April 7, 2020

"Even before the virus struck, Republicans and Democrats were girding for a record number of voting rights lawsuits throughout the states..."

"... over voter identification provisions, the location of polling sites, and moves to purge voter rolls. But the pressure to move to more voting by mail has intensified the maneuvering, and shifted its focus to absentee balloting....  Richard L. Hasen, a professor of law and political science at the University of California, Irvine... [said] 'We know that voter fraud, while very rare, more commonly occurs with absentee ballots than in-person balloting... [but w]hile there are legitimate reasons to worry about increased vote by mail... it’s not legitimate to fear increased vote by mail because it means that more voters would be able to vote'....  'I hope not, but I fear Wisconsin is a preview of what we’re about to see in the rest of the country,' said Ben Wikler, the chairman of the Wisconsin Democratic Party. Mr. Wikler said that the Republicans had been seeking to stick to the April 7 in-person election date to ensure low turnout, which, he said, would be a potential boon to Mr. Kelly, the conservative judge up for re-election. 'I think it creates a perceived opportunity, even if the public health consequences are ghastly,' Mr. Wikler said. He later tweeted that the Supreme Court decision would 'consign an unknown number of Wisconsinites to their deaths.'"

From "Wisconsin Election Fight Heralds a National Battle Over Virus-Era Voting" (NYT).

I love the Hasen quote: "there are legitimate reasons to worry about increased vote by mail... it’s not legitimate to fear increased vote by mail." Legitimate to worry but not legitimate to fear? I can imagine babbling out such a thing, but why did the Times print that quote? Of course, he's just trying to say what is always said on this subject, that making voting easier also makes it less secure and the 2 major parties emphasize the pros or cons based on their own interest in winning elections. It's easy to pick your party and know which side to come out on.

Wikler is, of course, openly on the Democratic side, and he's seizing hold of the new argument: DEATH!!!  That's a solid addition to the old argument that Republicans want to disenfranchise minority voters.

Meanwhile, here I am in Wisconsin on election morning, completely accepting my own disenfranchisement. I'm one of those citizens who always vote, but I'm not voting today and I did not request an absentee ballot. I did not like the procedure for requesting an absentee ballot (committing to voting absentee for the entire year and uploading a photo of my driver's license to a government website). And the level of social distancing I've chosen for myself — I don't go to the grocery store, though it's open — is inconsistent with going through my polling place. I don't believe that voting would consign me to my death. In fact, I'm not particularly afraid at all. I just have my preferences and I've made my decision. And it actually fits with my political preference: aloofness.

144 comments:

Mark said...

It's time for the courts which ruled it safe to vote to re-open hearings.

The irony is not lost on many that the WI Supreme Court which is fine with in-person voting put off anything requiring open court hearings or jury until nearly the same June date that Evers tried to move the election to.

It's safe for thee but not for me, they say.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

...and uploading a photo of my driver's license to a government website

I'm pretty sure a government website already has all your driver's license information.

rhhardin said...

The disadvantage for Democrats is that they don't know in advance how many fake votes they need. I suppose discovered ones can still be added as before, though.

Josephbleau said...

Hackers can hack the DMV as easily as they can hack the ballot request sites. An image of your DL is not as useful as the data record, you would need to OCR it, harder to automate for mass sale on the dark web.

DavidD said...

The Democrats always talk about voter-ID laws disenfranchising minorities—as if minorities are somehow unable to get an ID or don’t otherwise have a need for an ID—but never about how an illegal vote for one side disenfranchises someone who voted for the other side.

I wonder why this is.

Kevin said...

I just have my preferences and I've made my decision. And it actually fits with my political preference: aloofness.

You'll still be counted among the disenfranchised and your absence will be used to prove the evil intentions of one person or another.

We have turned the right to vote in this country into an obligation felt by all people, half or more of which are somehow disenfranchised each and every election.

Kevin said...

Shorter Althouse: My friend Ben took over the state Democratic Party and I stopped voting.

stevew said...

Any disenfranchisement is self-imposed, which it sounds to me that you are saying.

I reflexively distrust the motives of anyone that advocates for easier, more convenient voting. If voting is so vitally important, as many people (mostly politicians) argue, then it should require a commitment from the voter of time and thought. Checking a box or two on a form that you stuff in the mail isn't that.

If the governor were able to suspend, postpone, or otherwise stop an election it would open up the system for political abuse and undermine the confidence in the system as a whole.

MayBee said...

it’s not legitimate to fear increased vote by mail because it means that more voters would be able to vote'...

Is he saying the reason people fear increased vote by mail is because it means more voters would be able to vote, and that is not a legitimate reason?
Or
Is he saying the fear is illegitimate to fear increased vote by mail because that fear is superseded by the fact that it makes it easier to vote?

Anyway....there is an old canard that Republicans don't like to make it easy to vote. That's not true. They don't like to make it easy to falsify votes, or for people who shouldn't be voting to vote.

Rory said...

People around the world have shown courage when it was required to come out to vote. The opportunity to vote when it requires fortitude may be a blessing.

MayBee said...

The term "purge" the voter rolls also bothers me.

In the past 10 years I've been registered to vote in 3 different American states. There is no way to remove myself from the voter rolls when I leave. Some bureaucrat has to do it at some time of their choosing The process used to remove voters from rolls is incredibly mysterious, and always called "purging" and made to sound like it disenfranchises people when someone finally does it.
I have to believe it serves someone to have all these inactive voters still registered to vote in old locations.

Krumhorn said...

Anyone who says that voter fraud is “very rare” has forfeited their credibility and is almost certainly a leftie. The lefties are pure cancer.

- Krumhorn

Roy Jacobsen said...

This is a list I collated a couple of years ago, so some of them may no longer be true, and other requirements may have been added. I note that I have NEVER heard a Democrat complain about any of the following.

You have to have a valid photo ID when you want to:
• Purchase tobacco products
• Purchase alcohol
• Purchase pseudoephedrine (a.k.a. Sudafed)
• Pay with a check
• Check in to a hotel
• Travel on an airline
• Open a bank account
• Take a tour of the Whitehouse (https://washington.org/DC-faqs-for-visitors/how-can-i-tour-white-house)
• Get prescriptions filled
• Apply for food stamps https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10101.pdf)
• Apply for a library card
• Enter the main headquarters of the Department of Justice in Washington to “petition the Government.”
• Apply for a passport
• Get medical care [Not required by law, but a common practice to help prevent abuse of pain medication]
• Go to an R-rated movie
• Go to a strip show/watch “exotic dancers”
• Adopt a pet
• Purchase a home
• Purchase a car
• Purchase a gun
• Apply for a loan
• Receive a marriage license
• Drive
• Get a job
• Get a post office box (https://poboxes.usps.com/poboxonline/search/landingPage.do)
• Get a hunting license
• Get a fishing license
• Get a business license
• Rent an apartment
• Rent a car
• Rent a boat
• Rent tools and equipment
• Rent furniture
• Receive welfare
• Receive Social Security benefits
• Enter a casino
• Enter a bar
• Attend college
• Get utilities for your residence turned on
• Pick up a package from the US Post Office, UPS, or Fedex
• Sell scrap copper
• Re-enter the U.S. from Canada
• Obtain copies of your own medical records
• Get a free meal from a restaurant on your birthday
• Vote in a union election (http://electionlawcenter.com/2011/12/10/union-elections-require-a-photo-id-to-vote.aspx?mid=54)
• Get a document notarized
• Order a certified copy of a birth or death record
• Enter a county jail or federal prison to visit clients or relatives
• Pick up your child/grandchild from school, daycare or summer camp (in many locations)
• Pay by credit card at U.S. Post Office
• Visit intensive care units or psychiatric units at hospitals
• Donate blood or plasma
• Cash a bank check/money order/SSI check/Welfare check at a bank without an account (and in many cases, even if you have an account)
• Collect a lottery ticket winnings over a certain amount (varies with state)
• Conduct any legal real estate transaction
• File a will
• Conduct pawnshop transactions
• Send or receive a MoneyGram/Western Union
• Enter an IRS office to pay taxes
• Enter any military base
• Enter an airline lounge at an airport
• Apply for a swim pass at a rec center
• Serve jury duty
• Attend an NAACP rally against voter ID laws (No! Really! http://thepunditpress.com/2014/02/08/naacp-holding-rally-to-protest-voter-id-laws-photo-ids-required-to-attend/)

Kevin said...

