Today's News and Observer prints an informative article about the outgoing Executive Director of the State Board of Elections, Mr. Gary Bartlett.
In his two decades as Executive Director, Mr. Bartlett has moved the North Carolina system of elections from a chaotic system where each of the 100 counties did its own thing to a system with uniform equipment and procedures across the state. Bartlett's focus has always been on the voter. "Respect for the process starts with respect for the voters," he has written."Partisan influences must take a back seat to the very basic premise that individuals who are qualified and eligible to vote must be given the opportunity to cast a ballot and have their ballot counted."
During his tenure, North Carolina has moved to head of the pack of states operating fair and effective voting systems.
It has been my pleasure over the past three years to work with Mr. Bartlett. He has served the state of North Carolina and its voters well and faithfully.
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
North Carolina Election Law
The North Carolina General Assembly is considering more than sixty bills that would change the way elections are conducted in the state, plus more than a dozen measures that would call for constitutional amendment votes in 2014.
One of the most consequential bills for Pamlico County is House Bill 607, which passed the House on April 9. This bill decrees the use of paper ballots in all elections in North Carolina. If adopted, it will abolish the use of the Ivotronics Direct Record Election (DRE) touch-screen machines in use in Pamlico County since 2006.
The bill requires that these machines no longer be used for elections beginning January 1, 2014. In other words, we would have to replace the machines in time for the next Congressional election, including the primary election, about a year from now.
That's a tall order, and an expensive one.
In Pamlico County, we like our Ivotronics machines. But they will need to be replaced in three to five years, whether HB 607 becomes law or not. Technology marches on and parts are no longer being made.
Still, DRE machines have advantages.
One of the most consequential bills for Pamlico County is House Bill 607, which passed the House on April 9. This bill decrees the use of paper ballots in all elections in North Carolina. If adopted, it will abolish the use of the Ivotronics Direct Record Election (DRE) touch-screen machines in use in Pamlico County since 2006.
The bill requires that these machines no longer be used for elections beginning January 1, 2014. In other words, we would have to replace the machines in time for the next Congressional election, including the primary election, about a year from now.
That's a tall order, and an expensive one.
In Pamlico County, we like our Ivotronics machines. But they will need to be replaced in three to five years, whether HB 607 becomes law or not. Technology marches on and parts are no longer being made.
Still, DRE machines have advantages.
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Training For Election Officials
Training for North Carolina election officials ended early this afternoon in Concord.
Some of the training was done by experts brought in from the world of education and training to improve our ability to prepare precinct officials to insure effective elections. The morning's expert, after enlightening us on the techniques of Andragogy (you can look it up), admitted that she had learned a lot. "I vote," she said. "I walk up to the scanner with my paper ballot, put it in the slot, and it says "whoosh.'"
"I had no idea until this week," she admitted, "what goes on behind the scenes. Thank you all for what you do."
I will have more to say after I study the election bills submitted to the General Assembly. Some have already been passed. Many of the bills seem based on what some legislators imagine goes on behind the scenes rather than actual knowledge.
The pending bill I most strongly support is H38. If adopted, it will eliminate second primaries. Good idea.
Some of the training was done by experts brought in from the world of education and training to improve our ability to prepare precinct officials to insure effective elections. The morning's expert, after enlightening us on the techniques of Andragogy (you can look it up), admitted that she had learned a lot. "I vote," she said. "I walk up to the scanner with my paper ballot, put it in the slot, and it says "whoosh.'"
"I had no idea until this week," she admitted, "what goes on behind the scenes. Thank you all for what you do."
I will have more to say after I study the election bills submitted to the General Assembly. Some have already been passed. Many of the bills seem based on what some legislators imagine goes on behind the scenes rather than actual knowledge.
The pending bill I most strongly support is H38. If adopted, it will eliminate second primaries. Good idea.
Saturday, March 30, 2013
North Carolina Municipal Elections
Although North Carolina Municipal elections are not held until November, candidates seeking to be on the ballot for municipal elections must file in July. Candidates must file no sooner than noon on the first Friday in July (July 5 this year) and no later than noon on July 9.
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Elections And Democracy
Something to think about.
You can't have democracy without elections.
You can certainly have elections without democracy.
There are several schemes afoot to do just that.
You can't have democracy without elections.
