1. KingCo, in general, subscribes to the "close enough, here is a piece of candy of trying hard" philosophy in it's schools. This lack of precision on a simple document like a ballot is consistent with where the bar has been set for our Seattle youth (except those wealthy enough to attend Private Schools).

The fact that Pierce County got it right is immaterial Stefan. Didn't you learn anything from this election contest??? Even the Judge said that despite a number of County's reconciling votes and voters.....it wasn't important or required!
This ballot wording SNAFU is consistent with Judge Bridge's ruling and standard....the standard which is NO STANDARD.

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on September 5, 2005 12:00 PM

2. And another thing Stefan---
Don't you know it is wrong to keep score???
1) You might make the loser feel badly.
2) The score doesn't matter in KingCo....the "winner" is pre-determined despite the facts.
Perhaps you ought to change your heading to :
Pierce 0
King 0
Counting & Accountability is an evil right-wing conspiracy!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on September 5, 2005 12:04 PM

3. How do you know they can spell perjury? Pierce's oath says "under penalty of law," while King's says "under penalty of purjury" (sic).

At least Pierce County is using an oath that makes some sense. Swearing that one understands the effect of the laws is different from swearing that the law is such and such.

It would be better still to have an oath that recites the necessary qualifications and includes statements that the disqualifying factors don't apply to the individual.

I doubt many voters could recite the needed qualifications, yet the oaths simply state "I am entitled to vote." Note also that one must be a resident of the state, county and precinct for at least 30 days before the election--but the oath simply says "I am a legal resident of the state of Washington." Even the elections officials cannot recite the necessary qualifications, if the oaths they prepared are a reliable indication of their knowledge.

Posted by: Micajah on September 5, 2005 12:08 PM

4. Why isn't this oath the same statewide? For that matter why aren't all ballots, vote-by-mail ballots, provisional ballots, and computer systems to count the ballots, all the same in this state?
Way to inconsistent.

Posted by: cc on September 5, 2005 12:52 PM

5. Clearly Pierce County didn't throw enough money at the problem. Maybe if they spent more money on their elections department, they too could be grossly inefficient. My other theory would be that their elected Elections Director keeps the department running smoothly. Maybe King County should be asking Pierce County how they have overcome those infamous and mysterious "cultural differences" that KC elections blames for so many of their inefficiencies.

In my opinion, this is probably an example of good people doing a good job with less resources.

Posted by: dl on September 5, 2005 01:02 PM

6. cc,

There is a statewide requirement that apparently is being ignored, WAC 434-240-190. (The score should be Pierce 0, King 0.) I won't go into details but nobody seems to be getting it right.

Here's one relatively small discrepancy: the statute requires that the penalty summary be "immediately adjacent to the space for the voter's signature". Note the arrow on the Pierce County envelope. It looks like someone drew an arrow as editing instructions to move the paragraph but instead the arrow got printed - and it is a very nice arrow indeed.

Posted by: Bob Edelman on September 5, 2005 01:24 PM

7. Lest you think that Pierce County has it together, I would like to point out that I just received my Pierce County absentee ballot in the mail, and another one just arrived as well. My wife also received hers, but alas she did not receive a duplicate, so she only gets to vote once in this election.

Posted by: JustSumGuy on September 5, 2005 03:15 PM

8. Effective 19 Sep 05, this is the new WAC section containing the oath to be printed on absentee ballot envelopes:

NEW SECTION
WAC 434-250-050 Ballot materials. In addition to the instructions and in addition to materials required by chapters 29A.36 and 29A.40 RCW, each absentee ballot must be accompanied by the following:
(1) A security envelope, which may not identify the voter and must have a hole punched in a manner that will reveal whether a ballot is inside;

