HorsesAss.Org

  • Home
  • About HA
  • Advertise
  • Archives
  • Donate

Misplaced election reform priorities

by Goldy — Wednesday, 11/11/09, 11:17 am

These things don’t happen in a vacuum, and so it is not surprising to see Gov. Chris Gregoire joining the chorus of establishment voices demanding that the ballot deadline be changed from postmarked on election day to received by election day.

Earlier in the day, Gregoire said that the days, and potentially weeks, of not knowing the outcome of an election is hard not only on the candidates, but on the people who voted for them.

“Those candidates deserve to know. The people deserve to know,” Gregoire said about the counting process.

But as admirable as her empathy for her fellow politicians might be, the governor has yet to say a word about the real scandal in last Tuesday’s election: the forty-some thousand King County voters who were disenfranchised due to our state’s wholly inadequate ballot design and review procedures.

With the bulk of the ballots counted, my earlier analysis holds up. More than 9 percent of King County ballots fail to record a vote on Initiative 1033, compared to only 3 percent in the rest of the state. Meanwhile, the equally high profile Referendum 71, featured at the top of the ballot (as opposed to hidden underneath the instructions), enjoys a remarkably low 1.6 percent residual vote rate in King County, right in line with voters throughout the rest of the state.

And this otherwise inexplicable falloff in voting on I-1033 occurred despite the fact that the No campaign spent millions of dollars on TV ads that explicitly instructed voters on where to find the question on the King County ballot.

Gov. Gregoire and Secretary of State Sam Reed may not have noticed the scandal, but the Voting Technology Project at the Brennan Center for Justice has, citing the I-1033 vote as “more evidence, if any was needed, of the potential disenfranchising effects of poor design.”

But the Brennan Center goes further, actually recommending a very simple, reasonable and inexpensive reform:

What probably would have alerted officials to this problem ahead of time, and at little or no cost, would have been a simple usability test: observing ten or fifteen King County citizens as they “voted” on the ballot before the design was finalized. This solution is simple, easy and cheap. The Usability Professionals Association has a great explanation of how it’s done.

If county officials watched a dozen people fill out the ballot, at least a couple might have accidentally skipped the ballot initiative. And, with that, officials would have been alerted to the fact that their ballot contained a serious flaw.

The ballot eventually got it’s usability test, of course…but on Election Day. And approximately 40,000 voters showed — a little too late — that this particular ballot design failed.

Secretary of State Sam Reed has been pushing the ballot deadline issue hard behind the scenes, attempting to capitalize on what has been wrongly portrayed as a slow, long slog to determine the winner in the Seattle mayoral race. But while both he and Gov. Gregoire argue to fix a problem that is not a problem, with a solution that will not speed up election night reporting at all, they both ignore an obvious flaw in our elections system, that just disenfranchised tens of thousands of voters, and that can be easily fixed via a small, inexpensive procedural reform.

I don’t expect the Governor or the Secretary of State to agree with me on every issue. But I do expect them to have their priorities in order when it comes to something as basic to democracy as the integrity of our electoral process.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Pulling Back the Curtain on Rob McKenna’s War on the Sick

by Lee — Wednesday, 11/11/09, 6:15 am

In the wake of the Obama Administration’s declaration that the federal government would respect state medical marijuana laws, Kirk Johnson in the New York Times reported the following:

For years, since the first medical marijuana laws were passed in the mid-1990s, many local and state governments could be confident, if not complacent, knowing that marijuana would be kept in check because it remained illegal under federal law, and that hard-nosed federal prosecutors were not about to forget it.

But with the Justice Department’s announcement last week that it would not prosecute people who use marijuana for medical purposes in states where it is legal, local and state officials say they will now have to take on the job themselves.

Why? If it’s legal, then what job is there to take on? The article appears to be implying that it’s the job of state and local officials to enforce the federal law over the state one. That’s just not true. Here in Washington, our state law enforcement officials should be following the voter initiative passed in 1998 (and the follow-up legislation from 2007), not the Federal law. Unfortunately, our Attorney General doesn’t seem to agree. Rob McKenna’s office has been trying to undermine Washington State’s medical marijuana law, and thanks to a Public Disclosure Request, we’re finally able to shine some light on what they’ve been doing.