You can certainly have elections without democracy.
There are several schemes afoot to do just that.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Friday, December 7, 2012
Post Election Poll: "Republicans Not Handling Election Results Well"
Public Policy Polling (PPP), a Raleigh, NC polling firm, reports results of a national post-election poll.
PPP summarizes that Republicans are taking the outcome hard and also declining in numbers.
Nearly half believe ACORN stole the 2012 election for Obama. (ACORN ceased to exist in 2010.) 55% of Romney voters believe Democrats committed voter fraud and 25% want their state to secede from the Union because Obama was reelected.
The PPP summary has a link to a printable pdf file of the complete poll. PPP conducts its polls with robocalls and does not contact cell phone numbers.
PPP summarizes that Republicans are taking the outcome hard and also declining in numbers.
Nearly half believe ACORN stole the 2012 election for Obama. (ACORN ceased to exist in 2010.) 55% of Romney voters believe Democrats committed voter fraud and 25% want their state to secede from the Union because Obama was reelected.
The PPP summary has a link to a printable pdf file of the complete poll. PPP conducts its polls with robocalls and does not contact cell phone numbers.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Where Do Republicans Troll For Votes?
I've been watching this for a long time, so I thought I'd share some observations.
In the past year, I have read a number of articles by Republicans emphasizing that the Democratic party was the party of white supremacists. I admit that used to be the case, at least in part. The "solid south" was dominated by a racist party of white supremacy.
Not all southern democrats were obsessed with race. But those who ran for public office had to make an accommodation with racists. In those days, a southern democrat (all white people were democrats) would describe a particularly hot day by saying "I'm sweatin' like a n****r at a white folks' election." In fact, there were "white folks' elections" at least until 1944 when the US Supreme Court ruled against party primaries that excluded black voters.
The Democratic party "big tent" began to fray in the 1940's. First, President Truman integrated the armed forces by executive order. Then, northern progressive Democrats like Hubert Humphrey began speaking out. This led, at the 1948 Democratic convention, to defection of progressives (former Vice President Wallace's Progressive Party) as well as southern racists (Strom Thurmond and the States' Rights party).
That still didn't lead to Republican victory in the presidential race, but led to a concerted effort by Southern Republicans to recruit southern democrats to their party banner. That move, initiated by the chair of the Virginia republican party had only modest success, but the move expanded. By the time Richard Nixon ran for president, the "southern strategy" had already been underway for a decade.
This "southern strategy" got a boost from Brown v. Board of Education, wherein the US Supreme Court rejected the principle of "separate but equal."
Passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act led to massive defections from the democratic party, as Lyndon Johnson foretold. But it was the right thing.
Even so, the southern democratic party didn't become the minority party in the South until after integration of public schools began to really happen. That's also about the time we first heard widespread alarm at the "failure" of public schools and the creation of private, usually "Christian" "academies" unaffected by Brown.
Until that time, the Republican party had been largely a regional party confined to the North and Midwest and widely understood to favor the interests of northern industrialists and financiers.
How could Republicans become a truly national party? Elementary. Play the race card. In a recently uncovered audio recording of a 1981 interview, Lee Atwater, the Carl Rove of his generation, candidly revealed the strategy:
You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”
There were dangers with this strategy. Many Republicans genuinely relished identification with the party of the Great Emancipator - the party of Abraham Lincoln. But the challenge facing the party was in many respects similar to the challenge that faced the Federalist Party as the electorate expanded: how to get voters from the lower classes when the organizing principle of the party was to further the economic and political interests of the wealthy and powerful?
The answer? Play the race card.
Ronald Reagan did it in 1980 when he opened his campaign for the presidency at a rally in Philadelphia, Mississippi, site of the lynching of three civil rights workers seeking to register blacks to vote. When he attacked "welfare queens," everyone got the message. It was Lee Atwater's message.
More recently, when Mitt Romney inveighed against the "47%" and talked about "moochers" and "dependency," it was the same theme: "the Democrats want to tax you hard-working white workers for the benefit of those lazy, shiftless blacks and hispanics and other aliens."
That was the message. It was heard loud and clear by many of Romney's supporters. It was also heard loud and clear by all citizens of color and other groups (e.g. Jewish citizens) despised by white racists and militant evangelical Christians.