"Even before the virus struck, Republicans and Democrats were girding for a record number of voting rights lawsuits throughout the states..."

Can we add girding to the list of words like garnering that should be removed from use?

Other than "girding your loins", I mean, because that makes people snicker.

Howard said...

FIFY
Blogger Krumhorn said...

Anyone who says that disenfranchisement is “very rare” has forfeited their credibility and is almost certainly a deplorable. The deplorable are pure cancer.

Howard said...

girding to garner lawsuits

lane ranger said...

It has always amused and annoyed me that the same people who claim there is no evidence of vote fraud are the most stridently opposed to efforts to examine whether vote fraud has occurred.

D.D. Driver said...

"committing to voting absentee for the entire year"

Okay. Everyone but the law professor knows that this is not true, right?

Todd said...

'We know that voter fraud, while very rare, more commonly occurs with absentee ballots than in-person balloting...

Does he get have credit for being half right?

The arguments against stronger voter ID boils down to "if it disenfranchises even ONE person" which is [sorry, not sorry] a ridiculous bar. It is the same argument the left uses for abortion. For some reason they NEVER use it for the 2nd.

Well, if stopping a legal vote is bad, is not allowing an illegal vote even worse? You are disenfranchising ALL voters when an illegal vote occurs. You are stealing the "will of the people" from citizens by skewing the vote results AND reducing systemic trust.

Also, take a civics class. Individual voting is NOT a right. It is NOT in the bill of rights. The states decide how to "figure out" the will of the people for elections.

Dan said...

Not sure why you didnt request a ballot directly from the local clerk. That is what I did. Sent a request with a copy of my drivers license. Got it in the mail 2 - 3 days later. Sent back the next day. That was at least 2 weeks ago. Simple.

Todd said...

Roy Jacobsen said...

This is a list I collated a couple of years ago, so some of them may no longer be true, and other requirements may have been added. I note that I have NEVER heard a Democrat complain about any of the following.


I may have missed it in your list but I think you left off "enter a DNC event". Oh the sweet irony!

Jersey Fled said...

Dear Ann,

This is what happens when you vote for Democrats.

XOXOXO

Fled

Fernandinande said...

The disadvantage for Democrats is that they don't know in advance how many fake votes they need.

Trump failed to restore the federal stockpile of fake votes after it was depleted by the Obama administration.

Jersey Fled said...

PS

Even nice ones like Klobuchar.

Fled

wildswan said...

"Roy Jacobsen listed all the places at which you need ID. Great list but on the list was:

... Get medical care [Not required by law, but a common practice to help prevent abuse of pain medication]"

Actally, if you are on Medicare or Medicaid you are required by law to show government picture ID to see the doctor each time. Obama put this regulation in place. But you never hear of "undue burden" on the poor and aged, the group using Medicare and Medicaid, to get medical care. So, everyone on Medicare or Medicaid has gotten the needed ID and, as it's government picture ID, they could use it to vote. Or, if it needed to be updated, they are quite capable of updating it.

Fernandinande said...

I don't go to the grocery store, though it's open ... In fact, I'm not particularly afraid at all.

OK.

I'm one of those citizens who always vote, ...And [not voting] actually fits with my political preference: aloofness.

OK.

wildswan said...

Wisconsin's absentee voting law requires that each polling place have received the absentee ballots connected with it by 8 pm the day of the election. This is to prevent cheating by adding in absentee ballots after the polls close as is possible in other states where no one knows how many absentee ballots there are. But this provision has been circumvented in this Wisconsin election and so we may expect "big city voting customs" in relation to absentee ballots.

Otto said...

"And it actually fits with my political preference: aloofness." Decoded " we Democrats do not have any strong candidates so this old geezer will continue to isolate "

Browndog said...

Voting in America is not a new thing, requiring time and effort to work out the kinks.

Yet each time the democrats, and it's always the democrats, institute a new procedure to make voting easier they insist voting is even harder than ever, and more procedures are needed.

It's so absurd I wouldn't doubt if someday they propose having people come to your house and pick up you ballot.

Lurker21 said...

It's comforting and reassuring that however much things have changed, bitter partisanship is still around. If lives are at stake, politicians ought to come together with a resolution. Divided government has many advantages. Mixed messages like this in time of crisis aren't among them.

Krumhorn said...

Blogger Howard said... Anyone who says that disenfranchisement is “very rare” has forfeited their credibility

Presumably Howard lacks the intellect to grasp that disenfranchisement can mean whatever the leftie wants it to mean whereas voting fraud is a feature of the law. That would be the only real explanation for his statement unless we include partisan blather. That would be one of the indicators of the leftie cancer in our world today.

In Howard’s world, the convenience store running out of Pabst in quart bottles and pork rinds on Election Day would be disenfranchisement. I would call it EBT-cashing day.

- Krumhorn

Jake said...

You weren’t disenfranchised. You chose not to apply for an absentee ballot and you are choosing to vote in person. Your failure to exercise your franchise is your own doing.

Marcus Carman said...

Sorry Ann, but your insistence that you must commit to voting absentee for the entire year is incorrect. I'm surprised you are still pushing it.

Shouting Thomas said...

Howard, I suggest you watch “How to Fix a Drug Scandal” for some info on who it is who’s disenfranchising and jailing minorities.

Spoiler alert. In two of the most liberal, completely Democratic venues in the U.S., Boston and Amherst, two liberal Democratic women deliberately fucked up the lab tests for over 35,000 drug prosecutions.

This criminal behavior was covered up for years by a succession of DA’s, all female and Democrats.

Fernandinande said...

two liberal Democratic women deliberately fucked up the lab tests for over 35,000 drug prosecutions.

It's a pretty sorry excuse for a crime if you can't tell whether or not the crime has been committed without blood tests or lab tests.

Ann Althouse said...

Marcus Carman said: "Sorry Ann, but your insistence that you must commit to voting absentee for the entire year is incorrect. I'm surprised you are still pushing it."

I'm not "pushing" it. I believe it to be true. If I'm wrong, then you could convince me I'm wrong by pointing to something that proves what you are saying. I think you are wrong. I have shown the screen shots I was getting and discussed the language. That showed what I was seeing at the govt website. If what I saw and how I read it are wrong, it was bad enough that it was presented as wrong where I went to see if I could get an absentee ballot.

Moreover, I am Facebook friends with Ben Wikler, and I asked him on one of his posts about the problem and I got no answer from him. He knows I have a widely read blog, so getting the correction to me was important.

I'm not "insisting" on anything. Correct me and show me the evidence! If you can't do that, then you are the one "insisting," because you're just saying something as pure say-so and not proving anything.

brylun said...

Are court decisions political?

Every single Dem on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and the U.S. Supreme Court voted with Dem Evers and Dem U.S. District Judge William Conley.

Every single Rep on the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court voted against Dem Evers and Dem Conley.

