1. I though reapportionment uses the census, not voter registration?

And please post the IP address of the King County government poster!

Posted by: Concerned on July 21, 2005 08:53 PM

2. And to THINK that Logan is speaking at the Election Center's conference next month.

Gee, I think that sometimes I just have to accept my confusion for confusion and not question it further. I just don't GET some people.

Posted by: Cydney on July 21, 2005 09:13 PM

3. Chapter 44.07D RCW
LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS AND APPORTIONMENT
http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/index.cfm?fuseaction=chapterdigest&chapter=44.07D

Sec. 3. In every case the population of the legislative districts described by this plan has been ascertained on the basis of the total number of persons found inhabiting such areas as of April 1, 2000, in accordance with the 2000 federal decennial census data submitted pursuant to P.L. 94-171.

Posted by: Darth Dogbert on July 21, 2005 09:33 PM

4. http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/index.cfm?section=44.05.090&fuseaction=section

"RCW 44.05.090
Redistricting plan.

In the redistricting plan:
(1) Districts shall have a population as nearly equal as is practicable, excluding nonresident military personnel, based on the population reported in the federal decennial census."

This is how you wind up with, for example, the 47th LD having 69,237 voters, while the 36th LD has 90,851; lots more kids in the 47th than the 36th.

Posted by: Legast on July 21, 2005 10:01 PM

5. Absolutely. This is but one of the reasons it takes them so bloody long to tabulate the mail ballots after election day. They aren't willing to do what it takes to winnow down the workload. It could be so much easier! Yet they just complain about what a hard job they have. Well, duh---they make it more so.

Posted by: M on July 22, 2005 12:03 AM

6. Yes Stefan!

We found many duplicate and potential duplicate voters on the database.
Remember this example from - I believe - the Seattle Times database?
If these are found just in a small portion of the surname *Wood*...can you imagine how many duplicates there may be in total?

-----
[Sorry. there's no need to post examples of people with common names like Wood. There are enough people with that name that it doesn't give you much information about duplicates -- Stefan]

Posted by: Deborah on July 22, 2005 12:58 AM

7. The elections process is completely messed up in KC(duh). I left the state of WA in 97, registered to vote in my new state immediately, came back last August, 7+ years later, and registered to vote in my new district (married in the meantime, so my last name had changed, which I noted on the registration form, last 4 of soc.sec.#, previous address, etc). Also, they did not say that I was still registered, but insisted that I re-register.
At the polls, I wasn't on the list, so I voted by provisional ballot. A month later, I received an "updated" voter registration card with my maiden name, as if I had been here voting the entire 7 years, and they were just changing my address.(I checked, and my vote was counted, like I never left. I should have come back for every election.)
Then in Feb., months after registering, I received a letter addressed to my correct name, telling me that they could not process my application for voter registration until I read and sign the "Voter Declaration", then they would send me my voter registration card in 2-3 weeks. Even funnier, I did absolutely nothing, and the next month I received a voter registration card with my correct name, as if I had signed their declaration.
If I was a Democrat (I know, not all are dishonest, just the ones that vote twice, vote while dead, are voting felons, or have counting issues), I have 2 voter registration cards, 2 names, and could vote twice.

It seems like an awful lot of paperwork and mix-ups, potential for fraud, and a huge argument for requiring picture identification at the polls, complete with address, and NOT an all mail system. I would fire anyone this incompetent. And for the liberals that like to snipe on this board, yes, I would fire them just for the fun of it. And according to KC Elections, there are two of me, so I could fire them twice, for twice the fun!

Off topic, I know some of you guys have some knowledge of the KC family courts...and if any of you have background on the appointed commissioners, my husband would very much appreciate hearing what you know (besides accepting baseball tickets and $200 dinners from attorneys appearing before them regularly). He just had an issue, and would like to find one with ethics. Ethics seem hard to come by.