It didn't work, at least for president.
It did work in North Carolina, for state offices. But the resulting victory for voters answering to the racist dog whistle, will work to the detriment of working people across the state.
Well before the election - in fact, last September - Atlantic's Ta-Nehisi Coates focused his gaze on the "welfare queen" idea and how this is becoming a losing proposition for Republicans. Not only because of racism, though it is clear that African Americans, Hispanics and Oriental Americans have no trouble decoding the racist message of Republican candidates.
Then, too, there's the demography thing.
In the past year, I have read a number of articles by Republicans emphasizing that the Democratic party was the party of white supremacists. I admit that used to be the case, at least in part. The "solid south" was dominated by a racist party of white supremacy.
Not all southern democrats were obsessed with race. But those who ran for public office had to make an accommodation with racists. In those days, a southern democrat (all white people were democrats) would describe a particularly hot day by saying "I'm sweatin' like a n****r at a white folks' election." In fact, there were "white folks' elections" at least until 1944 when the US Supreme Court ruled against party primaries that excluded black voters.
The Democratic party "big tent" began to fray in the 1940's. First, President Truman integrated the armed forces by executive order. Then, northern progressive Democrats like Hubert Humphrey began speaking out. This led, at the 1948 Democratic convention, to defection of progressives (former Vice President Wallace's Progressive Party) as well as southern racists (Strom Thurmond and the States' Rights party).
That still didn't lead to Republican victory in the presidential race, but led to a concerted effort by Southern Republicans to recruit southern democrats to their party banner. That move, initiated by the chair of the Virginia republican party had only modest success, but the move expanded. By the time Richard Nixon ran for president, the "southern strategy" had already been underway for a decade.
This "southern strategy" got a boost from Brown v. Board of Education, wherein the US Supreme Court rejected the principle of "separate but equal."
Passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act led to massive defections from the democratic party, as Lyndon Johnson foretold. But it was the right thing.
Even so, the southern democratic party didn't become the minority party in the South until after integration of public schools began to really happen. That's also about the time we first heard widespread alarm at the "failure" of public schools and the creation of private, usually "Christian" "academies" unaffected by Brown.
Until that time, the Republican party had been largely a regional party confined to the North and Midwest and widely understood to favor the interests of northern industrialists and financiers.
How could Republicans become a truly national party? Elementary. Play the race card. In a recently uncovered audio recording of a 1981 interview, Lee Atwater, the Carl Rove of his generation, candidly revealed the strategy:
You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”
There were dangers with this strategy. Many Republicans genuinely relished identification with the party of the Great Emancipator - the party of Abraham Lincoln. But the challenge facing the party was in many respects similar to the challenge that faced the Federalist Party as the electorate expanded: how to get voters from the lower classes when the organizing principle of the party was to further the economic and political interests of the wealthy and powerful?
The answer? Play the race card.
Ronald Reagan did it in 1980 when he opened his campaign for the presidency at a rally in Philadelphia, Mississippi, site of the lynching of three civil rights workers seeking to register blacks to vote. When he attacked "welfare queens," everyone got the message. It was Lee Atwater's message.
More recently, when Mitt Romney inveighed against the "47%" and talked about "moochers" and "dependency," it was the same theme: "the Democrats want to tax you hard-working white workers for the benefit of those lazy, shiftless blacks and hispanics and other aliens."
That was the message. It was heard loud and clear by many of Romney's supporters. It was also heard loud and clear by all citizens of color and other groups (e.g. Jewish citizens) despised by white racists and militant evangelical Christians.
It didn't work, at least for president.
It did work in North Carolina, for state offices. But the resulting victory for voters answering to the racist dog whistle, will work to the detriment of working people across the state.
Well before the election - in fact, last September - Atlantic's Ta-Nehisi Coates focused his gaze on the "welfare queen" idea and how this is becoming a losing proposition for Republicans. Not only because of racism, though it is clear that African Americans, Hispanics and Oriental Americans have no trouble decoding the racist message of Republican candidates.
Then, too, there's the demography thing.
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Political Contributions To Presidential Candidates
Washington Post's Harold Meyerson has put together an analysis of the major groups of contributors to the Obama and Romney campaigns.
