HorsesAss.Org

This afternoon, the Secretary of State’s office released R-71 data in a brand new format. Apparently, the data now reflect the actual numbers of duplicates, rejected signatures, and accepted signatures.

There are some noticable differences over the previous data releases. As David Ammons explains it:

The error rate is lower than the daily and cumulative numbers that had been previously reported, because the earlier numbers included many signatures that still were being reviewed by master checkers. A prime example is that hundreds of signatures were not initially found on voter rolls by the checker, but a later check by the veteran master checkers did make a match.

He also points out:

State Elections Director Nick Handy said it remains “too close to call” whether R-71 will make the ballot, and cautioned against making assumptions based on the current error rate.

Handy is incorrect in one respect. Given a proper statistical estimate of the duplicate error rate in the total sample, and a proper projection of the other invalid signatures, we can estimate a total number of valid signatures and offer some statistical certainty about the number. (Of course, this assumes we are given the correct numbers in the first place….)

The statistical certainty only accounts for the fact that we have only a sample of the total petition evaluated so far. It cannot account for non-sampling error, biases, correlations among batches of pages, etc. Of course such error may be ignorable. I’ll get back to that issue in a later post.

The total number of signatures that have been completed is 33,214, which is just under a quarter of the total petition. There have been 3,450 invalid signatures found, for an uncorrected rejection rate of 10.39%. This rate doesn’t mean much because it doesn’t include the rate of duplicate signatures in the total petition.

The invalid signatures include 3,117 that were not found in the voting rolls, 130 duplicates, and 203 that did not match the signature on file. There are also 12 pending signatures in which a better signature card is needed. (Oddly enough, the data table includes the 12 pending signatures in the rejected totals; I suspect this is an error, albiet a minor one).

The 130 duplicated signatures from a sample of 33,314 suggests a duplication rate on the entire petition of about 1.62%.

Using the V₂ V estimator, the number of valid signatures is expected to be 121,103, thus squeaking by with 526 signature over the 120,577 needed to qualify for the ballot. (The sampling error is many times smaller than the 526 margin.) The expected total rejection rate is 12.05%.

The bottom line: Unless new errors are found in the processing or counting, or some large, systematic increase in the error rate is seen for the remaining 76% of the signatures, we should expect to see R-71 on the ballot this fall.

Update: I just noticed I used the V estimator, not the V₂ estimator. The V estimator is slightly biased toward too few valid signatures, so the qualitative results are the same.

Join us tonight for a refreshing drink over some stimulating political conversation at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. The festivities take place at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. beginning at 8:00 pm.

Hey…bring your resume along. I hear a Guvmint recruiter will show up, and take applications to serve on a special new Obama panel….

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSv7Va8enjc[/youtube]

Not in Seattle? The Drinking Liberally web site has dates and times for 335 other chapters of Drinking Liberally for you to get lost at.

I just came in from the beach to find my inbox filled with emails from Mayor Nickels and Mike McGinn.  According to McGinn, Nickels is a liar who makes false promises, while Nickels accuses McGinn of lying about Nickels being a liar. And this just in, according to McGinn, Nickels is lying about McGinn lying about Nickels being a liar.

Or something like that. Rather than actually reading the emails, I decided to have a beer and help my daughter play Bananagrams. (We kicked her older cousins’ collective ass.) So there.

Before Saturday’s event with Rep. Jay Inslee and Drug Czar Kerlikowske, a local medical marijuana patient named Ric Smith showed up. Smith, who lives nearby in Shoreline, wanted to ask Kerlikowske a question about why he went from being sympathetic to the medical marijuana community as Seattle’s police chief to amplifying old propaganda as the Drug Czar. Unfortunately, the meeting was closed to regular citizens, so he wasn’t allowed into the rooms set aside for either the roundtable or the media Q&A.

What’s even worse, had Smith been able to ask his question, it’s not clear that Kerlikowske could legally have given him an honest answer. By law, the Drug Czar must oppose any efforts to legalize any Schedule I drug, even for medical use. As drug law reformers have pointed out, that puts Kerlikowske in a position where he’s mandated to distort the truth and deny science. In fact, several commenters from Saturday’s post got on my case for even expecting an honest answer from him.

As a medical marijuana patient, though, the stakes are clearly higher for Smith. For his privacy, I won’t go into details on his medical condition, but it’s possible that he could one day meet the same fate as Timothy Garon, the Seattle man who died last year after being denied a transplant over his medical marijuana use.

Unlike any of the gullible morons who’ve been disrupting town hall meetings this week for the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries, Smith actually does have to worry about decisions being made by government officials that could effect whether he lives or dies. If there’s anyone in this country who had a good reason to disrupt a recent town hall and make a scene over the government inserting themselves between patients and doctors, it was him. Yet instead, as the local TV crews started bringing in their cameras, he shook my hand and quietly walked out the door.

Legal documents can be awfully confusing, so as a courtesy to voters, here’s a brief summary of some of the revelations from Susan Hutchison’s discrimination suit against KIRO TV.

