Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Comments

  1. I worked at the polls as a watcher for the Patrick campaign for a few hours.

    <

    p>
    People came in who had moved and didn’t remember if they had changed their registrations.  People came in who didn’t know that they had to have registered way back. 

    <

    p>
    The election staff was great at trying to help them either find the place they should be, or telling them the deal. 

    <

    p>
    But I’m certain there would have been more participants if same day registration was in place.  And isn’t that the goal–more participants?

    • But I’m certain there would have been more participants if same day registration was in place.  And isn’t that the goal–more participants?

      <

      p>
      Some would say that the goal is more informed participants — either by having the current participants more informed, or by adding more participants, with the newly added participants more informed.

      <

      p>
      I think it’s bad form to judge the criteria by which others make voting decisions, but the above concern is commonly cited.

      <

      p>
      Even if same-day registration doesn’t happen, is it really necessary to have a 20(!?) day waiting period?  See, we have these things called computers, and Internets, and printers, and whatnot.  It should be do-able within 48 hours.  It surely doesn’t take 20 days.  SO… even if they can’t get same-day for philosophical or so-called security or other reasons, they could reduce the deadline from 20 days to something far more reasonable.

      • Who are these “some”? Of course, it would be desirable for all the voters of the Commonwealth to be “informed,” the only valid criteria are citizenship and residence. What is most needed are ways to maximize participation.

        • Let’s say voting was compulsory.  The folks who would have voted anyway vote based on their traditional system of beliefs, and all the folks who wouldn’t have voted simply flip a coin for each election.

          <

          p>
          Do you think the results would be better, worse, or the same as if an election where those who flipped coins simply chose to stay home?

          <

          p>
          Obviously people don’t generally choose by actually flipping a coin, and we’re not talking about compulsory voting.  The extreme example is simply used to make a point: more people voting doesn’t necessarily mean that the results are more likely to represent the true will of the people.

      • as a former volunteer in the local (Worcester election office), I was a Democratic Assistant  Commissioner), here are but a few things behind the scenes that you all don’t get to experience, so I’ll give you just  a few.

        <

        p>
        First of all, there are the bare bones number of actual Election Commission paid staff people.  Worcester has 1 Ex. Dir.  and 2 clerks for 100,000+ voters.  Computers are great and it works, only if there are enough people to input the info.

        <

        p>
        As a volunteer, that is all I did for more than 5 hours a day, inputed new voters or made changes,  removed deceased voters…the phone on election day never stops, and we have 6 extra lines into the office. and only a couple of extra helpers, because of the sensitivity and legality of the information we dealt with.  We actually have to be sworn in by the City, to work in the commission office on election day.

        <

        p>
        20 days lead time, there are State and Federal regs governing when a ballot must be produced and enough deadlines to choke a good horse.

        <

        p>
        And election workers must be paid, it varies, but most cities and towns barely have funds to cover mandated workers. 

        <

        p>
        6 workers per precinct, 50 precincts in Worcester.

        <

        p>
        And we turn over every rock in the city to get poll workers.  You must commit to a minimum 14 hour day, the WHOLE day.  You get 1Dinner break and 2 smaller breaks to stretch your legs.  It all is driven by which party you belong to,  (that is one thing I wish they would change.  Especially with the dwindling numbers for republicans in many places.)

        <

        p>
        And now to the poll workers themselves.

        <

        p>
        Don’t get me wrong, I’m close to belonging to the senior club myself, but in most towns and cities, seniors are the only ones that can devote an entire 14 hour day to do this and so many have been at it for 30+ years.  My precinct personally, has 5 of the 6 over 75 years young.

        <

        p>
        It take them 5 minutes just to find your street and name, (especially is the larger cities).the print is far from ADA code……I have trouble reading it even with my specs on!

        <

        p>
        If we recommend to increase participation, the wait time will get even longer. 

        <

        p>
        Now while I would stand in the cold for an hour to vote, many of today’s generations would not, so that needs to be addressed. 

        <

        p>
        Even with more poll workers, many polling places are not large enough to accommodate more people.

        <

        p>
        And having said ALL that, if it could be worked out, it removes a lot of angry people that think it is NOT their responsibility to let anyone know , when they move or change their name, etc. Election wardens have enough on their plates, to add referee to their already crammed day.  and I’ve just scratched the surface as to the responsibilities of poll workers…but you all don’t need the manual, I think you get that it’s not about just showing up and filling in circles and walk back out the door…..

        <

        p>

        • more money in our voting process.