After the PDR was filed, nearly 800 pages of emails and other documents from the Department of Corrections were recently released to the Cannabis Defense Coalition. They’re broken up into eight 100-page PDF files. The documents are not in any order, so I created a chronological index for easy searching of specific events.

The reason that so much attention is focused on the DOC is because a number of qualified medical marijuana patients have been raided by police and arrested (the medical marijuana law does not provide an affirmative defense from arrest), pressured into accepting plea deals that would keep them out of a jail cell but still on probation, and then put under the supervision of the Department of Corrections. The Department of Corrections would then claim the authority to deny those individuals the ability to use medical marijuana through internal rules that they’d made up after consulting with the AG’s office. They would then easily enforce those rules by administering drug tests. In the end, you had individuals who’d been authorized by their doctors to use medical marijuana having law enforcement interfere with that decision and either force them to stop using that medicine or to use a less effective alternative like Marinol.

This end-around of the voter-approved medical marijuana law worked on a number of medical marijuana patients. Pamela Olson was one victim before her husband Bruce fought his own case in Kitsap County court and won (sadly, they lost their home in the process). It’s not clear, even with the released documents, exactly how many people were affected by this (names are redacted throughout), but lawyers who defend authorized patients have been dealing with cases across the state for several years now and are still hoping to bring some kind of legal action against the Attorney General, the DOC, or both.

What we do know from the documents just released is that there was clearly some nervousness within the DOC about how the Attorney General’s office was advising them to deal with those under their supervision who were authorized by a doctor to use medical marijuana. The actual advice from the AG’s office is also redacted throughout the documents (using the same attorney-client privilege argument that the Bush Administration used to initially keep the infamous torture memos under wraps), but emails like this one from a DOC employee make it clear that the Attorney General was advising them to do things that were morally questionable at best and against state law at worst [emphasis in original]:

Karen, Lori, Eldon let me offer a few off the top of my head thoughts and comments. How DOC handles the medicinal use of MJ depends on whether this is the hill we want to die on? The advice from the AGO may* (see below) be correct, as far as it goes, i.e. [<—————-redacted—————–>] But the real question is not whether DOC can violate an offender who proves the prerequisites for the medicinal use of MJ, but can/should DOC recognize it as a defense? From a small “p” political standpoint does DOC want to violate an offender for activity that the state legislature recognizes as lawful? Something they made lawful in recognition of the medical necessities occasioned by the offender’s illness.

Consider if you will the purpose and intent of the enabling statue: “The people of Washington state find that some patients with terminal or debilitating illnesses, under their physician’s care, may benefit from the medical use of marijuana. Some of the illnesses for which marijuana appears to be beneficial include chemotherapy related nausea and vomiting in cancer patients; AIDS wasting syndrome; severe muscle spasms associated with multiple sclerosis and other spasticity disorders; epilepsy; acute or chronic glaucoma; and some forms of intractable pain. The people find that humanitarian compassion necessitates that the decision to authorize the medical use of marijuana by patients with terminal or debilitating illnesses is a personal, individual decision, based upon their physician’s professional medical judgment and discretion.” So how would this look? Offender XY is HIV positive and has full blown AIDS.

They are in considerable pain and a licensed doctor has agreed that MJ will relieve this offenders suffering. If all of the statutory requirements are met, this person’s possession and use is not against state law. Should DOC still violate this offender for actions that our state legislature recognized was necessary for, “humanitarian compassion”. Do we really want to die on this hill?

That memo was from April 2008. A month later, as a number of the indexed items show, the DOC was forced to apologize to a medical marijuana patient who was improperly arrested and held for six days until her blood pressure shot up to dangerous levels. At around the same time, the DOC finally formalized their policy on dealing with medical marijuana, which was little more than a smokescreen that made it appear as if they were accommodating the law, but in reality was simply denying everyone who had their doctor fill out the DOC’s verification form. On several occasions, they were informed that they were violating state law, but those warnings don’t appear to have made any difference in their policy.