Hutchison’s suit charged KIRO with age and race discrimination after she was replaced as evening news anchor by a younger, Asian-American woman, Kristy Lee.

Shorter Susan:  Attractive white women are an oppressed minority.

In a deposition, Hutchison said the late U.S. Rep. Jennifer Dunn, a Republican, had asked her to run against U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, a Democrat. Hutchison also said the head of the Republican Party in King County had asked her to run for Seattle mayor.

Shorter Susan:  Mayor of Seattle is a nonpartisan office, and since I was asked to run for it, that must make me a nonpartisan.

She believed KIRO executives were out to get her when she was suspended for a week without pay in July 2002. The suspension came after Hutchison was denied a vacation request over the Fourth of July holiday, called in sick and went on a vacation to Bend, Ore., with her husband.

“I was deeply humiliated and punished beyond belief for taking two sick days and there was a hatred there among the news director and the general manager,” she said in a deposition.

Shorter Susan: I was deeply humiliated for being treated like, you know, any other employee, when in fact I’m Susan Hutchison.

Hutchison was assigned work she didn’t know how to do, she said, “to make me a spectacle so that they could write me up every day for what I could not accomplish … they wanted me gone, period.”

KIRO officials maintained in the records that they demoted Hutchison because of low ratings.

Shorter Susan:  I was spiritually ready for the job, but I guess I wasn’t professionally ready.

Shorter, Shorter Susan: Nobody can fire the KC Executive for not knowing how to do her job.

She took medical leave Sept. 19, 2002 — and never returned to work before she was fired Dec. 20 — because she was “totally stressed out” by her situation at KIRO.

Shorter Susan:  I didn’t quit; I was fired for not being a young Asian woman.

Hutchison called the mother of a college student who wanted to intern at KIRO and told her the station would be a bad environment for her daughter. The student’s mother, according to a sworn statement, found the call from Hutchison — whom she had never met — “strange.”

Hutchison alleged that John Woodin, then KIRO’s general manager, was a “sexual predator” and had a “drug problem,” according to the mother. Her daughter went ahead and worked at KIRO in the summer of 2002 and told her parents she “had no problems with John Woodin and had seen nothing to corroborate the accusations made by Susan Hutchison.”

Shorter Susan:  I’m strange. I’m also a vindictive, spiteful shrew, who’s not afraid to slander you behind your back if you dare to cross me, so watch out.

Part I
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5HgfwPtxLw[/youtube]

Part II
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0gen_HoxrM[/youtube]

Portland curmudgeon/blogger Jack Bogdanski on the difference between health care protestors now and anti-war protestors then:

The Democrats were protesting killing people, and the Republicans are protesting healing people.

Sometimes simple observations are good.

You can go with complete idiocy:

AJC columnist Jay Bookman noticed that in the latest Investors Business Daily editorial about how the ‘death panel’ will condemn all handicapped or disabled people to death on some horrid wind-swept mountain, it notes that …

People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn’t have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless.

Needless to say, Hawking, who is recognized as one of the great theoretical physicists of the 20th and 21st century, was born in the UK and has lived his entire life there.

Andrew at NWPI NPI notes that Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., has embraced a “robust” public option in an appearance last week on The Bill Press Show.

This is good.

Just in case you’re wondering why I haven’t been posting much the past few days…

A conservative activist who opposes health care reform and who claims “union thugs” roughed him up in St. Louis doesn’t have health care insurance. So the righties are taking up a collection, which is nice, because it’s nice to help people.

You just can’t make this stuff up.

(Props to TPM.)

Friday morning I wrote about why numbers matter, castigating my friends in the legacy media for failing to do their math. It was perhaps a nitpicky complaint in focusing on the R-71 signature count, but it was part of a larger pattern of failing to accurately and truthfully represent numbers in the press.

Early news reports claimed that R-71 would likely qualify for the ballot, despite the fact that the numbers, if you bothered to add, subtract, multiply and divide them, clearly said otherwise. As the sample expanded and the full effect of the duplication rate started to be reflected in the daily totals, comment threads started to fill with conspiracy theories about how the Secretary of State’s Office was jiggering the numbers to keep R-71 off the ballot. In my mind, shallow reporting led to misguided expectations that would ultimately further undermine public faith in the integrity of our electoral process.

But of course, all that was written before I learned that the numbers we were getting from the Secretary of State’s Office were total bullshit… a preliminary, half-cocked accounting that didn’t reflect that actual invalidation rate at all. On Friday afternoon I received a call from Darryl telling me that all the numbers had changed and all of our well reasoned conclusions could be tossed out the window. Oh, our equations were still valid, but with the SOS moving over 400 signatures from the bad to the good pile, they now produced dramatically different results.

And to complicate matters, after suddenly adjusting the totals a week into the validation process, the SOS failed to provide the all important breakout of duplicate signatures in the final result, leaving us unable to rerun our equations with the supposedly more accurate data.  I mean… WTF?