The results are very interesting. Meyerson summarizes:
"Obama won overwhelming backing from the most productive and innovative sector of American capitalism. Romney won the backing of finance and casinos, whose contributions to American productivity and well-being are more difficult to discern, and which are industries based on reshuffling resources in games the house almost always wins. Obama, if you will, won the makers; Romney, the takers."
That observation is based on where serious money came from. It is quite a different matter to analyze where the votes came from and why.
I'll save that for later.
The results are very interesting. Meyerson summarizes:
"Obama won overwhelming backing from the most productive and innovative sector of American capitalism. Romney won the backing of finance and casinos, whose contributions to American productivity and well-being are more difficult to discern, and which are industries based on reshuffling resources in games the house almost always wins. Obama, if you will, won the makers; Romney, the takers."
That observation is based on where serious money came from. It is quite a different matter to analyze where the votes came from and why.
I'll save that for later.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Do We Have A Broken Election System?
Today's New York Times has an editorial addressing how to fix a broken election system.
Some of the ideas make sense and some of the comments are especially pertinent.
On the other hand, relatively few of the problems identified by the NY Times affect elections in North Carolina.
In Pamlico County, our election system is not broken. It functions quite well. Can it be improved? Yes.
Our voter turnout exceeded the state average - 71% for Pamlico County; 68% for the state of North Carolina. We make it easy for voters to cast their ballots by conducting early voting for longer hours, having many voting locations (ten polling places for 9600 registered voters), and having well-trained election officials.
Unlike other locations in North Carolina and around the nation, we had no long lines. Most of the time, the longest wait was about five minutes. We did have printer breakdowns at two locations, and the line grew to about half an hour at Arapahoe until we installed backup equipment and procedures to keep the lines moving.
A major factor in our success has been thorough planning and preparation. That happens because we have a superb Director of Elections: Lisa Bennett. Pamlico County is fortunate to have her.
Some of the ideas make sense and some of the comments are especially pertinent.
On the other hand, relatively few of the problems identified by the NY Times affect elections in North Carolina.
In Pamlico County, our election system is not broken. It functions quite well. Can it be improved? Yes.
Our voter turnout exceeded the state average - 71% for Pamlico County; 68% for the state of North Carolina. We make it easy for voters to cast their ballots by conducting early voting for longer hours, having many voting locations (ten polling places for 9600 registered voters), and having well-trained election officials.
Unlike other locations in North Carolina and around the nation, we had no long lines. Most of the time, the longest wait was about five minutes. We did have printer breakdowns at two locations, and the line grew to about half an hour at Arapahoe until we installed backup equipment and procedures to keep the lines moving.
A major factor in our success has been thorough planning and preparation. That happens because we have a superb Director of Elections: Lisa Bennett. Pamlico County is fortunate to have her.
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Pamlico County Elections Wrapping Up
Yesterday was the deadline for any candidate to request a recount. There was no such request for any candidate for a Pamlico County office.
Today at 5:00 was the deadline for any election protest concerning irregularities (other than counting of votes - that protest deadline was November 16). No such protest was received for any Pamlico County contest.
The statutory date to begin to issue certificates of election to winning candidates is November 22. Since that is Thanksgiving day, we will hold off until next week.
Today at 5:00 was the deadline for any election protest concerning irregularities (other than counting of votes - that protest deadline was November 16). No such protest was received for any Pamlico County contest.
The statutory date to begin to issue certificates of election to winning candidates is November 22. Since that is Thanksgiving day, we will hold off until next week.
Monday, November 19, 2012
Election Wrap Up: Getting Close - No Statewide Recount
Last week, there was still a possibility of a statewide recount of the race for Lt. Governor. According to press reports, the margin between the two candidates was small enough to allow a request for a recount. There was also the possibility of a court challenge to NC provisional ballot procedures, and the possibility of a request for copies of the cover of all provisional ballots with non-public records (drivers license, social security number and date of birth) redacted. Responding to such a request would be a large undertaking.
This morning, we received notice from the State Board of Elections that Lt. Governor candidate Linda Coleman has decided not to seek a recount and has asked that her public records request of last week be withdrawn. There will be a few district and county recounts, but so far as we know, there will be none involving Pamlico County.
As an aside, my observation is that, given the procedures and equipment used in North Carolina, there is little likelihood that any recount will result in a different outcome.
