Worries About a Florida Primary Do-Over Through Vote By Mail

There are strong reasons, both equitable and political, to do something about the current standoff over whether Florida's delegates to this summer's Democratic National Convention should be seated. But the idea currently floated by Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) of conducting a "do-over" via an all vote-by-mail primary makes me very concerned about the security and accuracy of such a vote. A far better option would be to award delegates 50-50 to Sens. Clinton and Obama.

Politically knowledgeable people know the relevant background. As I recently explained at Slate, "Florida and Michigan famously held their primaries too early this year, violating the scheduling rules set by the Democratic National Committee. None of the Democratic candidates campaigned in those states, and Obama's name did not even appear on the Michigan ballot. ("Uncommitted" got 40 percent of the votes, compared with Clinton's 55 percent.) Clinton won both of these contests, and she has taken the position that the Florida and Michigan delegates should be seated, a position rejected by the DNC chair, Howard Dean."

Certainly seating Florida and Michigan delegates elected from these early states a very bad precedent for the Democratic Party. It would only encourage states in future elections to buck party rules and increase the race to the front of the line in an already front-loaded primary system. But Michigan and Florida voters didn't make this choice of when to vote; politicians made if for them, and it seems unfair to punish these voters by not allowing their votes to count or their delegates to be seated. And in any case, these states are too important to the Democrats in the November general election to risk angering them now.

One possibility some have suggested is simply seating Florida and Michigan delegations with an even split between Clinton and Obama delegates. That's not what the Florida and Michigan voters chose, but that seems fairer than approving the results of a contest run under unfair rules and conditions.

A fairer option -- if it is feasible -- is a "do-over." Michigan, which already has great experience running caucuses, is rumored to be planning a late spring caucus.

Florida presents a much more difficult problem. It has no experience with caucuses, and it is in the process of transitioning, yet again, between voting technologies. (Florida was one of the first states to phase out those inaccurate punch card voting machines, but they were replaced by electronic voting machines. The state has now decided to scrap the electronic machines, given public distrust over their use, and is replacing them with other technology such as optical scan equipment.)

Sen. Nelson's call for voting by mail has some surface appeal. The election is simple -- a single question with a small number of choices. Poll workers would not be required, nor the rolling out of election machinery. It will be cheaper, which is especially important because there is a large argument over who should pay for a do-over primary.

But an all vote by mail primary makes me very nervous. Putting aside the fact that such a vote is not allowed under current Florida law and would need approval of the Florida legislature, vote by mail simply is not as secure as polling place voting. Vote by mail is essentially a mandatory absentee ballot election. Absentee balloting raises the specter of voter fraud and coercion, for the simple reason that polling officials are absent when voting choices are made. In the absence of a secret ballot, it becomes much easier to enter into an illegal vote buying contract, because the buyer can verify how the seller has voted. In addition, because voting takes place out of the public eye, the possibility of coercion or intimidation about how to vote becomes possible. Even if a Florida do-over would not produce a clear delegate winner between Clinton and Obama, it would have great political importance and could well influence the votes of the superdelegates, who will hold the balance of power if this issue goes to the convention.

It might be that my concerns over the security of vote-by-mail in Florida are overstated. After all, Oregon's vote by mail system has been touted as an excellent and fair system. Perhaps so for Oregon. But what is true for Oregon is not so true for Florida. One need only think back to the massive absentee ballot fraud in the 1997 Miami mayoral race that led a court to order a new election. And there's something especially worrisome about rolling out a new system for counting votes for the first time in a presidential contest. It is like debuting your new play straight on Broadway.

The worst-case scenario for a Florida do-over is that the race is exceedingly close, and credible questions are raised about the fairness of the voting process. That won't help anyone -- especially Democrats -- when Florida voters return to the polls in November.

Comments

[active1234]

I am new to this blog and perhaps this is not the right forum. However, I would like to know if any one can answer the following question:
Can Republicans in Fl switch their party affiliation in Florida so they can vote in a Democratic primary?
I am asking this because I am a professor and those of my students who consider themselves to be Republicans have told me that they are planning to switch their party affiliation so they can vote in the Democratic Primary for Hillary Clinton. This way they argue, they can ensure a Hillary win in a primary election and thus, a Republican victory in the national election?