I was unable to find the breakdown of the 7th Circuit, but it is still controlled by the Dems and it voted with Dem Evers and Dem Conley. Can anyone shed light on composition of the 7th Circuit panel, so we can find out if the unanimous partisan political decision meme holds true there?

Temujin said...

The only way to get a modicum of security in elections is with in-person written ballot voting done during specific hours on one day. Every step taken to move away from that specification allows greater chance of fraud.

Mail in ballots, or long-distance e-voting are horrible options. Electronic ballots has always been a major question mark and anyone who owns a computer should understand why it's simply not a secure way to vote. Mail in ballots en masse invites mail in ballot harvesting. And if you don't think that would happen, you don't understand how the Democrat power groups work. They are built for this kind of stuff.

Krumhorn said...

I think our hostess is incorrect about the one year absentee voting business. Here is the WI application EL-121 to vote absentee. Number 6 in the instructions clearly offers a choice whether to vote just this once absentee or for the rest of the year or indefinitely under certain conditions.

https://elections.wi.gov/sites/elections.wi.gov/files/2020-03/EL-121%20Application%20for%20Absentee%20Ballot%20%282018-10%29.pdf

- Krumhorn

Todd said...

Browndog said...

Voting in America is not a new thing, requiring time and effort to work out the kinks.

Yet each time the democrats, and it's always the democrats, institute a new procedure to make voting easier they insist voting is even harder than ever, and more procedures are needed.

It's so absurd I wouldn't doubt if someday they propose having people come to your house and pick up you ballot.

4/7/20, 7:13 AM


Too late, ever hear of "vote harvesting"? See CA and other places...

DarkHelmet said...

For myself, I shall mask up, glove up, put on my goggles and go vote. Needs must when the devil drives.

Jersey Fled said...

Several years ago, my elderly parents told me about the "nice young lady" who came to her door, gave them an absentee ballots, helped them fill them out, and took the ballots with her so that they would not have to mail them.

On another note, my daughter is now registered to vote in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and two counties in New Jersey. She has been unsuccessful in getting any of the invalid registrations purged and has now given up. The Ohio registration might be gone now because they have made an effort to clean up their voter rolls.

But voter fraud rarely happens.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

Ann, I voted absentee. You did not have to commit to voting absentee for the entire year. You had the option of requesting ballots for the year. I indicated I would only be voting by mail for today's election.

Sebastian said...

"I did not like the procedure"

The very definition of disenfranchisement.

D.D. Driver said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Annie C. said...

Kevin said...
"Even before the virus struck, Republicans and Democrats were girding for a record number of voting rights lawsuits throughout the states..."

Can we add girding to the list of words like garnering that should be removed from use?

Other than "girding your loins", I mean, because that makes people snicker.

Today's comment brought to you by the letter "G". :-)

Greg the class traitor said...

More honest Hasen: "Sure, Democrats use absentee balloting to steal elections, but I'm an utterly dishonest pro-Democrat Party hack, so I'll make up a strawman, and beat up that while pretending the Republicans are all as malevolent as i am."

wild chicken said...

committing to voting absentee for the entire year"


Huh. In Montana you can always walk in to vite on election day instead, but the ballot would be rejected if an absentee mail from you had already been scanned in.

Nobody says no you can't vote, you can vote only absentee.

Big Mike said...

Needing ID cards?!?!? Many sounds of weeping and wailing coming from the cemeteries where the interred people can no longer vote Democrat.

Marcus Carman said...

Here is a link to the application. It's the same as the on-line application. Note that you can date specify the ballots you want mailed. I'm sorry you're so defensive. It's not a good look for you.
https://elections.wi.gov/sites/elections.wi.gov/files/2020-03/EL-121%20Application%20for%20Absentee%20Ballot%20%282018-10%29.pdf

Inga said...

“Actually, if you are on Medicare or Medicaid you are required by law to show government picture ID to see the doctor each time. Obama put this regulation in place. But you never hear of "undue burden" on the poor and aged, the group using Medicare and Medicaid, to get medical care. So, everyone on Medicare or Medicaid has gotten the needed ID and, as it's government picture ID, they could use it to vote.”

This is simply not true.

Greg the class traitor said...

I see Mark is being dishonest here, too. My response from teh old thread:

Mark said...
It's time for the courts which ruled it safe to vote to re-open hearings.


Hi Mark, are you stupid, or just dishonest?

The US Supreme Court ruled, consistent with pretty much all US Supreme Court precedent, that Federal Judges aren't allowed to muck with election rules a week before the election.

"Allowing people to continue to vote for up to a week after the "election day" is pretty much the platonic ideal of "mucking with the election rules".

Therefore, the US Supreme Court quite properly stuck down the rogue "Judge"'s ruling.

The WI Sc ruled that Tony Evers was right when he said on April 1 that he didn't have the power to unilaterally change the election date.

Neither body ruled that Wisconsin SHOULD have an election today. Both bodies, however, quite properly recognized that individual rogue actors don't have the power to screw with election rules in the week before the election.

Both bodies ruled, quite appropriately, that all out assaults on democracy by rogue nuts, be they a Governor or a "Judge", need to be struck down.

Evers issued his "Stay at home" order, and order shutting down "non-essential services", on March 25. He shut down schools on March 18.

If he was, and you Democrats were, acting in good faith about the election, then any "we need to change the election" proposals needed to happen back then.

But they didn't. You all only became "really concerned" about "social distancing + elections" when the absentee ballot return numbers started coming in, and the Republicans were significantly ahead.

So stop pretending there's even a shred of good faith on your side in this. This was about your side making an illegitimate power grab, and getting correctly rejected.

Nothing more.

Big Mike said...

@Althouse, maybe Ben Wikler didn’t respond because he thinks you’re apt to vote for Kelly?

Dan said...

Ann, Even if you received an absentee ballot you can still bring it with you and vote in person. I guess I am not really sure what you are so afraid of.

Greg the class traitor said...

Hi Professor,

Flu is seasonal. Which means that we should expect the Wuhan Flu to come back in the Fall.

So, even if your belief that you were "committed to voting absentee all year" was true, so what?

1: You're probably going to be "socially distancing" in November anyway

2: If you're not, you always have the option of filling in your absentee ballot, and bringing it to your local polling place and dropping it off on election day. heck, if you don't want to fill it out at home, I'm sure they'd let you go to a booth and fill it out there.

So what is your complaint? That they will insist of mailing you a ballot early for the November election? Do you have a problem with you mail getting stolen / lost?

MikeDC said...

It's not obvious at all that holding the election normally harms one side or the other. Republicans tend to be older, and thus more at risk to dying from COVID.

Jalanl said...

Bravo Ann!
Your actions and beliefs are perfect for a free citizen of a representative republic. You examined the trade offs and made a choice. Not only that, you freely acknowledge that you have made a choice and it is yours to make.
The foundation of a free society is people making their own choices and living with the consequences. Too many people here wanted the Governor to break the law because of their "feelings" or "fears". But once you allow that you cannot complain when your hero becomes a monster. You want Caesar then you have to live with Caligula! And for every Caesar there are 100 Caligulas!

Jamie said...

Buying spray paint. You have to have an ID to buy spray paint.

LuAnn Zieman said...

It's impossible to show you a screen shot since the page has been changed after the time expired to vote absentee. When I applied for an absentee ballot, one could choose all or one of the elections for the year. There were 3 at the time. No one had to choose to vote absentee for the duration of the year. In addition, the information one enters is sent to one's voting precinct's clerk, who sends the ballot, and to whom the ballot is returned. I am an election inspector and have taken several mandatory classes on all aspects of voting. Absentee ballots is one of the subjects required. I have no idea what government website you saw that did not include the choices.

