Skip to main content

View Diary: "Election Reform": Bringing Back The Big Ideas (139 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  hear hear (none)
    i like all your ideas but one thing: #3 suggests the question, what is the point of contesting a voter's registration at the polls?  i understand you want to prevent ineligibles from voting, but why at the polls?  why not between the time of registration and voting (except, obviously, in the case of voters who register at the polls)/

    i say we eliminate this stupid contesting voters rule.  let people register; then if someone wishes to contest the voter's registration, the burden of proof is on him to show that he has explicit and personal knowledge to disqualify the voter's registration.  and THEN let the voter be notified that his registration is being contested.

    .. a letter to the editor a day keeps Bush away

    by kosaddict on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 11:00:46 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  yes! (none)
      You wrote:  "i say we eliminate this stupid contesting voters rule.  let people register; then if someone wishes to contest the voter's registration, the burden of proof is on him to show that he has explicit and personal knowledge to disqualify the voter's registration.  and THEN let the voter be notified that his registration is being contested."

      Yes, I agree.  Good point.  They put the burden of proof on the voter in many states.  All someone had to do was say, "I contest this voter," and he/she was given a provisional ballot. Strange, eh?  Instead of "prove you have a right to vote," it should be "prove I don't have the right to vote."  The detective has to prove you committed the crime; you don't have to prove you didn't.

      I didn't mean to endorse contesting -- particularly not at the polls on election day.  But in the event that votes are contested, people should have the opportunity to be notified and respond.

      Other petty stuff that shouldn't take place... To take Ohio as an example, they actually went through the registration lists and removed people who hadn't recently voted.  What's up with that?  So if I'm a registered voter, but missed the last election, I have to re-register?  As I recall, this was an obscure law.  (does anyone know if this is a regular practice or if they pulled out some old law for this election?)  Also, the Republican Party sends out mail to voters and if it is returned unopened, the voter is removed/challenged!  Partisans should not be allowed to remove anyone from a list without that voter given notice to respond.

      Same day registration would cure some of the above ills.  If my name got off the list through some glitch, I could just register on the spot and cast my votes.

      •  yes - same day registration rocks (none)
        i agree wholeheartedly.  in this day of atms and streaming video and what-not, there's no reason we can't do same-day voter registration.  in fact i remember several people who had solved this problem from a technological standpoint in 1998 and implemented it in nicaragua, of all places.  my one concern about same-day is that it not further overload busy precincts - we don't want the lines to be any longer than they need to be.

        as far as provisions for preventing voter contesting, it might do to explicitly list things which may not be used to contest a voter's registration - unreceived registered mail is a good example.

        .. a letter to the editor a day keeps Bush away

        by kosaddict on Tue Jan 04, 2005 at 02:30:19 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site