[SCMagnolia]

I worry about a primary do-over here in FL by mail-n voting as well, given the history of voter fraud in this state desite recent efforts to reform the process. The 2000 elections, Katherine Harris and a lot of other goings-on still leave a bad taste in my mouth.

I'm watching CNN a little while ago and AL Sharpton, here at the FL Chapter of his National Action Network, is threatening a lawsuit if a do-over does not happen in FL. He said voters, who did not go to the polls because they were told by the DNC their votes would not count, cannot be disenfanchised. First let me say, I voted for John Edwards in the primary AND I believe the FL vote should stand.

It seem it was okay to disenfranchise 1.7 million FL voters when Sen. Obama was ahead and BEFORE it looked like some real attention might be paid to the fact that THOSE votes wouldn't count (At the recent State of the Black Union in LA, Rev. Sharpton said, "Now that we're ahead, you want FL and MI to count, that ain't gon' happen."). So, if Rev. Sharpton's concerns now are solely about voter disenfranchisement overall, why was no lawsuit threatened then? Why now?

[lissielu]

Shame on the DNC, they want to break their own rules. Doesn't look good for the Democratic party, make and break their own rules

[JamesSalt]

voting by mail is a progressive reform that we all should support. The easier the process, the more voters there are. This is more democratic and we should welcome the experiment in fl.

[SeekerOne]

We can't hardly afford experiments. And if partisans are paying for it, and are left in charge of it, we can afford it even less.

[ericphillips]

It isn't an experiment. it is a reality. Oregon has been vote by mail for years, and it has been a success. A big problem in polling is getting people to the polls. I'm talking those with problems getting there: handicapped, elderly, the poor without transportation, and so on. Vote by mail works great. Read about it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40032-2004Dec31.html

[rlpete2]

A revote would be unfair to other candidates whose campaigns might have been sustained by success in Florida or Michigan. This is a mess, and undoubtedly give conservatives great glee, but the national party had to stop the leapfrogging attempts by states to be first.

A 50-50 split would be a meaningless token, but rationing delegates based on national totals doesn't take into account the differences in turnout between primaries and caucuses, nor the difference between open and closed primaries. There isnot any solution that will satisfy everybody.

As Sen. Bob Kerrey has said, "You don't change the rules in the middle of the game." Any resolution that changes the nomination will create a disgust that will persist through November. The party leadership must renounce Clinton's ploy, and the divisive politics she has employed. It's not just the White House, but control of Congress and state government at stake.

[Roshi98]

The vote in Florida was ALREADY free and fair, with record turnout and a clear winner. Despite no official campaigning, all of the candidates on the ballot, ads run by one of them (Obama) counter to DNC rules, and a fawning national media touting Obama the second-coming, Hillary decisively won that state. Michigan is much more complicated than Florida in that several major candidates were not on the ballot.

[Researchguy66]

This gets very tiresome..­.

You can tell precisely who favors which candidate based on their stand on this issue...

Obama = "get over it"
Clinton = "It was fair"

Aren't Democrats supposed to be principled? The ends do not justify the means and all that?

[Opus007]

Can somebody out there in Michigan and Florida tell me WHY you would change your primary even after being told that it would result in your delegates losing their seats?

Isn't there somebody out there in Michigan or Florida with the answer? Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like you chose to throw away your votes.

Even if in January Hillary had the advantage in Florida- Obama has really closed the gap. With a 25 million dollar revote both candidates would be close in delegates and votes. It is not going to decide anything so what's the point? I guess this whole debate favors Clinton in that the best case scenario would be a revote where she breaks even or gains and the worst case scenario would be no revote but a chance to play the victim.

What idiots decided to change the primaries anyway? I don't seem to hear them weighing in?

[ericphillips]

So was the vote in Cuba. Record turnout, and a clear winer. Raul Castro won. (sarcasm!)

