May 17, 2006
Dismal voter turnout in Oregon, despite vote by mail
Another article in the Oregonian about voter turnout:
"As of 7 p.m. Tuesday, the Secretary of State's office reported that 32 percent of Oregon ballots had been returned. The lowest historical turnout was 34.9 percent in 1998 and 38 percent in 1994 and 1996."
The reporter says this is the lowest turnout in 46 years. The Oregon Secretary of State chalks it up to "negative campaigning" and the lack of charismatic candidates. In other words, voter turnout ebbs and flows with people's interest in elections. It isn't based on whether they vote at the kitchen table or in a poll station. See the full article here.
Posted by Jonathan Bechtle at May 17, 2006
11:23 AM | Email This
1. Wait. This is impossible. Vote by mail was supposed to get more people voting not less. Hmmm. I wonder what happened?
2. Don't the numbers seem to show a gradual DECLINE in voter participation over the past twelve years...(1994/38%; 1996/38%; 1998/34.9%; 2006/32%)?
3. Why do you care where people vote? In Oregon we can vote at a polling place (yes, they are provided for those who prefer that), we can mail it in, or we can drop it off. Oregon usually has one of the highest voter participation rates in the country. Also, they're not done counting. According to central oregon's news channel 21 "Statewide, the returns were at 32 percent as of late Tuesday afternoon - similar to 2002, when the statewide figure finished at 46 percent."
4. Check this out: Oregon Secy of State's tabulation of voter turnout in this May 2006 election
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/may162006/cum.pdf
It shows nearly-complete voter turnout for all 36 counties in Oregon. Notice that most urban counties, Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas, among others had lower percentages of voters than the rural, eastern counties, so far.
Another intriguing possibility: Jackson has a very low turnout. That county may have been 'late' in reporting results due to Multnomah (Portland) being 'late' in past elections and miraculously overturning close elections! They may be practicing holding up results until Multnomah commits with a semi-firm number of ballots cast.
Yes, some turnouts are low because there were not interesting candidate races, but I think there is more to it. I'm beginning to think that many new voter registrations in Nov. 2004 were fraudulent. I also believe there will be more than the 6% to 8% ballots normally returned by the Post Office as undeliverable when everything is tallied.
This bears out my theory that voter fraud occurs in the registration process, not the vote-by-mail and counting process. Not that the latter couldn't happen, only that registration is now the easiest place to cheat. I don't believe the oft-cited coercion as the kitchen table scenario holds any water - in fact, it sounds ridiculous on its face to me. I do believe nursing homes and other institutions are possible problems.
5. The real reason behind declining voter turnouts, irregardless of the method of polling, is the voter's perception that the political offering (the contenders) are a bunch of slugs! I would gladly choose the lessor of two evils if I could perceive a difference.
6. It might also be that voter turnout is low because people know the results are FIXED!.
Speaking of Oregon, has anyone there checked to see how many of those recently discovered 50 to 80 THOUSAND fraudulant drivers license holders were registerd to VOTE under the motor voter act???
Imagine how low the turnout would REALLY be without the non legal vote.
7. Mac, I think you're onto something about registration. But don't discount the kitchen table scenario. Just the other day there was a post about a study that 44% of Puget Sound women had been physically or vebally abused at some point in their adult lives. That study has its flaws, but it does suggest that voting may not be coercion free. We don't know, and may never know unless people come forward and volunteer their experience.
Drew, you're absolutely right. While the trolls are dying to keep the same criminals in office, I, for one, would love to vote them ALL out and start over. The legislative branch, at the State and US level are, in my opinion, a cesspool of corruption and special interests.
8. Is vote-by-mail the solution to the election controversies that have gripped other parts of the country for much of the past six years?
A growing number of election reform advocates think so, including Dave Jackson, a member of the Oregon Voter Rights Coalition, one of numerous grass-roots groups across the country worried that elections are rife with fraud and cheating.
