←back to thread

212 points DamienSF | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
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 #
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 #
1. 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 #
2. logfromblammo ◴[] No.12176065[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.