Re: Flash, San Diego mayor gets elected on undervote

From: Ed Kennedy <ekennedyx_at_yahoo_dot_com>
Date: Thu Feb 03 2005 - 22:24:18 CST

Hello Kurt:

    I agree but the judge didn't. http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050203/news_1n3ballot.html. Personally I think it's a technicality and may be overturned on appeal. Yes, writing the name out seems a pretty clear indication of voter intent to me. On the other hand, letting the mayor who caused the problem to clean up may be poetic justice. Point is that clients may be asking for ways to minimize undervotes. While we'll never quite be able to tell, I suspect a lot of the 'unbubbled' ballots may have been absentee so an 'undervote detector' may not have made any difference. If absentee ballots are hand voted, a touch screen ballot marker/printer may not make any difference. Full disclosure: The loosing candidate is a progressive outsider and still is a City Council member so I was kind of attached to her becoming mayor. Time for me to move on regarding this issue.
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: dr-jekyll@att.net
  To: Open Voting Consortium discussion list
  Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 6:11 PM
  Subject: Re: [OVC-discuss] Flash, San Diego mayor gets elected on undervote

  It would seem to me that rejecting the ballots because of perceived undervotes because the "I am a write-in" square isn't checked shouldn't be necessary. It should be clear that the voter's intent would be obvious by the fact that there was a name written in.

  Perhaps, this is another good reason why all ballot counting should be done in public with the news media allowed. Anybody who would count such a ballot as not having a voter's intent to write-in for this person should not be allowed to remain anonymous. I believe the people would not stand for this if they knew of it and the only reason why they don't know of it is because the vote counting is frequently done behind closed doors or in semi-public places.

  --
  Kurt

  This email sent using 100%
  recycled electrons.

    -------------- Original message from "Ed Kennedy" <ekennedyx@yahoo.com>: --------------

    Hello All:

        Here's another optical ballot problem. While the write in candidate received 5501 more votes than the regular candidate, she lost because bubbles indicated that there was a write in vote were not filled in by these voters. While the actual law that allowed this ridiculous outcome (remember, "...the law is an ass") may be rewritten in the coming legislative session it would have been nice if undervoted ballots were kicked back out to the voters at least at the polling places for them to correct this problem. Obviously, there would be the problem of people who actually didn't want to vote but perhaps an over ride button or a special scan card might work. This may cause various local and state agencies to request smarter optical scan machines.

    Thanks, Ed Kennedy
    --
    Always work for the common good.

    10777 Bendigo Cove
    San Diego, CA 92126-2510
    USA

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  OVC discuss mailing lists
  Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  OVC discuss mailing lists
  Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org

_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Sun Feb 27 17:17:03 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 27 2005 - 17:17:13 CST