December 29, 2005
Statewide Voter Database

Secretary of State Sam Reed has been congratulating himself for years on the statewide voter database which has an advertised debut date of Jan. 1, 2006.

The electronic database of registrations, which goes online Jan. 1 to comply with a 2002 federal law, should identify many illegally registered felons among the state's 3 million voters. It also should curtail voting in the names of dead people and clean up many duplicate registrations, officials say.
As it turns out, it won't be 100% ready on January 1. I received this clarification from an official at the SoS office:

We are planning on the file’s availability on January 3, 2006, which is the first business day of the New Year. But you should know that it will be the initial load and will not have the death or duplicate comparisons completed on it at that time. Those will be done during the first weeks of January. The felon comparison will be conducted after the February special election. My recommendation for the cleanest list is January 30. The felon comparison will require 30 days to complete including any due process, so that would make the first half of March a good time.
Being the data guy that I am, I've already sent in my order for a copy of the initial version as soon as it is available. (For one, I'd like to compare the dirty version with the first "clean" version) I was told that "It may take a couple days after January 3rd to get CD ready and in the mail to you.". I'll keep you posted. The SoS office admits in the article that the new database "won't do much to curb registrations by voters at addresses that aren't really their residences". But if at least felons and the deceased are removed from the voting rolls more promptly than currently, that will be a good thing. It will also be good if the statewide database will do a better job of removing duplicates. The Secretary of State could also match the statewide list against the federal immigration database to remove non-citizens, but it's not clear yet whether he will actually do so. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 29, 2005 12:32 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Will this eliminate the duplicate voters between counties? Such as someone living in Pierce county commuting to Seattle and voting at home in Pierce county and voting at work in King County.......

Will the State cross check their voter files with Oregon's files?

Posted by: sgmmac on December 29, 2005 02:15 PM
2. Being guilty of lurking regularly and posting rarely, I am however, interested in what sgmmac means about checking voter files with Oregon files. I am a pretty frustrated red guy stuck in a blue state, but I wasn't aware of any problems with Oregonians voting in Washington Elections. If true, I would love to know more.

Posted by: dkm on December 29, 2005 02:50 PM
3. As of June 2005 there were 1,314 registered voters with Oregon mailing addresses. The only states with more mail addresses were
After California (3,580), Arizona (1,619) and Virginia (1,320)

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 29, 2005 02:57 PM
4. On the news today, (King 5), they were talking about the need to update poll voting machines as a reason for the delay in completing their update of the database? I hope I heard them wrong! With Poll voting quickly being eliminated...and Absentee voting still as open to fraud as it ever was.... I'm thinking the state is not going to produce a credible database....

In fact...Here is what Sam Reed said: (do the math...33 counties out of 39 are already All Mail voting - yet he says he is waiting for new poll machines for 12 counties?....Hmm...39-12= 27....?)

" In Washington state, Reed noted that 12 of the state's 39 counties use touchscreen machines and have already ordered parts for more than 190 machines that will now have to provide a paper trail of votes as well. The measure was one of several laws passed this year in an election reform effort following last year's hotly contested governor's race.

Reed said that with a majority of the state's counties switching to all vote by mail - 33 so far - the amount of equipment needed might be less. But he worries that with other states scrambling to get the same paper-trail equipment, vendors may not be able to get the equipment to everyone in time.

"That is going to be a challenge, a challenge they tell us they can meet, but it's an area that I have some concern," he said."

What a bunch of crap! Reed knows damn well that he isn't waiting for any equipment! In fact - that's probably one reason behind the frenzy to change all counties to All Mail voting within one year! So they could get around the voter database requirements! And to think....Sam Reed is the "president" of the National Association of Secretaries of State! I give up!

Posted by: Deborah on December 29, 2005 03:01 PM
5. I just remember reading complaints from voters in Vancover about Oregon voters voting in Washington. I also read about snowbirds in Reno double voting in both states. It would be interesting to see if any of those mailing addresses in other states are registered at Business Addresses in Seattle.

Posted by: sgmmac on December 29, 2005 03:02 PM
6. Some states do check their databases against other states, we should push for that.

Posted by: sgmmac on December 29, 2005 03:05 PM
7. dkm

In the 04 presidential election, there were instances of Oregonians trying to vote at the polls over here. Many of them were turned away because they couldn't prove they lived here. But they were given a provisional ballot "just in case" oh, don't cha know! Weather or not these ballots were validated in another question.

Posted by: kim in vancouver on December 29, 2005 03:11 PM
8. Heh, thanks for the replies "kim in vancouver", "sgmmac", and "SS".

I wasn't aware of the Oregon connection, although I am not at all surprised. Wish Oregon had someone tougher than Lars keeping pressure on the .gov from our side.

Thanks for the information again.

Posted by: dkm on December 29, 2005 03:44 PM
9. I have no respect for Sam Reed - he is full of himself and is RINO if there ever was one. He'd even be a pathetic Democrat.

He is what happens when people don't pay attention. There's another school of thought though - like make lemonade of lemons (Reed) or Don't get mad, get even.. Chew on that good before the next election.

Posted by: KS on December 29, 2005 09:13 PM
10. I notice that all the corrections and safeguards are designed to clean up error, not deliberate fraud.

Posted by: South County on December 29, 2005 10:14 PM
11. Come on Deborah,

Washington State needs newer machines to not use don't we? We can't be a backwards state with old worn out machines not in use.
Otherwise, we might be accused of a careless and sloppy attitude towards our citizens' elective franchise.
Please be sensible.

Posted by: Amused by liberals on December 30, 2005 10:33 AM
12. I was thinking. IF we have a list of people who use mailboxes to get mail Take those names and birthdays +-2 years and see if they are listed anywhere else.
I do not know if this database search engine will catch the same John Smith voting in 5 counties or even 5 different precincts in KC. Some names are easy to say they are the same person. Some people are lazy and use the same home address but what if you have a cabin in the mountains, a home your family lives in and a business address. Could it be possible to vote 3 times with a different address for the same person. It would be very hard to tell. There is not one number used to cross reference the data.
If they used WA State Drivers license numbers you could be able to cross reference that way but then you have people who change their name when they get married and you could have two different drivers licenses. If you use SSN numbers since everyone has to have one by 1 year of age well you have a black market used by Illegal aliens to provide phoney SSN numbers. The worse case I heard of was the same SSN was used by a dozen people. All with different names. Or would WA allow the Mexican ID card as proof of US Citizenship and the right to VOTE.

Posted by: David Anfinrud on December 30, 2005 11:46 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?