Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday April 28 2018, @08:34AM   Printer-friendly
from the a-"little-hiccup" dept.

The Center for American Progress reports

As residents of Arizona's eighth congressional district cast ballots in a special election to replace former Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) in Congress, roughly 140,000 of them may be unaware they are eligible to vote because they did not receive the ID card the county is required to send them after they register.

According to the Arizona Republic, Maricopa County officials have not sent all voters the cards they can use to cast a ballot under Arizona's voter ID law because of an issue with the company used to print the materials. The paper reports that just 60,000 ID cards have been mailed to people who recently registered or changed their registration, while about 140,000 have not been sent.

[...] Arizona was one of the first states in the country to enact a non-photo voter ID law when a ballot measure was approved by voters[1] in November 2004. Under the law, the state must take steps to ensure that all eligible voters have an acceptable form of ID. According to the secretary of state's office[PDF], "a county recorder must issue a voter ID card to any new registrant or an existing registrant who updates his or her name, address, or political party preference".

But because of an error by the company used to print the ID cards, they have not been mailed out since December.

Although these citizens could provide other forms of ID at the polls, some voters told the Arizona Republic they're concerned that less informed voters may not realize they are registered without the card.

[...] During the presidential primary in March 2016, some Maricopa County voters waited in line for up to five hours to cast a ballot. The chaos led to an investigation by the Department of Justice and numerous lawsuits, including one filed by the Democratic National Committee.

Before the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, Arizona was required to pre-clear any changes to its voting law with the DOJ.

[1] Requires cookies


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by FatPhil on Saturday April 28 2018, @10:45AM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Saturday April 28 2018, @10:45AM (#672964) Homepage
    Well, there certainly was a large swing towards the Dems (NYT source):
    """
    Debbie Lesko Republican 91,390 52.6%
    Hiral Tipirneni Democrat 82,318 47.4

    173,708 votes, 100% reporting (143 of 143 precincts)

    The former Arizona state senator Debbie Lesko fended off an energetic Democratic challenge to win the special congressional election on Tuesday, according to The Associated Press.

    Tuesday’s special election in Arizona’s Eighth Congressional District, in the conservative suburbs outside Phoenix, revealed the depth of Republicans’ political challenges in 2018. Ms. Lesko was favored to win over Hiral Tipirneni, a Democrat and emergency room doctor, in a district that supported Donald J. Trump in 2016 by more than 20 points.
    """

    A 20 point lead would mean a 7.5% swing - is that more or less than you'd expect given that Trump's the 2nd worst president of all time?

    Looking at the 2016 election (https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona%27s_8th_Congressional_District_election,_2016), if I've understood your utterly utterly baroque system, it seems that the previous results/turnout were this:
    """
    Republican Trent Franks 68.5% 204,942
    Green Mark Salazar 31.4% 93,954
    """
    Which implies:
    (a) voter turnout is massively down
    (b) there was a 37 point lead, not a 20 point lead, and therefore there was a 16% swing.

    So this result turned massively towards the Dems, and clearly voter turnout has been affected by something (looking at the news, shrugging, and saying "clearly democracy has failed in this country"?), so *without the actual data*, is seems not unlikely that the Dems (who might be more motivated) benefitted from the fuck-up more than the Pugs.

    Very much ISO real data please!
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3