Rhode Island Repeals Straight Ticket Device

Thanks to Ballot Access news for this post.

A straight ticket device lets voters cast a vote fr all the nominees of one party with a single mark on the ballot.  Voters who use this option usually do not read the entire ballot, just the top party labels and the box to make straight ticket.

Straight ticket voting is harmful to minor party and independent candidates.

Election officials dislike the straight ticket device because it causes some voters to fail to vote on ballot measures and non-partisan races.

On June 21 at 4am, the Rhode Island legislature passed HB8072, to repel the straight ticket device.  Six minutes later, it adjoined for the year.

Rhode Island is the ninth state to repeal the straight ticket device in the last fifty years.  The other states are:

1. Delaware - 1965
2. Georgia - 1993
3. Illinois - 1997
4. South Dakota - 1997
5. Missouri - 2005
6. New Hampshire - 2007
7. New Mexico - 2011
8. North Carolina - 2013

States that still use a straight ticket device:

1. Alabama
2. Indiana
3. Iowa
4. Kentucky
5. Michigan
6. Oklahoma
7. Pennsylvania
8. South Carolina
9. Texas
10. Utah
11. West Virginia

If you live in one of these states, it is time to work on repealing the straight ticket device.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us

NYC BOE to Change Ballot Format

Tiny typeface that rendered election ballots nearly unreadable for many voters is a thing of the past.

The New York City Board of Elections voted unanimously to proceed with work on a trilingual ballot that will eliminate the use of a six-point font, which allowed ballots to be printed in five languages.

The new ballot format will make its debut in the November General Election.

The changes will come at no additional cost to taxpayers.  The board still needs to evaluate elections expenses regardless of the proposed ballot alterations, but the number of printed ballots would remain the same.

Last year's ballot fiasco stemmed from the city's compliance with language-access laws requiring ballots to be presented in English, Spanish, Chinese, Korean and Bengali.

The ballot used in the general election was the board's worst-case scenario.  Approximately 60 polling sites in Queens needed all five languages and dictated how the ballot appeared in all polling sites.  The board at the time debated increasing font size for districts that didn't require all five languages but was stopped short.  Attorneys for the city counseled that doing so might violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

The board will now have more room, both figuratively and on the printed page.  New ballots will sport a 10-point font and feature up to three languages.  Each of the five required languages will still be used, but with three different variations.

For example, the Queens ballots that require the five languages will be available in three combinations: English, Spanish and Chinese; English, Spanish and Korean; or English, Spanish and Bengali.

Election districts in the Bronx and Staten Island, which only require English and Spanish, won't use the trilingual ballots, nor will most districts in Brooklyn and Manhattan.  A smattering of districts in the latter two can expect to see the English, Spanish and Chinese variation.

Poll workers are not allowed to ask voters whether they have a ballot preference, making it incumbent upon the voter to request a specific ballot language.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us

General Election Playbook

Continuing my playbook for Structural Political Reform, we come to the General Election. We left off with the running of the Open Primary. Now we need to decide how we get candidates to the General Election. And here is where we run into many walls.

Under our current state and federal systems, the general is where we not only elect our political representatives, states use this election to determine the number of petition signatures to get on future ballots, determine a party's position on the ballot, etc. So reducing who can get on the general ballot requires all states to change their election laws. So I was ready to punt this part of my playbook. Then I can across this comment on someones blog:

"Why don’t the different parties pay for the primary? It is not the election. It is to see who will run in the election according to the different parties..."

Now I had something to work with. Why do we need state run primaries? We only need the states to run state and federal General Elections where all registered voters have a change to take part in the process of voting.

To create a system to answer all the Supreme Court issues, I would create a General Election ballot system with these features:

1. All Candidates selected by their parties (Major and Minor) paid for system.

2. A fee or petition process for non-selected major and minor party candidates.

3. A fee or petition process for independents.

5. A fee or petition process for non-qualified party candidates. It would be up to the state to determine the process to become a qualified party.

6. Write-ins.

Ballot Format

There would be two boxes next to the candidate's name: One optionally indicates the candidates registered party, the other optionally indicates all endorsements.

A possible additional element in the primary could be IRV. This would allow your first selection of a favorite son or daughter, vanity candidate, etc., and the use of other selections to rank your choices.

Please let me know how you would run an election.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!

Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us