Michigan is one of a minority of states that still uses a straight-ticket device on general election ballots. Such devices permit a voter to make one mark on a ballot, so that the voter has then automatically voted for each of that party’s nominees. Straight-ticket devices make it possible for a voter to vote in all partisan offices without even looking to see who is running.
The Detroit Free Press of April 23 has this op-ed, defending the straight-ticket device. It is by Mark Brewer, chair of the Michigan Democratic Party. The op-ed says that 40% of Michigan’s voters use the device.
Lots of Donkey ROBOT voters in many / some States ???
P.R. and A.V.
Pingback: 2BASnobs Wine Tasting Kit. |
I could have sworn that John Engler did away with that when he was governor some fifteen years ago. Did Michigan change their minds, or did their legislature somehow veto it?
The Democratic Party of Michigan sponsored a referendum, and the voters put the straight-ticket device back into the law.
Brewer’s op-ed is in response to Brian Dickerson’s column on the subject last week, which was the subject of an earlier thread here:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2010/04/18/detroit-free-press-column-condemns-straight-ticket-device/
As I mentioned in that earlier thread, the referendum was over a bill that covered many other issues as well as straight-ticket voting. (One of the other issues was a lesser form of photo ID, in fact.)
If it is true that there would be longer lines with removal of the straight-ticket option, that implies that election officials are provisioning polling places based on past voting practices. “Those people tend to vote straight ticket so we don’t need as many voting machines to keep lines mooving,” or “These other people tend to pick and choose so they need more machines.” Voters at the former area may feel pressure to vote straight ticket so as to not produced lines.
Alternatively, election officials are provisioning polling places based on the number of voters. In straight-ticket areas voters are able to vote quickly and leave. In pick-and-choose areas there would be more likelihood of voters having to wait in line. Some might be discouraged and leave, others might feel coerced to vote straight ticket.
Pingback: Central Michigan University’s Dan LeFevour, Antonio Brown and Bryan Anderson ready to feel the draft
Brewer’s op-ed is in response to Brian Dickerson’s column on the subject last week, which was the subject of an earlier thread here:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2010/04/18/detroit-free-press-column-condemns-straight-ticket-device/
As I mentioned in that earlier thread, the referendum was over a bill that covered many other issues as well as straight-ticket voting. (One of the other issues was a lesser form of photo ID, in fact.)
@6:
==
Well, there is a standard in Michigan state statute — MCL 168.796a, to be exact:
/=====================================================
. . . As a minimum for each election, the board
of election commissioners shall provide at least
1 voting station for each 400 registered voters
in each precinct through August 31, 1998 and
at least 1 voting station for each 300 registered
voters on and after September 1, 1998. . . .
=====================================================/
(BTW, Michigan is all optical-scan, except for a few DREs for ADA access/etc. — or at least that was the plan adopted.)
OTOH, some places do have a few more stations than that minimum. It might be interesting to study how many there are where, so we can see how far those places can go to alleviate that maximum level of class-size-like polling-place crowding.
And it may be important to the voters themselves to know — because another section of Michigan’s Election Code, MCL 168.786, at least theoretically sets the other parameter in the equation:
/=====================================================
. . . A voter shall not have the right to remain
within the voting machine booth longer than 2 minutes
and if he or she refuses to leave it after the lapse
of 2 minutes, the voter shall be removed by the
inspectors. However, the inspectors may grant the
voter further time in their discretion.
=====================================================/
So now let’s do the math. The polls here are open 7am to 8pm — that’s 13 hours or 780 minutes. If a precinct has the minimum of 1 voting station per 300 registered voters, they each can average 780/300 = 2.6 minutes in the “booth”. That’s not leaving much time for one voter to leave and another one to come in, is it? . . . not to mention that there do tend to be peaks and valleys in turnout throughout a voting day. And the ballots here can sometimes get pretty long. . . .
#9 If they are using optical scan equipment, then a “voting station” is just a box-like structure so people can’t see how the voter is voting, and a hard surface to vote on. If the town were footing the bill, they could use some cardboard boxes and folding tables. If you can get state or federal funding, you could probably spend a few $100 for the fold-up, height adjustable Super Duper Deluxe, made with aluminum tubing and fiberboard or plastic.
The version shown on the SOS is aluminum and plastic and looks like it folds up to around suitcase size with a built in carrying handle. Michigan Counties use 3 different types of optical scan equipment.
Actually running the ballot through the scanner should take less than 30 seconds, even for someone who is totally unfamiliar with doing so. And it shouldn’t matter whether it is straight ticket or not.
It appears that the key part of 168.796a is “… shall provide a sufficient number of voting stations needed to ensure the orderly conduct of the election taking into consideration the projected turnout, the length of the ballot, and the number of voters …”
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/sos/XIV_Establishing_Voting_Precincts_and_Polling_Places_266021_7.pdf
The voting station minimum provided above must be exceeded when and where appropriate
[Italics in original]
So there should be no reason for the lines of the type described by the Democratic chair unless the election officials are considering the number of straight-ticket voters in their consideration of the length of the ballot.
#9 If they are using optical scan equipment, then a “voting station” is just a box-like structure so people can’t see how the voter is voting, and a hard surface to vote on. If the town were footing the bill, they could use some cardboard boxes and folding tables. If you can get state or federal funding, you could probably spend a few $100 for the fold-up, height adjustable Super Duper Deluxe, made with aluminum tubing and fiberboard or plastic.
The version shown on the SOS is aluminum and plastic and looks like it folds up to around suitcase size with a built in carrying handle. Michigan Counties use 3 different types of optical scan equipment.
Actually running the ballot through the scanner should take less than 30 seconds, even for someone who is totally unfamiliar with doing so. And it shouldn’t matter whether it is straight ticket or not.
It appears that the key part of 168.796a is “… shall provide a sufficient number of voting stations needed to ensure the orderly conduct of the election taking into consideration the projected turnout, the length of the ballot, and the number of voters …”
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/sos/XIV_Establishing_Voting_Precincts_and_Polling_Places_266021_7.pdf
The voting station minimum provided above must be exceeded when and where appropriate
[Italics in original]
So there should be no reason for the lines of the type described by the Democratic chair unless the election officials are considering the number of straight-ticket voters in their consideration of the length of the ballot.
[…] Ballot Access News » Blog Archive » Michigan Democratic Party … […]
Pingback: living room furniture chair | Kimberley St. Pierre