Come on, the outcome was not fair. Many people did not vote because it was not going to count. And frankly, Hillary had months to fight this issue, but didn't start until she were sure the polls had her winning. If she had lost, she wouldn't even suggest this.

[Bozwellian]

LOL, yeah that cable outlet campaign ad of Obama's, ran how often ? and HOW MANY TIMES HAD CLINTONS VISITED TO FUND RAISE which IS subversive campaigning for sure and NO MATTER THE RULES WERE SIGNED ON by the Clintons, KNOWN by the Clintons for BOTH MICHIGAN AND FLA>...Jus­t reminds one of WHY many DO NOT WANT BUSH>>CLIN­TON>>>BUSH­/CHENEY (all the NEW PREDENDETS TO OP WITH) >>>>to another CLINTON...­BEEN THERE, done that and TIRED OF THEM ALL !!!!! ENOUGH, lets at least TRY for something new, we may get lucky !!!! TIME FOR THE CLINTONS TO LIVE BY THEIR SIGNING AGREEMENTS, plain and simple !!!!

[stupidme]

Bill Clinton is already calling in some overseas favors so the do-over can find contributors for funding. THIS THING IS GOING TO ONLY CAUSE MORE PROBLEMS. IT IS A ROAD FRAUGHT WITH PERIL!!!! Florida and Michigan screwed up and I'm going to wind up on the short end.

[Researchguy66]

I fail to see how you wind up with the short end, should the Democratic party members of Florida and/or Michigan get a chance to present a multually agreed-upon slate of delegates. I'm willing to be empathetic, but I can't seem to understand the logic.

[stupidme]

President John McCain is how I end up on the short end. And speaking of short, this whole thing is incredibly short-sighted. Again, it is a road fraught with peril ! For starters, in order for things to work, the process has to go off flawlessly ---- flawlessly. If you cannot be assured virtual perfection, you wind up in the same place you started, if not worse. Again, this is a road fraught with peril !!!!!! Mail = Mail Fraud. Money to Fund = Follow the Money. and on and on it goes. Hell, you already have a fox in the hen house with Charlie Crist in Florida. See at the Convention. Let's start laying odds as to whose delegation walks out first!

[John C. Bonser]

The real problem is not Clinton vs Obama. It is the exceptional stupidity of the DNC that created the problem. In one quick action they have sent Florida into the Republican column again!

There is no way the find a solution the is both fair and acceptable. As soon as the election id over, we need to clean house!

[flyarm]

Excuse me, how do you think we Dems have been voting here in Florida since 2000? We have been voting by absentee! If you bothered to ask us here in Fla you would have known that! Or maybe you do already know that!!...A­nd why because we had voting machines that made our votes dissapear, and you are now concerned about absentee ballots here in Florida? Where have you been?.And that is why you are screaming with your hair on fire,..bec­ause you know what the outcome will be, doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what Dean and the Obama/MSM game plan is!! You are being disingenuous when you write an article like this, and you and the Obama game plan are only exposing your corruptness to our system of democracy.

Do you live in Florida?If you don't then where is the fire? What stake do you have in this..it is my vote that has been disenfranchised. I do have a stake in this . I however know the facts and all your nonsense , no matter how you package it, does not sell to those of us In Florida that know the facts.

Seems Dean screwed up his own campaign, and now he has a too-fer..o­r 3 fer..he has screwed up our votes being counted in Florida and Michigan..­.and is currently attempting to disenfranchised our votes in the Democratic process. I see that as a dereliction of duty, but then again that is a whole other post , isn't it?

Where were the sanctions against South Carolina? They moved their primary date.

The big difference is they still have their diebold voting machines, whereas in Florida ,through the bill that changed our primary date ,that bill made the DRE voting machines in the state of Florida illegal , not for the 2012 election but for the 2008 election. Also in that bill was a 100% mandate for Voter Verified Paper Ballots.