Posted by: Michelle on July 22, 2005 01:17 AM

8. Voter to poll worker; 'I have forgoten if I voted, can you check for me and let me know?'

First Question, (with a straight face); 'How many times did you vote in the LAST election?'

Posted by: Arky on July 22, 2005 04:59 AM

9. "In every case the population of the legislative districts described by this plan has been ascertained on the basis of the total number of persons found inhabiting such areas as of April 1, 2000"

Note that apportionment is done on the basis of population, not citizens. This gives goverments an incetive to not identify and deport illegal aliens, since the more people in their area the bigger the cut of Federal and State aid they get.

The last estimare I saw suggests CA has 5 extra Democratic congressman (and Electoral votes), due to the millions of illegas in that state.

Posted by: Zorkpolitics on July 22, 2005 05:20 AM

10. If there are thousands of duplicate voters, especially absentee voters, that means the county's exceptionally higher voter turnout percentage (especially for absentees), was actually even higher. It would be interesting to run even rough corrections to find out what the actual percentages might have been if the duplicates were scrubbed. That absentee return rate was already very high by historical standards, especially for an urban county, if I recall correctly. A corrected rate of return based on actual, living voters would raise additional questions about the number of valid absentee ballots that were actually received.

Posted by: Eric Earling on July 22, 2005 06:20 AM

11. Hey Shark and all...
One way to "encourage" the elections dept to clean the rolls is to hit them where they think... in the pocketbook! Remember that levies and such are dependent on voter turnout! If there are lots of bogus votes in the system then the required number to validate an election is higher/harder to reach. If we help them see that they risk FAILURE of their "necessary" taxes by not having clean and updated voter rolls just maybe they'll get it in gear!
Of course there's the other approach... suggest that opponenets of a tax levy might use the bogus registration to defeat some "emergency" tax levy. Between you and I that is not likely but the preception that it could happen may help motivate the election dept to do their job.

Posted by: Victor on July 22, 2005 08:43 AM

12. One of the problems with the duplicate voters is that when someone moves within the county, re-registers but neglects to enter the address where they were previously registered they get a whole new registration because it appears the elections office is not too good at comparing the name, birthdate and SS# or Driver's license number.

All is well until the forwarding kicks in about 6 months later. Then the elections office will not only forward the next ballot to the new address but apparently changes the address in the voter database. From then on the person gets two ballots until they figure out how to get one of them removed and most people don't want to take the time.

Forwarding is a big problem. When they forward the ballots the person gets a ballot for the precinct where they used to live, not where they currently live so we get vote skewing and possibly, if it is bad enough, elections lost. It also appears that the elections office will change and forward ballots anywhere in the world, never mind a new precinct, new county or new state! In my opinion they should NEVER forward a ballot UNLESS it is to a legitimate post office box at the specific request of the voter because for whatever reason the person can not receive mail at the place of residence within the county. The elections office should also be required to verify the voter's physical residence annually in any case where the registered address differs from the mailing address.

Posted by: Orin on July 22, 2005 10:44 AM

13. I have a new employee on my staff. He and his wife vote absentee. They both received their ballots three days after the election, so they tossed them. They were upset missing their votes for Rossi. I showed them the Sharks 'Sound Politics Voter Database', we entered their names and found out each one had voted in the election.

I guess if you got a ballot and did not mail it back in, KC voted for you. Now he is mad that he didn't save the worthless empty ballot.

This has to stop. And we have to be mad enough to act on it. If not we, the voters will never be heard from again. After all it is a winning formula. Fraud does win.

Posted by: Son of Liberty on July 22, 2005 11:14 AM

14. Sorry Stefan,

I was just trying to show how something as simple as the inclusion or ommission of a middle name or initial may qualify a voter for a possible duplicate registration. In some cases - in the voter database - the exact name, city and zipcodes were duplicated ....causing me to wonder if they are registered twice...
Yes - I am aware that some may be Jr. or Sr. - or may be two individuals, who live in the same area with the exact same names......But there are enough possible and probable duplicates listed in the voter database to warrant an investigation or audit into this.