(2) A return envelope, which must be addressed to the county auditor and have a hole punched in a manner that will reveal whether the security envelope is inside. The return envelope must display the words "OFFICIAL BALLOT - DO NOT DELAY" prominently on the front, the words "POSTAGE REQUIRED" or "POSTAGE PAID" in the upper right-hand corner, and the following oath with a place for the voter to sign, date, and write his or her daytime phone number:

I do solemnly swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that:

I am a legal resident of the state of Washington;

I am entitled to vote in this election;

I have not already voted in this election;

It is illegal to vote if I am not a United States citizen;

It is illegal to vote if I have been convicted of a felony and have not had my voting rights restored;

It is illegal to cast a ballot or sign an absentee envelope on behalf of another voter, except as otherwise provided by law; and

Attempting to vote when not entitled, attempting to vote more than once, or falsely signing this oath is a felony punishable by a maximum imprisonment of five years, a maximum fine of $10,000, or both.

Signature Date

The return envelope must conform to postal department regulations.

County auditors may use existing stock of absentee envelopes until January 1, 2006.

Posted by: Micajah on September 5, 2005 03:44 PM

9. I don't think anyone is accusing Pierce of having it fully together, but they are doing a much better job than King is, even after King County has been exposed over and over again as not coming up to snuff.

I'ts a relief to see that there is a form of the voter oath that actually makes sense out there.

I'm glad I am a poll voter - I'm not certain I could sign the oath on the absentee ballots in King County as it stands, as I cannot swear under penalty of "purjury" that I know for a fact that "attempting to vote when not entitled...is a felony punishable by a maximum inprisonment of five years..."

I'm not a lawyer. I have no idea what the maximum penalty for illegal voting is, nor would I wish to sign an oath stating that I did know!

Posted by: Observer on September 5, 2005 03:47 PM

10. In KC there is no penalty for voter fraud...it is a trick question.

Posted by: Danny on September 5, 2005 04:10 PM

11. The Washington State prison system has some very good correctional education programs. Let us hope that some of the election officials get the oportunity to use these excellent programs in the near future.

Posted by: Huey on September 5, 2005 07:37 PM

12. Geeze!

The County of the notorious "Hill Top" and "Lakewood" areas is more adept at legal ballot production than our King County??? Sigh....

I liked it better when Pierce County only had us beat in murders and robberies......

Posted by: Deborah on September 5, 2005 08:15 PM

13. Thank you for answering my question Bob and Micajah.

I cannot believe they put a line for your phone number. That is really, really deceitful.

And that arrow is really cool. It looks to me like you are supposed to sign on the date line. And two colors? That's expensive.

Posted by: cc on September 5, 2005 10:02 PM

14. In KC there is no penalty for voter fraud...it is a trick question.

ROFL!!!

Posted by: South County on September 6, 2005 05:33 AM

15. On 09-04-05 the Tri-city Herald ran a story on math achievement in the local area schools. The following from the article seems to address the point made by Mr Cynical and Huey.
Erin Bennett doesn't really care that her students can solve 12 x 3 = 36.
When the Columbia Elementary School teacher conducts a math lesson, she's more interested in how her students solve the equation, and if they can explain themselves well. And the right answer doesn't hurt.
"You did it in a really cool way," she told student Jarred Brutscher. "Tell us how you did it."
I dashed off a letter to the editor suggesting that these children would have a future with the King County elections officials.
But Jarred should forget that part about "Tell us how you did it."

Posted by: Tom Scott on September 6, 2005 08:45 AM

16. I have to swear or affirm that it's illegal to vote if I'm not a US citizen, or if I've been convicted of a felony, and that it's illegal to cast a ballot on someone else's behalf? But I don't have to swear or affirm that I am not, in fact, doing any of those things, just that it's illegal if I do?

Who wrote this WAC, anyway?

Posted by: Kimmrz on September 6, 2005 02:44 PM

17. I knew there were perks to living in Pierce county!!This appears to be another one (A big one!!)

Posted by: Laurie on September 6, 2005 08:51 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:

Remember info?