The "Oath of Voter" on the King County absentee ballot envelope for the September 2005 primary. This isn't as serious of a mistake as giving the wrong forwarding instructions to the post office, but don't these guys have a spell checker?

hat tip: Aaron S. in a comment to a previous post.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at September 03, 2005 04:55 PM | Email ThisI seriously think the rest of the state needs to take King County out and give it a good beating before 2008.
Posted by: ScottM on September 3, 2005 05:09 PMHere we are a year later and nothing of substance has been done to address the REAL problem with our elections... The illegal voters on our voter roles.
There was a real effort to register thousands of voters with questionable status at best. Homeless are registered at the Elections office, AND large numbers at the Aloha Inn and other places, that do not live there and in fact are no where to be found. Obviously no one cross checks these people to see if their votes were legal.
Dead people who lived in care facilities remain on the voter roles with permanent absentee ballots being sent to them at those locations. No one is cross checking those as well.
The bottom line is they can talk about training, or minor "tweeks" to the system but as long as we have a corupted voter database we are going to have thousands of fradulent votes being cast in every election.
With the status quo we will have stolen election after election and in most cases will not even realize it.
This is a major reason we MUST change the balance of power on the King County Council.
Posted by: Steven Pyeatt on September 3, 2005 06:17 PMFor KCE I defer to the bard:
You starvelling, you eel-skin, you dried neat's-tongue, you bull's-pizzle, you stock-fish--O for breath to utter what is like thee!-you tailor's-yard, you sheath, you bow-case, you vile standing tuck!Henry IV.
We need solid enough majorities to toss all the incumbents, demand reform of the newly elected. Failing that election reform by initiative, or more radical means.
There is no idication of anyone currently in office taking the issue seriously.
Demonstates the state of our schools when the HS graduate can't spell "purjury."
Posted by: JCM on September 3, 2005 06:38 PMIs this torture almost over? Can we get rid of Ron Sims and finally get our county's sense of order, honesty and ability back? It's been over a decade since integrity mattered in King County.
Posted by: Deborah on September 3, 2005 07:21 PMSims is corrupt. We will all avoid being disappointed as long as we set our expectations properly. Sims is corrupt, therefore, we will have corruption in KC as long as Sims is there.
Posted by: Danny on September 3, 2005 08:09 PMRe KCE:...and the hits just keep on coming.....
As George Costanza once wailed in an episode of 'Seinfeld', "Make it STOP!"
Posted by: Michele on September 3, 2005 09:15 PMIt was intentional, gives a free pass for fraud, if you can't spell perjury, how can you prove it.
Ron Sims wins with 80% of the vote and David Irons gets 60% in Nov.
Posted by: JCM on September 3, 2005 10:39 PMQED
Posted by: Calvin A on September 4, 2005 07:11 AMHow about "honest--cross my heart..?" Naw--too religious--It would be tied up in courts for 10 years by the ACLU;
Maybe everyone misunderstood this clause for many years--originally misspelled as "perjury" but original intent & spelling was to be "perch-ery." That is, voters were asked throughout history if they like fish--most said "no." It's OUR fault again, not the legislators and elections workers, right?!
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on September 4, 2005 10:40 AM
Interesting, I looked up 'purjury' in my 8,000 page dictionary. There is not a single word in there that starts with p-u-r-j, but if there were it would be listed right after the word 'purity', which we won't find in the election process in King Co. Sure be nice if we could get the local papers to get this info out to the masses.
Posted by: CommonSense Coug on September 4, 2005 10:54 AMAlso, Sims needs to go. I don't have the exact quote, but when he mentioned he does not follow what the popular opinion of the people is at the time, but will do what is right... Well, that says enough for me, it doesn't really matter what "we" want to see happen.
Posted by: Ted Bundy on September 4, 2005 11:01 AMIn this age of sophisticated scanners, printers and identity theft, I would gladly pay a few cents to enclose an outer envelope that's discreet--anyone in 'Elections' listening? Or is that too stressful for the envelope-opener technicians?
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on September 4, 2005 02:48 PM
You commented about the lack of security for signatures on return envelopes. You can blame the Governor.
Senate Bill 5499 and Senate Bill 5743 both had identical provisions for revising absentee envelope requirements, including a provision for a security flap to cover the voter’s signature and optional phone number. However, SB5499 went into effect on July 24th while SB 5743 won’t go into effect until January 1, 2006. Governor Gregoire vetoed the section in the earlier bill stating, “As certain rural counties have already begun purchasing envelopes for this year’s election cycle, and in light of limited funds to purchase new envelopes, it would create unnecessary hardship to require them to immediately purchase new return envelopes under Section 4 of Engrossed Substitute Senate Substitute Bill No. 5499”.
I suspected that any money saved would be trivial so I e-mailed Gregoire's office to find out if she actually had an assessment that would justify delaying part of the election reform bill. The response was a remarkable admission that shows how unimportant election reform is to her: “The amount of this savings is not known, but is likely quite small.”
anyway, I have my answer--and why am I not surprised?! this is the same regime that gave us 90+ "emergency" reasons for laws;
Isn't it interesting that MY ("sacred voting right") signature can be for all to see on the outside of an envelope, while our police and others are prohibited from asking whether someone is an illegal alien? their privacy rights trump mine in today's twisted world;
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on September 5, 2005 09:37 AM9A.72.085
Unsworn statements, certification.
Whenever, under any law of this state or under any rule, order, or requirement made under the law of this state, any matter in an official proceeding is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by a person's sworn written statement, declaration, verification, certificate, oath, or affidavit, the matter may with like force and effect be supported, evidenced, established, or proved in the official proceeding by an unsworn written statement, declaration, verification, or certificate, which:
(1) Recites that it is certified or declared by the person to be true under penalty of perjury;
(2) Is subscribed by the person;
(3) States the date and place of its execution; and
(4) States that it is so certified or declared under the laws of the state of Washington.
The certification or declaration may be in substantially the following form:
"I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct":
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(Date and Place) (Signature)
This section does not apply to writings requiring an acknowledgement, depositions, oaths of office, or oaths required to be taken before a special official other than a notary public.
[1981 c 187 § 3.]
In the voter's guide, Dean Logan's "I so sowwy" letter to the public also includes the statement that "No one was more sorry, or frustrated, than me..."
He must be related to JarJar Binks: "Mesa gonna go run elections now, okeeday?"
Just so you know, Mr. Logan: No one is more sorry than I (am sorry).
But, just when it gets so good, it gets better. To add insult to injury, just remember the admonition Bridges gave us. That brainless, idiot dolt said we had to work within such a crooked, incompetent, corrupt system to change it.
Posted by: Interested Observer on September 7, 2005 06:03 AM