This morning, we received notice from the State Board of Elections that Lt. Governor candidate Linda Coleman has decided not to seek a recount and has asked that her public records request of last week be withdrawn. There will be a few district and county recounts, but so far as we know, there will be none involving Pamlico County.
As an aside, my observation is that, given the procedures and equipment used in North Carolina, there is little likelihood that any recount will result in a different outcome.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
House Of Representatives Problem
D.R. and M.D., writing in The Economist blog Democracy in America, take issue with Speaker Boehner's claim that the American people have given the House of Representatives a mandate by electing a Republican majority. They point out that the American people gave more votes to Democratic candidates for the house than to Republican members and attribute the Republican majority to successful gerrymandering: http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/11/congressional-representation-0?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/callvotersuppression
Their blog post is interesting, because it addresses a number of problems with some of our historical assumptions about representation. The main issue the blog post addresses is that the maldistribution of seats in the house.
The authors do point out that "It is not the first time that a party has won a majority of seats in the House despite receiving fewer votes than its rival. Mr Gingrich’s team won re-election and a 26-seat majority in 1996, on 47.8% of the vote to 48.1% for the Democrats. In 1942 Sam Rayburn managed to attain a 13-seat majority for the Democrats in the mid-terms, even though his party won 46% of the vote to the Republicans’ 51% (small wonder that Rayburn holds the record as the longest-serving speaker). But rarely does it produce such a skewed result as we've seen in the House this year."
Actually, Sam Rayburn's accomplishment is less impressive when you realize it took place in an era before the Supreme Court's decision in Baker v. Carr which established the principle of "one person, one vote." In other words, each member of Congress must represent an approximately equal number of citizens. That was not the case in 1942.
D.R. and M.D. tentatively suggest proportional representation as a way to avoid this problem, and then quickly back off because it would require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
I'm not so sure. The Constitution doesn't even mention Congressional Districts. There may be ways without such an amendment.
I posted some thoughts on the subject last May:
Some of the ills of congress are built into our constitution. The US Senate, for example, which likes to characterize itself as "the world's greatest deliberative body" is arguably the "free world's" least democratic body. That is, first of all, a consequence of the constitutional arrangement that each state, regardless of size or economic output, have an equal number of senators. This is compounded by the increasingly inexplicable commitment of the senate to the requirement of a supermajority of senators to pass any legislation at all. My solution to that: get rid of paper filibusters imposed by the cloture rule. Let's go back to "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" style of filibuster. Filibusters would become more rare because voters could see what was happening and better understand what it was about.
Some republicans want to fix the senate by repealing the seventeenth amendment providing direct popular election of senators. What, we have too much democracy?
A common complaint about the House of Representatives is "My representative doesn't listen to people like me."
Some advocate term limits to fix this. I say, we already have term limits. Elections. What we don't have is enough representatives.
We are going through redistricting right now. This is the process after every decenniel census (except for the 1920 census - there was not a reapportionment after that census). First Congress reapportions seats in the House of Representatives to the states according to population. District boundaries are then redrawn by state legislatures and in some cases by courts.
Contrary to popular opinion, the number of seats in the House of Representatives is not in the Constitution. But the number has not changed since it was set at 435 in 1911. At that time, each member of the House represented about 216,000 citizens. Since then, our population has more than tripled, but the number remains the same. Now each member represents about 708,000 constituents.
My suggestion: enlarge the House so that each member represents about 216,000 citizens. With modern communications systems, that would allow the members closer communication with constituents. It would also lower the financial and organizational barriers to running for office. It might reduce the influence of money in politics and even create opportunities for more political parties to become competitive.
How many representatives would we have? About 1,426. Admittedly, that might make the body even more unwieldy, but it might just as well force more cooperation. It would certainly induce representatives to be more responsive to constituents.
How could we accommodate so many representatives? Replace the desks on the floor of the House with benches. Reduce representatives' personal staffs. Currently, members are allowed to hire as many as eighteen personal staffers. Reduce that to five per member. Representatives might have to study bills themselves, possibly answer phones and write some of their own correspondence. But they wouldn't have to raise so much money.
Originally Posted May 29, 2012
Note: I would actually prefer proportional representation. Failing that unlikely outcome, a possible (but not necessary) consequence of enlarging the House might be to increase the possibility of third (or fourth...) parties. It might at least make it harder to have the kind of lock step voting patterns we see on the Republican side of the House today.