The larger question for the attorneys, doctors, and patients who’ve been fighting the DOC over this policy continues to be focused on what Attorney General Rob McKenna’s office was doing and why. All of the deliberations and discussions at the beginning of this timeline happened during the Bush Administration, when it was still the Federal Government’s policy to expend resources to override state medical marijuana law (which the Obama Administration just reversed). But Rob McKenna doesn’t work for the Federal Government. He’s our state’s top law enforcement officer. There’s no reason for him to be trying to enforce Federal laws over our state laws, especially a state law that was passed by a wide margin in a voter initiative and maintains widespread support. It’s clear from reading through these documents that the AG’s office was giving advice that led to a policy that undermined the law, but until there are enough resources to take them to court over their claims of attorney-client privilege, their communications to the DOC will stay hidden.

For anyone who hasn’t followed the fight over medical marijuana in states where it’s been legalized, Kirk Johnson’s description of the attitude of local law enforcers may seem surreal. At a time when we have prisons that are bursting at the seams and budgets that are running low, you’d think that people who collect a salary on the taxpayer dime would have more sense than to remain so concerned about stopping people with serious ailments from using a medicinal plant. Throw in the fact that the voters of this state have demanded that this be legal, and it’s beyond comprehension that police are still actively trying to stop people from using it. Whatever the rationale is for Rob McKenna to continue to undermine the state’s medical marijuana law, the least we should be able to get from him is more transparency into what his office has been doing.

***************************************

The Cannabis Defense Coalition, who put in the PDR request, is expecting to get two more document dumps from the DOC. The requests are not free, so if you feel inclined to pitch in, they have a Paypal donation page here.

UPDATE: A Public Disclosure Request was filed, not a FOIA. The post has been updated.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Interesting Baird-Seattle factoid

by Jon DeVore — Tuesday, 11/10/09, 8:09 pm

Well, okay, this is not a secret if you follow Washington politics, but it’s worth bringing up right now.

According to Open Secrets, Rep. Brian Baird’s (D-WA-03) top three metro areas for donations last cycle, excluding PAC contributions, are Portland-Vancouver, Seattle-Bellevue-Everett and Washington, D.C.

bairdmetro

And it sounds like the heat is ratcheting up. From Politico:

A delegation from Vancouver’s Clark County Democratic Central Committee on Monday requested a meeting with Baird in the district to encourage him to vote yes on the final version of the Health Care Reform bill.

Chris Bassett, a Vancouver-based Democratic activist who writes a blog about Clark County politics, said the congressman had damaged his standing within the party.

“Brian’s really moving the wrong way,” he said. “A lot of Democrats are going to sit on their hands in 2010.”

“This, for a lot of folks like myself frankly, is the last straw,” Bassett said.

I’ve been tempted to write that the lesson I took away from the Guns of August was that being over-the-top rude and crazy is the best way to get Baird’s attention, but as we all know, liberals are expected to be civil at all times. Don’t want anyone hitting the fainting couch. Jolly good, tea and crumpets, gov’nor.

So I politely and respectfully hope that individual donors to Baird, many of whom live in the Puget Sound region, will consider politely encouraging him to vote for the final bill, assuming the Stupak-sepsis amendment is removed. Did I mention be polite?

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Drinking Liberally — Seattle

by Darryl — Tuesday, 11/10/09, 5:38 pm

DLBottle

There’s some celebratin’ to do following last week’s election. So join us tonight for some political jubilation at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally.

Festivities take place at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. beginning about 8:00 pm. Or show up early and enjoy the fine cuisine.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
The Men Who Stare at Votes
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Not in Seattle? With 339 other chapters of Drinking Liberally, there is one just around the corner from you.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

You’re invited!

by Goldy — Tuesday, 11/10/09, 3:41 pm

I’ll be emceeing a couple of celebrations this week, and you’re all invited.

Geov Parrish 50th Birthday Roast & ETS! Benefit
On Friday evening, Nov. 13, join me, Knute Berger (Crosscut), former school board president Brita Butler-Wall, Tim Harris (Real Change), Lansing Scott (ETS!), Maria Tomchick (KEXP) and Mike McCormick (KEXP) as we celebrate the unlikely occasion of Geov Parrish’s 5oth birthday by viciously roasting him. Assuming Geov makes it to his 50th birthday.

