Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on $11,600

1

Good I'm glad they did. Better that than disenfranchise people. And a better use of money than a lot of other King County pork barrel and feel good projects.

Posted by wf | January 2, 2007 3:40 PM
2

Wish I had known that then. I'd have saved myself a stamp.

Posted by Anonymous Coward | January 2, 2007 3:44 PM
3

In Canada the Post Office pays for it and they even come door to door and make sure everyone is registered to vote, unlike our haphazard undemocratic system.

Why should we pay postage to vote?

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 2, 2007 3:44 PM
4

I think King County Elections should just pay the postage on all the ballots. I know it is not cheap, but voting is one thing really that important.

Posted by StrangerDanger | January 2, 2007 3:45 PM
5

I don't mind for now, but as soon as the vote is mail-in only (is that 2008 in King County?) postage should definitely be pre-paid.

Posted by DOUG. | January 2, 2007 3:48 PM
6

As I recall the extra stamp bought us a long list of uncontested non partisan races. All that extra money paid for the formality of voting for unopposed candidates. (Note that write in votes do not count if the candidate is not registered as such for the election. So these unconstested races were totally pointless.)

Posted by kinaidos | January 2, 2007 3:49 PM
7

how much do they spend setting up polling places all over the place, including maintaining the equipment and keeping track of all the ballots? Just go to a postage-paid vote-by-mail system where everyone just fills out their ballot at home and sends it in. I bet that would be cheaper, but even if it's not it would make voting easier.

Posted by charles | January 2, 2007 3:55 PM
8

Postage on mail in balloting is nothing more that a de facto poll tax --- the county needs to pay ALL costs of elections, printing, postage, counting, etc., from the taxes every single one of us - voter and non voter alike - pay so amply.

Period.

Posted by George | January 2, 2007 3:59 PM
9

C'mon people. There's no way you got to the polling place for under 39 cents. Just put another damn stamp on it, King County doesn't own the post office.

Posted by Dougsf | January 2, 2007 4:03 PM
10

As the son of a postal worker, I heartily applaud large ballots and the extra postage they require.

I encourage all citizens to launch initiative campaigns in hopes of fulfilling my dream of an $8 postage due ballot.

Posted by Seth | January 2, 2007 4:08 PM
11

Kinaidos,
Also on the ballot were 10 wordy city charter amendments. There was one important one in there that gave the city council a role in department head appointments. It was a nice check on the mayor's power.

Posted by Josh Feit | January 2, 2007 4:11 PM
12

@9. Thousands of people who vote in the city of Seattle can WALK to their polling places. I got there for nothing, on foot.

Posted by DOUG. | January 2, 2007 4:30 PM
13

Other Doug... you're time must have been worth at least the price of a stamp, which I think is currently the best bargain in America (postage, not your time).

I'd love to see postage paid, mail-only elections (of course with the option of voting in person at limited locations - libraries? - for those select, address challenged few), but in the meantime, King County probably has better things to do with $11k. That could have bought A LOT gas-powered of leave blowers.

Posted by Dougsf | January 2, 2007 4:41 PM
14

It shouldn't cost anything to vote, period.

And one's vote shouldn't be thrown in the trash because one purposefully or accidentally failed to put the postage on the envelope.

I'm amazed at how more and more open people have become in this country to the idea that fundamental rights are only ok if they aren't too inconvenient for the government and the oligarchs.

What's wrong with having people pay a fee at the polling station or to the USPS to help defray the costs of voting? It's a poll tax!

What's next? Having to pay to register as a citizen, so one can avail oneself of the Bill of Rights?

#3 Hit it on the nose. When you compare our voting and our healthcare system to places like Canada, we look more and more like a thugocracy banana-republic everyday.

Posted by mirror | January 2, 2007 4:45 PM
15

P.S.
Citizens! Stop hatin' on yourselves! Dare to demand and expect a just society instead of wringing your hands and saying, "... if it's ok with you sir and it doesn't inconvenience the smooth workings of the way things are..." Sheesh.