From what I know (and at this point, I obviously don’t know much for certain), it still looks like R-71 will likely fail to qualify for the ballot, but that’s actually beside the point. We had just spent a week congratulating the SOS for their timely and helpful daily updates, and the speed at which they responded to public and media inquiries.  And now we learn that the data they fed us was crap, which I guess would’ve been okay, if they had only warned us. So much for defending the integrity of the office.

Bullshit in, bullshit out, and all that.

I just thought the public deserved (and was getting) a little better.

Well said

Last week’s contest was won by wes.in.wa. That’s 3 out of the last 4 for wes, who’s become the man to beat recently. The correct location was Mosaic Stadium in Regina, Saskatchewan, home to the Saskatchewan Roughriders of the CFL.

Here’s this week’s, good luck!

Blue Texan at Firedoglake, after noting that the disruptors at a Texas town hall last week were organized by the Travis County Republican Chair, and how the disruptors seemed also to opposed Social Security and Medicare:

They’re just throwing a temper tantrum over “SOCIALISM!” — which in their wingnut brains applies to everything from TARP to the stimulus bill, and yes — to Social Security and Medicare.

They’re fringe, anti-government nihilists and they’re not interested in the government reforming health care, or anything else. The media, however, continue to frame these events as a referendum on health care reform, which they are not. One side wants to reform health care, the other wants to lynch the federal government.

This kind of sums up the key points we need to understand about the disruptors. It’s not really about health care to begin with, and it’s being inflamed not just by far-right front groups funded by corporations, but the Republican Party itself has deliberately decided to encourage and organize people to throw gurgling, babbling hissy fits.

So while some on the right put on their Chesire cat grin and proclaim that Democrats are somehow against ordinary Americans expressing themselves, it’s pretty clear which side is trying to prevent real debate. Their claims that we did such things to them are false and the result of the fevered imagination born of right wing victimhood, a necessary and ever-present mental contortion they use to justify wrong actions. A few Code Pink and such protestors here and there are simply not the same thing. Anyone can go pick out random incidents and make a false equivalence, a favorite tactic of the right.

Imagine, if you will, that during the lie-up to war the DNC and labor had adopted a deliberate strategy of shouting down Republicans at their district meetings, or anywhere else they appeared. Imagine that they hired tons of lobbyists and spent millions of dollars to do so. Imagine the airwaves, mainstream and not, filled with crazy-ass claims that George W. Bush was actually from another country and thus not the president. You get the idea.

As we all know, not only did that not happen, progressives had to show Democrats that they could win at the ballot box by vigorously defending basic Constitutional principles and at least talking about real problems like health care.

The only protestors I recall, for the most part, were individual Americans forlornly taking to the streets of our cities while many Democrats went along with the madness, and the protestors were often met with pepper spray and derisive cries of “traitors” from the right. What so offended the righties is that anyone would dare to oppose their madness, and they have now conflated peaceful, non-violent protest with their desire to destroy civil discourse once and for all.

As many have noted, it was only a few years ago that some Oregon teachers were removed from a Bush rally for daring to wear pro-Constitution t-shirts. I recall a public lecture series here in Vancouver during the Bush era, held on public property, at which a few anti-war protestors who desired only to silently hold small placards were escorted out of the venue, at the mayor’s insistence, by uniformed police, because their views were “insulting” or some such nonsense. Public resources were used to squash free speech, and the local newspaper didn’t seem to have much problem with it.

Yet here we are being lectured at by some of the same fools who couldn’t stand to have their eyeballs scalded by the searing sight of someone else’s views about the wrong-headed invasion of Iraq. Forgive me if I have had enough of the lies, the double standards and faux outrage.

What we did to the Republicans was beat them at the polls, and they can’t stand it. They can’t stand it so much they are throwing yet another magnificent, reprehensible hissy fit, mostly because it makes us mad. I guess we should get mad easier.

While it’s understandable that individual constituents may be confused and angry because of right wing distortions, or even not confused and angry for good reason, reasonable people will agree that a major political party deliberately shutting down public meetings as a strategy is petulant at best and dangerous to democracy itself at worst.

Leaving aside the real possibility that mentally unstable people will do bad things, here we have the remains of a reactionary conservative movement that built itself on “law and order” in reaction to the excesses of the 1960’s now behaving in the very manner it supposedly found so loathsome. History doesn’t always repeat itself, but it hardly seems like a winning strategy.

Sure, the obvious thing to do would be to shut down Republican town halls at every opportunity, if you can find any, up and down the ticket, but that’s well, too obvious. Far better to find creative ways to have real discussions, with or without the disruptors, and see if we can’t somehow make the health care system less nuts for regular people. I guess people who want to are going to yell and scream no matter what, but after they get done shouting and being rude there will still be the matter of tens of millions of Americans who have no health care insurance.

If this is the path Republicans continue to follow in their struggle to regain even a modicum of respect from most Americans, I’d have to say that in the long run we’ve already won.