In Florida and Michigan, put Bill Bradbury in charge!
It seems that all the chatter in the presidential race is about Florida and Michigan - and the possibility of conducting "do-over" elections with vote-by-mail.
Oregon's vote-by-mail system is being talked up as one possible solution to the Democratic Party train wreck in Florida and Michigan. As every lover of this presidential soap opera knows, the party refuses to seat the delegation of either state because they violated party rules by holding their primaries too early in the year.On Sunday's "Face the Nation," Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., noted that he joined in an unsuccessful lawsuit trying to get Florida's delegation seated. Now, he suggests that Florida Democrats get to vote again.
Curiously, Senator John Kerry - also appearing on "Face the Nation" - made a cryptic comment about Oregon's 100% vote-by-mail system. Mapes again:
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who is backing Barack Obama, was also on the show, and he chimed in that he didn't think a mail-in ballot was as "democratic." He suggested that "they ought to have the combination, like Oregon."The host, Bob Schieffer, never did get Kerry to explain what he meant by that. If Kerry thinks Oregon also has polling places, he's mistaken of course. He might be referring to the fact that Oregon voters have numerous drop-off sites if they don't want to mail their ballots back. Such a system would be easy to set up in Florida and/or Michigan as well.
Maybe it's time for another Flight for Freedom from Oregon, only this time, with a planeload of county clerks and Secretary of State Bill Bradbury!
Discuss.
|
March 10, 2008
Posted in in the news. |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Mar 10, '08
Count-every-vote Mr. Bill Bradbury, master of the democratic process?? Oh yeah, he's the one quoted in the Washington Post saying as a super delegate he doesn't give a fig how Oregonians voted, or which Dem. candidate has the most delegates, as feudal lord of the Dem. party he's going tell the peasants to go to hell and vote his druthers. He's not exactly a good advertisement for neutrality (former co-chair of the Clinton campaign in Ore.) or for anything associated with the concept of "democratic."
Mar 10, '08
”He's not exactly a good advertisement for neutrality or for anything associated with the concept of "democratic."
Not to mention his partisan efforts keeping Nader off the ‘04 ballot in Oregon as a way to bolster Kerry’s weak campaign.
Bradbury’s the last guy anyone should expect to play fair.
Mar 10, '08
Well, technically Oregon does have "polling" places. An elector can go into any one of the 36 county election offices, pick up their ballot, or bring their mailed ballot and vote in a booth.
9:36 a.m.
Mar 10, '08
Perhaps a delegation consisting of Oregon Secretary of Stae Candidates Brad Avakian, Kate Brown, Rick Metzger and Vicki Walker could take a week from their campaigns and journey to Florida and Michigan to spearhead the 'vote by mail' programs. Draw straws to see who is paired with who, boy-girl, boy-girl. What a great test of their skills and prowess that would be, to say nothing of the National Media coverage!
Mar 10, '08
My understanding is that the Florida legislature (Republicans AND Democrats) voted to change the primary date and that they knew they would be violating party rules. Now that the DNC is holding firm to the rules the Democrats still want their votes counted. Two solutions:
Hold another vote with the Democratic Party of Florida picking up the tab if the state won't do that.
Florida secede from the Union and we all say, "Good riddance." This Mickey Mouse state has been nothing but a pain in the u-know-what in presidential elections. Thanks to Florida we got Dubya for president.
10:55 a.m.
Mar 10, '08
Bill Bodden:
Correct. I went and looked up the information on the two states' votes a few weeks back:
Florida: It was HB 537 and from what I see on the legislature’s web site, there were only 3 votes against it – one in the House and two in the Senate. So this wasn’t something Republicans did to Democrats – it was something equally participated in by both sides.
Michigan: There the House is controlled by Dems (58-52), the Senate by Rs (21-17). The governor is a Dem. It was Senate Bill 0624. The vote was 36-0 (1 excused, 1 not voting) in the Senate on the last vote. It was 67-34 in the House. And of course the governor signed it.
Breakdowns: House: Dems yes: 29, Dems no: 22; Repubs yes: 38, Repubs no: 12 Senate: one Democrat was excused, one Republican didn’t vote
11:55 a.m.
Mar 10, '08
I think this is a good idea. There are weaknesses to the VBM system but they don't operate here (in fact, some weaknesses are strengths in this context).
More soon, I'm penning an op ed and doing interviews.
Mar 10, '08
It was my understanding that right now, Florida does not allow VBM for candidate elections. Will it be possible for the state to get a bill through in time? Given the very Republican tilt of the state government (and Charlie Christ's VP hopes) it is in their interests to not solve this problem and force a fight at the Democratic Convention.
Also, is Michigan law more amenable to VBM?
Mar 10, '08
I read something about a 90 day lead time requirement in Fl as well. And the funding for this from pro-Clinton sources, that won't work. They would need to do both MI and FL for this to be a possibility. Both campaigns need to sign off on this for it to work.
