RE: Mail In Ballot problems...

["Paul Tiger" <tigerp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'd love to know where this information about overweight ballots comes from?
All the ballots should weigh the same. The ballots are the same physical
dimensions, even while they may have different things printed on the. Every
voter in BC only got one ballot card, it doesn't matter how many issues
existed. The ballots weigh the same.
Now there where a few idiots that enclosed notes: love letters; commentary;
and hate mail. If those ballots weighed more it certainly was not the fault
of the clerk.

One of the first rejected ballot envelopes to come through the process was
covered with scribbles; had no ballot inside (you could tell by the feel);
had a sheet of lined notebook paper inside with magic marker all over it.
There was a circle around the stamp with a line to a comment that said "Poll
Tax". It was entirely amusing, but since it had no signature on the outside
it was never opened. Too bad, because it was fun and I would have liked to
read the rest of the note inside it.

Back on topic: I my mind the USPS was the biggest bottleneck and pain in the
ass. Before the mailing of the ballots the clerk sent out something like
(Tom would know) a 170K piece mailing of a post card to confirm the mailing
addresses of BC voters. Right off we had problems with deliveries of those
cards. Some came back in batches, leading us to believe that the USPS was
just being lazy.
When ballots went out to confirmed addresses (confirmed by the post card
mailing returns from the voters themselves) we had returns of undeliverable
mail. Voters called in to ask where their ballots were? Some said things
like, "We've lived here for 20 years and we are getting junk mail, but no
ballot."
Ballots would not have been sent to known dead addresses, and were all
clearly marked as not to be forwarded. Yet some were forwarded and others
that went to confirmed addresses were returned. Still others were marked
with the forwarding addresses, and returned, as they were supposed to. But
if a voter had confirmed their address and information by filing in and
returning the post card, then why would the ballots then be returned by the
USPS, if they were sent to the correct and confirmed addresses?

Just to make it clear for those that don't understand about forwards: If a
ballot is forwarded to a new address the 'ballot style' would need to change
or voters would be voting on issues in precincts where they did not live.
Some people don't understand this, and thought that they should have
received their ballots for their old addresses at their new ones.

There was a wide disparity in how the USPS handled ballot mailings. This
happened in 2001 as well. While some people may think that the USPS is
trustworthy, I am way more skeptical. Neither rain, nor sleet, nor snow; you
can always rely upon the USPS to deliver the right mail to the wrong address
or visa versa.

Paul Tiger
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter or Alison Richards [mailto:aprichards@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 6:21 AM
To: paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx; ralphs@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: jpezzillo@xxxxxxxxx; laura@xxxxxxxxx; AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx;
MorsonB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Mail In Ballot problems...

From:  Peter Richards  303 449-2825

To:  Ralph and Paul

Cc:  Joe Pezzillo,  Laura Price, Al Kolwicz,  Berny Morson (Rocky Mtn.
News)

Date:  Sat.,  15 Nov. 2003

Re:  Main In Ballot problems...  continuing... ??

Below is an email about continuing problems with the US Postal Service
and ballots dribbling in for the 4 November 2003 election...  I am not
sure who is saying what to whom, in the emails...  the way they are
snipped...

What is your source of this information?

Can you document it?

Boulder County Commissioner Paul Danish is talking about printing a list,
somewhere, of all voters who did NOT vote in the last election, (this is
public information,) out of all folks who were mailed ballots, for people
to double check that their ballots were received.  The point of this
would be to document problems with the Post Office in getting ballots
back to the respective election officials...

The Boulder County re-count (headline in Daily Camera today) only
intensifies this issue...

I am most interested in following up on the election problems of the most
recent election, and think the other members of the CVV group can handle
the issues of future problems.

I have a major contact (now retired) in the Post Office,  who is equally
skeptical of their ability to deliver ballots, especially those with
problems....  i.e. overweight ballots...

Congressman Udall's office may be able to get to the  bottom of this Post
Office problem.... if we can document problems.

Best,  Peter


On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:43:34 -0700 "Paul Tiger" <tigerp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
writes:
> So we can talk about counting by hand - not a DRE issue, but we can't
> talk
> about absentee? Absentee is always going to take place.
>
> You'd better spend some time reading elections laws before you
> decide that
> you can go off in whatever direction suits you.
>
> Yeah this is about DRE. If you want to spend more time discussing
> this, lets
> get it off this list and stop bothering people with it.
>
> FOCUS
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Shnelvar [mailto:ralphs@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 3:50 PM
> To: paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Another Tactic? Absentee ballots
>
> Dear Paul:
>
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:03:13 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >Ralph,
> >
> >You snipped off part of my reply. I said that people should hand
> carry
> their
> >ballots back in because we can't trust the USPS.
> >Ballots that were sent long before the election are still arriving
> at the
> >clerk's office. Voters are saying that they sent ballots as long as
> ten
> days
> >before the elections and the clerk is just getting them, or still
> hasn't
> >seen them.
> >
> >The BIGGEST breakdown in mail ballot elections is the postal
> service.
> >Absentee balloting is the same as mail-in balloting.
>
> Paul, this is neither the time nor the place to debate
> mail-in/walk-in
> balloting.  We're fighting the DRE problem now.
>
> The biggest problem with mail-in ballots and/or walk-in ballots is
> the lack
> of security both outbound and inbound.  The USPS is merely one
> problem among
> many.
>
> >
> >Paul Tiger
>
> Ralph Shnelvar
>
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Ralph Shnelvar [mailto:ralphs@xxxxxxxxx]
> >Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 4:40 AM
> >To: paul.tiger@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: Re: Another Tactic? Absentee ballots
> >
> >On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:23:02 -0700, you wrote:
> >
> >>PT> I like this idea, if we could make it work in a voting
> population as
> >>PT>large as Boulder County's. You might be able to pull this off
> in a
> >>PT>smaller county. In areas east of midwest counties and townships
> are
> >>PT>rather small and twisting the arms of the clerks is easier to
> do with
> >>PT>such a protest.
> >
> >This is my first posting here.
> >
> >Paul Tiger and I - both Libertarians - often take opposing views.
> >Unsurprisingly, this is going to happen again.
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >>
> >>paul tiger
> >>
> >>Mcgrath, Bob___PI_Mkt wrote:
> >>
> >[snip]
> >
> >>>
> >>>One idea posted there was to urge all voters to obtain absentee
> ballots
> to
> >>>bypass the machines.  Thoughts?
> >
> >I suggest that people read Sunny Maynard's (Green Party) and my
> article in
> >the Sunday Denver Post:
> >        www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~75~1734196,00.html
> >
> >The last thing that we need is to promote mail-in balloting.
> While
> >electronic voting offers high-tech opportunities for fraud,
> mail-in
> >balloting offers both high-tech and low-tech opportunities for
> fraud.
> >
> >Ralph Shnelvar
> >
>
>
>