To use a generic last name *example* of what I posted above:

John A *Example* SEATTLE 98109 Voted Absentee
JOHN A *Example* SEATTLE 98109 Voted Absentee

JULIE D *Example* SAMMAMISH 98074 Voted Absentee
JULIE D *Example* SAMMAMISH 98074 Voted Absentee

PATRICIA A *Example* SEATTLE 98105 Voted Absentee
PATRICIA ANN *Example* SEATTLE 98105 Voted Absentee

SUSAN *Example* ISSAQUAH 98027 Voted Absentee
SUSAN GAYLE *Example* ISSAQUAH 98027 Voted Absentee

Posted by: Deborah on July 22, 2005 09:02 PM

15. Sorry Stefan,

I was just trying to show how something as simple as the inclusion or ommission of a middle name or initial may qualify a voter for a possible duplicate registration. In some cases - in the voter database - the exact name, city and zipcodes were duplicated ....causing me to wonder if they are registered twice...
Yes - I am aware that some may be Jr. or Sr. - or may be two individuals, who live in the same area with the exact same names......But there are enough possible and probable duplicates listed in the voter database to warrant an investigation or audit into this.

To use a generic last name *example* of what I posted above:

John A *Example* SEATTLE 98109 Voted Absentee
JOHN A *Example* SEATTLE 98109 Voted Absentee

JULIE D *Example* SAMMAMISH 98074 Voted Absentee
JULIE D *Example* SAMMAMISH 98074 Voted Absentee

PATRICIA A *Example* SEATTLE 98105 Voted Absentee
PATRICIA ANN *Example* SEATTLE 98105 Voted Absentee

SUSAN *Example* ISSAQUAH 98027 Voted Absentee
SUSAN GAYLE *Example* ISSAQUAH 98027 Voted Absentee

Posted by: Deborah on July 22, 2005 09:03 PM

16. Are you still p*ss*ng and whining about the election? You know, I'm sure there is a third-world country somewhere where you could go to argue about election fraud, and as a bonus to Seattle, you could get gutshot for your efforts!

Posted by: Third Party Voter on July 23, 2005 10:14 AM

17. No, Mr. liberal who hides behind the independent name, she is referencing established data that proves an systemic and endemic problem that, unless seriously addressed, will mean than no one's vote but the liberal vote (which means you, I'll wager) has any assurance of being counted.

I didn't think you'd care, dimwit....

Posted by: alphabet soup on July 23, 2005 10:50 AM

18. the problem is when voters send in a voter form and use a different name or variation of their name, forget to write the correct DOB and write in a current date instead, KCE does not use the SSN and not all records have a DOL number on them. Voters will insist when they call that they put the former information down but when the original document is pulled in fact a lot of times it is not listed. KCE or any elections department can make changes that can better a process but when you have to rely on the voter to provide correct and accurate information it is not always that easy.

To the person who moved back to WA 7+ years later, when you registered to vote in your new area that area should have notified KCE of the registration or you should have.

Stefan, I hear what you are saying but.......

Posted by: PJ on July 23, 2005 02:23 PM

19. PJ, I notified KCE of my previous address when registered, maiden name at the time of previous registration, DL #, last 4 of ssn, etc. They should have been able to tie that together. As it stands now, there are 2 of me at the same address. They were able to find my old registration, send a new card with my old name to my new address. They would only know the new address from my current registration, which went through separately several months later.
My husband and I left the state at the same time, and he was registered in 97 as well. However, they had no record of him.
Not debating, just wanted to point out the convoluted thinking of KCE, and how their standards are not consistent. And my family is not the only one with registration issues, missing absentee ballots, not being credited with voting, etc. There has beeb a lot of "weird" stuff that happening in this last election, as well as previous.
Cascade County......

Posted by: Michelle on July 25, 2005 08:56 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:

Remember info?