Marcus Carman said...

If you're going to play moderating games to "prove" to your readers I didn't have the guts to respond, you're going to find yourself with a less widely read blog.

https://elections.wi.gov/sites/elections.wi.gov/files/2020-03/EL-121%20Application%20for%20Absentee%20Ballot%20%282018-10%29.pdf

Unknown said...

Re voting the entire year:. Go to myvote.wi.gov - the state site where you make your request for an absentee ballot. It gives you a choice as to which elections you are requesting an absentee ballot. Your choice, any one, any some, any all. DBK

Greg the class traitor said...

Mr. Wikler said. He later tweeted that the Supreme Court decision would 'consign an unknown number of Wisconsinites to their deaths.'"


No, Mr. Wikler, Ever's decision not to submit a change to the election when he was making his other order on March 25 "consign[ed] an unknown number of Wisconsinites to their deaths."

It's neither the role nor the responsibility of the US Supreme Court to decide what WI election dates should be. That's the job of the State government.

Ever's orders to "stay at home" and shutting down all "non-essential services" both came less than two weeks ago. Did he, at that time, serious believe the orders would be revoked before today? No.

Did he, at that time, propose a change in the upcoming, less than two weeks away, election? Such as pushing it back until the summer?

No.

He only did that when the absentee ballot return numbers started coming in, and they came in favoring the Republicans.

Any claim that this is about public safety, rather than about Democrat party power, founders on the reality that a public safety move would have happened March 25

Original Mike said...

"I have shown the screen shots I was getting and discussed the language. That showed what I was seeing at the govt website."

I'm sorry I missed this, could you please tell me which post has these screens shots and discussion?

I applied for an absentee ballot in Madison and it was VERY explicit that voting absentee in this election ONLY was an option. It was one of three choices to select. It could not have been clearer.

Krumhorn said...

By the way, while we’re on the topic of mistakes in the law, I recall reading here once a statement by our hostess that she was forced to choose another state in which she and Meade could be married because WI requires an officiant. That is not correct. WI has an old session law that provides for a marriage without an officiant. I know that because I found it in a law library in San Diego and was married under that law up in Oneida County.

Our hostess is often brilliant and remarkably insightful, but....

- Krumhorn

I'm Not Sure said...

"It's so absurd I wouldn't doubt if someday they propose having people come to your house and pick up you ballot."

Since marking a ballot could be difficult for some, a better solution is to save the trouble of all the running around to pick them up and just have those people mark ballots for everybody.

Todd said...

Temujin said...

The only way to get a modicum of security in elections is with in-person written ballot voting done during specific hours on one day. Every step taken to move away from that specification allows greater chance of fraud.

4/7/20, 7:45 AM


THIS!

Voting is a privilege and if you can not make the effort to get to the right place, at the right time, the the proper identification, you didn't want it bad enough.

I am ALSO in favor of voting "tests". You should be able to name your POTUS, Senators, Congressman, and [I will be generous here] two SCOTUS. If not, no vote for you. I am tired of ignorant fools voting for CRAP cause other ignorant fools (MSM) told them it was GREAT!

I used to also hold that you should be a net payer of taxes (i.e. not get back more than you put in (excluding SS - which should be ended). If you have NO skin in the game, why would you get a say in how OTHER people's money gets spent?

A Voice of Reason said...

I've always found 1 Kings 3:16-28 somewhat instructive regarding the motives of the side that opposes Voter ID.

Gusty Winds said...

How does moving the goal post so you can vote and count until you win qualify as a a voting right?

D.D. Driver said...

Sorry, the link on my previous post did not work. Ann, please see page 99-100 of the GAB Elections Day Manual to understand your error. Just because you receive a ballot in the mail does not mean you cannot vote in person. You still can. You just cannot vote twice.

If the absentee ballot has not been returned, the election inspectors ask the voter “Did you mail or personally deliver your absentee ballot to the clerk’s office?

i. If “yes,” the voter cannot vote at the polling place.

ii. If “no,” the voter is issued a ballot if otherwise qualified.

1. If an absentee ballot is later received for that voter, the elector’s absentee ballot would be processed as a rejected absentee ballot and the clerk contacted immediately.

Original Mike said...

I don't wish to burden our hostess. Could any commenter point me to the screen shots? I have looked in the two posts that I know of on this topic and they are either not there or I missed them (I am far from infallible). I'm assuming they are in another post (maybe a cafe?). I don't read every post; it's simply not possible.

Bruce Hayden said...

“This is a list I collated a couple of years ago, so some of them may no longer be true, and other requirements may have been added. I note that I have NEVER heard a Democrat complain about any of the following.”

Some of the items on your list aren’t quite accurate. I have spent much too much of my life, it seems, in NV casinos, but almost never gambling in them. Worked for several of the bigger chains, and lived by them. Parts of Las Vegas, the doors are wide open, and you just circulate in and out as you wish, ovine between casinos. We spent a couple days in February with her daughter and SIL in VEGAS. They stayed in a casino hotel, and we didn’t because of the cat. We popped in a couple times a day to eat, visit, and just hang out. No DL. On the flip side, outside casinos, you need a DL to use credit cards in many places. Record amount of fraud apparently, with so many transients, and people literally down on their luck.

I was going to say that I didn’t need a DL (or valid ID) to buy the subdivision in MT a week ago, but then remembered that I had to have a document notorized, and that required at least a putative ID. Of course, the requirement for ID for the RE transaction itself may have been waived, because I bought the subdivision from a bank where I have an account, that required a ID to open (very handy - you don’t need to worry about certified funds, just transfer the money in, and send an email giving the banker the right to take what he needs from the account). Probably have to have documents notarized to buy and sell houses, which is in the near future here in AZ.

Rory said...

I think that lawyers have a special duty to vote under circumstances where fortitude is required to cast a vote. Voting provides legitimacy to the law, and therefore to the profession.

Original Mike said...

I got my absentee ballot only yesterday, so I am going to take mine to a public library to get it in on time. I requested it a day before the deadline, but I imagine they're swamped with requests. My own fault for dithering.

rcocean said...

The idea that not voting by mail or having to show an ID is somehow "suppressing the vote", some great hardship, or is undemocratic is simply ridiculous. This is a naked political power grab by the Democrats who want as many illegal aliens and non-enfranchised poeple to vote as possible. AND commit voter fraud.

Is there anyone so naive they think that when Left-wing Judges strike down Voter ID laws they really believe the trash they write? Is there anyone so naive they think these constitutional "Scholars" study the issue with objectivity and decided that Vote ID is anti-minority? I find that hard to believe. They're all like the Queen in Alice in Wonderland. Execution first, trial afterwards.

Gusty Winds said...

Today I will risk my life and go to Sussex, WI City Hall and gladly vote for Justice Kelly. I will then wash my hands with the public hand sanitizer, and go across the street to the local Piggly Wiggly. They have the coldest beer cooler in town. I will buy a 12 pack of Miller Lite tall boys, and a pack of Marlboro Lights. I might even buy a steak, go home and fire up the grill.

JackWayne said...

Aloofness looks an awful lot like passivity. And fence sitting.

rcocean said...

We've had this argument it seems like a 100 times. The Center-right people bring up facts, reasons, historical evidence showing its just common sense to require Voter ID or have people show up and vote, or have sensible cut-offs for mail in ballots. And the Democrats and Left/Liberals just screech "You're Killing people!" "You hate poor and black people!" "Its too hard for them to get an ID".

I've come to the conclusion that reasoned argument is a waste of time when its about the Left gaining or maintaining power. We need to start using the weapons of mockery and contempt.

rcocean said...