“From what I know, Oregon’s vote-by-mail system is the most secure voting system in the country,” Jackson said, explaining that he first began worrying about elections after the 2000 Bush-Gore counting debacle.
The vote-by-mail system will be on full display in today’s primary election. The offices of the Multnomah County Elections Division will hum with activity as around 150 temporary workers process ballots that have been filled out and mailed in by county voters.
Signatures will be checked, ballots will be inspected and automated counting machines will tabulate the results that are scheduled to be released beginning at 8 p.m. Voters have until then to bring their ballots by the office, at 1040 S.E. Morrison St., for them to count.
To learn more about how the system works, Jackson and two other coalition members — Jim Andrews and Kathleen Bushman — visited the office May 8. They met with Multnomah County Director of Elections John Kauffman, who walked them through the office where workers already were busy processing the vote-by-mail ballots that had been streaming in since blank ones for the May 16 primary election were mailed out in late April.
As they walked from room to room, Jackson and the others peppered Kauffman with questions about how the ballots are handled. They wanted to make sure ballots could not be stolen or switched and to know what safeguards prevented elections workers from learning how individual voters cast their ballots.
Jackson, Andrews and Bushman are among thousands across the country who are worried about the integrity of the nation’s voting system. Their concerns were heightened by numerous problems with Ohio’s primary election, which was held May 2. Among other things, some Ohio voters and elections workers had problems using the state’s new computerized touch-screen voting machines. Similar problems have plagued elections in other states in recent years, too.
In response to questions about the situation in Ohio, Kauffman explained that such problems cannot happen in Oregon because vote-by-mail requires paper ballots that are fed through relatively simple tabulating machines.
Voters cast their votes by using pens to fill in ovals on the ballots. Because nothing has to be punched out, the ballots are not marred by the hanging, dimpled or pregnant chads made infamous in Florida during the 2000 presidential election.
At one point in the tour, Kauffman, Jackson and the others watched workers test the six machines that will count all of the ballots cast in Multnomah County, beginning early in the morning on election day. The same set of specially prepared ballots was run through each machine, which then produced a printout of the results. Elections workers checked to make sure each machine tabulated the ballots correctly.
After the tour, Jackson praised Kauffman and the other elections workers for carefully handling the ballots and properly maintaining the counting machines. Despite that, Jackson and the other coalition members still plan to spend election day at the office, watching for any irregularities.
“I think Kauffman and the other employees are trying really hard to do their jobs right, but you can’t be too careful these days. There’s too much at stake,” Jackson said.
System has its critics
Longtime anti-tax activist Don McIntire believes vote-by-mail elections are open to more fraud than conventional polling place elections, however. McIntire, the father of Oregon’s property-tax limitation system, is convinced that unscrupulous partisans are coercing voters in their homes and using ballots that have been mailed to the wrong addresses.
“It should be called fraud-by-mail, not vote-by-mail,” McIntire said.
But no proof of widespread fraud has ever been found in vote-by-mail elections, said Anne Martens, spokeswoman for Secretary of State Bill Bradbury, who oversees all elections in Oregon. According to Bradbury’s office, only six people have been prosecuted for voting violations since the state began conducting all elections by mail six years ago.
“That’s a very small number,” Martens said.
The state first began experimenting with local vote-by-mail elections in 1981 and started holding all elections by mail in 2000. Today’s election is the fourth statewide primary to be conducted through the mail in Oregon.
According to Kauffman, there are many reasons why Oregonians have embraced vote-by-mail elections, including their convenience.
“If you want to vote at home, you can. If you want to vote someplace else, you can. If you don’t want to put it in the mail, you can bring it in or drop it off at an official drop site,” he said.
McIntire decries vote-by-mail as undermining the sense of community created by traditional elections, however. As McIntire sees it, democracy came alive when all voters visited their local polling places on the same day.
“It was like a Norman Rockwell painting. You got to see your neighbors, they got to see you, and you all got the sense you were doing something important,” he said.
