February 23, 2006
Well now I know why there are so many duplicate registrations

Here's one explanation, anyway. This afternoon I accompanied an acquaintance to the DOL to apply for a Washington driver's license. The counter clerk asked the applicant if he needed to register to vote. (Needless to say, she did not first ask him whether he was a United States citizen) The license applicant had already registered to vote and simply said "no". A few minutes later after finishing the other paper work, the clerk printed off a completed voter registration form and handed it to the applicant with the instructions to "sign this". The applicant declined the registration form. The clerk expressed surprise that he refused it. "Don't you want to register to vote?" she asked. He explained that he had already registered, the clerk seemed disappointed and took the form back. For all we know she signed it and sent it in on his behalf.

UPDATE: Thanks to Rep. Toby Nixon for posting a comment with a reference to the statute on voter registration at designated state agencies such as the DOL: RCW 29A.08.330.

(3) The person providing service at the agency shall determine if the prospective applicant wants to register to vote or transfer his or her voter registration by asking the following question:

"Do you want to register to vote or transfer your voter registration?"

If the applicant chooses to register or transfer a registration, the service agent shall ask the following:

(a) "Are you a United States citizen?"

(b) "Are you or will you be eighteen years of age on or before the next election?"

If the applicant answers in the affirmative to both questions, the agent shall then provide the applicant with a voter registration form and instructions and shall record that the applicant has requested to register to vote or transfer a voter registration. If the applicant answers in the negative to either question, the agent shall not provide the applicant with a voter registration form.

There is nothing in here that says that if the applicant answers in the negative to the question "Do you want to register to vote or transfer your voter registration?", then the agent shall not provide the applicant with a voter registration form. Nor is there a requirement in this case that the agent shall qualify the applicant with questions (a) or (b) before providing the applicant with the unsolicited registration form. I guess this is what Democrats have in mind when they say they want to "make it easier to register and vote".

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 23, 2006 05:53 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Stefan,

Has anything been done yet to determine the citizenship status of current Washington State registered voters? This DOL observation is very troubling when you consider that non-citizens who are obtaining drivers licenses may decline to register and then sign the form under the direction of the DOL agents.

What would a non-citizen generally do if they received a voters pamphlet in the mail and the opportunity to request permanent absentee status?

Do you believe it possible that DOL agents are being directed to fill out registrations without the consent of license applicants and attempting to register people who otherwise have declined?

In an all-mail system, voters who have registered will not even need to request permanent absentee status before ballots start to show up in the mail.

It's incredible watching the consistent attempts by the left to undermine the foundation of our democratic system!

Posted by: MJC on February 23, 2006 06:29 PM
2. Seems to fit the Democrat modus. Hand out as many ballots and registrations as possible. Heck some of them might even be legal.

Posted by: Jeff B. on February 23, 2006 06:30 PM
3. Should have done it. Give those govmint workers something to do.

Posted by: starboardhelm on February 23, 2006 07:24 PM
4. Are these clerks on some kind of bonus system for registering people? Oh brother. This is one of the reasons why the lines are so long at the Licensing offices. Don't even bother going to Bellevue's office. You'll wait for 1-1/2 hrs and not get in. Now we know why.

Posted by: Misty on February 23, 2006 08:57 PM
5. Actually, the clerk asked the questions in the right order, according to RCW 29A.08.330(3) (see below). Of course, you should have to provide proof of citizenship to register, but that bill didn't pass last year.

-- Toby

RCW 29A.08.330(3):

(3) The person providing service at the agency shall determine if the prospective applicant wants to register to vote or transfer his or her voter registration by asking the following question:

"Do you want to register to vote or transfer your voter registration?"

If the applicant chooses to register or transfer a registration, the service agent shall ask the following:

(a) "Are you a United States citizen?"

(b) "Are you or will you be eighteen years of age on or before the next election?"

If the applicant answers in the affirmative to both questions, the agent shall then provide the applicant with a voter registration form and instructions and shall record that the applicant has requested to register to vote or transfer a voter registration. If the applicant answers in the negative to either question, the agent shall not provide the applicant with a voter registration form.

Posted by: Rep. Toby Nixon on February 23, 2006 09:56 PM
6. YOu should have asked for a building permit or permission to fill a ditch or build a dock. Those things take serious time, and heck if they are handing out paperwork....