Posted by mirror | January 2, 2007 4:51 PM
16

I agree, just sayin'...

Being the progressives that we San Franciscan's are, in Mayoral elections we also have the option of dumping our ballot directly into the Bay ourselves.

Posted by Dougsf | January 2, 2007 5:02 PM
17

The $11,600 is a drop in the bucket compared to the millions the county is spending to force everybody to vote by mail.

Poll voting is less expensive and more reliable.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky | January 2, 2007 5:19 PM
18

Which method would deliver a higher turnout? (honest question, not a statement)

Posted by Dougsf | January 2, 2007 5:26 PM
19

If we in Oregon have learned anything from our own vote-by-mail system, it's that mail-in ballots are cheaper and increase voter turnout.

Posted by Oregonian | January 2, 2007 5:49 PM
20

"mail-in ballots...increase voter turnout"
Ok, but what sort of voters are you turning out? I say there is no substitute for showing up at your polling place on election day and casting your ballot, in person, amongst your fellow citizens. Unless you have a valid reason for being away all day on election day you should not request an absentee ballot or vote on line.

Posted by steady | January 2, 2007 7:03 PM
21

If the TV stations can clean up with their outrageous ad rates for the stupid political commercials, the least the elections board can do is have the post office (or the county or whoever) pay for postage on the ballots.

Interestingly enough, however, the postman told me that ballots without sufficient postage would be returned. Was there perhaps varying degrees of enforcement?

Posted by catalina vel-duray | January 2, 2007 7:57 PM
22

Mail in voting up turn out no question. Which is why Republicans hate it. Rich, white people find it easier to vote on a rainy Tuesday in November, while working families put their energy into just getting by. At least let them mail in their ballots. What are the Republicans afraid of?

Posted by Strangerdanger | January 2, 2007 9:47 PM
23

Unless you have a valid reason for being away all day on election day you should not request an absentee ballot or vote on line.

A Diebold allergy, for example.

Posted by rodrigo | January 2, 2007 10:41 PM
24

Every person I know uses the mail in ballot.... young, old, lame and spry.

And all agree that it gets them to vote more often and with more skill. You have time to research issues and candidates, like judges, and therefore cast your ballot as a much better informed voter.

Will never use the walk in system again.

Conservative are called that because they cling to the old and stale, resent change and new ideas, and show no flexibility.

And they like low turnout of mainly older upper class white people.....with money, connections and great auras of conceit.

Three cheers for the masses voting a very informed ballot election after election.....by mail .....and the county paying for all postage involved.

Posted by sammy | January 2, 2007 11:43 PM
25

reply to Steady - steadily clinging to the past ----------

in Washington state there is no need to be ill or insane or disorganized to vote by mail ........ you missed 15 years of comments and discussion on this issue

and it is called vote by mail, one of two choices, open to any voter ....same ballot, mere delivery system .... drop it in the box or mail it ... affects nothing else ... just mechanics of delivery

all that old illness and etc. stuff was thrown out many years ago .... by the way, I mix with fellow voters from my precinct every day, call them my neighbors

I like your term fellow citizens and that is why I want more of them to vote every election ..... something to do with a really functioning democracy as well

Posted by sidney | January 2, 2007 11:58 PM
26

"Poll voting is less expensive and more reliable."

Anything to back this up, Stefan?

Posted by Sean | January 3, 2007 12:37 AM
27

Sean: quite a lot to back it up. Visit my blog and search the archives for "Mail Ballot Horror Show", for starters.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky | January 3, 2007 10:01 AM
28

What Stefan doesn't tell you is that he and his right wing pals don't like all mail ballots because they increase turnout in voting. Republicans don't like the turnout high because that generally doesn't favor big business, gay bashers, or those who play the race card.

Watch for Stefan to increase the misleading rhetoric about all mail balloting in 2007...then ask yourself why the state of Oregon and 34 of 39 counties in the state do quite well with it.

Posted by c'mon stefan | January 3, 2007 10:42 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).