It is unlikely the state will go back to polling place elections, however. Oregon voters placed a measure requiring all primary and general elections to be held by mail on the ballot in June 1998. It was approved at the general election held five months later, 757,204 votes in favor to 334,021 against. A 2003 poll conducted by the University of Oregon found that 81 percent of Oregonians prefer vote-by-mail to polling place elections.
High-tech voting can be iffy
Now a new reason for sticking with mail elections has been added to the mix — security. After the problems counting votes in Florida’s 2000 presidential election, public attention focused on the nuts and bolts of the nation’s voting system. Similar problems were found in other states using punch card ballots.
Congress responded by passing the Helping Americans Vote Act of 2002. Among other things, it provided funds for states to update their voting systems. Many states — but not Oregon — began switching over to the latest generations of computerized touch-screen machines, similar to bank ATMs.
But the touch-screen computers have proven to be even more controversial than the punch-card ballots. Some voters have problems using the machines, including elderly voters who may not be used to computers. And many have voiced concerns that the machines do not use or produce paper ballots that can be counted by hand in case a recount is required.
According to the nonprofit Open Voting Consortium, approximately 30 percent of the votes in the 2004 general election were cast on machines that could not be audited.
The ongoing controversies are fueling a grass-roots movement of activists demanding reforms, including a return to old-fashioned paper ballots. More and more, they are looking at Oregon’s vote-by-mail system as a national model. Paper ballots are available for recounts, and elections officials check the signature of every voter who casts a ballot.
According to Martens, the only other state that checks every signature is New York — and it does not require paper ballots in every race.
“Vote-by-mail is more secure than any polling place election, and more secure than any touch-screen,” Martens said.
Oregon’s vote-by-mail system is being praised by reform activists across the country. Some, including Jackson, believe it could be improved by requiring random audits after each election to ensure the accuracy of the results. A number of current reform proposals include a routine audit requirement.
“As good as vote-by-mail is, it could be better,” Jackson said.
Kauffman argues that random audits are not necessary because state law requires automatic recounts of all close elections.
“As long as an outcome is in question, there will be a recount,” Kauffman said.
Add it up
Although voting by mail may be simple, counting the ballots is not. In the weeks before today’s primary election, the Multnomah County Elections Office had to hire approximately 150 temporary employees to process the ballots that arrived every day in the mail. The employees were spread out over four rooms on two floors in the Morrison Street office, including most of the building’s sprawling basement.
By last Thursday morning, the workers were busy in all four rooms. Ballots arrived from the post office in boxes, each still inside two envelopes — a return mail envelope signed by the voters and, inside that, a secrecy envelope with no way of identifying the voters.
When the envelopes first arrive, workers sort through them, finding and setting aside approximately 6 percent to 8 percent that could not be delivered because the name and address did not match.
According to Kauffman, in the vast majority of cases where ballots could not be delivered, it’s because voters moved since the last election and the ballots cannot legally be forwarded to their new addresses. Fictitious registrations — if any — also will be returned by the post office. Several weeks after the election is over, elections officials will remove all those voters from the registration rolls.
The envelopes containing all ballots submitted by voters then will be checked to make sure they are properly signed and, if so, they will be opened and the secrecy envelope will be removed. Without knowing who mailed the envelope back, workers then will open it and remove the ballots.
Workers then inspect the ballots to make sure the marks are dark enough to be read by the counting machines. If the marks are not dark enough but the intent is clear, the workers are allowed to enhance but not change the marks. Members of the public, including official representatives of political parties, are allowed to watch this process to make sure the workers are not changing votes or voting in races that were left blank.
The ballots are organized by precinct and run through the counting machines on election day. Because around 40 percent of Multnomah County’s 309,000 registered voters are expected to cast ballots, the counting will start early in the day and take many hours to complete. Partial results will be released shortly after 8 p.m., the traditional time when the polls close. The count will be updated throughout the evening and into the next day until it is complete.