The festivities take place at the University Baptist Church, 47th & 12th NE in Seattle’s University District, where there will be cake, desserts, the usual party frivolities, and of course, roasted Geov. Tickets are $15 or two for $25; all proceeds benefit Eat the State! Doors open at 7PM.

King County Democrats Victory Celebration
Pop the corks and toast the winners as the King County Democrats celebrate an outstanding election season. Join us for a champagne buffet, awards and prizes, special guests and more. Tickets are $25, and benefit the KCDCC.

Sunday, Nov. 15 at Renton Carpenter’s Hall, 231 Burnett Avenue North, Renton. RSVP here, or call 425.255.2679.

Look forward to seeing you all there.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Fred Jarrett Quits Senate to Serve as Constantine’s Deputy

by Goldy — Tuesday, 11/10/09, 10:55 am

State Sen. Fred Jarrett announced today that he would give up his seat to serve as Deputy Executive to former primary rival Dow Constantine. The newly enhanced position will make Jarrett the number two man in King County Executive’s office. It’s a good fit for Jarrett, who brings both extensive legislative experience to the position, and administrative experience as both Mercer Island mayor, and a longtime Boeing executive.

Yeah, sure, until a couple years ago, Jarrett was a (ugh) Republican… but he was always my favorite Republican — more liberal on more issues than some Eastside Democrats — so I have no misgivings there.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

The real Oregon vote by mail example

by Goldy — Tuesday, 11/10/09, 10:05 am

Writing in the Washington Post in the wake of the 2004 presidential election, Oregon Secretary of State Bill Bradbury pitched his own state’s vote-by-mail system as an answer to touch screen and polling place staffing controversies experienced elsewhere. But in doing so, he obviously felt the need to spin one of vote-by-mail’s biggest perceived weaknesses: its relative slowness in reporting results.

With a large number of ballots received before Election Day, the first tally released on election night contained nearly 50 percent of the vote and proved to be an accurate predictor of the final numbers.

That’s right, Oregon’s first election night tally in 2004 encompassed less than half the ballots ultimately counted… a little more than King County’s first and only election night report last Tuesday, and a little less than that for Washington state as a whole. As I’ve explained before, it’s not the lack of ballots that slows our returns, but rather the lack of sufficient resources to count the ballots as they come in.

If the goal of Washington Sec. of State Sam Reed, and now Gov. Chris Gregoire, is to provide near complete returns on election night, changing the ballot deadline to Oregon’s received by election day standard simply won’t do it. Rather, the only reliable solution would be to scrap vote-by-mail altogether.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

It must have been our time of the month

by Goldy — Tuesday, 11/10/09, 8:39 am

Forget the fact that he ran the most impressive, effective, tireless, grassroots campaign I’ve seen since I started following local politics. According to the political sages at the Seattle Times, Mike McGinn mostly owes his victory to moody voters…

SEATTLE voters are in a testy mood. They turned down the practical, stay-the-course mayoral candidate, Joe Mallahan, and opted for the anti-establishment, in-your-face change agent, Mike McGinn.

Which of course explains why Seattle voters also overwhelmingly chose the practical, stay-the-course candidate, Dow Constantine, in the race for King County Executive. Yup… we sure are “drawn to nonconformists.”

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Open thread

by Goldy — Tuesday, 11/10/09, 12:35 am

Has anybody else noticed how thoroughly Susan Hutchison got her ass kicked?

With the latest ballot drop, Hutchison has fallen to 40.93% of the vote. To put that in perspective, that’s less than a point and a half better than admitted-Republican David Irons garnered in 2005, a race in which a third party candidate captured 4.6% of the vote.

And an 18-point margin? That’s embarrassing, especially considering that she actually thought she was going to win this thing up until a couple days before the election.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Catholic Church up to usual scuzzball politics

by Jon DeVore — Monday, 11/9/09, 9:17 pm

So you, or your wife or daughter might be forced to by an insurance policy under the threat of federal penalty, and one of the prime actors in shaping part of that that bill, the Bart Stupak sepsis amendment, was the Catholic Church.

Which, you know, is great if you’re a devout Catholic. It’s more than a bit problematic if you believe, just as sincerely, that government inserting itself into one of the most private and painful medical decisions families face is flat out wrong.

