1. what is wrong with straidht ticket voting>

2. It discriminates against independent candidates.

3. A straight-ticket option doesn’t *have* to discriminate against independent candidates. It also doesn’t have to discriminate (or at least not much) against turnout in non-partisan races, or even smaller parties with fewer candidates on the ballot. In fact, Michigan law at least theoretically protects voters’ rights to choose those options.

   As the LWVMI explains here:

   http://www.lwvmi.org/voterpower/faq.html

   if you vote each office separately and don’t use the straight-ticket option at all, we call that a *mixed* ticket. But you can also mark the straight-ticket option as a general rule and then override it in individual races — *that’s* what is called here a *split* ticket.

   Michigan law does allow both split and mixed tickets — but apparently not all local election officials know that. (Or at least not all of them will admit it. While I was a Green Party candidate, I heard some such officials tell people their ballots might not be counted if they split their tickets. . . .)

   It is also worth noting that the act Richard refers to, which was put to a referendum in 2002, would have affected a few more things than just straight-ticket voting. Here’s the official description that was on the ballot:

   “A REFERENDUM ON PUBLIC ACT 269 OF 2001 — AN ACT TO AMEND CERTAIN SECTIONS OF MICHIGAN ELECTION LAW

   Public Act 269 of 2001 would:

   —Eliminate “straight party” vote option on partisan general election ballots.
   —Require Secretary of State to obtain training reports from local election officials.
   —Require registered voters who do not appear on registration list to show picture identification before voting a challenged ballot.
   —Require expedited canvass if presidential vote differential is under 25,000.
   —Require ballot counting equipment to screen ballots for voting errors to ensure the accurate tabulation of absentee ballots. Permit voters in polls to correct errors.
   —Provide penalties for stealing campaign signs or accepting payment for campaign work while being paid as a public employee to perform election duties.

   Should this law be approved?

   Yes __________ No __________”

   The above language is shown below the Michigan Legislature entry for MCL 168.795c — which is the point in the Election Code where split and mixed tickets are mentioned together by name. See here:

   http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-168-795c

   Splitting a ticket is also explained somewhat in MCL 168.782b:

   http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-168-782b

   Mind you, we can’t split tickets in the primary here. And candidates for governor and lieutenant governor run as a team — like President and VP — so we can’t split our votes for those teams. But if our state law were properly known and enforced, the straight-ticket option would simply be a convenience for the voter. There would still be more convenience for voters supporting bigger parties, true — but convenience is not to be sneezed at. Bear in mind also that MCL 168.786 lets “election inspectors” throw voters out of the voting booth after two minutes(!):

   http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-168-786

4. RICHARD i know of many cases where ind candidates win with straight ticket voting. i also know many party faithful that dont always vote a straight ticket.

5. RICHARD PLEASE LIST THE STATES THAT ALLOW STRAIGHT TICKET VOTING

6. Based on my memory, it is Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, West Virginia. That list is incomplete. I think there are 14 states.

7. P.R. and nonpartisan A.V. — NO primaries and NO straight ticket voting.

8. THANKS FOR THE INFO RICHARD

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.