Kauffman says his office has taken many precautions to make sure no cheating occurs. For example, all of the rooms used to store and process ballots can be opened only by authorized employees with pass cards. The counting machines are not connected to the Internet or even a phone line, to prevent anyone from hacking in to them. And they are tested again election morning to make sure their results are accurate.
“No system designed by humans is ever perfect,” Kauffman said. “But we’re confident the results will be accurate, and we can count all the ballots by hand if we have to.”
9. Secret ballots remain secret
Vote-by-mail elections require both the voters and county elections officials to follow a number of steps to make sure ballots remain confidential and are accurately counted. Elections officials and watchdog groups agree these steps minimize the possibility of fraud in Oregon elections.
1. Voters receive their ballots in the mail approximately two weeks before an election day. Each voter receives a ballot without his or her name on it, a secrecy envelope without a name on it and a return mail envelope that includes the name and address, a unique bar code and a place for a signature.
2. Voters fill out their ballots at their convenience.
3. Voters place their completed ballots in their secrecy envelopes.
4. Voters place their secrecy envelopes in their return mail envelopes.
5. Voters read the voter’s statement on the back of the envelope, which says that only the registered voter who received the ballot can legally cast it, and that this is the only ballot the voter has used. Voters sign the envelopes certifying they have complied with the election laws. It is a Class C felony to falsely sign the envelopes.
6. Voters return their ballots to their county elections offices by mail or in person, or they leave them at official ballot drop sites.
7. Before opening the return mail envelopes, elections workers scan the unique bar codes to help track who has voted.
8. Before opening the return mail envelopes, elections workers compare the voters’ signatures with signatures on voter registration cards. If the signatures do not match, the voters are notified and asked to contact their county elections officials.
9. To maintain the secrecy of the ballots, the return mail envelopes are opened by groups of elections employees in an open, public process. The unopened secrecy envelopes are taken out and separated from the return mail envelopes.
10. In the second stage of the process, the secrecy envelopes are opened and the ballots are taken out.
11. Without being able to identify the voters, elections workers inspect the ballots to make sure they can be read by vote-counting machines. If the ballot is not machine-readable but the intent is clear, elections workers are allowed to enhance the marks or duplicate the ballots so they are more readable. This happens in an open, public process.
12. The ballots are tallied by the vote-counting machines and the results are announced to the public.
10. At
Mail Voting Does Not Increase Participation, authored by Stefan Sharkansky and Posted by publius at May 17, 2006 09:57 AM, Publius carelessly bloviates that,
”The fact is that for working families, for families with children who have trouble finding child care, for folks who travel long distances to and from work, for average people who would like to take a bit more time, ballot in hand, to research lower-ticket races... for all of those people, Vote By Mail makes it more likely that they will vote, and vote thoughtfully.”
It appears that the FACTS don’t match Publius' fantasy.
Making voting easier for people is not a reasonable substitute for making voting reliable and less prone to fraud. Further, there is NO EVIDENCE THAT MAKING VOTING EASIER INCREASES TURNOUTS. In fact the evidence shows the reverse.
Nevertheless, this is not the most important issue. I would far rather that people, who are not serious enough about their elective franchise to make the effort to vote, don't vote. If you care more about Democracy than expediency, you will not argue with this.
We know for a fact that in Oregon, less people voted with all mail voting . . . so . . . we are left to wonder, how many who would have voted otherwise at the polls were left out by authorities who failed to mail ballots to those among them that are likely to vote against their interests?
No chance you say . . . can't happen . . . guess again . . . right
11. Of the states with the highest voter participation rates in 2004, Oregon was the only one that did not have election day registration (one must register at least thirty days before an election in Oregon).
12. voter participation rates in Oregon primary elections:*
1990: 46.1%
1992: 49.1%
1994: 38.2%
1996: 37.8%
1998: 34.9%
2000: 51.3%
2002: 46.68%
2004: 46.4%
The use of vote-by-mail was first approved on a limited basis by the legislature in 1981 and was made a permanent feature of elections in 1987. In 1998, Oregon voters amended state law to require that the primary and general elections in May and November of even-numbered years also be conducted vote-by-mail. Beginning in 2000 primary and general elections have been conducted by mail.