          <

          p>
          If we need to hire more people to process applications before election day, so be it.  There are always skilled people looking for work, and while most folks don’t want temporary work, many are willing to take it to help make ends meet.

          <

          p>
          As for election day volunteers, if we need more of them, then we’ll have to get them.  If we need to pay them (like jury duty), than we’ll do it.

          <

          p>
          These costs would be negligible relative to the state’s budget, and arguably the most important investment the state could make.

          <

          p>
          This isn’t to minimize the concerns you raise — rather, it is to highlight them.  The state should never raise artificial barriers to voting, such as longer than necessary queue times or longer than necessary voter reg lead times.

        • Poll worker reform is an ongoing issue in this state.  To run elections of any sort competently, poll workers need to be supported and well trained — and there need to be enough of them to get the job done.

          <

          p>
          There is some great momemtum on this issue already.  The Secretary of State’s office recently helped pass a bill that allows 16 and 17 year olds to be poll workers.  Boston had 18 high school students working on Election Day, as well as about 100 college students.  There are several advantages to recruiting high school students in particular to join the ranks of the existing poll workers, many of whom are retirees.

          <

          p>
          1.  Young poll workers understand computers and technology.  Growing up with computers at school, cell phones, and the like, younger poll workers are flexible learners.

          <

          p>
          2.  In cities with multiple language groups, young people are often bilingual.  In Boston and Chelsea on Election Day, I watched young poll workers translate between older poll wardens who spoke only English and voters who spoke mostly Spanish and had only limited English skills.  It was great.

          <

          p>
          3.  The small stipend paid to poll workers — often around $100 for the day —  is much more enticing to a 16 or 17 year old (who often face minimum wage choices when they seek work) than  to a working adult.

          <

          p>
          4.  Young poll workers learn the ins and outs of elections and become turned on to participating as voters for the long haul.  This ‘real world’ civic engagement compliments whatever civics they learn in school.

          <

          p>
          There is still more work to be done.  Voters should not have to face long lines. 

          <

          p>
          It would be great to see the Secretary of State reach out to some private industry experts from Stop and Shop or one of the other major retailers and see how they handle predictable rushes, to see if there is any advice we can give to town clerks or smart changes in procedure that might be warranted to help with the 5pm to 8pm rush on Election Day.

          <

          p>
          One thing we might do is look at bringing a second shift of poll workers to work from 3pm to 8pm, especially on the days of gubernatorial and presidential general elections.  A 14 hour day is very tough for many of the existing poll workers, and it might be good to have some workers fresh for the evening rush.  It is worth investigating.

          <

          p>
          In general, we need to make sure that town clerks, city elections officials, and the Secretary of State have the tools they need — including money — to get the job done.

          • and as you know, from your work, that this is one part of government that is broken and needs fixing.

            <

            p>
            Today, with more budget cuts, the cities and towns have most of this fall on their shoulders.  Mandated by state law,  some of which I found very archaic.

            <

            p>
            Many of our older poll workers(seniors) resist change and even though here in Worcester we do a training EVERY year to refresh memories.  And each worker gets a handbook to keep and study.

            <

            p>
            Poll workers here are paid from the Election Commission’s operating budget.

            <

            p>
            We have done outreach to minority groups, but every year we must rely on our reserve of stand in poll workers.  Dwindling with each passing year.

            <

            p>
            Once again, #’s of poll workers mandate by state law.

            <

            p>
            I think the kids are a great idea.  Though I’d make it seniors only. Lots could use the $100 stipend.

            <

            p>
            We’ve discussed splitting the shifts, but once again, to maintain the integrity of the paperwork,  the Sec. of State has (for the time being) nixed the idea.

            <

            p>
            I hope with all the discussions we have had in civic engagement work groups, that we will revisit some of the items.

            <

            p>
            But at this time, I can’t see same day registration  working in the larger cities, where there is a huge amount of citizens constantly moving and changing addresses within the City.

            <

            p>
            Over all, I always advocate for personal responsibility.  IF a person moves, or if any of their pertinent  information changes, the voter, not the city of town, needs to do their part to avoid problems on election day.

            <

            p>
            My biggest frustration on election day, every year, is the hundreds of phone calls of  ” Where do I vote?  We have created a link on the City website, for every voter in Worcester, to personally go and look up there precinct BEFORE election day!  Not as they are rushing out the door on their way to the polls.

            <

            p>
            I agree Avi, those of us with the knowledge of how voting works, must keep pushing for a more efficient way to keep increasing the numbers of citizens that vote and educated on issues.

            <

            p>
            Going to the polls just for the sake of saying you went, and not be “present “,  truly does the process an injustice and  works to create a government of popularity and apathy.

