The Pennsylvania Elections Department has sent this 2-page letter to county boards of election, suggesting that the counties permit voters at the polls to wear T-shirts and buttons that mention candidates. Thanks to Daily Kos for the link.
The Pennsylvania Elections Department has sent this 2-page letter to county boards of election, suggesting that the counties permit voters at the polls to wear T-shirts and buttons that mention candidates. Thanks to Daily Kos for the link.
It’s so nice to know that PA will recognize my First Amendment rights to wear what I want to when I vote.
I think I’ll order that Nader shirt now.
Too bad that New Mexico didn’t have this same ruling, as a few years ago a couple of Libertarian Party activists were arrested there for wearing Libertarian Party clothing in a polling place.
Passive electioneering, to which the letter referenced above refers, is a tricky concept. No right is absolute, and the exercise of any right potentially conflicts with the exercising on the part of someone else with a different right, i.e. your right to freedom of speech conflicting with everyone else’s right to a free and fair election not tainted by the possibility of voters being influenced or pressured inside a polling place or even at the voting machines.
Precisely because no right is absolute, I doubt in the town that you live in that you have the right to “wear what you want to” when you go to school, or at your place of employment……or anywhere at all, if what you want to wear is, for example, a shirt that says “I will pay you to assassinate the president.” or “The person wearing this shirt advocates and encourages you to participate in the violent overthrow of the United States government.”
Municipalities nationwide (except now, apparently, in Pennsylvania) place restrictions on how close to polling places candidates or their representatives may campaign (within 100 ft., etc.). Wearing buttons or T-shirts, carrying signs, etc. is routinely classified within the category of “electioneering.” Perhaps the Supreme Court will eventually cast that aside, but it’s unlikely they will ever cast aside the concept that no right is utterly unrestricted, or unrestrictable.
When I was in Hawaii in 2000 I took a course to be election poll worker. We were shown dentist-like gowns that were to be given to to voters to wear over their t-shirts. We were also told to park our cars where if stickers were on the car, they couldn’t be seen.
This left the impression that at that time Hawaii was strict about all of this. The rules on this could have changed since I left six years ago.
David Gaines Says:
“Passive electioneering, to which the letter referenced above refers, is a tricky concept. No right is absolute”
Yes, all our rights are absolute. A libertarian is supposed to understand this. Otherwise, just change the name to “prililege”, from “right” and you’ve got your non-absolute version.
The examples about work and school are ridiculous, since (assuming you’re talking about private sector schools and work) that represents contractual agreements and has nothing to do with what you have a “right” to do.
“The person wearing this shirt advocates and encourages you to participate in the violent overthrow of the United States government.â€
Cool shirt. What’s wrong with this one? How much trouble should Revere, Paine and Adams have gotten into for wearing their “The person wearing this shirt advocattes and encourages you to participate in the violent overthrow of the British throne” jacket?
“Municipalities nationwide (except now, apparently, in Pennsylvania) place restrictions on how close to polling places candidates or their representatives may campaign (within 100 ft., etc.). ”
Uh, not really. At least not consistently. They arrest you for wearing a shirt (like they did me) but say “have a nice day” as someone drives away from the handicapped spot at the polling place in a car with an “Obama” bumper sticker on it? Just shows it’s all BS and, as usual, an example of government “law” erratically and discriminatingly enforced as to make it meaningless to me.
But…as long as you’re going to have elections, who the HELL does it hurt to campaign? What difference does 100 feet make? At LP conventions, I’m casting my vote for president as people ALL AROUND ME (quite literally) are wearing t-shirts, carrying signs, handing out literature, and I never felt threatened for my life. I STILL would rank murderers and rapists ahead of t-shirt wearers at voting locations as far as societal predators are concerned. But that’s just me.
“When I was in Hawaii in 2000 I took a course to be election poll worker. We were shown dentist-like gowns that were to be given to to voters to wear over their t-shirts. We were also told to park our cars where if stickers were on the car, they couldn’t be seen.”
Did it work? Did it prevent someone from catching a dreadful, deadly election-related disease? I hope voters wore their gas masks too.
“just change the name to “prililegeâ€, ”
oops, meant “privilege”
“We were also told to park our cars where if stickers were on the car, they couldn’t be seen.”
I’m assuming you’re referring to election poll workers’ cars. Which I can KIND OF see (but not really); however, regular voters have bumper stickers on their cars too. My guess is that, in Hawaii, in order to deal with this, officials would have to swarm cars as they came into the parking lot, rifle through them to make sure there are no pieces of literature lying on the dash or signs in the back seat, and spray paint (black, preferably) over any political bumper stickers, before the car is safe to enter the parking lot. I never thought of it this way, but maybe this kind of “election defumigation” isn’t such a bad idea. Maybe after that pilot program is successful, it can be tried at schools and churches too.
what will happen, when a voter e.g. wears a football or hockey jersey which by accident displays the same surname as of one of the candidates? … and what about a tattoo… 😉
Gary Fincher, maybe you should move to Pennsylvania now. You would be safe at the polling places …
…and, for a job, you could work full time to register voters so the Pennsylvania LP could get permanent party status.
Hey, PA LP, why not set up a program for Gary. Monthly donations could fund him. I’ll chip in every month.
You would have LPHQ calling you to demand that the voter registrations get burned, like they did with signatures in Massachusetts.
After such disasterous petitioning failures in West Virginia, Connecticut and Maine, I doubt the LP would have the balls to get in the way of the good LP petitioners in the near future.
Of course, the good LP petitioners need to show some loyalty as well, and stop double boarding for other parties.
So, come on Pennsylvania LP. Let’s get the voter registration drive on the road.
After such disasterous petitioning failures in West Virginia, Connecticut and Maine, I doubt the LP would have the balls to get in the way of the good LP petitioners in the near future.
Don’t doubt it. They have already instructed the AZLP not to hire those same petitioners on a long term voter registration project.
Why would PA be different?
paul Says:
September 26th, 2008 at 11:12 am
“After such disasterous petitioning failures in West Virginia, Connecticut and Maine, I doubt the LP would have the balls to get in the way of the good LP petitioners in the near future.
Don’t doubt it. They have already instructed the AZLP not to hire those same petitioners on a long term voter registration project.
Why would PA be different?”
If this is true, please let me know where I can get more info. They should have learned their lesson. You say they did this in the last week or two, since the failure in CT became apparent?
(I predicted the CT failure by the way, as soon as I heard the number of sigs collected. It was the same as 1984 when Marshall Fritz failed in the CT ballot drive for Bergland.)
I will be happy to send money to a state doing voter registration for LP ballot access. If the National LP is banning good petitioners (or LP voter registrars) then I’ll send money to the state LP instead of to NLP.
We need to build our party and stay loyal to our people: keep our pros working year round as much as possible for LP ballot access.
Our pros need to stay loyal to the LP and NOT help other parties.
You can call Jake about it. He’s given out his number on here before, so I won’t be doing anything to invade his privacy by telling you it is 907-250-5503.
Does anyone have Fincher’s number?
Yes, he put it out on the blogs also.
207-450-5117