If you can vote without an ID, you should be able to buy a gun, cigarettes and booze without one.

Bruce Hayden said...

“This is a list I collated a couple of years ago, so some of them may no longer be true, and other requirements may have been added. I note that I have NEVER heard a Democrat complain about any of the following.”

Thing though is that much of that list is stuff that middle class people do. The perpetual claim is that it is the poor, the homeless (domestically challenged?), etc that are the issue. SIL has a son, who just turned 21, who lives with his mother, doesn’t drive, and doesn’t have a DL. We will likely see him for Easter, and someone will have to go pick him up. He doesn’t drink or smoke either. We all think it quite weird. How do you get to the WH, Congress, or the Dems’ convention without flying? My kid got their first ID at maybe 8, in order to fly unaccompanied. Before the quarantine, they were on track for at least 50 flights, at least, this year. That boy, above, who doesn’t drive, has never been to an airport either (or in a casino, etc).

Krumhorn said...

Original Mike, here is here earlier post:

https://althouse.blogspot.com/2020/04/madison-mayor-says-absentee-ballots.html

If you check the Madison page today, it has been revised:

https://www.cityofmadison.com/clerk/documents/election/AbsenteeBallotRequest.pdf

- Krumhorn

I'm Not Sure said...

"But they didn't. You all only became "really concerned" about "social distancing + elections" when the absentee ballot return numbers started coming in, and the Republicans were significantly ahead."

There is no way absentee ballot votes should be counted before election day. Any honest person would understand why.

James Pawlak said...

1. Submitting proof-of-citizenship (eg State ID card) prevents the corruption of the
weight-and-value of good citizens (ie Who are not aloof) votes;
2. I am not sure if obtaining ONE absentee ballot commits such voters to a year's commitment to using them.

Krumhorn said...

I've always found 1 Kings 3:16-28 somewhat instructive regarding the motives of the side that opposes Voter ID.

Why? Because it’s a story about filthy whores?

That would do it for me.

- Krumhorn

purplepenquin said...

Did you hear the one about the blonde who was worried about uploading a copy of her gov't ID to gov't website?

No punchline - true story.

Dan from Madison said...

Original Mike - "I applied for an absentee ballot in Madison and it was VERY explicit that voting absentee in this election ONLY was an option. It was one of three choices to select. It could not have been clearer."

Same experience here. It took me literally one minute to apply for an absentee ballot not only for myself but for my wife too. No id required, however my address was on file with them already so perhaps this made it easier.

Even if there was an ID requirement, bfd. You use your ID everywhere to do stuff all the time.

Sorry if Ms. Althouse couldn't or didn't want to go vote in person and couldn't handle the absentee ballot request like a million plus other people. This talk of disenfranchisement is a bit overwrought.

brylun said...

Absentee ballots cannot be counted before election day, but the names and party affiliation of the absentee ballots can be recorded and analyzed as the ballots arrive.

Charlie Currie said...

How, why, is going in person to a polling place to vote currently more dangerous than going to Wal-Mart, Costco, the grocery store, liquor store, drug store or 7/11?

purplepenquin said...

I am ALSO in favor of voting "tests".

Well, that is what a lot of VoterID laws actually are...modern day literacy test, enacted for the same reason that the previous ones were. Look at how they set up the law (IE concealed carry permits acceptable - most college IDs are not) and you can see they are targeting some groups while favoring others.

BTW - It ain't The Law which says everyone has to show an ID to buy booze, cigs, pay with a check, or most of the other things on that long list that was posted earlier....rather those are almost all company policies.

Heck! You can even get on an airplane without an ID.

In the event you arrive at the airport without valid identification, because it is lost or at home, you may still be allowed to fly. The TSA officer may ask you to complete an identity verification process which includes collecting information such as your name, current address, and other personal information to confirm your identity. If your identity is confirmed, you will be allowed to enter the screening checkpoint.

Original Mike said...

Thanks, Krumhorn. Apparently, another example of government incompetence. When will people learn that we need to keep government simple and stable (i.e. last minute changes on the fly are going to result in f*uck ips)?

Rory said...

"There is no way absentee ballot votes should be counted before election day."

I don't think they have to actually count the votes. They just see where the votes are coming from, and get a pretty good idea of which way the vote is going.

Greg the class traitor said...

Not Sure said...
I said: "But they didn't. You all only became "really concerned" about "social distancing + elections" when the absentee ballot return numbers started coming in, and the Republicans were significantly ahead."

There is no way absentee ballot votes should be counted before election day. Any honest person would understand why.


They aren't counted before election day.

But who has requested an absentee ballot, who has returned their ballot, their Party registration, and what county they live in, are all matters of public record, available in real time.

The Democrats are freaking out because GOP voters and GOP counties are returning more ballots than are Democrat voters and Democrat counties. That is solely what this is about

Greg the class traitor said...

MikeDC said...
It's not obvious at all that holding the election normally harms one side or the other. Republicans tend to be older, and thus more at risk to dying from COVID.


And that probably explains why Evers didn't try to move the election back on March 25, when he issued all his other orders. Because at that time, he didn't think he knew what would better advantage the Democrats.

By early April, it appeared highly likely that those GOP voting at risk old people were getting and returning absentee ballots, and Democrat leaning voters were not. So then, only then, did Democrats "discover" that it was "killing people" to hold the election now.

I look forward to watching the vote totals being released tonight, and seeing who was right

Real American said...

Democrats tried to cancel an election they think they're gonna lose. How many people heard the governor cancelled the election but didn't hear that its back on? Certainly some people. The Democrats actions have disenfranchised more voters than anything the Republicans have done.

Calypso Facto said...

Ann said ... "uploading a photo of my driver's license to a government website"

You do know where your government-issued driver's license comes from, right?

I've seen a lot of Democrat so-called "prudent concern" for in-person voting, but virtually no discussion of the fact that the heavily Democrat counties of Dane of Milwaukee led the state in the percentage of absentee ballots requested, and that shutting down the elections would lock in this advantage, disenfranchising millions of probably older, more conservative, voters.

Skeptical Voter said...

Well we'll see which Wisconsin political party has the more kamikazes! Give me a vote even if it means death! There's a lot of nonsensical hyperbole on offer today.

This year's elections and lawsuits are going to be a political cage wrestling match--and that's sad.

Farmer said...



My wife and I live in Wisconsin and voted by absentee ballot. Committing to voting absentee all year was an option, not a requirement. In fact, IIRC, committing to all-year absentee voting required a reason. One-time absentee voting didn't.

But when I was requesting the ballot, I was confused about the same thing. I thought I had to commit to voting absentee all year. A closer reading clarified things.

I can't prove any of this, though, because I've already gotten and cast my ballot and the deadline for getting the ballots has passed anyway: https://myvote.wi.gov/en-US/VoteAbsentee

Original Mike said...

Lot of people dropping off their ballot at the library just now.

Yancey Ward said...

Increasingly, I would do away with all mail in voting. It should be done in person, with photo-ID, and an indelible ink marking your right index finger. The one other thing I would change is that voting be done over an entire weekend.

If, for any reason, you can't make it to the polls, then that is just tough shit, Sunshine. Your vote really isn't all that important in the big scheme of things.

WhoKnew said...

Thank you Greg the class traitor. As much as Democrats and the media will try to portray this as heartless Republicans killing grandma by making her go to the polls, it is a decision about whether Evers has the authority to change the date not whether it was a good idea to have in person voting. As recently as Friday, Evers recognized and publicly acknowledged that he had no such authority. Somehow he magically gained the power (despite no changes in the law or the constitution) to move the date on Monday. Now that I think about it, the weekends are a particularly fertile time for Evers. Just a couple of weeks ago on a Friday he didn't see any reason to lock down the state but on Monday it became a dire necessity. FWIW, I disagree with both of his weekend epiphanies.