But hey, it’s not like the the Catholic Church doesn’t have a track record of scuzzy political actions and inserting itself into painful, private family decisions. From The Wall Street Journal:

The bishops have a history of political activism. In the 2004 presidential race, some bishops said they would refuse to grant communion to Democratic nominee John Kerry, a Catholic who favored abortion rights. In 2005, the bishops’ conference backed efforts by then-President George W. Bush and Republican lawmakers to intervene in the Terri Schiavo right-to-die case. But rarely has the church entered the fray with such decisive force.

The Catholic Church often does stand-up work in regards to social justice issues, so it’s more than a bit troublesome that the larger social justice issue of health care reform is being subverted by the very same organization. It’s a shame, too, because there are many, many Catholics in the Democratic Party, but the leadership of the church leaves, um, a lot to be desired. If you want people to respect your religion, you need to show proper respect for the beliefs of others.

Now, if one sincerely believes that abortion is wrong, that is fine. There are others who believe that abortion will happen no matter what the law of the land is, as pre-Roe v. Wade history shows us, and that the results will be horrific and barbaric for women. The key question is who gets to make the decision: the state or the individual. Not hearing a lot of noise on that score from the Tea Party folks, are we?

As has always been the case, anti-abortion forces are not sincerely interested in reducing unintended pregnancy, because these are the same people who oppose contraception. It’s about punishing the sluts, pure and simple, and if a whole bunch of women who have problems with desired pregnancies get caught up in the Stupak sepsis amendment by accident, they could care less.

The only silver lining in this awful amendment mess is that I don’t recall such anger and energy on the left in a long time. Congratulations, Bart Stupak-sepsis, you and your pals at the C-Street “Family” house have awakened liberals in a way Obama never could.

You bet your bippy we’re pissed, and we’re not going away. Democrats would be wise to take note.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Why does it take Oregon so long to count their ballots?

by Goldy — Monday, 11/9/09, 5:46 pm

Forgive me for obsessing on the topic, but when our foils at the Seattle Times editorial board and our friend Joel Connelly at the Seattle P-I are both editorializing in favor of changing the voting deadline from postmarked on election day to received by election day, you just know there’s gonna be another legislative move afoot to do exactly that. And with the facts firmly on my side, I just can’t let this one go.

Both Joel and the Times complain that ballot counting in Washington state is too damn slow, and both point to first-in-the-nation all-vote-by-mail Oregon and its received by election day standard as a model for how to do these things right, so you might reasonably assume that Oregon counts its ballots considerably faster.

Well… not exactly.

It’s hard to do an apple to apple comparison, what with last Tuesday having been our first all vote by mail general election, while Oregon didn’t have a 2009 general election at all, but a quick look at King County Washington’s performance during 2009 versus Multnomah County Oregon in 2008 bears some mixed results.

Of the 366,948 ballots cast in Multnomah in November 2008, 133,908 were tallied and reported by the end of election night, or roughly 36.49%. Of the approximately  600,000 ballots projected to have been cast in King in November 2009, 254,261 were tallied and reported on election night, or roughly 42.4%.

That’s right… on election night, slow as a snail King reported a larger percentage of the total ballots than did supposedly speedy Multnomah.

From there on, Multnomah jumps out ahead, tallying 60.69% of the total ballots cast by Wednesday night, and 94.3% by Thursday, compared to a relatively paltry 51.4% and 62.9% respectively for King. But how much of this advantage was due to Multnomah having all the ballots in hand by 8pm Tuesday? Not much.

Unlike King, Multnomah elections appears to have labored around the clock during the first few days following the election, generating 29 reports between 7:41 PM Tuesday and 4:40 PM Thursday, and at all hours of the day and night. KCE, not so much, generating just three reports during its equivalent three day period, working what appears to be a daily, eight-hour shift. And it really does take Multnomah a three-day, round-the-clock effort to push its way through 94.3% of the ballots it has on hand.

So what if King were to invest in the same sort of effort?

Well, as it turns out, KCE reports a daily estimate of the uncounted ballots it has on hand, and when you add those to the daily totals, King could have conceivably tallied as much as 72.9% of ballots by Wednesday night, and 85.9% by the end of the day Thursday. And by Friday night, when Multnomah had tallied 95.7 of its ballots, King already had 94.1% of projected ballots either tallied or on hand.