Their blog post is interesting, because it addresses a number of problems with some of our historical assumptions about representation. The main issue the blog post addresses is that the maldistribution of seats in the house.
The authors do point out that "It is not the first time that a party has won a majority of seats in the House despite receiving fewer votes than its rival. Mr Gingrich’s team won re-election and a 26-seat majority in 1996, on 47.8% of the vote to 48.1% for the Democrats. In 1942 Sam Rayburn managed to attain a 13-seat majority for the Democrats in the mid-terms, even though his party won 46% of the vote to the Republicans’ 51% (small wonder that Rayburn holds the record as the longest-serving speaker). But rarely does it produce such a skewed result as we've seen in the House this year."
Actually, Sam Rayburn's accomplishment is less impressive when you realize it took place in an era before the Supreme Court's decision in Baker v. Carr which established the principle of "one person, one vote." In other words, each member of Congress must represent an approximately equal number of citizens. That was not the case in 1942.
D.R. and M.D. tentatively suggest proportional representation as a way to avoid this problem, and then quickly back off because it would require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
I'm not so sure. The Constitution doesn't even mention Congressional Districts. There may be ways without such an amendment.
I posted some thoughts on the subject last May:
Some of the ills of congress are built into our constitution. The US Senate, for example, which likes to characterize itself as "the world's greatest deliberative body" is arguably the "free world's" least democratic body. That is, first of all, a consequence of the constitutional arrangement that each state, regardless of size or economic output, have an equal number of senators. This is compounded by the increasingly inexplicable commitment of the senate to the requirement of a supermajority of senators to pass any legislation at all. My solution to that: get rid of paper filibusters imposed by the cloture rule. Let's go back to "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" style of filibuster. Filibusters would become more rare because voters could see what was happening and better understand what it was about.
Some republicans want to fix the senate by repealing the seventeenth amendment providing direct popular election of senators. What, we have too much democracy?
A common complaint about the House of Representatives is "My representative doesn't listen to people like me."
Some advocate term limits to fix this. I say, we already have term limits. Elections. What we don't have is enough representatives.
We are going through redistricting right now. This is the process after every decenniel census (except for the 1920 census - there was not a reapportionment after that census). First Congress reapportions seats in the House of Representatives to the states according to population. District boundaries are then redrawn by state legislatures and in some cases by courts.
Contrary to popular opinion, the number of seats in the House of Representatives is not in the Constitution. But the number has not changed since it was set at 435 in 1911. At that time, each member of the House represented about 216,000 citizens. Since then, our population has more than tripled, but the number remains the same. Now each member represents about 708,000 constituents.
My suggestion: enlarge the House so that each member represents about 216,000 citizens. With modern communications systems, that would allow the members closer communication with constituents. It would also lower the financial and organizational barriers to running for office. It might reduce the influence of money in politics and even create opportunities for more political parties to become competitive.
How many representatives would we have? About 1,426. Admittedly, that might make the body even more unwieldy, but it might just as well force more cooperation. It would certainly induce representatives to be more responsive to constituents.
How could we accommodate so many representatives? Replace the desks on the floor of the House with benches. Reduce representatives' personal staffs. Currently, members are allowed to hire as many as eighteen personal staffers. Reduce that to five per member. Representatives might have to study bills themselves, possibly answer phones and write some of their own correspondence. But they wouldn't have to raise so much money.
Originally Posted May 29, 2012
Note: I would actually prefer proportional representation. Failing that unlikely outcome, a possible (but not necessary) consequence of enlarging the House might be to increase the possibility of third (or fourth...) parties. It might at least make it harder to have the kind of lock step voting patterns we see on the Republican side of the House today.
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Pamlico County Election Canvass
Ten days after the election, every county board of elections meets at 11:00 a.m to make the preliminary count made on election day official. That happened yesterday all across North Carolina. In finalizing the count, the board considers timely absentee votes submitted by mail that were received after election day (we had eleven) as well as provisional ballots cast on election day.
In Pamlico County, sixty-three provisional ballots were cast. When we examined those sixty-three ballots, we determined that twenty-five of them met the legal criteria to be accepted as legal votes. The thirty-eight ballots that were rejected will still be processed as voter registration requests and many of the provisional voters will be added to the county's voter registration rolls.