Jersey Fled said...

I had to show i.d. to dump an old computer at our township's recycling center a few months ago.

This same township requires no i.d. when I vote.

Original Mike said...

"Absentee ballots cannot be counted before election day, but the names and party affiliation of the absentee ballots can be recorded and analyzed as the ballots arrive."

This shouldn't be allowed either. What possible public good does it provide?

Darkisland said...

I call bullshit on the idea that making it easier to vote will increase turnout.

Turnout in the US in presidential elections is what, around 50-60% of registered voters? Not elegible population, just the ones who registered.

Puerto Rico has perhaps the the most difficult voting in the US. Virtually no absentee ballots and only if one falls into a few categories like student, military and a few more. Not just voter ID but a voter registration ID that must be obtained in advance. Polls only open for 4 hours on election day. Paper ballots, marked with a pencil and counted by hand.

Used to be even harder. It used to be that everyone on the island got locked into a classroom to vote and didn't get out until everyone in PR had voted.

Yet we routinely have 70-80% turnout. Not 70-80% of registered voters but 70-80% of the entire 18+ population.

So bullshit on making it easier to vote. Make it harder. Make it mean something.

John Henry

Darkisland said...

Here is who can vote absentee in Puerto Rico. Note that a certification is needed that one falls into one of the categories who can vote absentee. It's a bunch of hoops to jump through.

http://ww2.ceepur.org/es-pr/EducacionyAdiestramiento/Paginas/Solicitud-de-Voto.aspx#vausente

John Henry

Greg the class traitor said...

Skeptical Voter said...
This year's elections and lawsuits are going to be a political cage wrestling match--and that's sad.

Yes, it is.

On the plus side, the US Supreme Court and the WI Supreme Court both demonstrated yesterday that they weren't just iong to let the Democrats seal the elections this year
It's good to know that

Ann Althouse said...

“ I think our hostess is incorrect about the one year absentee voting business. Here is the WI application EL-121 to vote absentee. Number 6 in the instructions clearly offers a choice whether to vote just this once absentee or for the rest of the year or indefinitely under certain conditions. ”

I was using an on line application that wasn’t like that. It did not offer a place to check that I wanted to vote absentee only on April 7.

You’re showing a mail in form that wasn’t possible to use at the end of last week when I tried to do it.

Ann Althouse said...

“ Here is a link to the application. It's the same as the on-line application. Note that you can date specify the ballots you want mailed. I'm sorry you're so defensive. It's not a good look for you.”

Wrong.

See my previous comment.

Ann Althouse said...

They screwed up the on line page they were pointing us to last week. I took screen shots, so I know I am right. The fact that this other form had more options only underscores the screw up!

rcocean said...

Some left-wing journalist with Axos just tweeted that the Dems need to pack the SCOTUS in order to "save Democracy". That's liberal fascism in a nutshell.

rcocean said...

Cant' we just have a makeup election for all the stupid/lazy people?

Ann Althouse said...

https://althouse.blogspot.com/2020/04/madison-mayor-says-absentee-ballots.html#more

There is my post with my screenshots of the screwed up website.

I was not using a mail-in application and it was too late to do that!

D.D. Driver said...

Ann, I'm ruling against on summary judgment. You lose as matter of law. It doesn't matter one lick which box you could check on an online form. Irrelevant.

Your contention is that by signing up for an absentee ballot, a voter somehow forfeits their right to vote in person for the entire year. We all know that this isn't true as a matter of election law. The checkbox is a redherring. Is it that hard to admit a mistake?

Original Mike said...

Perfect example of why not to mess with election rules.

Greg the class traitor said...

Original Mike said...
Me: "Absentee ballots cannot be counted before election day, but the names and party affiliation of the absentee ballots can be recorded and analyzed as the ballots arrive."

This shouldn't be allowed either. What possible public good does it provide?

What public good? You can check to see if someone is trying to steal your vote, by voting early in your name.

What political good? Political parties do "GoTV" (Get out The Vote) efforts. Knowing who has already voted lets them only bug the people who have not yet voted.

While I personally believe that all organized activities related to registering to vote or to vote are a bad thing, i'm in a small minority on that one. Those who think this a good they will score this as a public good.

As the laws are made by politicians, and politicians love having that information, don't expect it to ever be banned.

Greg the class traitor said...

Counterfactual:

Evers and the Democrat leaders of the State Legislature and Party could have gone to the Republicans in charge of the State Legislature, on March 24 - 25, and said "Look, we have a public health problem here, and having an election April 7 is probably a bad idea. Let's move everything to the 3rd Tuesday in June. No rules changes on early voting / absentee ballots, just time shift everything 10 weeks. We Democrats will publicly praise the change, and promise not to make or support any lawsuits for changing the voting rules for this election. Deal?"

They probably would have gotten agreement, and the election would have been moved.

But they didn't do that.

Instead, what they did was wait until a bunch of articles came out showing that the absentee ballot return data was strongly favoring the Republicans, and THEN they tried to change the rules. Not because they care about public health (they don't) but because they care about power, and this makes them look like they're going to lose it.

If you have a problem with WI having an election today, take it up with the Democrats, especially Evers. It's their choices that made it happen

I'm Not Sure said...

"They aren't counted before election day.

Good to hear that I misunderstood what people meant when they said it was becoming clear how the voting was going.

"But who has requested an absentee ballot, who has returned their ballot, their Party registration, and what county they live in, are all matters of public record, available in real time."

I can see the need to track who has returned an absentee ballot, but there is NO good reason to track and analyze any of the other stuff.

Original Mike said...

"What political good? Political parties do "GoTV" (Get out The Vote) efforts. Knowing who has already voted lets them only bug the people who have not yet voted.

While I personally believe that all organized activities related to registering to vote or to vote are a bad thing, i'm in a small minority on that one. Those who think this a good they will score this as a public good.
"

Why do you think you're in a small minority?

I'm outraged that government has any official business with political parties.

0_0 said...

If following the rules might be advantageous to the other side, then damn the rules!

Todd said...

Original Mike said...
"Absentee ballots cannot be counted before election day, but the names and party affiliation of the absentee ballots can be recorded and analyzed as the ballots arrive."

This shouldn't be allowed either. What possible public good does it provide?

4/7/20, 12:10 PM


and

Not Sure said...
"They aren't counted before election day.

Good to hear that I misunderstood what people meant when they said it was becoming clear how the voting was going.

"But who has requested an absentee ballot, who has returned their ballot, their Party registration, and what county they live in, are all matters of public record, available in real time."

I can see the need to track who has returned an absentee ballot, but there is NO good reason to track and analyze any of the other stuff.

4/7/20, 1:17 PM


Well, to understand that, you need to look to who benefits by knowing those things. History would say DNC. If they know all of the above, they know where to focus there "get out the vote", vote harvesting, the handing out of "walking around money", tracking down those elusive but ALWAYS faithful dead D voters, and how many car trunks need stuffing.

You know the old saying, "The voting an't done until the Democrats have won!"

Calypso Facto said...

Greg the class traitor said..."Instead, what they did was wait until a bunch of articles came out showing that the absentee ballot return data was strongly favoring the Republicans"

Any evidence of that, or pure speculation? Just curious.

Greg the class traitor said...

Not Sure said...
Me: "But who has requested an absentee ballot, who has returned their ballot, their Party registration, and what county they live in, are all matters of public record, available in real time."

