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.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Mail in votes in Florida is unacceptable. I think there were enough questions about the validity of the 2000 presidential vote in Florida to reject anything like totally unsubstantiated and unaccountable mail in votes. I do not trust those elected republican officials in Florida. Everybody, Rush Limbaugh, Coulter, Bucannen, all right wing talk show hosts and most republicans would love for Hillary to win the nomination. Why? McCain would beat this self displayed Monster in a heart beat.
"I think there were enough questions about the validity of the 2000 presidential vote in Florida to reject anything like totally unsubstantiated and unaccountable mail in votes."
As I saif before: "First of, Oregon has a mail-in ONLY ballot. Is Rick equally "concerned" about Oregon's elections? has he ever written an article on the same? Also, many major states, such as California, have no-questions-asked absentee balloting, and in many elections, including THIS one, up to 40% of votes are cast by mail. Where was Rick then? The entire notion that elections by mail are fraudulent is even more silly when you consider than EVERY primary state allows some form of absentee voting."
So unless you want to negate the LITERALLY millions of absentee ballots ALREADY counted thus far in the election (and which have, btw, gone more towards Obama than Clinton) and also not allow absentee ballots in upcoming primaries, you ought to re-think your comment.
Ahh, the FEAR CARD- nice. Green martians could come down, raid the US mail system with outterspace easers and switch Obama votes to Clinton as a republican conspiracy. What would be so bad about the elderly, shift workers and care-giveres actually being able to vote with ease????? Oh yeah, those people support CLINTON. This fear card way trumps the red phone issue for me.
Did you not hear? the "Monster" word cost someone their job as Senior Advisor. Do you really think it should be used any further?
Oh, for heaven's sake. Washington has mail-in ballots too, at least we do in Whatcom County where I live. No one has complained about mail-fraud.....as far as I know.
I support Obama AND I believe a do-over is not only fair, but a very good thing for people on both sides. We, as a country, need to feel that whomever we elect to the Presidency got there because the voters wanted it that way. I personally pledge not to whine or cry or cry foul if Clinton wins the re-vote. I would call upon all Obama supports would do likewise.
Will those of you who support Clinton also take a pledge not to cry "mail fraud!" should the re-vote favor Obama?
Its not a Do-Over thats the Media and Clinton machine spin. It will be the first legitimately sactioned voting in MI and FL. The first vote was not legit. Now lets do it right, not Do it over.
Split the delegates. Give me a break? Why wasn't NH punished. they did some rule breaking but no, noone talks about that.
Please voters went out. They knew there were two candidates on the ballot. There were more but these are the last two. You're acting like these are morones, yet again. FL voters are stupid, is what people said back in 2000 and now the DNC is treating them similarly.
If I was still in Fl like I was in 2000, I would not vote this year. The DNC is acting like the Supreme Court. Ignoring the will of the people and following some srewy rules.
Obama should accept the vote as it is. I can't imagine FLoridians would forgive him if he was the nominee and vote for him in NOV. I know I would stay home.
Obama should concede he lost there. These were grown-ups who voted. Don't insult them.
I've been wondering about NH myself. I admit I'm having a hard time following the rules, but it seems that if NH is allowed to move their primary dates regardless of circumstances or direction from the DNC, then why are other states not allowed to do so?
Splitting the delegates isn't fair, a do-over isn't fair, none of the options are fair because the rules aren't fair!
If anyone can explain why NH gets to make its own rules while everyone else plays by a set of rules, please do because I just don't get it.
Ben Smith over at Politco had an interesting angle on this. True, he's a hardcore Hillary supporter just a step shy of Taylor Marsh, but interesting nonetheless...
Florida screwed up. Get over it. NO to a "do-over". Don't count their delegates.
Same goes for Michigan. Tuff.
Florida didn't screw up, that was a Republican trick. It was the Dems who screwed up by not amending their own rules to accept the dates set by Florida. "Rules are Made to be Broken" in this case. Just change the dates in the rules to account for the dates set by Florida, count the votes and move on.
If I could also remind the not-quite-old-enough Obama supporters who keep saying "get over it". That is precisely what the Republican party mouthpieces kept saying after the election debacle in 2000. I'd suggest you all drop that line as you're not making any friends in Florida with it.
Yes, a more SECURE version of the "mail in" re-vote, would be the "mail out, walk in" revote.
Ballots would be MAILED to all registered Democrats, who are the only people authorized to vote in the Democratic primary.