*www.sos.state.or.us/elections/
13. OK Oregon elections experts, Anne, etc... Exactly how many of the owners of the 50,000 to 80,000 fraudulently issued drivers licenses voted or are registered to vote? You've got the names on the DMV records and the voter registrations lists... Can we get a number here??
14. jr's numbers from the Oregon Secretary of State's office are interesting although I don't think they prove anything one way or the other.
Nevertheless, an increase or decrease in voter turn-out is not key to the question about the acceptability of mail ballot voting.
If we voted by "Kreskin" we could claim a 100% voter turn-out, but it would not be an expression of the American or local community elective intent.
Requiring people to walk on glass in their bare feet to vote would be one thing, but the use of formalized polling places performs an important purpose that legitimizes the expression of legitimate intent by honest voters. It also makes it more difficult for those who strive to turn voting into an exercise of corruption and fraud.
Absentee ballots are fine for their purpose, but all mail voting is an invitation to criminals and an open invitation to honest people to become criminal. These "little crimes" will no longer be crimes because they will be so common and rampantly applied that phony voting and false elections will be the order of the day as they have become here in Washington State.
Soon it will become what liberal democrats want it to be -- a battle of who can cheat most effectively. Where does this end??
If you hate civil accord, a chance at a decent peaceful life in a civilized society, and you want the rule of law to be a complete joke that is only useful to government officials elected by fraud, promote all mail voting. It's the ticket.
15. Amused by liberals,
You said 'We know for a fact that in Oregon, less people voted with all mail voting.'
The numbers above don't seem to show that voter participation has increased or decreased because of the adoption of all mail voting.
16. Speaking of fraud in Oregon elections, does anyone remember this one from 2004?
On Tuesday, OSU senior Brandy Martinez was met outside the Valley Library by petitioners asking her to sign a petition to "lower car insurance for young people."
The petitioner asked her to sign her name and phone number on a blank sheet of paper and then presented her with a form he said was required to "verify [her] voter registration."
But she quickly recognized the paper to be a voter registration form, with the title obscured.
"I said, 'no, this is a voter registration form,' and he said, 'No, you need to fill this out to verify that you're registered,'" Martinez said.
The petitioner went on to say she needed to mark "Republican" on the form, saying the Republicans were the only ones willing to fund the petition.
She again refused and immediately called the Benton County elections office.
ASOSU President Kristen Downey said other universities have reported potential fraud.
"We're in contact with {Secretary of State] Bill Bradbury about issues we've come across -- the targeting of college-aged students. They're taking advantage of people -- it's probably their first time registering."
College Democrats member Joel Fischer said he wants anyone who thinks they may have been misled to contact the elections office and write an affidavit for submission to the secretary of state.
Martinez plans to do just that.
Across the state, other instances of possible fraud have been reported.
On the University of Oregon campus, canvassers circulating a petition to "crack down on child molesters" told students they must register as Republicans in order for their signatures to "count," The Associated Press reported.
17. Mac's comment that,
"I don't believe the oft-cited coercion as the kitchen table scenario holds any water - in fact, it sounds ridiculous on its face to me," is unimaginative.
Anyone who has ever lived with others knows the personal pressure that exists between people to conform, to justify ideas and beliefs in context with personal prejudices and to be influenced by an environment of partisan zeal that inhibits neutrality. If peer pressure exists anywhere, it exists at the kitchen table. I think this is a good and healthy thing so long as it doesn’t interfere with the legitimate expression of an individual’s elective franchise.
