←back to thread

212 points DamienSF | 10 comments | | HN request time: 0.687s | source | bottom
1. nkurz ◴[] No.12171190[source]
Since I haven't written it elsewhere, I'll write up my recent voting experience here. I'm registered as a "No Party Preference" (NPP) vote-by-mail voter living in Contra Costa County, California. As an non-partisan ballot, (logically) that ballot did not include the ability to vote in any presidential primary. But the rules of some parties in California (Democratic, Green, and Libertarian) allow you to vote in their primary as an NPP voter if you exchange your NPP ballot for a "crossover" ballot.

Shortly before the primary election, the California Secretary of State issued a clarifying statement about how the process worked for NPP voters. It included these options for NPP voters who wanted to vote in a primary:

  Contact your county elections office no later than May 31
  to request a [party specific] vote-by-mail ballot... OR

  Bring your vote-by-mail ballot to an early voting location
  or the polls on Election Day and exchange it for a ballot 
  with presidential candidates

  NOTE: If you have lost your original vote-by-mail ballot,
  you will have to vote a provisional ballot at the polls—your 
  vote will still be counted.  
http://www.sos.ca.gov/administration/news-releases-and-advis...

Since I was planning to vote in person anyway, and since I wanted to vote in the Democratic primary, I decided to bring my valid vote-by-mail ballot with me to exchange for a standard non-provisional Democratic party ballot at my assigned polling place.

When I got there (the lobby of the local Catholic church), I waited (briefly) in line, presented my mail-in ballot, and was told that exchanges for Democratic ballots were not being allowed. I mentioned the Secretary of States memo, and was (politely) told by the volunteer at the desk that they they knew nothing of this, and had been instructed that only provisional ballots were to be given.

Not wanting to hold other people up, and not wanting to accept a provisional ballot that would not show up in the end-of-day count, I left my place in line, went outside, and researched my options on my cell phone.

I discovered that indeed, Contra Costa County historically has had a policy of not exchanging mail in NPP ballots for "real" partisan ballots, that the Secretary of State's memo was part of the attempt to make clear that this was against state law, and that the day before the election the County had begrudgingly agreed to temporarily change its policy:

  After hearing reports of Contra Costa County’s practice,
  the Secretary of State’s Office contacted local elections
  officials. On Monday, they announced they would change
  their practice and offer these voters replacement ballots.
http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2016/06/07/contra-costa-county-at-o...

But apparently no one had told the volunteers working at the polls!

So seeing no way to solve this on my own, I went though the line again, and accepted a Democratic "provisional" ballot. I was told that I needed to take the "provisional voting class", and directed to a table with 4 or 5 confused people already seated at it. A few minutes later, another volunteer (elderly, bewildered, apparently having a very hard day) tried unsuccessfully to give us instructions on how to fill out the form on which we were to affirm our identity, electoral status, and reason for requesting a provisional ballot.

Then the volunteer left, and we filled out the forms as best we could. The process was sufficiently confusing that one of the voters gave up and left. After 5 minutes, the volunteer returned, and then mentioned that I wasn't supposed to have filled out the line that said "Reason for requesting provisional ballot", crossed out my complicated answer.

He then went to fetch the actual ballots for us. Most of us filled them out at the table, although I think one person went to a voting booth to do so. A second person gave up at this time. Or maybe they hadn't understood that they were supposed to sign and seal the envelope and drop it in the box on the way out? Or maybe they had to go to the bathroom and planned to return.

Eventually, the volunteer returned and I was told I was told to tear off the "receipt" from the provisional ballot and drop the ballot itself in an official looking bag next to the exit. The instructions on the receipt said that after 30 days, I could check online or by phone to see whether my ballot was accepted.

I came home, and immediately filled out and faxed a Voter Complaint form, which I hoped the State would be sympathetic too as the County was directly disobeying their directives and failing to uphold their agreement: http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/additional-elections-informa...