Thus it isn’t a lack of ballots that slows the counting process in King, but rather the lack of sufficient manpower and infrastructure to count them as the ballots come in. Indeed, moving the ballot deadline without dramatically increasing KCE resources would not have sped up the tallying process at all, as KCE barely got through the election day ballots on hand by the end of Friday’s first shift.

The point is, tallying mail in ballots takes time — much more time than polling place voting machines, which tally the ballots as they are cast — and given the rules that govern our elections, no all mail-in election is going to produce the near-complete election night totals we see from other states. And that is what the Oregon example really proves.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

McGinn expands his lead

by Goldy — Monday, 11/9/09, 4:26 pm

King County dropped an additional 20,953 Seattle ballots this afternoon, with Mike McGinn expanding his lead to a 4,939 margin in what until recently was considered a closely contested mayors race.

Mike McGinn 96,514 50.88%
Joe Mallahan 91,575 48.28%

McGinn won 56.5% of this batch of ballots, most of which I presume to have been received after election day. Talk about a trend.

I suppose that means Joe Mallahan will be conceding at his 5PM press conference today.

UPDATE:
Mallahan concedes, McGinn celebrates.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Joel’s ballot deadline proposal as “silly” as his nightmare scenario

by Goldy — Monday, 11/9/09, 11:35 am

I’ve already spent some time joyfully fisking the Seattle Times’ “absurd” proposal to change the deadline on mail-in ballots from the current postmarked on election day, to the more restrictive received by election day, so there’s no need to do a line-by-line takedown of Joel Connelly’s own contribution to this peculiar genre of conventional wisdom, except to correct one very glaring misstatement of fact:

Every other state mandates that ballots be in the hands of election officials when polls close on election night.

Ten seconds of googling shows that this simply is not true. State imposed deadlines for receiving mail-in ballots are all over the place, ranging from Pennsylvania’s restrictive requirement that absentee ballots be received by 5PM the Friday before the election, to the more permissive postmarked on election day rules in Alaska, District of Columbia, Maryland, Washington and West Virginia. Yes, Oregon is the only other state with all mail-in voting, and it requires ballots be received by election day… but that’s not much of a statistical sample, now is it?

That factual error aside, Joel’s main argument for moving the ballot deadline is a large, stinky red herring, for the only thing sillier than his fantasy of Washington playing the decisive electoral role in a tight, 2012 contest between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney (if it’s that close in WA, the electoral college outcome would be a foregone conclusion long before election day), is his suggestion that our ballot deadline could conceivably contribute to a constitutional crisis.

The main problem with both Joel’s and the Times’ musings (apart from the fact that their proposal would inevitably, you know, disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters statewide), is that they insist on conflating King County Elections’ slow ballot counting performance with the mail-in ballot deadline, when in fact the two currently have very little to do with each other. As I reported on election night, KCE had about 350,000 ballots on hand as of 5PM the Friday before the election. Yet they only managed to count about 250,000 ballots as of election night, and didn’t finally get through that original 350K batch until Thursday afternoon.

So perhaps, the 485,000 ballots counted before KCE shut down for the weekend included all those received by election day. Perhaps. And this morning, nearly a week after the close of our virtual polls, KCE is only just now getting around to counting the ballots that have arrived since.

All else being equal, KCE would not be much further along in the counting process had the deadline for receiving ballots been election day. And with the vast majority of ballots arriving by the Friday following the election (it only takes a day or two to send mail within the county) moving the deadline could only speed up results by a few days, even with a dramatically expedited counting process.

As for the excruciatingly close contest that Joel imagines, it’s the provisional ballots, missing and mismatched signatures, counts, recounts and various canvassing board and court challenges that drags out the process for weeks. Had the ballot deadline been moved prior to the 2004 gubernatorial election, it would have ultimately done little if anything to expedite the certification process.