Next Thursday, November 22, the county board will issue certificates of election for every contest involving only county offices, in the absence of a demand for recount or an election protest. As of this writing, we do not anticipate a local recount or protest.
There remain two possibilities for a statewide recount: one congressional seat not involving Pamlico County and one statewide contest - that for Lieutenant Governor.
Once the election is truly over, I will have a few words to say about various candidates. In the meantime, my interest remains policy and process, not individual candidates.
In Pamlico County, sixty-three provisional ballots were cast. When we examined those sixty-three ballots, we determined that twenty-five of them met the legal criteria to be accepted as legal votes. The thirty-eight ballots that were rejected will still be processed as voter registration requests and many of the provisional voters will be added to the county's voter registration rolls.
Next Thursday, November 22, the county board will issue certificates of election for every contest involving only county offices, in the absence of a demand for recount or an election protest. As of this writing, we do not anticipate a local recount or protest.
There remain two possibilities for a statewide recount: one congressional seat not involving Pamlico County and one statewide contest - that for Lieutenant Governor.
Once the election is truly over, I will have a few words to say about various candidates. In the meantime, my interest remains policy and process, not individual candidates.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Reflections On Elections
Elections are a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for democracy. By that, I mean representative democracy, which is the only kind that has a chance of functioning in a large nation. But what constitutes representation?
Nearly half of our voters are dissatisfied with the outcome of the presidential election. In North Carolina, more than half of our voters are dissatisfied with the outcome of Congressional elections.
After each election, there appear criticisms and suggestions for how to fix problems.
From my perspective as an election official of the State of North Carolina, I think we have a pretty good system. This reflects sound decisions made years ago by the North Carolina Board of Elections and by my county, Pamlico County.
I plan to make specific comments about problems and possible solutions. I wouldn't trade our problems for those of other states such as Florida and Ohio.
The New York Times posted an interesting discussion on the question of whether our voting system(s) need to be fixed.
In the next days and weeks I plan to add my thoughts to the mix.
Nearly half of our voters are dissatisfied with the outcome of the presidential election. In North Carolina, more than half of our voters are dissatisfied with the outcome of Congressional elections.
After each election, there appear criticisms and suggestions for how to fix problems.
From my perspective as an election official of the State of North Carolina, I think we have a pretty good system. This reflects sound decisions made years ago by the North Carolina Board of Elections and by my county, Pamlico County.
I plan to make specific comments about problems and possible solutions. I wouldn't trade our problems for those of other states such as Florida and Ohio.
The New York Times posted an interesting discussion on the question of whether our voting system(s) need to be fixed.
In the next days and weeks I plan to add my thoughts to the mix.
Monday, November 12, 2012
And Now A Word From David Frum
David Frum, George W. Bush speechwriter, appeared on "Morning Joe" on MSNBC. Here is what Frum had to say about the Republican Party:
I believe the Republican Party is a party of followership. The problem with the Republican leaders is that they're cowards.... The real locus of the problem is the Republican activist base and the Republican donor base. They went apocalyptic over the past four years. And that was exploited by a lot of people in the conservative world. I won't soon forget the lupine smile that played over the head of a major conservative institution when he told me that our donors think the apocalypse has arrived.
Republicans have been fleeced and exploited and lied to by a conservative entertainment complex.... Because the followers, the donors and the activists are so mistaken about the nature of the problems the country faces the nature--I mean, it's just a simple question. I went to Tea Party rallies and I would ask this question: "have taxes gone up or down in the past four years?" They could not answer that question correctly. Now it's true that taxes will go up if the President is re-elected. That's why we're Republicans. But you have to know that taxes have not gone up in the past. And "do we spend a trillion dollars on welfare?" Is that true or false? It is false. But it is almost universally believed.
That means that the leaders have no space to operate.Painted themselves into a corner? Not sure I believe that.
Friday, November 9, 2012
The Past Isn't Dead- It Isn't Even Past: Faulkner
Is history destiny? I found this map today in a comment on a blog entry by Noah Smith. Noah's entire post on "makers and takers" is worth reading.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Election's Over!
No more speeches. No more debates. No more annoying ads. No more robocalls.