I never heard back any followup from the complaint. I've checked online several times, but 45 days later it still shows up as "No ballot found". That's right, so far as I can tell my vote was neither counted nor rejected, just lost. I might try phoning or going in person to see if I can learn more, but at this point I feel it's a lost cause.

Edit: I should point out that I don't blame the volunteers --- they were poorly trained, and doing as they are told. But why are we relying on poorly trained volunteers for our elections? I do blame the County, since they failed to follow through on their pledge to the State and the press, but assume this is mostly poor communication rather than any specific ill-intent.

replies(3): >>12171249 #>>12174463 #>>12176317 #
2. elthran ◴[] No.12171249[source]
> I'm registered as a "No Party Preference" (NPP) vote-by-mail

Could you explain this to a Brit? I'm interpreting your statement as when you register to vote that you have to indicate which party you prefer - is this really true?

If so, are you allowed to vote for the other party?

replies(3): >>12171349 #>>12171356 #>>12174333 #
3. DamienSF ◴[] No.12171349[source]
American voters have the possibility to register as Democrat, Republican, Green, another party of their choice or none (NPP). Depending on the voter's State and which party he intends to support during the primary process, the voter may or may not be required to be registered under a specific party preference in order to vote during the primary.

For example, the Democratic New York primary is a closed primary which means only voters registered as Democrats have the right to vote. However, the Democratic Californian primary is an open primary which allows voters registered as Democrats or as NPP to vote.

Voters can change their party preference at any time but they may be required to be registered under a specific party for a certain period of time in order to be given the right to vote in some States. For instance, in order to vote in New York you needed to be a registered Democrat for the past 6 months prior to the election date. This is a disadvantage to candidates who are well supported by independent voters (NPP) as many of them did not change their registration on time. That said, these rules are those of the party and while they can be considered unfair, this doesn't qualify for election fraud.

An election fraud tactic the report mentions is "registration tampering" which consists in switching the registration of voters without their consent and knowledge in order to suppress their right to vote. There have been numerous reports of registration tampering across most States with voters being switched from Democrats to Republicans or from Democrats to NPP and so on. Registrations seem to have been switch electronically (change in the database) some even involving forged signatures.

replies(1): >>12175353 #
4. nkurz ◴[] No.12171356[source]
Yes, Americans in most states indicate their party affiliation when they register to vote. This doesn't affect who they are allowed to vote for in the official "General Election" that actually chooses who wins the election, but sometimes does affect whether one is allowed to vote in the "Primary Election" held by the individual political parties to determine who their candidate will be.

The confusing part is that the "Primary Elections" (which are held according to the rules of the party) are often run by the counties according to state rules, and are combined with other local elections that are open to all registered voters. Some parties in some states only allow those registered as belonging to their party to vote in their primary, while others allow "unaffiliated" voters to participate. The result is an mish-mash of private party rules and official state rules.

Party affiliation and primary elections have an odd semi-official status. Statistically, a little over 2/3 of the otherwise eligible voters are "registered to vote". Of these, about 1/3 are registered as belonging to the Democratic Party, about 1/3 are registered to the Republican Party, and about 1/3 are "unaffiliated". Something less than 5% of voters are registered with a "third party", and in recent history candidates from these parties haven't played much of a role except as a "spoiler".

Anyway, the current situation is that both Republican and Democratic parties have just officially chosen their candidates. The Republicans have allowed the public to "democratically" chose Donald Trump, much to the distress of many prominent members of the party who feel he does not espouse their values. The Democrat Party has chosen Hillary Clinton, but many (including many supporters of Bernie Sanders) feel she was actually selected by the party as their nominee well in advance, and that the "Primary Election" was being treated as a formality rather than a selection process.