Voters would then need to "walk into" a Government office in order to fill them out and present a photo ID. This would avoid the possibility of ballots been sold to the highest bidder.
Individuals who have some legitimate NEED for an absentee ballot would be allowed to mail in their ballot, but this would be STRICTLY LIMITED to those people who can document their inability to vote in person.
James Carville pledged $15 million for a revote. It would be worth it for Hillary to pay the entire bill even if Obama balks.
If Obama balks, then he proves himself to be IDENTICAL to GEORGE BUSH. A CHEAT. So its up to Obama: Is he a slimey, sleezy, hypocritical CHEAT? Or a real man? We'll see. It's sort of like the "temptation of Christ". Is Obama the Savior? Or is he just a sleezy little False God who puts victory above all else?
We'll see.
And if Hilary balks ? Is she then a "slimey, sleezy hypocritical cheat" ?
A somewhat bigoted response !!
Definitely. If she balks. But Carville already offered up $15 million toward paying for it. Which the media doesn't seem to be talking about.
It would actually be great for Hillary to offer to pay for the whole thing if Obama balks. Then she could point out to the people of Florida that SHE believes in DEMOCRACY, while Obama is apparently some sort of FASCIST who does not believe in elections.
Further heel-dragging by Obama is very unwise.
Obama has put HIMSELF up to a higher standard. HE is the one who has claimed to be BETTER than the rest. More honest, less corrupt, more in touch with the people. But now, he wants to continue to DISENFRANCHISE Florida and Michigan, just because it is unlikely that he will win there?
Obama loses either way on this issue. He must stop dragging his heels and become enthusiastically involved in setting up and paying for a truly FREE and FAIR election in Florida. If he does not, it besmirches him and makes him look like a hypocrite.
Does every voter in Florida have a photo ID? Or do only licensed drivers have photo IDs?
Anyone in Flordia can get a photo ID, whether a licensed driver or not. It looks similar to a driver's license but is used for identification only.
The argument you'll hear is that so many would-be Obama supporters can't afford photo identification. Sixty bucks or so is certainly a hardship to many...but then again, so is the rampant fraud. A couple in my precinct right ahead of me during the primary were astonished to find that they had already voted...whether they were shocked because they thought they could vote twice or whether someone else had already taken the liberty, I don't know. Voter fraud is rampant down here...on all sides. I suspect it is everywhere.
This is the best solution to the problem I have heard yet. You need to present this to the DNC
Chairman in Washington.
The whole idea of having to vote over sounds stupid, but we all know this was a Republican trick to screw up the election process here in Florida again. The Republican House in Florida is responsible because they changed the date. The Democratic Voters here in Florida are entitled to have their vote count.
Hillary Clinton should not have to pay the entire bill for this though - we voted for her the first time, we have not changed our minds. We will vote for her again.
My Friends - I'm John McCain and I am running for President of the United States - I hope you can now see why you need to vote Republican. Democrats can't ever run their own primaries, never mind the country. Even as we speak, the tax and spend Democrats are out there trying to scrape even more money to fix something that they screwed up in the first place. If they can't be trusted with their own party finances, how can you trust them with our economy? I'm John McCain and I approve of this message.
And after the last 7 years - you think Americans should trust the Republicans to run the economy ?
You jest - of course !!
Americans elected George Bush - Americans are capable of anything. And heck, what if Johnny puts Mitt ( I'm a business man) Romney on the ticket? Then you throw a few terror alerts in here and there ... Add a little bit of Rove magic in for good measure and then boom - The run on wire coat hangers begins. Democrats simply cannot help themselves ... the Florida and Michigan debacle is bullshit and is only going to do more damage than can be imagined. It's a no win situation. Sometimes you just cut your losses and move on.
WOW. WOOOOOOWOWOWOW! The transparent desperation of Obamaniacs shines through. First of, Oregon has a mail-in ONLY ballot. Is Rick equally "concerned" about Oregon's elections? has he ever written an article on the same? Also, many major states, such as California, have no-questions-asked absentee balloting, and in many elections, including THIS one, up to 40% of votes are cast by mail. Where was Rick then? The entire notion that elections by mail are fraudulent is even more silly when you consider than EVERY primary state allows some form of absentee voting.
Secondly, the entire "its not fair" to the other states argument is ludicrous. As we have seen, these two states have ALREADY been punished by the DNC, and have also from the get-go been told the way to remedy it would be to have a do-over - paid for at their own expense. That is "punishment", and to either not allow another vote or to split the delegates 50-50 is in fact "changing the rules in the middle of the game", since the rules have ALWAYS up to this point allowed for a re-vote.