I have no problem with intimidation because every liberal that has lived with me has been thoroughly bested in debate by me to the point where they stay quiet. While I find the fact that liberals would be very uncomfortable voting at my kitchen table very humorous, it illustrates the point. Common sense alone dictates that the kitchen table scenario is a very negative aspect of all-mail voting. I wouldn’t be unduly influenced by it, and probably neither would Mac (I can only speculate), but many would be heavily influenced, where voting at a polling place would free them to vote their mind rather than their apprehensions or situational reservations.
The formality of a polling place serves a legitimate and important purpose of creating a neutral environment for voters. Not always -- but far more so than all mail voting ever will.
18. I can see how the situation could arise that someone is bullied or pressured at a kitchen table, the repetition of this scenario begs the question of why people would fill out their ballots at the same time. I'm not completely sold on the all mail system, but the objections to it don't sway me either. This is being portrayed as a partisan issue, but I'm not sure if that portrayal of things holds water if we look at the issue with a national or historical perspective. In Arizona a Republican businessman helped to get an all mail voting initiative on the ballot. In the past in Washington Republicans have encouraged their supporters to register absentee. Let people vote for the voting mechanism they like by using it. If someone wants to mail their ballot in, they can already do that. Why not let people go to the polls?
19. eric,
I don't think the question is a matter of why people would fill out their ballots at the same time as much as the fact that the formalization of voting at the polls had its place and served an important function -- part of which is/was situational neutrality. If this is untrue -- it is untrue. I doubt it.
I may be wrong, but I think that "all mail voting" is promoted far more my liberals than conservatives --if for no other reason -- because it is offers a greater opportunity for fraud. Liberals are losing electoral "market share" on ideas and less of them are able to get elected in America because of the whacky absurdity of their ideas. If they don't cheat as Gregiore did, they lose.
I worked on the 2005 and 2005 recounts in Washington right along side the big boys and liberal democrat elections officials from the very top on down demonstrated specific disrespect for the formal counting process in King County. King Couty elections officials directly broke the letter of their own elections recount rules right in front of me with perfect and arrogant impunity. I will testify any time any place to this -- I was there.
King County elections officials prominently and openly behave as if formality of any kind is contemptable and bad -- the formalities of counting, collecting, interpreting, and reporting elections results. Formalities -- like laws -- are meant to restrict both Democrats and Republicans but in the contests here in the state of Washington, the democrat judiciary and elections officials ignored the laws and made rules up to cheat anyone who will vote against them. Stefan proves that the malfeasonce I saw in form, manifested itself in fact.
I don't know about any Republican Arizonan businessman and all mail voting, but I think it could be easily proven that Republican conservatives would vote down "all mail voting" by a very large margin.
The problem -- as you say -- with letting people "vote for the voting mechanism they like by using it," is that no one will ever know if it is working because there will be no rational basis of comparison on specific points of dispute.
How do we know if "all mail voting" doesn't amount to a direct substitute of accuracy for expediancy? If King County Elections has its way, we won't for sure.
How will we know if there is more or less fraud if the fraud is far less easily identified? We won't.
How will we know if a supposed increase in voter turn-out isn't in fact -- actually intentional and widespread fraud. We cannot.
Thanks for making the point, "If someone wants to mail their ballot in, they can already do that. Why not let people go to the polls?" The answer is because liberal democrats in power want to seize an advantage while they can, and procedural democracy, choice for voters and voters rights don't matter to them unless those same Democrats are elected.
Thanks.
20. In Oregon you can of course wait until election day to vote, or even until the very last minute, 7:59pm, on election day if you want. The way this works in Portland is you drive your ballot to the elections office at SE 11th and Morrison and hand deliver it out your car window to the county election workers there giving curb service for that purpose. And a lot of voters do that, including me. It's kinda fun to spend some time there on election day and watch it, and it's also more than a little bit disconcerting to watch one person turn in a thick stack of ballots, or even occasionally a whole boxful of them. It raises poignant questions about the integrity of the process that go way beyond kitchen table scenarios.
Also, the best explanation for the low turnout that I've heard is this: no US senatorial races and no controversial measures were on the ballot, and those are two things that motivate people to vote.