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

[grrrfren]

Superdelegates, take note. I've voted for some 38 years, always Democratic. However, I will do whatever it takes to keep Hillary Clinton out of the White House including promoting and voting for the Republican nominee. So, superdelegates, take all the time you need to mull this over and then get comfortable to watch the Democratic party and Hillary Clinton go down to defeat in November . It will worth it to me to watch he crash and burn.

[WAdem]

The superdelegates saw the poll, grrrfren, and Obama loses as many voters to McCain as he gains from your bloc. Hillary loses few to McCain and gains fewer vs. Obama right now, but the race is not static. You mention your dislike for HRC. Don't you realize how his negatives are growing with each passing day with the unjustified demonization of Hillary from people like you? My wife, for one, will either vote for Hillary or McCain. She considers Obama unelectable. So, despite the fact that you have bought into the GOP talking points about HRC, there are as many who feel just as strongly that Obama has no chance to beat McCain.

[maggieb]

Thank you WAdem, your post supports my sentiments exactly. If people think Caucuses are fair then think again. If they also believe that the Indys & so-called cross-over Repubs are going to vote for Obama come November then they really believe in HOPE. Its a strategy to get Hillary out and it may have worked too, we'll see.

[danceswithyids]

I believe this is called cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Food doesn't taste quite the same once you've gone and cut the ol' schnozola.

[fletch1031]

Unreal. This is patently unfair to the other 48 states that did not try to leapfrog the process in hopes of increased attention and influence. They effectively tried to game the system. I live in Oregon, a state that patiently waited its turn in this primary process. And, for once, we are about to make a real difference in the nomination contest. But now a state that played by the rules is about to get second-class treatment by the DNC in favor of Michigan and Florida.

What is the point of rules if they are not going to be enforced by the DNC? Every candidate knew these two states were stripped of delegates. State parties knew if they moved up their contests in defiance, they would be stripped. There were no surprises here. So why should they be rewarded for poor behavior? I feel for the voters in those states, but they had a chance to challenge their state parties. it's too late now.

The lesson from this if these states get to call 'mulligan: That breaking the rules doesn't matter. You can just get a do-over. Maybe in four years all of the states can try to game the system so the whole thing is a scheduling disaster, but take solace in the precedent to be set here. Break the rules, you can always get your do-over if you scream loud enough. This is a slap in the face of the voters in the other 48 states.

And besides -- no matter if the do-over is a primary (a mail-in primary could be rife with fraud in this hotly contested season) or caucus -- the whole thing is a sham. You cannot recreate the moment in time when these contests took place. Edwards was still in the race. Who knows how things might have been different if he was an active challenger in either Michigan or Florida? His supporters should be outraged.

I am ashamed of what a mockery this primary season has become. Smears. Lies. Media bias. And now do-overs for rule-breakers. What the hell is happening to our democracy?

[realistxxx]

Well you know, when the rules don't work to the polically elite's advantage, they just change the rules. Politcs As Usual!

Caucuses are a foundation of the nominating process. Oops Clinton can't win them. Well, then they are un-democratic. Politics as usual!

All Democrats nominate the next candidate regardless of whether they live in a red or blue state. Oops Obama wins more red states and not enough of the big bluest of blue states. Well, then only the big blue and the purple states matter (Oh and by the way Clinton says F-U Virginia, Colorado, Iowa, Missouri etc.). Politics as usual!

Florida and Michigan race ahead to hold their primaries early and they should be penalized. Oops, Clinton won the beauty contest. We must seat the delgates and count the votes. What about all of those disenfranchised voters that stayed home because they thought the primaries didn't matter? F-Them this is POLITICS AS USUAL!

Obama played by the rules as an unknown outsider and focused on how to actually win the nomination against all odds. Remarkably, he has won it with an ingenious strategy, but the POLITICS AS USUAL crowd represented by Clinton/Bush are now changing the rules of the nominating process because THIS IS POLITICS AS USUAL!

Well, despite the rant Barrack and his supporters should get used to always having to deal with the "FIXERS". Nobody plays by the rules. Not here and not around the world.

So now it's time to fight. This is a test of our meddle and moxie and I am convinced WE will rise to the challenge.

Despite the game being rigged, YES WE CAN!

Did anyone who actually believes that Obama is a transformational candidate... ever think that the Clinton's/McCain's/Bush's of the American political system would ever let us get away with this without a street fight?