Third, as has been said over and over, Florida democrats were OVERRULED and wanted a later date. As for the rank and file people - you know, ordinary citizens - are Obamaniacs REALLY suggesting that 10% of the voters be disenfranchised because of what a few politicians have done? Is that in the spirit of "yes we can" and a "new kind of politics" or "hope and change?" And will that REALLY motivate Michigan and Florida voters to come out in the fall? Of course you know that answer is no.
Its clear and simple: if Obama were AHEAD in the polls in these states you would all be clamoring for a re-vote. Period.
There is no desperation on the winning side, only caution.
What you say is simply not true. It is not the case that Obama people seek to disenfranchise anyone.
A re-vote is the only way to settle this.
Most Obama supporters are clamoring for a revote. It's HRC who does not want a revote. And while HRC may win this time, I am a sure a revote will be much closer to 50/50 now.
I certainly don't see anything in this article to conclude that the writer is an "Obamaniac." To me it looks simply like he's got an unrealistic concern about the potential for corruption of the voting process if it's done by mail, but for the life of me I can't agree with his arguments. Since so many states do mail-ins in a big way, including Oregon who does all their voting that way, and there have been very few problems with any of those systems, I don't see how vote buying could be done on a scale that would really impact the race. It is, after all, illegal, and the very people who would be poor and desperate enough to sell their votes for a pittance would also be more than inclined to turn in the vote buyers for a reward to get them busted. It should work fine. And both candidates would have an opportunity to campaign beforehand, so what's the problem?
No re-votes in Michigan or Florida. If the DNC or Coward Dean are not PAYING for the Primary they should have NO VOICE in deciding the when it will be held. The DEMS and Republicans should be thankful that the TAXPAYERS are funding the cost of these votes. If the Political parties want control let THEM PAY.
Giving a 50-50 split to the two is ABSURD. I live in Florida and Hillary WON 50-30. Is this some sort of ObaMath? Sure, Obama could gain some votes if he campaigns, but 50-50 is HIGHLY UNLIKELY.
This is why we need an ELECTION. James Carville promissed 15 MILLION DOLLARS to pay for a full scale REVOTE, if Obama would do the same. Why has the media been totally silent on that? Why has Obama been silent on that?
Let's face it. Obama is CHICKEN. He knows that he would LOSE in Florida. He is a CHEAT, a HYPOCRITE and a CHICKEN if he is unwilling to have a fair ELECTION. We do not need a cheating hypocrite in the White House. We already have one there.
The mail-in vote may be "better than nothing", but not much better. You might as well auction the ballots off on e-bay. A full RE-VOTE is necessary.
Mail is NINETEENTH CENTURY. Florida has a fully computerized database. It is EASY for people to come to Government offices, over a 2-week period, present their photo ID, and VOTE on the existing voting machines. It seems to me that this would be CHEAPER than mail-ins, and FULLY SECURE.
If desired, PAPER BALLOTS could be used. This is a RUN-OFF election, it is only necessary to have TWO NAMES on the ballot: Obama and Clinton. This should not cost MILLIONS of dollars to print up and administer.
Security measures to improve security on a mail in vote: 1. Require the voter to NOTARIZE their mail-in ballot. 2. Require the voter to come to a GOVERNMENT OFFICE to fill out the ballot and submit it, presenting PHOTO ID. This would preclude sales of ballots.
With these CONTROLS, fraud could be avoided.
Actually, 50/50 it is not completely possible/likely Obama could do even better for two reasons.
1. Since the original Florida primary when Obama was behind 20 points nationally his message has seen him take the lead. There is no reason to believe that there would not be a similar effect in FL.
2. The original primary was held at the same time as a property tax decrease referendum. Most expert analysis suggest that Hillary's win is materially attributable to the fact that the vast majority of voters who turned out were there to vote on taxes, not a primary everyone knew would not count. The demographic of those most likely to benefit from property tax relief (was at least) HIGHLY favorable to Hillary, older voters. Holding a primary with nothing else on the ballot today will yield a very different result. I have no link on the research; believe me, do your own research or keep your head in the sand as you wish.
BTY, I am and Obama supporter but also a Floridian with a homestead exemption who did not vote as I was unaffected by the ballot.
Dude, are you on drugs? You really didn't appreciate how the proerty tax amendment affects all of us...everyone who actually lives here has a homestead exemption. This tax amendment actually DOUBLES the homestead exemption, but only if you agree to basically defund all of our failing schools, scale down local hospital operations and gut our fire and police departments.