Mail-in ballots currently must be received by the certification date — 15 days after a primary or special election, 21 days after a general — but in practice, only a handful of out-of-state and overseas ballots, mostly from overseas military personnel, trickle in during the final weeks of the canvass. I suppose an argument could be made for moving up the ballot deadline to say, the Monday following the election (as in West Virginia), but that would not officially certify results any quicker.

Resources permitting, we could count the bulk of the ballots a couple days sooner, but the thousands of provisional and signature-challenged ballots set aside for special handling will take just as long to process, with or without the added burden of handling a trickle of late mail-ins. And anything along the lines of what Joel fears — a presidential race in hand-recount territory — simply cannot be avoided or expedited; in the end, there’s only one canvassing board, and it can only consider one disputed ballot at a time.

So Joel’s proposed “fix” would do nothing to ward off the paranoid fantasy he imagines.

It would, however, make it more difficult to vote, while dramatically truncating election campaigns well in advance of election day. And that makes for a proposal I simply cannot support.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Santorum Stupak

by Jon DeVore — Monday, 11/9/09, 9:40 am

Already up at the Urban Dictionary:

Stupak–A medical condition (subset of sepsis) resulting from unsafe – unnecessarily so – back alley abortions as a result of the “Stupak Amendment” to the 2009 Health Care Reform Bill.
Doctor: Unfortunately, while this would have been covered under private insurance carriers, public plans were barred from including women’s health measures. I’m sorry, you’ll have to see “Dr. Julio” in the alley behind 7-11.

(Three weeks later.)

Doctor: I believe you’ve developed Stupak, a form of sepsis, a severe illness in which the bloodstream is overwhelmed by bacteria.

I guess you can go to Urban Dictionary and vote if you wish. While there are others worthy of scorn in this sorry episode, Bart Stupak deserves to go down in history as the misogynistic disease that he is. If his barbaric poison pill is in the conference report, there will be political hell to pay.

(Props to Firedoglake and Eschaton.)

AND–From an article at The Hill, here’s a paragraph that neatly summarizes why the Stupak amendment is so asinine:

Stupak’s language not only prohibits abortion coverage in the public insurance option included in the House bill. It would also prevent private plans from offering coverage for abortion services if they accept people who are receiving government subsidies.

So, as far as anyone can tell, that would be virtually all plans.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

The purge continues

by Goldy — Monday, 11/9/09, 8:03 am

My reliably liberal Democratic mother and stepfather both kinda like Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, as do many of their friends down there in the Sunshine State. Despite the fact that he’s a (gasp) Republican.

You know, you raise your parents as best you can, and then you have to let go.

But the point is, Crist is exactly the type of Republican, relatively moderate in both substance and demeanor, who has a shot at winning Democratic voters nationwide. Which of course is why the Club for Growth is attempting to “Scozzafaza” Crist in his bid for the U.S. Senate, pumping dollars behind right-winger Marco Rubio.

Don’t get me wrong, Crist is no liberal. But he’s no Mike Huckabee or Sarah Palin either. And whatever hope Republicans take nationally from gubernatorial victories in Virginia and New Jersey, NY-23 is a cautionary tale they would do well to heed.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print
  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 551
  • 552
  • 553
  • 554
  • 555
  • …
  • 1039
  • Next Page »

Recent HA Brilliance…

  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 7/11/25
  • Friday Open Thread Friday, 7/11/25
  • Wednesday Open Thread Wednesday, 7/9/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 7/8/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 7/7/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 7/4/25
  • Wednesday Open Thread Wednesday, 7/2/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 7/1/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 6/30/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 6/27/25

Tweets from @GoldyHA

I no longer use Twitter because, you know, Elon is a fascist. But I do post occasionally to BlueSky @goldyha.bsky.social

From the Cesspool…

  • Shut up bitch on Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!
  • Vicious Troll on Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!
  • 2nd Amendment Remedies are mext on Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!
  • Sean Hannity on Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!
  • EvergreenRailfan on Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!
  • EvergreenRailfan on Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!
  • Roger Rabbit on Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!
  • Roger Rabbit on Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!
  • Chuck Grassley on Friday Open Thread
  • EvergreenRailfan on Friday Open Thread

Please Donate

Currency:

Amount:

Archives

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

[iire_social_icons]

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.

© 2004–2025, All rights reserved worldwide. Except for the comment threads. Because fuck those guys. So there.