Croker Sack reminds us of one particularly lame provision in SB 5499 "Clarifying and standardizing various election procedures": The county auditor has to publish a ballot/voter reconciliation report within thirty days after final certification. That is all. No requirement to prepare and release the report as part of the certification documents, let alone a requirement that the winner of a race can be certified only if the margin of victory is greater than the margin of unreconciled error.
What a joke. Or to put it more gentlemanly, as Croker Sack does:
This new section’s report is not just worthless, it is an apparently cynical effort to make it appear that election laws are being reformed when in fact they are not.At best.
I've called Sen. Kastama's office for comment. Perhaps there's a good reason for this provision that I'm overlooking. And/or perhaps the Senate would be open to public feedback to strengthen the bill.
This would be a good opportunity to contact your own legislators and encourage them to adopt the election reforms that accomplish the most to restore integrity to the process -- like re-registration with proof of citizenship and reconciling ballots with voters as a condition of certification.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 03, 2005 11:59 AM | Email ThisObservers need unhindered access, and they should be seated across from every table.
Posted by: Tim B. on March 3, 2005 02:08 PMThe fact that no one is or will be is the tell that this whole process is a sham. Indeed, rather than pursue accountability, you have the opposite occurring. You have Commissar Reed out there on the taxpayer's dime extolling the virtues of the existing system. And the Rats and the lamestream press lap it up ("See, even REPUBLICAN SoS Reed says the election was honest.").
I'm telling you, if this were anywhere else in the world but this country there'd be people in the streets. But we're too laid back and polite here to think about "offending" anybody.
Posted by: Interested Observer on March 3, 2005 02:45 PMGranting that there are already laws in place, perhaps you ought to read SSB 5499 section 17 and think about it.
It would be a move away from the lax laws we already have -- towards even greater laxity.
Instead of emphasizing the need to reconcile voter and ballot numbers, it would postpone until after certification the preparation of a report which would tell you just how badly you got screwed in the last election by people who found a way to stuff the ballot boxes.
Plenty of ignorant bureaucrats now claim that there is nothing wrong when there are far more ballots than voters.
Section 17 would be one more arrow in their quiver as they make that specious argument.
But, if you really don't give a damn, then don't bother reading it before forming your opinion. People who don't give a damn won't contact their legislators anyway, so it would clearly be a waste of your time to read what has been proposed in SSB 5499 section 17.
Posted by: Micajah on March 3, 2005 05:35 PM