Well here it is. We need the audacity of hope to see this through.

Just one thought for the old school dems, superdelegates and party leaders. We have the nuclear option. Can you say Third Party. Oh and how did the Whigs feel... hmmmmmmmm?

[Barbyrah]

Third party...yes. (We do not have to take on the role of victim in this. "Change" doesn't have to limit itself to just the candidate, or the message. It can also include...the method.)

[danceswithyids]

Caucuses are in fact inherently undemocratic.
Nuff said.

[grrrfren]

Thanks to Clinton side, this election will be rigged. But the American people are getting what they deserve by succumbing to Clinton's scare tactics and voting for her in Texas and Ohio. Nowadays, I'm so ashamed of this country. It's really very sad to see how truly undemocratic our electoral system is. Other countries must be sitting back and laughing (or crying) as they watch the goings on. After the debacle that will be the 2008 election, the U.S. will have no standing to advise other nations on their elections.

[PaulLoeb]

Though I'd be fine with a 50/50 solution, I think the potential for major disaster is far less when you don't have winner take all.

[earnesttruthseeker]

And....if Hillary can't mathematically 'catch up' via a do-over..what would we be wasting everyone's time and money for??

[Hawise]

Voter enfranchisement and staying true to the 50 state plan.

[danceswithyids]

Thank you. And for all those who don't want my state Michigan and Florida to have a chance to vote, I just want you to know that we would be fighting for your rights. We in Michigan believe in our democracy and we also happen to be a very diverse state both economically and ethnically, not to mention religiously.
We are no different than any of you, except some people we never had any say in their appointment made decisions to try to change the hold Iowa and the like had on being first.
Also just so everyone knows, New Hampshire also broke the rules, but they will have their delegates seated. NH held their primary before the DNC said they were allowed to.
How about making an early state one that represents the make-up of America?

[earnesttruthseeker]

The idea of ANY kind of a "do-over" in ANY way is completely preposterous. Everyone (including those voters, BTW) should have known when that godforsaken agreement was made that the voters would be "disinfranchised". Why wasn't everyone screaming about it then? Gov's and Hillary included? Instead, she signed the agreement. Shouting 'disinfranchisment!' now simply rings ridiculously hollow.

Things should stay exactly as they are - per the rules set up at the beginning that EVERYone understood.

[danceswithyids]

I am from Michigan and we have been screaming. Screaming for the past year. We are a state in tremendous peril right now. Do you honestly think the people of Michigan don't want to have a voice?
The only thing preposterous, is that Coke thought New Coke was a good idea.

[danceswithyids]

One major issue with a mail-in primary is it disenfranchises those with lower incomes due to their moving more often thus being less likely to receive the ballot.

[TabysGrandma]

When you move you just need to change your address on your voter registeration. It is not that hard. I know lots of people with lower incomes but they know that. It does not take money to do that, just a form

[danceswithyids]

True but the time it takes to forward the mail has a lag. If the ballots are sent out and need to be returned in a short amount of time, it will effect those voters. Also not everyone is able to move to a new permanent place, they may have to move from family member to family member for a while. We are in a RECESSION regardless of the talk, since they can't call it one, until we've already been swimming in it for six months. The bad economy is causing a greater number of people being forced to move, more than ever before.

[PioneerKing]

MAIL FRAUD!! One of the most prevalent means of voter suppression has been mail fraud. The state of Florida has been one of the principal states embroiled in litigation surrounding it's inability to keep accurate voter registration data and as a result there has been a long standing tradition of voting abuse by mail fraud. A surfeit of dead people and non-existing beings were found to have voted in 2000 and 2004 in Florida. A mail in primary in the state of Florida, the home of the hanging chad would come across as nothing short of the appearance of impropriety. A mail in primary by the state of Florida would be considered rife for fraud and would do nothing to instill voter confidence. The DNC needs to come up with a better solution than a mail in primary. Does the DNC really want the Supreme Court to decide another presidental election?

[Dazedandamazed]

Under this revote plan Republicans who already voted for a Republican candidate in January would now get to vote again in a new democratic primary. They would get to help select the Republican and the Democratic nominees. That is not allowed in any other state and it should not be allowed in these 2 states. If they want a do over it should only allow those who registered Democrat before January 29 2008 to vote in it.

[danceswithyids]

Where did you get this info that a Republican who has already voted in the R primary can vote again in the D primary, even though it is open.
I think there is still the one person one vote thing.