Mar 10, '08
The preamble of the US Constitution starts out with “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union”. Section 4 – “Elections, Meetings” states as follows: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof;” Amendment 10 – “Powers of the States and People” states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” No where in this document have I found that political parties have the right to establish rules that trump the rights of the states and the people. The people of Michigan and Florida have the right to have their votes counted and apply to the nominee of their choice no matter when they choose to hold their primary. If they are not allowed to have their votes count in the Democratic primary, maybe any votes cast for Democratic candidates in the general election should not count either. Furthermore, the order of when primaries occur has become so discriminatory whereby the same states always hold them first; and since the Oregon primary comes so late in the game either candidates have dropped out of the race and/or the decision has already been made, when I receive my Oregon Democratic primary ballot, I will make my mark at the fill in the blank line and write-in for President “None of the Above”. Additionally, I am distastefully tired of government policies and mandates that attempt to dictate lifestyles and mobility choices. I will NOT vote for any candidate, that for what ever reason, campaigns on a platform that in any way erodes the freedoms of we the people! I encourage others to do the same.
1:42 p.m.
Mar 10, '08
They didn't trump the rules of the states; the states held their elections whether DNC wanted them to or not.
But the convention is the PARTY'S province. And they can decide who to seat and not seat, entirely on their own. MI and FL deliberately flouted the party's rules, and now they are paying the price. If they want to have a vote that follows the rules, by all means do it and seat the delegates. But you can't validate rule-breaking now.
2:20 p.m.
Mar 10, '08
TR: What Joe said. This is not a general election. It is not even a federal election, which makes that portion of the Constitution not applicable.
Mar 10, '08
Yes, Oregon is the first in most everything. Only Oregon knows how to handle the situations in Florida and Michigan. Send Bradbury, he's fair.
Mar 10, '08
My guess? Caucuses will be the only affordable and time effective solution. As for the candidates, they have exactly no say, whatever, as long as it meets DNC rules. Despite Hillary' nonsense, she does not own DNC nor the election process and has no say. This should have been sorted out months ago, DNC has been more than willing, all the State Party had to do was do it. (well and finance it)
As for assertions about some kind of rights regarding Democratic Primaries you forget that it is a matter of private association and right to assembly that you propose to interfere with. Not happening, which is why states may fund primaries and count the votes, they do not control them. A state can hang strings on funding, but it is up to the State Party to accept or not. It is a pretty big bribe...
Mar 10, '08
Be wary about the Vote by Mail solution for the presidential election. I am a vote-by-mail supporter, but VBM doesn't cut evenly. In 2004, Oregon tied Kansas for the nation's BIGGEST GAP in voter turnout between old and young voters. A big reason for this gap is vote by mail; young voters move around a lot and they don't have stamps. Accordingly, using Vote by Mail might impact the result given Hillary's and Obama's different demographic appeal.
A related note: Oregon's youth vote gap should be a big issue for the Secretary of State candidates.
Mar 10, '08
Interesting comment, Jeff. Is that because students who move in the fall to start college or a new job don't get registered in time?
Mar 11, '08
They don't have stamps? Come on, you can buy them on the internet. Having a 19 year old daughter I can assure you not having stamps has nothing to do with her registration status.
10:28 a.m.
Mar 11, '08
In 2004, Oregon tied Kansas for the nation's BIGGEST GAP in voter turnout between old and young voters. A big reason for this gap is vote by mail; young voters move around a lot and they don't have stamps. . . . A related note: Oregon's youth vote gap should be a big issue for the Secretary of State candidates.
The first thing to note is that a very large percentage of voters drop their ballots off in one of the designated retrieval stations, they don't mail them at all. That's because the majority of voters vote in the last three or four days before the election when they are warned that the mail may not get there in time. So the allegation that young people are stamp-deprived is an unlikely source for the so-called "youth vote gap."
The second thing to note is that a higher percentage of young voters still vote under vote by mail than they do at ballot box elections. It's just that older voters end up voting at an even higher percentage with vote by mail because they are more consistent voters in the first place and they find the impediments to getting to the ballot box much greater than young people do. With the convenience of vote by mail, an extremely high percentage of seniors vote--which is a good thing.
The idea that any "gap" is always an institutional problem rather than the result of conscious choices people make is one of our worst modern maladies. Young people are less likely to vote than olders voters because of apathy, not lack of access to stamps.
10:51 a.m.
Mar 11, '08
Jack, thanks for an insightful post. I'd be interested in the numbers that back it up -- not because I doubt you, but because I'm kind of a statistics geek like that.
I take exception only to the last sentence. Young people, as a group, are anything but apathetic. They are dating, pursuing careers, and seeking connections in the communities they inhabit.
If they fail to see a connection between electoral politics and their futures, that would strike me more as a failing of our political and/or educational systems, than of the young.
(More on this subject at http://www.aboutus.org/theopenlobby )
2:48 p.m.
Mar 11, '08
I take exception only to the last sentence. Young people, as a group, are anything but apathetic. They are dating, pursuing careers, and seeking connections in the communities they inhabit.
If they fail to see a connection between electoral politics and their futures, that would strike me more as a failing of our political and/or educational systems, than of the young.
I stand corrected. I was using "apathy" to stand for "politically apathetic" which, in their case, may be a rational response to a world where there are many claims on their time and attention that they value more.
In fact, I have often thought that the anguish by the politically engaged that so many people don't bother to vote is much like the response of avid football fans to the fact that many people don't watch the Super Bowl. The fact that we can't comprehend that other people don't care about something that is central to our lives doesn't make them irrational.
And sorry I can't give you the data to back up my assertions although I'm pretty sure they're right. It's primarily my impression from twenty years of looking at election results and polling.
4:19 p.m.
Mar 11, '08