            <

            p>

  2. Can you assure me that 100% of the voters enrolling “the day of” are 100% eligible to vote?  Why, I bet you wouldn’t dare assure me 100% of conventionally enrolled voters are eligible.

    <

    p>
    How do we know same-day enrolled voters are not illegal aliens? What prevents the same voter from registering in multiple districts and voting multiple times?  What about an out-of-state voter driving down from, say, NH and voting in Lawrence or Haverhill?  Are same-day enrollees legal MA citizens, do they meet our residency requirements?

    <

    p>
    For every illegal, ineligible vote that slips through someone else’s vote is nullified.  Casting an ineligible vote is a crime, no?

    <

    p>
    Our electoral system is already a wreck, and it seems same-day registration opens the way to increased fraud.  Is this what we want?

    <

    p>
    Unless you can convince me otherwise, it’s a terible idea.

    • in Vermont is accepted and successful. My family regularly opts to vote early because of schedule conflicts, or just to get it done. In my town, as soon as the ballot is made up, you can go down to the Town Clerk’s office, take your ballot into the conference room and have the whole shiny conference table to yourself. No one asks why you’ve come early, you just get to vote. Of course, we also sit there and discuss each candidate while we fill in the little ovals…almost as social as election day!

    • Can you assure me that 100% of the voters enrolling “the day of” are 100% eligible to vote?  Why, I bet you wouldn’t dare assure me 100% of conventionally enrolled voters are eligible.

      <

      p>
      That’s right.  Perhaps a more important question is: are same-day registrants more likely to be ineligible to vote.  I think not; in fact, I’d bet they’re less likely to be ineligible because they’re showing very recent proof that they live at that address.  There are people in my precinct who no longer live with their parents but vote in my precinct anyway — if they were asked to re-register, they couldn’t really prove they live with their folks any more (since, well, they don’t).  Nevertheless, I don’t think that you could demonstrate that same-day registrants are more likely to be fraudulent.

      <

      p>
      How do we know same-day enrolled voters are not illegal aliens?

      <

      p>
      Five years in prison and/or $10,000.

      <

      p>
      What prevents the same voter from registering in multiple districts and voting multiple times?

      <

      p>
      Five years in prison and/or $10,000.

      <

      p>
      What about an out-of-state voter driving down from, say, NH and voting in Lawrence or Haverhill?

      <

      p>
      Five years in prison and/or $10,000.

      <

      p>
      For every illegal, ineligible vote that slips through someone else’s vote is nullified.  Casting an ineligible vote is a crime, no?

      <

      p>
      Guess what the penalty is.

      <

      p>
      Our electoral system is already a wreck, and it seems same-day registration opens the way to increased fraud.  Is this what we want?

      <

      p>
      The question is: does it open us up to fraud at an increased rate and I believe the answer is no.  Election day shenanigans are far more likely to come from somebody with power (an election worker, someone affiliated with a voting machine company, an elected official) than from a voter.

      <

      p>
      Why?  Five years in prison and/or $10,000.  And, if you’re an illegal alien, the risk of deportation.  An individual fraudster using the same-day registration method simply can’t swing enough votes to be likely to be successful.

      <

      p>
      How may fraudulent votes could you cast in a single day, one at a time, in person?  25?  That’d be about 2 an hour.  You’ve got to travel, wait in line, fill out the registration form, and then vote every half hour.  So, I think 25 is optimistic, but let’s say 25.  Now, what are the odds that 25 votes swings a statewide (our district or county-wide) election?  Virtually zero.  For how many people is the choice of an elected official worth 5 years in prison or $10,000?  Not many.  But what about a vast conspiracy, capable of swinging the election 5000 votes?  Well, that would take 200 people… and conspiracies with 200 people driving around the state showing (real or fake) IDs and filling out forms aren’t likely to work.

      <

      p>
      Same day registration works because the payoff for voter fraud is so much smaller than the potential cost, which is (say it with me): Five years in prison and/or $10,000.

  3. i’d guess this gets passed. With all the important players seemingly open to it I can’t imagine an overly contentious debate. I would expect Patrick to incorporate it into his whole “checking back in” mentality. I dont think it would be monumental victory for anyone including Patrick or Galvin included, just because it is favored by most people (kind of like passing legislation that says puppies are cute-ok maybe not that easy but you get my point). I think it would be a biggger story if either Patrick or Galvin did not support it, but again i dont think that would happen.

    • Remember the furor when in-state tuition for illegals was proposed?  Off the radar screen, about to sail through … until the public got wind of it.

