a very long way to go to fix the election system, so that we even get near to what is called Democracy.
Of course, as we go along the forces of evil will try to subvert the system any way they can.
I don't think there's much honor left in America and the rampant stupidity is hard to accept.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 2/6/2008 @ 6:06 pm PT...
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 2/7/2008 @ 8:56 am PT...
MarkH - I think what we need to do is UNfix the election system!
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 2/8/2008 @ 5:00 am PT...
So he video tapes his being told he could not video tape, which is wrong, but perhaps understandable since most people do not like being taped w/o permission and these guys working at polling stations are probably not highly trained on what is or is not allowed (in Taiwan where I live but can not vote, you can not even bring your cell phone into the voting booth since most have cameras and I can understand why you should NOT be allowed to video).
Yet but he can not include the audio of his telephone conversation confirming the most important point, which was that there was no way he should have still be listed as a Democrat and denied the opportunity to vote for Ron Paul except on a provisional basis.
Does not pass the smell test to me, and I am no defender of our banana republic style elections by any means. Maybe he did not have a speaker phone, who knows, but if you are prepared enough to carry a video camera and tape your denial to vote unprovisionally, wouldn't you find a way to tape your call confirming the most important aspect of your case after the fact.