Posted by: righton on February 23, 2006 09:56 PM
7. Motor/Voter act in action again. The idea is great on paper. Everytime you go to register to drive, you should be asked if you have registered to vote, if not then they can fill out the forms for you all you need to do is sign after registering to drive. This works most often with teens and transplants from other regions. However, the law needs to be reformed. Namely, since the missing or false address scandals of the past elections; that the DOL should have access to the complete Washington State voters rolls and flag when the address listed for the Driver's License conflicts with the address of where the voter is registered. If you look at the RCW to get a license to drive you have to provide an accurate Washington State residence as per RCW 46.20.091 . Of course that would mean changing a portion of another section of the licensing section of the RCW which covers address changes. This section mentions that any address change isn't for the purpose of voting in a place they aren't registered to vote. However to clean up the language of the motor/voter act would make too much sense and would probably lead some people in the community to scream that they are being disenfranchised.
There have been problems in other states with the motor/voter acts and double voting or voting in places where they don't actually live. If my faulty memory serves me right a similar thing has happened in Virginia in the 1998 and 2000 elections.

Posted by: Charles on February 23, 2006 10:30 PM
8. The fact that the clerk asked the questions in the right order is, I think, a hopeful sign. However, it's not such a good sign that the clerk did not listen to the answer. The person said "no" when asked and was handed a registration form anyway. Does the clerk get an A for effort, an F for inattention, or an 'Attaboy' for meeting quota?

Posted by: katomar on February 24, 2006 12:26 AM
9. Am I the only one, or has Stefan taken to becoming Rep. Toby Nixon's front man?

Check out a number of his recent posts. Toby this, Toby that.

Stefan should be paid for all his Toby Nixon campaign work...here's hoping he gets his fair share and isn't just being taken advantage of...

Posted by: Toby Stefan Toby on February 24, 2006 06:05 AM
10. My husband and I recently moved. we checked the box on the change of address for our driver's license about changing our voter registration as well.

I wonder if that was a good idea...

That was December. We haven't yet seen new voter cards.

Posted by: My Boaz's Ruth on February 24, 2006 07:47 AM
11. People
Wake up and smell the coffee. The voting system is undermined. Let there be no doubt about it. When we quibble about legal meanings to straight forward regulation, see aliases, and other assorted problems, such as citizenship, then the system is broken, perhaps beyond repair.

Given just the following facts:
1. Non-citizens vote
2. People register multiple times, frequently using address which are not their abodes.
3. People vote multiple times, sometimes using aliases
4. Dead people rise up and vote.
5. People cast and sign ballots for the infirm and mentally incompetent.
6. Criminals vote, sometimes from prison.
7. No attempt is made to assure balances prior to certifying elections.

The above are just a few examples that immediately come to mind. I am certain that the readers may add to the list. My point is that the system is intentional undermined. What else will explain the abhorrent behavior of the leaders and managers. Corruption has become a way of life in Washington State. Judge Bridges called it a culture. I prefer the term, corruption.

The real question is can one political party accomplished all of this corruption? I seriously doubt that only one party is to blame. I refuse to believe that past Republicans did not aid or abet in a wink and nod fashion. Only when the corrupt pot boiled over and stunk to high heaven across the state and country did the Republican Party challenge the voting contest. Prior to that no other voting contest were challenged, even the close race between Slade and Cantwell went unchallenged. Silence implies tacit acceptance. For had Slade challenged the results the outcome of the Governor's race made had been different. And that is my point, Republicans quietly acquiesced. And they continue to quietly acquiesced on a daily basis by voting for legislation that further diminishes the values they campaigned on. If the Democrats are the Devils incarnate, what are the Republicans? Judases.

Posted by: Snuffy on February 24, 2006 08:36 AM
12. Snuffy,

Of course you are correct. Politicians, regardless of ideology, will do everything to keep them in power. The republicans are as good at vote tampering, gerrymandering and other evil things as are the democrats.

The lunacy is when the RIGHT blames the LEFT entirely and vice versa.

The public should blame BOTH and vote these crooks out of office.

The sad part is the Stefan and followers (and the Goldstein and followers) believe they are God-given right and the other side is God-given wrong.

Both are so disgustingly partisan that their manipulating data to suit their extreme views is nauseating.