Where was Gov Dean in applauding the citizens of Florida that fought for that bill and worked hard for that bill? Used their own money , time and efforts for that bill. Wasn't it Dr.Dean who encoruaged every American citizen to involve themselves in the American political system from the ground up? I call B.S. on his B.S.

Do you even bring that up to the American people? That we in Florida through that same bill Banned DRE machines In Florida, and made VVPB the mandate for our states electorate. Does Gov Dean ever explain that to the people of the democratic party or American people?
No never.

Your article really borders on Propaganda, but then again , you probably know that don't you?

I trust my vote by absentee ballot more than I did the DRE voting machines. I helped with a test of the DRE Voting Machines in my county after the 2004 election and saw votes swapped ! Not once, not twice but 9 times on just one vote.

Oh and why are you not screaming about Oregon? They have been voting exclusively by mail for quite a while.
Oh i know why, Oregon doesn't have as many delegates for Mr Obama to lose does it?

Flyarm, a 2004 former Democratic Delegate for the State of Florida.

[Researchguy66]

If we were able to apply the same precautions to a "do-over" as we do to absentee ballots, I'd buy that. I'd bet that's twice as expensive as a revote using precincts and voting machines, though.

[flyarm]

You not i know how this will be done..so please , hold opinions on this Re-do until we see a plan .

I don't agree or disagree with anything i am doing untili have seen the plan!
From what i am Hearing right now in Fla on Our local news is the Model will be our absentee ballots.

If it is good enough for all our other elections why not now?

I have voted Absentee since 2002..and on Jan 29th i voted Absentee for John Edwards..i trust the paper ballot more than the former DRE voting machines we have had here in Fla that are banned as of July1 2008
But i am darned sick and tired of having Governor Dean trying to shove a caucus down our thorats as he has since last may when this WONDERFUL bill was passed banning those horrible voting machines from my county and state!

Too bad too many of us know the History of Gov Dean trying to shove the Caucus down our throats..n­o thanks Dean...

Now when you look at how many Wyoming citizens caucused..­just this week..3% of the registered democrats.­..I will take my chances on a write in Vote...in Florida Thank you.

Oh and by the way..in Wyomings 2004 primary..a­pprox 90% of the registered Democrats voted.

Gee...what a fantastic turn out this year ....not.

And from what i heard on the news this morning , the results of Texas Caucus may not be known for al least a month, now how is that ?? I worked a large caucus's in Iowa in Jan for John Edwards ad a Co-Captain, the numbers were all called in at the end of each Caucus...s­o what is going on in Texas?????????

Oh yeah...Dea­n loves those caucus's for Obama..you bet he does, it seems Gov Dean likes disenfranchizing voters in the democratic party...th­at is obvious now.

I have no dog in this fight , except I have worked hard to see fair and legitimate elections in Florida, as have many citizens of Florida , with no help from the DNC, nor Dean.

Instead of applauding what our citizens did getting rid of those disgraceful machines, Dean Punished us, and the Dems in our state legislature that signed that bill for all the right reasons.

Gov Dean had an agenda, of which is very clear to many of us today in Florida!
We would have to be blind to not see it!
flyarm

[pmhunt]

Why has no one on the Obama side of this issue responded to James Carville, or Governor Rendell regarding raising the funds to have a re-do. Carville and/or Rendell guaranteed 15 Million Dollars, the ball is is Obama's court, put up or shut-up.

First of all, all the names were on the ballot in Florida, people voted, she won a huge majority of the voting, that should count. None of the 50/50 split bullshit. You can not penalize these Florida voters and then ask them to forgive and forget and expect them to vote democratic in November.

As for Michigan, put their respective names on the ballot and let them vote.

Come on Barack get this done. Put your money where your mouth of hope is. Or is it true what they say you are all talk and no action?

[UnknownSoldier]

The election wasn't legitimate. All candidates agreed before hand not to campaign in Florida or Michigan abd agreed that the delegates shouldn't be seated illegitimately

Hillary Clinton broke her word, plain and simple. Obama is not hitting Hillary Clinton on this because he is placing himself above tearing her down, just in case she is the Nominee.