I can see the need to track who has returned an absentee ballot, but there is NO good reason to track and analyze any of the other stuff.


1: If it's available, it's going to be analyzed

2: Voting is counted on a precinct, and then County, level. Absentee ballots are returned to the County Registrar of voters. Reporting "we have this many requests in, this many ballots sent out, and this many ballots returned" is pretty basic transparency.

3: If you're going to let people check to see if their personal absentee ballot has been received by the Registrar of voters (and you should), then you're going to have a hard time keeping it from everyone else.

4: Parties have a right to exclude non-Party members from voting in their Primaries. Thus Party registration. Even if you don't have Party registration, which Party's Primary you voted it should be a matter of public record, for transparency and tracking purposes

And at this point all the data i've mentioned is now available for analysis

Original Mike said...

"3: If you're going to let people check to see if their personal absentee ballot has been received by the Registrar of voters (and you should), then you're going to have a hard time keeping it from everyone else."

Why?

"4: Parties have a right to exclude non-Party members from voting in their Primaries."

Not in Wisconsin, they don't.

"Even if you don't have Party registration, which Party's Primary you voted it should be a matter of public record, for transparency and tracking purposes"

Your assertion doesn't make it so.

Darrell said...


Donald J. Trump
3 hrs ·
Wisconsin, get out and vote NOW for Justice Daniel Kelly. Protect your 2nd Amendment!

Greg the class traitor said...

Calypso Facto said...
Greg the class traitor said..."Instead, what they did was wait until a bunch of articles came out showing that the absentee ballot return data was strongly favoring the Republicans"

Any evidence of that, or pure speculation? Just curious.



No, I can't get Google or DuckDuckGo to return a single article about what counties are returning votes, and how many they are returning, despite reading several such articles last week.

Guess I'm going to have to get even more assiduous about saving the information our betters don't want us to have.

If you've got any contrary examples, please point me to them

Calypso Facto said...

Re: Wisconsin absentee voting, the Journal Sentinel says: "The counties that are generating a disproportionately high share of the absentee vote are concentrated in populous southern Wisconsin.

In fact, the three counties at the top of this list are the state’s biggest: very Democratic Milwaukee and Dane and very Republican Waukesha.

This is not a surprise. These three counties represent the areas with the most coronavirus cases, where voters are more motivated to vote by mail rather than in person. They may also be the three most politically mobilized counties in Wisconsin. And they historically cast more of their vote by absentee ballot than any other counties in the state.

Meanwhile, the counties that are generating a disproportionately low share of the absentee vote are concentrated in northern and western Wisconsin, especially in the Republican-leaning 16-county Green Bay media market.

What do these trends mean for the marquee April race — the state Supreme Court contest between incumbent conservative Justice Dan Kelly and his liberal challenger, Dane County Circuit Judge Jill Karofsky?

Here is one partial, hypothetical answer: if the absentee vote in every county perfectly mirrored its final vote in last year’s razor-thin, conservative vs. liberal Supreme Court race, then the regional tilt of the absentee vote reported so far would produce a narrow lead for Judge Karofsky of slightly less than one percentage point."

So, somewhat confirming MY hypothesis, the opposite of Greg's, Democrats saw they were WINNING the absentee ballot turnout, and sought to cancel in-person elections to lock in their lead.

hombre said...

Funny how Democrats/college professors always assert knowingly that voter fraud is “rare” or “very rare.” Never mind the bloated voter rolls, Democrat opposition to voter ID, hundreds of convictions nationwide or the fact that fraud is by definition concealed. They know. /Sarc

A vast majority of the convictions are Democrats BTW.

walter said...

Vicki McKenna Retweeted
BRIAN FRALEY
🥃
@Dailytakes
·
6h
Wisconsin’s Lt. Governor, everyone.
Quote Tweet
Mandela Barnes
@TheOtherMandela
· 6h
Good morning and welcome to the Shit Show! Today’s episode has been produced by the Supreme Court and directed by the incomparable Speaker and Senate Majority leader duo.
Buckle up, this one’s sure to disappoint!

Calypso Facto said...

Way to stay classy, Mr. Barnes!

The vehemence of the backlash makes me pretty sure they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

Francisco D said...

What is it about Midwest states and voting?

Growing up in Chicago, I knew about precinct captains pulling the straight D party lever a few hundred times before the polls opened, but now ..

There is the 2020 Iowa Caucus fiasco,
The 115% Obama vote in Detroit precincts (with Lil' Chuckles as a R election judge),
The Wisconsin cancellation/non-cancellation,
Al Franken's car trunk votes in Minnesota.
and so on.

I'm Not Sure said...

Greg- thanks for the detailed explanation. With regards to...

1: If it's available, it's going to be analyzed

No doubt there. My point is that a lot of this information shouldn't be available for consumption during the period that votes are being accepted.

2: Voting is counted on a precinct, and then County, level. Absentee ballots are returned to the County Registrar of voters. Reporting "we have this many requests in, this many ballots sent out, and this many ballots returned" is pretty basic transparency.

Why is this sort of transparency necessary while voting is ongoing? Surely, these counts can be reconciled when voting is done to confirm that the totals are accurate, can they not?

3: If you're going to let people check to see if their personal absentee ballot has been received by the Registrar of voters (and you should), then you're going to have a hard time keeping it from everyone else.

Even conceding the need to provide for a way to check to see if one's ballot was received, is there a reason the Registrar of voters can't refrain from allowing this info to become public? It's nobody else's business whether or not a specific individual votes. And what happens when somebody checks to see if their ballot has been received and the answer is "No"? Do they get another ballot? That would seem problematic.

4: Parties have a right to exclude non-Party members from voting in their Primaries. Thus Party registration. Even if you don't have Party registration, which Party's Primary you voted it should be a matter of public record, for transparency and tracking purposes.

For the sake of discussion, and seeing as how it's up to each political party to ensure that their candidate meets the requirements of the office they're running for, why shouldn't political parties be responsible for managing their own primaries and choosing who gets to vote in them? And why is party registration tied to voter registration? If, for example, the Democrats want to let Central America have a voice in who they run for president, that would seem to be their business and registered US voters can inform them of the wisdom of their decision in the general election. Until the actual election for a US office is held, why is the government involved at all?

Marc said...

I have to wonder why I read this comments thread: I already knew, I'm pretty sure, who was going to argue what ('knew' in a rhetorical or extenuated sense of course: it's not as if I keep a mental list of every commenter etc etc), who was going to promote the deplorable notion that we should all do mail-in ballots etc etc. I think I wanted to see if Althouse would concede that, if she had done a bit more searching about online, she might have seen her way forward with absentee voting-- it seemed to me clear enough the other day or whenever it was that a number of others had been able to accomplish that task without committing to absentee voting for the entire season or year or whatever the terms are. Maybe I simply like being able to trot out the famous line from Horace, indignor quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus, it peeves mw when worthy Homer nods off.

Ann Althouse said...

“ of law. It doesn't matter one lick which box you could check on an online form. Irrelevant. Your contention is that by signing up for an absentee ballot, a voter somehow forfeits their right to vote in person for the entire year. We all know that this isn't true as a matter of election law. The checkbox is a redherring. Is it that hard to admit a mistake? “

Did you study the screenshot and read my discussion of it? Based on what you’re writing, you did not. You’re wasting my time. Get up to speed or don’t participate.

Ann Althouse said...

The webpage I tried to use made statements that I accepted as true. Therefore I did not complete the process. If your argument is that something somewhere else negated what the govt said in its interface with the public, the state was still wrong and it wronged me in a way that stopped me from voting.

cbuds said...

