Yesterday there was a diary ridiculing the Sanders campaign because Betsy Franceschini, their Hispanic Outreach Coordinator, apparently called what was going on in the Puerto Rico primary a “great fraud”. The obligatory round of jeering ensued, including one comment from Kos about how Sanders should actually pay for the primary if he is so worried about the lack of polling places for Sunday’s election. It didn’t even seem to be true since no other media outlet is reporting it. But they should be.
Below is what seems to be a cogent recap of what is actually happening in Puerto Rico ahead of tomorrow’s primary.
- For the 2008 primary, Puerto Rico had more than 2,306 polling places
- On May 5, 2016, the Puerto Rico Democratic Party announced there would be 1,510 polling places and that the Party primary and local primary would be held on the same day to save costs
- On May 27, that number was reduced to 455, and subsequently down to 432, citing lack of available poll workers (who are volunteer), not lack of funding
- Voting hours are only from 8:00 a.m. — 3:00 p.m. on Sunday
- Voting for the Party primary and the local primary occur at different polling places, so each voter has to navigate to two different polling places in that 6 hour period.
- Public transportation is limited on Sundays.
- The Puerto Rico Democratic Party says they expect 700,000 people to vote on Sunday, but they believe that only 300,000 people will be able to vote.
- (Added on Edit) The list of polling places has changed several times over the past week.
- Certifications for Sanders poll workers have not been released (as of last night). Since the ballots are counted on the spot by hand, it’s important that each polling place have a representative from both candidates. There is EV voting set up for the local primary, but not for the Party primary.
- Prison voting already took place. Sanders’ campaign representatives had to hire an attorney to force their way into the prisons to observe the voting.
- Prisoner’s votes are placed in locked boxes and not counted until Sunday, but the Puerto Rico Democratic Party has already tweeted that Hillary is ahead in “early voting”.
NOTE: The article in the jeer diary conflated the certifications for poll workers (turned in on Thursday — apparently — and not certified as of late Friday) with the access to observe prison voting, but those are two separate things.
Now of course, the gentleman in the video is a Sanders supporter, so his version of the goings on will necessarily be through that lens, although he seems to be stating facts without being overly emotional about it. This diary welcomes any and all clarification of the facts.
On the face of it, these seem to be irregularities that have no place in any election anywhere on the planet. If this were a Republican secretary of state creating these circumstances in one of the states in the U.S., we’d be up in arms, calling for his or her ouster, because (a) it’s wrong and (b) we know that the more people who vote, the better the Democrats do — and so do the Republican secretaries of state, which is why they are always scheming for new ways to keep voters from voting — including reducing the number of polling stations.
It is not incumbent on the candidates themselves to pay for polling places to ensure there are sufficient number so that everyone can vote without a day long hassle (or at all). We as Democrats (and the DNC) support the lawsuits in those states where the lack of polling places has impacted voting. All candidates and their supporters should be equally incensed about how difficult voting is being made for the voters of Puerto Rico. The DNC should be outraged that Democratic voters are being treated this way. If there were a chance in hell of their votes mattering to Democrats in November, the idea of inconveniencing 700,000 Democratic voters in June so severely that many might not want to vote in November would be unconscionable. I’ve edited this since being a territory, Puerto Rico has no electoral votes.
Democrats have always fought for making access to voting easier. Sure, it could be that Sanders campaign just sues every time (no actually, his campaign has never sued to change any rules in any state over any primary or caucus, and we should not denigrate VOTERS who take the time to register their dissatisfaction where things have gone wrong) and is just a bunch of whiners. Or perhaps there are a hell of a lot of irregularities in this Primary season and they’re just pointing them out.
But likely it’s a combination of both heated rhetoric and serious election problems, and it’s important that as DEMOCRATS and liberals and progressives we not lose sight of the underlying issue, which is that NO VOTERS should be disenfranchised through no fault of their own.
- No voters should be removed from the voter rolls because some idiot in the Board of Elections “skipped a step” (i.e., the step of contacting them because they hadn’t voted in 5 years and instead simply removing them).
- No voters should show up to the polling place to be told their long-term affiliation with a party has been switched without their knowledge. It’s prudent to check, but voters should not be forced to check and recheck their registration status repeatedly prior to each election.
- No voters should show up to the polling place to be told their new registration, submitted on time, wasn’t processed on time.
- No voters should be forced unnecessarily to vote with provisional ballots or affidavits by poorly trained or harried poll workers. Provisional ballots are often just thrown away.
- No voters should be forced to wait in line for unreasonable amounts of time, ever. Elections should be held on convenient days at times and with sufficient time for everyone to vote
- No voters should ever be unable to vote because they lack transportation to their polling station
- Voting instructions should always be clear and if there is any chance of confusion, through an abundance of caution, steps should be taken to clarify through public service announcements or if necessary, extension of registration deadlines.
- All vote counting should be transparent, with independent verification that is not like what witnesses saw in Chicago (adjusting the physical ballot count to match the machine count and not vice versa)
These are fundamental to voting rights in the U.S., whether or not the enforcement of them impacts the outcome in any one election. “Well, Clinton is likely to win in a walk in Puerto Rico anyway, so who cares?” is not an acceptable response. Anyone who finds these ideas quaint and those of us who point out when they are violated to be “whiners” simply demonstrate that they find winning more important than Democracy. Anything goes for some people, apparently, as they elbow their opponent in the eye and dare the referee to call a foul, calling their opponent a wuss for complaining.
Again, if somehow these facts are incorrect, or there is some sort of justification for what will likely be an epic disaster in Puerto Rico tomorrow, please feel free to provide insight. But something is profoundly wrong if the contributors to a progressive website cannot see this (and other election issues this primary season) for the travesty it is without a partisan lens, without the need to jeer at those of us who are concerned.
This isn’t about who wins in a particular primary. This is about Democracy.
And Democracy does matter.
Sunday, Jun 5, 2016 · 1:31:15 AM +00:00 · delphine
I am greatly saddened to find that any Democrat or progressive can look at these objective details and their first reaction is “LOL you dead-enders, Bernie lost!!” In the end, if anyone is disenfranchised and we look the other way, we all lose. Since when have we decided that what happens during elections doesn't matter as long as “our” side wins? But “our" side is the Democratic side, not the Clinton side or the Sanders side. Our side is the side where people have strong, protected voting rights because our voices matter — ALL of our voices. If this is no longer the case, and we support it, then we’re ushering in a dangerous new era where we’ve abrogated our responsibility as citizens. In which case it’s clear why someone like Bernie Sanders, who advocates for full citizen participation, is dangerous to the powers that be.
And finally, let me say that, for all of the expressed concern here that people of color would be disenfranchised by Bernie’s proposed expansion of New Deal/Great Society policies and outrage that he would take advantage of the existing rules to reach out to superdelegates, calling it “white privilege”, there seems little concern here about the possibility that hundreds of thousands of people of color in Puerto Rico will be disenfranchised tomorrow.