[Researchguy66]

Both Hillary and Obama made several visits for Florida for fund-raising, which was not excluded under their agreement. In contrast, only Obama aired television commercials in Florida...­ad nauseum actually..­.and I mean that quite literally, sometimes they payed two-to three times a pod. Doesn't help that they weren't very good.

That besides the point, it would certainly be better to give them both an opportunity to actually campaign here and see what the outcome would be.

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

she broke her word in what way? The dem party has always had a rule for ways to allow the FL and MI delegates to be seated. There are 2 possibilities

1. Appeal to the credentials committe and take your chances
2. Create a new process (re-vote) for selecting delegates that meets the DNC rules

Both Clinton and Obama agreed to not campaign in FL. And, neither one did.

Both Clinton and Obama agreed that the delegates selected by an invalid primary wouldn't count, and they won't.

Clinton has been supporting the FL and MI voters in their quest to find a way to get their delegates seated. There was no RULE that said she couldn't support these voters in their quest.

Howard Dean himself re-iterated last week that these 2 methods I mentioned above are completely within the RULES.

[Roshi98]

Hillary didn't campaign in Florida. What are you talking about? Obama was the one who ran ads, not Hillary or any other candidate.

[gmc940]

Let's be honest. The Clinton campaign looks ridiculous trying to act is if they are motivated to what is fair for the people of Michigan and Flordia. They are not. They are motivated to do what is best for them.

They surrendered all moral authority on this issue when they began pushing for the Florida & Michigan delegations, when they had agreed in advance not to count them, and Barack Obama was not even on the ballot in Michigan.

The Clinton campaign says that caucuses are unfair. Why? Because they haven't done very well in them. If they were winning caucuses at the rate that Obama has been, they would be all for caucuses in Florida and Michigan.

If they think caucuses are unfair, what would they think of an election where their candidate is not on the ballot? I think James Carville would have an aneurysm on live television if that ever happened to her.

[flyarm]

You are incorrect, please people, know what you are talking about before making stuff up!!

No Campaign signed a pledge saying they would not seat the delegation­s..that is bogus!

this from Talk Left attorney :Jeralyn E. Merritt

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/9/201240/0802

Here's the four state pledge (pdf).

It says nothing about which delegates will count or not count in Florida and Michigan. It says nothing about whether a state's primary will count or not.

The candidates merely pledged not to campaign in any states holding a primary or caucus before Super Tuesday, other than Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

The text of the pledge is reprinted below:


Four State Pledge Letter 2008
Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina
August 31, 2007

WHEREAS, Over a year ago, the Democratic National Committee established a 2008 nominating calendar;

WHEREAS, this calendar honors the racial, ethnic, economic and geographic diversity of our party and our country;

WHEREAS, the DNC also honored the traditional role of retail politics early in the nominating process, to insure that money alone will not determine our presidential nominee;

WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the nominating calendar.

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC.

Hillary, Obama and Edwards all agreed to the pledge on September 1, 2007.

Now, can people stop saying that Hillary Clinton agreed the votes in Florida or Michigan wouldn't count or to the non-seating of the delegates? It prohibited only campaigning. Even fundraising was allowed.

The exclusion of Michigan and Florida was a penalty imposed by the DNC. ( Edit to add Howard Dean who is supporting Obama)

In my view, it was an unfair one and should be lifted. The votes should count as is, the delegates should be awarded and seated.

from :

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/9/201240/0802

[rberlind]

I do not think Florida law banning mail-in ballots is applicable to an election run by the Florida Democratic Party itself as opposed to one run by the state. I have no direct legal knowlege of Florida's laws on this issue but find it hard to believe that a state law could mandate how a political party conducts its internal affairs. Surely, the state of Florida does not control how every private organization (e.g., condo associations, country clubs, and chess clubs) elects their officials. Unlike a contest that would elect state-level government officials or even Florida's members of Congress, a primary is an internal party event that elects delegates to the party's national convention. I think Florida laws could only be applicable when the State of Florida plays a roll in running the primary since the state then is spending money on the primary and has a vested interest in making sure that it's money is spent in a manner that gives a fair outcome.