The "General Election" for President happens this November 2016. All registered voters are allowed to vote for whomever they choose at this point. They can even write in candidates who do not appear on the ballot. But unless something unexpected happens to Clinton or Trump before then (or unless this is finally the year that a 3rd Party candidate breaks through) one of them will be elected to office at that point, and will begin serving in January 2017.

replies(1): >>12176065 #
5. russell_h ◴[] No.12174333[source]
There are basically two kinds of elections in the US:

General elections are public elections in which anybody who meets certain requirements and is willing to invest the effort can run. As a public election any voter can vote for any candidate. If the candidate has been nominated by a political party, that party will be indicated on the ballot (and most Americans simply vote or the candidate nominated by their party of choice).

Primary elections are basically a private affair undertaken by a political party in order to choose a candidate who they will nominate for a general election. Primaries are facilitated by the public voting system and tend to be influenced by lots of state laws, but most of the specific rules governing a primary are left to the political party (and sometimes delegated to that party's state level organizations).

So parties get to make all kinds of rules about their primaries. In many states (it is subject to state law) parties limit participation in their primary to their members, or more often they disallow members of other parties (but allow someone who hasn't declared a party affiliation). The theory seems to be that this makes it more difficult for one party to ask their members to vote in another party's primary, in an attempt to nominate a candidate who wouldn't be viable in the general election.

6. AnimalMuppet ◴[] No.12174463[source]
> But why are we relying on poorly trained volunteers for our elections?

Poorly-trained is a problem. But when I go to vote (I'm in the US), I see the polling place guarded by little old ladies. It always amazes me a little bit. It's such a nice contrast to what I see in the news, where some countries have to guard their polling places with soldiers.

replies(1): >>12174715 #
7. wavefunction ◴[] No.12174715[source]
Most everyone else is working and volunteers are often actually temporary employees, which is another reason little old ladies take the responsibility on. They're living on fixed incomes and a little bit of extra cash is always welcome.
8. mikeash ◴[] No.12175353{3}[source]
Note that registering as a particular party depends on the state, and not all of them do it. Here in Virginia, for example, there isn't even an option to indicate party preference.
9. logfromblammo ◴[] No.12176065{3}[source]
Party declaration in the primary is public record. If you hold a politically sensitive job, and your state requires a declaration of party affiliation, you might not be able to safely vote as you please in the primary, because your employer might examine the voter rolls and use parallel constructions to fire the people with the "wrong" party affiliation.

All the adults in my family felt the fix was in for Clinton since 2008, as we assumed that she made a deal with the DNC regarding Obama's candidacy. If he lost, she would go ahead in 2012, and if he won, she'd go in 2016. So now it's 2016. I presume that the Clintons and the DNC have mutually-assured destruction levels of dirt on each other by now, so they must honor their deal. We never had any expectation whatsoever that any other candidate would get a fair shake. Nothing that has occurred since 2008 obviously contradicts the hypothesis. Secretary of state is #5 in the line of emergency presidential succession, and a perfect resume-builder for someone who didn't snag an elected office during the previous cycle.

We suspected that O'Malley was offered something in exchange for being Clinton's foil through primary season, and that he was able to bow out early, because former independent Sanders stepped in to fill his role as the token opposition, blissfully unaware as a party outsider that the fix was already in.

I am even now unconvinced that D. Trump was not a secret co-conspirator in the President Hillary Clinton plan. I'm not sure anyone expected the R party to actually select him, either.

10. huehehue ◴[] No.12176317[source]
> [...] why are we relying on poorly trained volunteers for our elections?

This deserves more attention. I encourage anybody with enough spare time to work a poll at least once (they typically pay you and cover commute costs).

Usually the people training volunteers were never properly trained themselves and, in my experience, responsibilities are delegated emphasizing fairness over merit.

The last poll I worked at had volunteers check in voters using some clunky software on an old laptop. It quickly became clear that none of the volunteers used (or perhaps even owned) a computer and, as a result, check-in was a disaster. I offered to take over or re-train them on how to use the software, but no -- it was my turn to hand out "I Voted!" stickers and I had to wait my turn to work the check-in station.