How you can say you didn't vote because you were "unaffected" is BEYOND my entire comprehension.
Sorry, my last first sentance should have read "50/50 is not only possible/likely, Obama could do much better than that.
If that's the case, then why is he CHICKEN?
How do you know when dead people are not voting absentee? How long does it take for Florida to know when dead people are voting since there is so many old people there?
How do you know that a separate stash of ballots will not be duplicated? That is what happens in China with actual contractors ripping off their clients. They make duplicate production runs behind the client's back. No one can tell the difference in authenticity because the duplicates are authentic in that they the real deal too.
And whom will count these ballots? Crist would want Hillary to win to bait his party's base so why would we think Florida would execute a fair election process. If Charlie Crist had nothing to gain, I would consider it plausible that less opportunities of tampering would ensue.
Greatest Username Evah!
WORD UP =]
The mail-in should be conducted by the Florida Democratic Party. They have accurate lists of every registered Democrat and they can insure that only authorized ballots are mailed out and returned.
As for the issue of voting by recently deceased people, that issue must come up in other states all the time. It can't be a big problem and it certainly is not enough to upset a simple, sensible plan to allow every Democrat in Florida to have easy access to vvoting.
I can't believe Democrats would support an innovative, untried election system when everything is on the line in Florida.
Like that hasn't blown up in their faces before.
Perhaps those who get hot under the collar should remember that the primary process is not technically a 'public' process in the sense of an election. It is technically the internal party process by which the party selects its official candidate, governed by the domestic rules of the party. As examples, the votes of Guam and Puerto Rico as if states, the diversity of primary procedures in the different states. Yes the whole system is ripe for reform. Perhaps a national single transferable vote system would be fairest.
But in the meantime, the rules are the rules and who is to say that both in Florida and Michigan the whole process has not been irredeemably contaminated by all the controversy since - not to mention the attempts by the Clinton campaign to manipulate Florida and Michigan public opinion to her own ends.
Under the DNC Rules, in the absence of consensus solutions, the matter of seating the delegates is in the hands of the credentials committee - and perhaps that is the optimum solution now, however inconvenient that may be.
Hillary '08
This entire issue causes concern for one reason. It is very likely that Clinton will win Florida. Do you ever wonder why it's only liberals and leftist democrats who constantly whine about voting when the numbers are close?
It's getting old people.
Hillary '08
Actually, Clinton winning FL is of little concern to Obama supporters for two reasons:.
1. Since the original Florida primary when Obama was behind 20 points nationally his message has seen him take the lead. There is no reason to believe that there would not be a similar effect in FL.
2. The original primary was held at the same time as a property tax decrease referendum. Most expert analysis suggest that Hillary's win is materially attributable to the fact that the vast majority of voters who turned out were there to vote on taxes, not a primary everyone knew would not count. The demographic of those most likely to benefit from property tax relief (was at least) HIGHLY favorable to Hillary, older voters. Holding a primary with nothing else on the ballot today will yield a very different result. I have no link on the research; believe me, do your own research or keep your head in the sand as you wish.
BTY, I am and Obama supporter but also a Floridian with a homestead exemption who did not vote as I was unaffected by the ballot.
I live in Broward County, Florida and I can honestly say that I'd rather not have our delegates seated than see a mail-in vote. There's virtually no chance that it would be conducted fairly...
Here's a much simpler option... an outbound telephone poll of 10,000 registered democrats - there are obviously sampling issues ... cell phones, district-level representativeness, selecting the voter in the household to poll, but it's far cheaper, can be far more secure and likely nearly as accurate as a primary or a caucus.
It doesn't really seem that complicated to me at all.
Some people don't have phones or can't be reached. Telephone surveys INVARIABLY over-sample females, because they are more likely to be at home, and also more likely to answer a survey. Not good.
I'm familiar with surveys. I conduct hundreds of surveys a year. I'm quite good at it and in fairly high demand. I wasn't suggesting a survey precisely, but rather randomly selected voting. It's the volume and the logistics which are precisely the problem with another primary and/or caucuses.
There are sampling fixes to all of those problems you mentioned and many more. Most researchers do not choose to emply them because they a) take longer and b) cost more. Neither one of those would be an impediment to a randomly selected voting scheme as the savings in cost and timing are an order of magnitude less.
But I can see why some people wouldn't feel comfortable with it.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