I think splitting the delegates down the middle is pointless. The net effect is the same as if the delegates were not reinstated. What the voters of Florida and Michigan care about is having influence on the selection of the Democratic nominee at the National Convention. Spiltting the delegates evenly does not give them any influence at all.

[fullkelly]

What is puzzling is why did Obama remove his name from the Michigan ballot but left his name on the Florida ballot? Some have been saying he took his name off the Michigan ballot because he was playing by the rules. But that is what is puzzling. Florida did the same thing as Michigan and moved up their primary date, so why is it that Obama did NOT remove his name from the Florida ballot if he was so interested in playing by the rules? There is only one logical answer. Obama and Edwards wanted to make Clinton look bad , politically, and make it hard for her in the eyes of the DNC. Hillary was leading in the polls 46%--to Obama's 22%. Obama had no chance of winning Michigan, but he thought there was a chance to win Florida, so he left his name on the Florida ballot.

[PistonMoaned]

New Hampshire insisted that all the Democratic candidates remove their names from the Michigan ballot so MI's invalid election REALLY REALLY wouldn't count. Obama and Edwards complied, Hillary did not. Florida was 2 weeks later and not near the time of the NH primary so no demand was made by NH regarding that.

[revederie]

This has already been addressed in this post - according to FLORIDA STATE STATUTE, only candidates that appear on the state primary may appear on the state general election ballot. Pretty stupid for anyone to remove themselves from the Florida ballot, when it knocks them out of the running entirely for the general election. If Michigan had a similar state statute, no one would have removed their names from that state ballot either.

And since everyone is whining about playing by the 'rules' that they believe should be so inflexible, why weren't New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina penalized for moving up THEIR primary dates? But of course, that would result in Obama LOSING some delegates, wouldn't it? If you're gonna play FAIR, those rules have to apply to EVERYONE, not just when it suits your motives, or when it is beneficial to whatever candidate you are supporting.

This fiasco really should wake up the DNC to CHANGE the primary system to ONE primary date, just like ONE national election. Talk about election REFORM - think of the money that could be saved, not to mention that all the jockeying for states to be FIRST would all come to an end.

If Obama was the one behind and Hillary was the one ahead in delegates, I have no doubt that their respective positions would be the opposite - SHE would be fighting tooth and nail to prevent a re-vote or allowing the delegates to be seated, and HE would be pushing as hard as he could FOR it.

It's just politics - you know - business as usual, and as far as I can see, neither one of the democratic candidates this year are anything to brag about, and all this bickering just helps the Republicans win THEIR case - another 4 years of the same old crap - and the country going down the drain.

[bushlies]

Ahh, the Dems and their ever-present circular firing squad! I can't understand why Dean and his idiots just let Florida and Michigan have their primaries when they wanted them. It would have been something different if they had them BEFORE 2008, say in December 2007 before Iowa or New Hampshire, but who cares WHEN they had them anyway? Now the whole thing has turned into a giant clusterf&*k that no one knows how to resolve.

How sadly typical.

[myjs]

Oregon's mail in voting is the model. They have been doing it for years and have the equipment and a working system. Oregon does not have as large a population as Florida and Michigan. And not a history of election "problems"

Check out this website from Multnomah Co., OR
Click on the link at the bottom of the page to view the VOTE BY MAIL VIDEO.
http://www.mcelections.org/

YUP, NOT SO EASY !

[PauCK]

Call me dumb. The "Rules" for Florida and the date of the primaries don't seem to matter to me because, as I understand it, the Dems made the rules which are NOT law while the state manages elections. Given the state set the election date, would that not automatically make the Dem's rules on those dates simply invalid? I remember voting in Florida...­what happened to that vote? Where is it?

Clinton and Obama were on the ballot and I voted for one of them. So count them and give the results to the Dems and demand they adjust their own rules to accept the LEGAL votes cast in Florida. It's a "Rules are made to be Broken" circumstance.