[SCMagnolia]

Dazedandamazed...I don't know about MI but FL is a closed presidential primary. Only registered Democrats could vote for the nominee,

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

were both of these states open primaries allowing for indies and maybe even republicans to cross over and vote in the dem primary instead of the republican primary?

If this is the case, will the re-do's also be open? And, if so, how do you stop someone who voted in the republican primary the first time from now getting a second vote by voting in the dem do-over?

[wiseapple]

I initially thought that Florida had an open primary, but I found out that it is closed- Democrats only. After reading this article, I think that the ballots could be mailed out and a deadline set for returning them. The sealed ballots should be returned in person to designated polling stations, over the span of a week, and the names matched with the voting registry for verification. This kind of process might eliminate the possible fraud.

[PaulLoeb]

I talked to Florida voters who didn't vote because they knew it wouldn't count.
Plus if you hold an election when no one can campaign (although Hillary made several "fundraising" stops that generated local media) it vastly disadvantages the lesser known challenger. Every state Obama has had time to campaign in, he's made up significant ground.

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

Holding private fund raisers, which both Obama and Clinton did, was not against the rules.

I wish people who don't know what the rules are, would stop complaining about tyhe rules.

[danceswithyids]

Shocker that the post above yours also fails to remember Senator Obama breaking the FLA rules by running ads for a week.

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

you mean those voters you talked to didn't go to the polls to vote for the other issues that were on the ballot at the same time as the primary? Or, they did vote on those other issues, but just chose not to make a presidential selection while they were there anyway?

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

what is the point of seating the delegates 50/50? Yo might as well not seat them if their opinion doesn't matter. Is the point of seating them just to allow them to have a trip to Denver, wear funny hats and get drunk every night?

That's about the same as suggesting that super delegates be required to vote for which ever candidate leads in elected delegates. What would be the point to that? MIght as well just not have them.

[MsLiz]

If no delegates are seated from Michigan or Florida, will the total number of delegates needed to be nominated be reduced? Put another way, does the winner need 50% +1 of those present or 50% +1 of the total number of delegates including Florida and Michigan?

There are other things voted on such as a platform.

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

good question, the total number has already been reduced to reflect these two states NOT having delegates. If they get re-instated, the total number of delegates needed to win the nomination will INCREASE.

[SShaw490]

Vote fraud - or voter error if one is more charitable - is a common issue in any election. The problem with mail-in ballots is that method obviously favors one of the candidates - Hillary Clinton. Hillary is the default choice for disinterested Democratic voters because she's probably the only name they know. That's why, in state after state, early polling shows her with a 20%+ edge and then Obama catches up and passes her, and that's also why Obama does much better in caucuses. When you poll 2 months before the election, the answers are the default ones, and some people never go past that stage of disinterest. Those people won't usually vote at all - they don't care who wins, which is fine. But if someone won't bother driving to a polling place and standing in line for 30 minutes to vote, they WILL just mark a ballot they got in the mail, fold it back up and stick it back in the mailbox. They don't care, but they'll do THAT much.

The problem with mail-in voting is that it's biased, and it's DESIGNED to be biased. It's DESIGNED to rig the election for Hillary Clinton.

[daddyG56]

Yeah, us poor stupid folk never heard of Obama. That's why we just default to Clinton.

I'm getting fed up with the elitists on this blog who seem to think that voters belonging to one demographic or another are disinterested, lazy or stupid or biased.

We're the big-tent party.remember, kids??

[danceswithyids]

Not anymore, we are becoming the its either my tent or your tent party. Next thing to logically proceed is the Big Top collapses as the center support can't maintain its strength.

[Swift2]

Really anxious about letting the people vote? You know, all they have to do to keep the fraud down is apply the rules that Joe Lieberman was too much of a disloyal jerk to enforce back in 2000, when he refused to let our side disqualify any vote purporting to come from the military. It's pretty good. One person, one vote, check the signature, make sure the postmark is good, and so on. And this is a problem, or do you want maybe 50,000 party activists with time on their hands to caucus about it?

[lovethesinner]

I wonder which candidate is favored in voting by mail?

[danceswithyids]

Currently the belief is that it will have a negative effect on Hillary supporters as if they are in lower income brackets there is more chance that they move often. This causes them to not get the ballot in the mail. And Clinton does well in that demographic.