What was the latest poll Biden vs Bernie? The young turn out for Bernie, and the COVID concerns are going to keep older folks home more than young folks. Was avoiding a result that calls into question the inevitability of Biden the real driver behind Evers decision?

brylun said...

Brylun: "Absentee ballots cannot be counted before election day, but the names and party affiliation of the absentee ballots can be recorded and analyzed as the ballots arrive."

Original Mike: "This shouldn't be allowed either. What possible public good does it provide?"

As the absentee ballots arrive, the names are checked against the voter rolls, so that the voter cannot show up at the polling place and vote twice. The party affiliation of the voter is public record, and the parties can get lists of their voters for purposes of signing designating petitions.

So, all you need is the list of absentee voters. Then you check the list of names against the party affiliation, and you get a pretty good idea as to the outcome of the absentee vote by this process. People usually vote, as an aggregate, in accord with their party affiliation.

I can't prove that Governor Evers changed his mind about holding the election based on these absentee returns, but it is very curious that on March 25th he was ok with going ahead with the election, then President Trump endorsed Kelly, then the absentee votes started to come in, and then Evers changed his mind. Very curious...


Original Mike said...

But brylun, you have not stated "the public good". In fact, whether it was your intent or not, you've stated a good case for ending this practice.

"The party affiliation of the voter is public record,"

WHY? It shouldn't be.

Original Mike said...

Government officials should not be making policy decisions based on party. You can't stop them from trying, so deprive them of the data needed to act. It's none of their damn business.

I'm Not Sure said...

"The party affiliation of the voter is public record,"

WHY? It shouldn't be.


Couldn't agree more. The only thing the government needs is confirmation that a person is eligible to vote. That's it. Period. End of story.

Terry Ott said...

Voted today at South Division HS in Milwaukee. Had very low expectations, but came away mpressed with the organization, staffing, virus-ratlated safety precautions, and (most amazingly) the efficiency of the process despite the hundreds of voters passing though during my time there. Upon leaving I thanked one of the overseers, adding, “whomever was in charge of deigning and executing this on short notice should be immediately put in charge of the DOT Drivers Licensing facilities”. he smiled and said, “Ya think?” Regret that I didn’t think to time it, but I’d guesstimate I was into the parking area and back out on my drive homei n something like 30 minutes. I was thinking on the drive over there with my 2 dogs the likelihood of my enduring the process was 30% versus 70% that I’d bail out and inatead take the pups on an extra long walk in a park I like nearby. I did both as it turned out!

paminwi said...

“......the state was still wrong and it wronged me in a way that stopped me from voting”
NO, NO, NO.
The state did not stop you from voting.
YOU stopped yourself from voting.
No one else is responsible but you.
I have been a poll worker in various municipalities and locations within those municipalities for 10 years.
Even if you receive an absentee ballot and you physically go to the polling location to vote, you vote in the normal way. You show your ID, sign the book and get your ballot.
No one questions you about your absentee ballot.
Now, if you tried to do both we would find out.
Poll workers who are responsible for processing absentee ballots MUST take your ballot envelope with your name on it to the people who have “the book” you sign. If you have already signed the book because you came in person your absentee ballot is marked as invalid. And put in a sealed bag with the number of voter you were in person marked on the outside of the envelope.
There are many reasons an absentee ballot can be invalid, from not having signature, the witness signature, the ballot envelope not sealed, multiple votes in a race that can have only one vote (versus say a school board election where the instructions may say vote for two people in this race), I could go on and on.
But NEVER, EVER, EVER ARE YOU DENIED THE RIGHT TO VOTE IN PERSON.
For goodness sake, even when you don’t have your ID you can provisionally vote. (That’s another whole process)
Our hostess will never admit she is wrong, but wrong she is.
After 10 years of working the polls I have seen people with her obstinacy and you just know you will never get through their mindset.
I just follow the rules (and trust me there is a book about 3 inches thick) that has every damn situation explained and how you resolve the issue.
But, I will say processing absentee ballots is a time consuming, pain in the ass, but every poll worker I have ever worked with took their responsibility very seriously.

Terry Ott said...

Charlie Currie said...How, why, is going in person to a polling place to vote currently more dangerous than going to Wal-Mart, Costco, the grocery store, liquor store, drug store or 7/11?

Exactly. And to illustrate that point, I’ll mention today’s experience at my polling place. Measures were taken to ensure the protection of all in-person voters, and done to a T. Had they not been, I’d have left staightaway — for I am in age 77, diabetic, and I smoke cigars. The “health” question was asked at the door and there was a voting place for people who said they were any kind of ill, or seemed overly aged or infirm, away from we others. Hand sanitizer was given at the door, coming and going. The line to move through the process was marked with “X” every six feet and everyone stopped at the next X until the line advanced. Where the line snaked around to where another line in the opposite direction appeared alongside, there was significant space between the two lines. Every single person “got it” and we were all being observed, just in case. ID was slid across the table to the clerk on a hard plastic “paddle”, and was left untouched while the voter was confirmed using a clerk’s tablet computer on the other side of the table Then ID was passed back to the voter on the paddle. I was issued a pen, courtesy of the City, which was not returned as a precaution. Before entering the ballot-marking booth, a poll worker sprayed it (after each voter) and wiped the workspace down, vigorously, before waving the next voter in. I, and what seemed like a large majority, wore a mask. Many wore gloves. Nobody that I saw conversed while in the line, other than to be directed by a poll worker (at a safe distance). I could not have felt safer, especially not at the kinds of retail places Charlie mentions in his comment. It was most impressive.

Beaumont said...

Fear or worry seemed to be at least one of the themes weaving its way through Ms.Althouse's post. I wish you would elaborate on what informed your political stance of aloofness. We know it was not fear because you specifically excluded it ss an underlying factor.

As to evaluating whether some people's anxieties of voting in person because of the risks of contracting or spreading Covid -19 were irrational or not, it may be interesting to look at how the actual Covid-19 numbers in Wisconsin and specific locales over the next month stack up with some of the Covid-19 modeled projections employed by various interested parties (for example the Trump administration (and some others) have referenced the "Chris Murray model". https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/wisconsin

Not a perfect test of the relative safety or dangers of voting in the age of Corona, but interesting nonetheless.

PhilD said...

" Of course, he's just trying to say what is always said on this subject, that making voting easier also makes it less secure "

I'm Flemish and we have compulsory voting. Despite that our system is secure enough while our, what should I call it, vote-handicapped seem to be able to vote nonetheless.

So I would call those who 'always say what is said' frauds interested in keeping your third world electoral system corrupt.

Rusty said...

purplepenquin said...
I am ALSO in favor of voting "tests".

Well, that is what a lot of VoterID laws actually are...modern day literacy test, enacted for the same reason that the previous ones were. Look at how they set up the law (IE concealed carry permits acceptable - most college IDs are not) and you can see they are targeting some groups while favoring others.

BTW - It ain't The Law which says everyone has to show an ID to buy booze, cigs, pay with a check, or most of the other things on that long list that was posted earlier....rather those are almost all company policies.

Heck! You can even get on an airplane without an ID.

In the event you arrive at the airport without valid identification, because it is lost or at home, you may still be allowed to fly. The TSA officer may ask you to complete an identity verification process which includes collecting information such as your name, current address, and other personal information to confirm your identity. If your identity is confirmed, you will be allowed to enter the screening checkpoint.

So, you still have to prove you are who you are. You have to have some sort of proof.
Well. I'm from Chicago. You wanna talk about vote fraud?

Marcus Carman said...

In the end, I did the work and due diligence. I voted, I stayed safe and I'm more than satisfied.