No more ballots.
As a member of Pamlico County's Board of Elections, I am prohibited from publicly advocating or opposing any candidate appearing on my county's ballot. I have chosen to interpret that as prohibiting the display of yard signs or bumper stickers.
But the election is over and there is no more ballot that I am responsible for.
Today I put up a yard sign for Obama/Biden.
I can now celebrate my country.
We can be truly exceptional.
No more ballots.
As a member of Pamlico County's Board of Elections, I am prohibited from publicly advocating or opposing any candidate appearing on my county's ballot. I have chosen to interpret that as prohibiting the display of yard signs or bumper stickers.
But the election is over and there is no more ballot that I am responsible for.
Today I put up a yard sign for Obama/Biden.
I can now celebrate my country.
We can be truly exceptional.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Remembrance Of Elections Past: 2000
Elections have consequences.
Counting votes has consequences.
Supreme Court interventions have consequences.
Consequences of 2000:
9/11;
John Roberts; Samuel Alito;
Iraq;
Twelve more years of global warming, aka climate change;
Vast increases in wealth of the top 1% of earners;
2007 economic collapse.
Cause of election outcome:
Press distortions about Al Gore;
Gore and his campaign were too polite;
Outright lies by Bush campaign given free pass.
In an earlier time, it was reasonably safe to rely on the mainstream press to provide objective coverage of elections. It was pundits (fed leaks) who did the dirty work. US law prohibited too much common ownership of media.
By 1992, the national press had pretty much shifted out of that mode.
In 1993 FOX got the rights to broadcast NFL football.
The rest is history.
Good results of 2000:
Help America Vote Act.
Counting votes has consequences.
Supreme Court interventions have consequences.
Consequences of 2000:
9/11;
John Roberts; Samuel Alito;
Iraq;
Twelve more years of global warming, aka climate change;
Vast increases in wealth of the top 1% of earners;
2007 economic collapse.
Cause of election outcome:
Press distortions about Al Gore;
Gore and his campaign were too polite;
Outright lies by Bush campaign given free pass.
In an earlier time, it was reasonably safe to rely on the mainstream press to provide objective coverage of elections. It was pundits (fed leaks) who did the dirty work. US law prohibited too much common ownership of media.
By 1992, the national press had pretty much shifted out of that mode.
In 1993 FOX got the rights to broadcast NFL football.
The rest is history.
Good results of 2000:
Help America Vote Act.
One More Day
Tomorrow is election day.
Unless you are a poll worker or other election official, the only thing you have to worry about is getting up and stopping by your precinct to vote. In Pamlico County, we hope election day lines won't be long - 46% of our registered voters have already cast their ballots.
We don't know how many voters will show up tomorrow, but based on four years ago, 2,500 seems like a good estimate.
Polls open at 6:30 am and close at 7:30 pm. Each polling place will count votes as soon as the polls close and announce their local results to any member of the public present. They will then deliver election records to the Board of Elections in Bayboro. County returns will be posted in the upstairs Court Room as soon as they arrive.
What happens if we have an emergency? The Board of Elections plans for contingencies so you don't have to. If there is a loss of power, we are prepared to use paper ballots in place of our voting machines. If a machine fails, we have backups. If a precinct official gets sick, we have emergency officials on call.
And we are all thankful we don't have the problems facing election officials and voters in New York and New Jersey.
The election will take place.
Unless you are a poll worker or other election official, the only thing you have to worry about is getting up and stopping by your precinct to vote. In Pamlico County, we hope election day lines won't be long - 46% of our registered voters have already cast their ballots.
We don't know how many voters will show up tomorrow, but based on four years ago, 2,500 seems like a good estimate.
Polls open at 6:30 am and close at 7:30 pm. Each polling place will count votes as soon as the polls close and announce their local results to any member of the public present. They will then deliver election records to the Board of Elections in Bayboro. County returns will be posted in the upstairs Court Room as soon as they arrive.
What happens if we have an emergency? The Board of Elections plans for contingencies so you don't have to. If there is a loss of power, we are prepared to use paper ballots in place of our voting machines. If a machine fails, we have backups. If a precinct official gets sick, we have emergency officials on call.
And we are all thankful we don't have the problems facing election officials and voters in New York and New Jersey.
The election will take place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
