Re: Election constitutional crisis

On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 07:50:11 -0700 (PDT), ohara5.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:

Apparently, the FL vote was done properly because all who have gone
over the votes have concluded that even under the counting scheme Gore
wanted he would have lost. Continuuing to recount over and over would
have disenfranchised millions of FL voters because there was a time
limit that was approaching. Dems may not mind disenfranchising FL
voters but us FL voters are angry about it.

What I don't understand about the Florida situation is that (in
Canada) I have been a election day scrutineer on several occasions and
the typical Canadian election day setup is that each voter gets a card
in the mail a month or so before election day saying where they are to
vote. At each polling place (typically an elementary or high school or
less typically a church hall) there are 3-6 polling stations usually
broken down alphabetically to make it easier for the clerks to check
off who has and who has not voted.

Come the end of voting the poll clerks usually hustle everyone who may
be lined up outside into the school gymnasium and if it's after
closing time the clerks usher voters who arrived before the close of
polling to the exits. Only after the last voter leaves does the real
machinery swing into action.

Each of our parties are entitled to have a scrutineer observing each
polling station. They are expected to stay till the end and are
expected to help count the vote with one electoral clerk at each
table. (Always round in my memory but that's minor)

The electoral clerk brings a sealed ballot box to each table, opens it
and gives a stack of ballots to each scrutineer who is expected to
sort his/her ballots into stacks for each candidate. This continues
till the ballot box is empty and all are satisfied that it is.

Once the initial sorting has taken place each passes his/her stacks of
ballots to the scrutineer next to them who then verifies there are no
ballots in the wrong pile at which point the count is made. You are
expected to privately record your count as the next step is to pass
them to the person next to you round the table who then counts them a
second time. Only if the two counts are the same is a ballot box
certified and any scrutineer has the right to request a third count.

This sounds long-winded but when I did it we counted 5 or 6 ballot
boxes (typically having about 500 votes apiece) three times (ie.
twice per time) in 90 minutes. When all scrutineers were finished they
were required to record the result, sign their names to the official
form and certify that they had seen the electoral clerk reseal the
ballot box which was then taken to a storehouse where once the appeals
period was done the ballots were destroyed.

Any candidate had the right to demand a recount though a deposit is
required which is refunded if the recount changes the result or
narrows the gap sufficiently. If the vote is within a certain
percentage (if memory serves 1/2% or 1%) the recount is automatic (no
deposit required) and done under a judge's supervision.

The only time I remember (in 30 years of watching elections) the
process taking more than a week was in the case of one district whose
elected member won by a plurality of ONE VOTE (there were multiple
recounts) and who promptly pissed away his career by being found in
the back of a car in carnal congress with a woman not his wife PARKED
IN THE GARDENS BEHIND THE LEGISLATIVE GROUNDS. (Several political
commentators suggested there would have been no scandal had he simply
gotten a motel room)

On the muncipal level our area has used computerized mark sense cards
for about 12 years. The cards provide firm evidence in case of recount
and the reader is automated to shunt aside (for manual counting) any
card that it has any doubt on on any matter. (This ballot form
contains votes for mayor, council, school board and usually one or
more plebescites or initiatives) Our district has about 40000 eligible
voters and the results posted on the municipal website
http://www.dnv.org/election/results.asp?ElectionID=4 at most two
hours after the close of voting.

Again you had the usual right of appeal and so forth.

I don' recall when this system started but it was used in 1999 which
was an unusually heavy year for plebiscites with more than 20 on that
year's ballot.

So I'm afraid the 2000 Florida experience leaves me culturally
confused that it could have been such a SNAFU. Having been part of the
process on two levels, it seems to me not to be quite as big a deal as
was presented to us in 2000 and 2004. My first case was all manual
counting, the second using voting machines - neither was a contentious
matter.
.

Quantcast