Al Franken does it nationally as does Rush Limbaugh. They are real blights on our society. I just wish the partisans would stand up and say something. (I do wish Rush were held to his own standard with the doctor shopping, druggie thing....soft on crime is evil and he, using his own rules, should be in jail for the hard crime he committed....just once I'd like to see a right winger suggest that).

Posted by: Toby Stefan Toby on February 24, 2006 08:56 AM
13. Toby Stefan Toby:
Um, did something change in our justice system? Has Rush Limbaugh gone to trial and been found guilty? If so, please let me know, because as far as I know, the prosecutor basically has been shown to have no case. In that event, I don't think you can really state he has committed a crime. As far as Sound Politics goes, time and again, Stefan and posters here have stated their disgust with the elections system and the mess at KCE. They have stated, time and again, their desire to see republican and democrat fraudulent voters and registrations off the rolls. The data manipulation charge is specious and nonsense. The data is from the voter registration data base.

Posted by: katomar on February 24, 2006 10:19 AM
14. Slightly off-topic, but I heard that the bill to require funeral homes to ask their customers if they would like to register to vote while being buried died in committee... can anyone confirm that?

Posted by: TB on February 24, 2006 01:34 PM
15. katomar, katomar, katomar:

rush himself admitted to what he did on the air...exactly the behavior that he said others should be sent to jail for a long time -- that is the definition of HYPOCRITE

the railings were never heard while the republicans controlled 1 or more of the state houses...give me a break..it's all about winning....otherwise they would be complaining about all the issues in republican counties...of which there are many, many documented ones...

your post is just another example of the complete and utter hyprocrisy of those far on the right and those far on the left...give me a major break

Posted by: Toby Stefan Toby on February 24, 2006 02:42 PM
16. Toby, Toby, Toby...
I was commenting on your post advising Rush was guilty of a crime. Maybe Rush has failings, and maybe his rantings were hypocritical, but certainly he has not been found guilty of a crime. He hasn't even been tried. Your post is just another example of the complete and utter inability of those on the far left to read and comprehend...give me a major break.

Posted by: katomar on February 24, 2006 06:36 PM
17. Snuffy nailed it!

This much widespread corruption could not exist without acceptance by both parties!

So - WTF is up with the Republican party that they would silently accept the corruption of our state elections?
It would appear that we have an "in your face" Democrat style of corruption...and a silent "head in the sand" style of corruption by the Republicans!

This is not American!

Posted by: Deborah on February 24, 2006 07:41 PM
18. Politics is the art of compromise. Frequently the compromises distort the consequences and diminish principles. There are a number of glaring examples. My favorite is the so called minimum wage law. Minimum wage has been law for a number of decades and seems to be acceptable to most politicians and people regardless of party affiliation. The law was created for the stated purpose of providing a minimum standard of living for workers. Their was little debate. Fast forward to present day and consider the consequences of a government, under force of law, dictating to an employer what to pay employees.
1. What business is of the government in a so called "free enterprise system that reacts to market conditions" to dictate employees pay?
2. How many entry jobs for teens ere loss because of minimum wage standards.
3. Ultimately the consumer pays the price of higher costs. Check out the price of a movie ticket and consider the cost of the teens working at the movie.
4. Unions use the minimum wage as a basis in negotiating contracts. If the minimum wage is increased, the union argue for a similar percentage increase for their members. "Minimum wage went up 6%, union members demand an increase of 6%".
5. If the minimum wage is so beneficial for society. Why not make it $30-$50 dollars an hour. Of course the answer is it will devalue the dollar. Which of course is my point. Creating a artificial minimum wage without regard to competition and labor values will ultimately devalue currency.

More examples of the consequences of the minimum wage law are available. Which leads me to my point.

About 10 years ago Washington State was considering applying minimum wage standards to restaurant workers (waiters and busboys) which are traditional paid tips. During a Republican Club meeting an official of the Restaurant Association argued that minimum wage should not be applied to restaurant workers, however its okay for others. And there you have it folks. It is a question of whose ox/bull is being gored.

First they came for the stranger and no one cried out, then they came for my neighbor and no one cried out, then they came for me and no one cried out.

The same story may be repeated for a number of compromises made on a daily basis, including the voting madness. If a 100,000 conservative voters decided to behave like the Democrats by voting early and voting often the system will be fixed pronto. Risk/reward is the balance that controls choices.

Posted by: snuffy on February 27, 2006 09:16 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?