      <

      p>
      I think that possibility exists for same-day enrollment.  How will the public be assured that everyone who enrolls the day-of are legally eligible to vote?  Are these votes provisional until registration and eligibility are verified?  Are names crossed-checked with other towns?

      <

      p>
      Will ID be necessary?

      <

      p>
      These are valid points, and I think you are sticking your heads in the sand thinking that objections won’t be raised.

      <

      p>
      Besides, no one has yet answered my concerns: how can you assure me that all same-day enrollment votes are legitimate?

      <

      p>
      Anybody?

        • Thanks for reciting the criminal code.  Driving without a valid driver’s license is a crime too, but hundreds — even thousands — of illegal aliens do it daily.

          <

          p>
          Just because someone has a telephone or cable bill does not mean they are eligible to vote.

          <

          p>
          What if the are illegal aliens?
          What if they have not met residency requirements? (6 months?)
          What if they give false ID?
          What if they are illegal aliens?
          What if they are illegal aliens? (Get it yet?)

          <

          p>
          Why your fetish with elevating voter turnout over the sanctity of the accuracy of the vote?

          <

          p>
          Our voter rolls in Boston, I bet, are chock-a-block full of outdated names, the deceased, persons since relocated, and simple errors.  This is a blueprint for fraud.

          <

          p>
          Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for maximizing voter turnout. But not at the expense of ensuring eligibility and maintaining the accuracy.

          <

          p>
          There are plenty of races across the land which were determined by a few hundred votes out of tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands.

          <

          p>
          It’d be nice to know that all the counted votes were legitimate.

      • I won’t go through all the details that stormv so ably wrote above, but he is correct.

        <

        p>
        Valid identification proving local residence and eligibility would required to fix your registration or register on Election Day.  This is far more rigorous anti-fraud measure than the mail-in voter registrations that are common in Massachusetts and nationwide.

      • I won’t go through all the details that stormv so ably wrote above, but he is correct.

        <

        p>
        Valid identification proving local residence and eligibility would be required to fix your registration or register on Election Day.  This is far more rigorous anti-fraud measure than the mail-in voter registrations that are common in Massachusetts and nationwide.

      • <

        blockquote>Besides, no one has yet answered my concerns: how can you assure me that all same-day enrollment votes are legitimate?

        <

        blockquote>

        <

        p>
        I’d imagine there are a number of ways to ensure legitimacy, and you mentioned some possibilities — including giving all new sign-ups provisional ballots until eligibility is set. But the fact that new sign-ups have to prove where they live makes it fraud even more less likely as compared to already registered voters, as mentioned by several posters.

        <

        p>
        But I think the best argument for this is that several states already do same-day registration, and fraud has not played a significant role in any of these places. In fact, while the issue of fraud is certainly something to take into account when setting up voting systems, the threat it poses is also consistently overblown by some critics (often conservatives, interestingly).

        <

        p>
        Anyway, between the theoretical argument of fraud and the fact that several same-day systems are already working in the real world, I’ll take the latter anyday.

        • …do you really mean that there was no problem electing an increasing number of Democrats in these places?

          <

          p>
          I am very amused that the DIEBOLD CATASTROPHE ….OOOOoooohhhhhh…. has simply VANISHED now that the Democrats have taken back the majority.  Gee, we haven’t just been listening to partisan sour grapes and griping for the last six years, have we?

          • I am very amused that the DIEBOLD CATASTROPHE ….OOOOoooohhhhhh…. has simply VANISHED now that the Democrats have taken back the majority.

            <

            p>
            I’m sure the people of Florida’s 13th district would disagree with you there.

            <

            p>
            But anyway, when I say that there hasn’t been proof of fraud in those places, I say it not because of partisan gripe, because because there is no evidence of fraud. Of course, if you have some proof that nobody else has been able to find, then I’d love for you to share it with everyone.

            <

            p>
            Really, it’s just unfortunate that apparently Republicans and conservatives use the “fraud” card every time there’s a proposal on the board to increase turnout, which should absolutely be a priority. I think America is resourceful enough to be able to deal with both simultaneously.

            • but haven’t I read that both LA Raza and ACORN have been caught trying to enroll ineligible persons (sorry … cannot find citation.)

              <

              p>
              I think out voting system is broken.  It isn’t accurate enough to reflect true voter intent in a 50/50 political climate.

              <

              p>
              Fix what’s broken before you compound the errors.

              • do you consider the Republicans’ loss “evidence enough”?

                <

                p>
                I don’t, and I’m still waiting for an actual argument against same-day voting other than complaints about some liberals’ arguments in 2004.

Archives