Among the various weird provisional ballots discovered in the Archives this week was this one.
The matching voter is listed in the election day voter database with a proper residence address. The provisional envelope lists only a private mailbox address. The provisional ballot was accepted and the voter database was updated to show him residing at that mailbox.
Apparently the provisional envelope also serves as an undocumented change of address form. The possibilities here are endless.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 15, 2005 09:19 AM | Email ThisOops, maybe they already did....
Posted by: SouthernRoots on October 15, 2005 09:41 AMLogan and team did very little to examine the obvious flaws claiming that, it was not their place to challenge registrations, voters should police themselves, they did not have time before certification, the dog ate their homework, etc.
Had Logan been a real leader that was interested in more than just a partisan result, when Huennekens came to him with evidence of the myriad of problems, he would have admitted that there were big problems and begun to unravel them, before certification. Instead, he did what weak, small, cowardly people do, he covered up to protect his own job, and looked the other way.
Posted by: Jeff B. on October 15, 2005 10:05 AMIt's true that not much is needed to transfer one's registration from one precinct to another on election day.
But what about the requirement for a valid residential address? Tranferring one's registration by supplying only a mailing address rather than the place of residence doesn't appear to comply with the law.
Also, do you have any idea how the second paragraph in the statute linked above fits with the constitutional requirement of residency in the state, county, and precinct for thirty days before the election? If the transfer is done on election day, the statute says to allow the voter to vote in the precinct in which he was previously registered -- and presumably no longer resides. How could a voter be lawfully permitted to vote in a precinct in which he has not lived during the thirty days before the election?
Posted by: Micajah on October 15, 2005 11:27 AMHowever, that is only one aspect of this - the double registrations were conveniently not dealt with - OK, so what about the felons in King County/does anyone know how many were purged ? and also how many have since registered, with KCRE again conveniently not doing QA on their voter rolls ?
Posted by: KS on October 15, 2005 12:55 PMResiding at a mailbox? Nice common sense judgement of the person accepting that document and change. Just like the insult of the foreign language on the provisional ballot. Residing in an overseas shipping container? Won't even be questioned. Assimilate into America? No way. Yea--tell me my vote has value with this silliness STILL going on.
The polling place inspectors are required to accept provisional ballots from walk-up voters unless they have concrete personal knowledge of illegality, enough to make a public challenge to the voter, an act for which they receive no formal training, and which they are discouraged from doing. The inspector is required to gather enough information from the voter to allow KCE to determine the voter's eligibility and to which precinct they should be assigned. I do not hold inspectors responsible for fraudulent voters submitting their ballots into the system (unless their ballots are fed into the Accuvote).
The assumption is that KCE will do a responsible job of analyzing the provisional ballot information, and making a just determination of eligibility and precinct. That assumption is no longer valid. Also, KCE can no longer be trusted to determine that absentee ballots originated with the registered voter, or that each voter gets only one ballot. It is a travesty.
I Think LOGAN and CO. probably violated every single state election law we have on the books when counting ballots.
Frankly, KC has very little incentive to clean up their act. Except for Stefan, I am not aware of any investigative or legal interest in this matter. MSM, Maleng, SOS, McKenna, and Fed Pros. Atty, are all either ignoring it or otherwise not allowed to investigate.
Posted by: dl on October 15, 2005 03:56 PMWhat Stefan is saying about this particular voter is that KC elections was stupid enough to use the illegal Provisional ballot's address to change the voter's registration information!
Posted by: Deborah on October 15, 2005 08:08 PMWell . . . you know what I mean.
however, any carnival ride operator makes decisions as to someone's suitability for a ride; be it height, or general demeanor or perceived condition; so--if a 'carnie' has such discretion and authority, why not someone who VOLUNTEERS or is PAID at the election site? is a carnival ride of less import to society than a legal voter? we care more about puking than the right voter? time to wake up and crack down on the loose standards;