Below is an encouraging note and a news
article from Colorado Springs
Al
Al Kolwicz
CAMBER
Citizens for Accurate Mail Ballot Election Results
2867 Tincup
Circle
Boulder, CO 80305
303-494-1540
AlKolwicz@xxxxxxxxx
www.users.qwest.net/~alkolwicz
http://coloradovoter.blogspot.com
From: Dr. Charles E.
Corry [mailto:ccorry@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004
7:50 PM
To: EJF comments
Subject: EJF newsletter -
Sometimes we win one - campaign against mail-in elections succeeds in Colorado
Springs 9/14/04
Despite the defeat of that initiative, the
City of Colorado Springs
decided to conduct its city elections by mail, claiming cost savings, and using
Diebold as a contractor. CAMBER and
the EJF found much to criticize in that election as documented in a Report on the April 1, 2003,
Mail In Election, Colorado Springs, Colorado. In June of 2003 I had also
made a presentation on the problems with mail in elections, and the city
election, to an audience that included the new mayor and one city councilman. CAMBER had also requested corrections to the canvass
board results and the city clerk had responded in a vague way to those
requests.
But we hadn't heard anything else.
So I was greatly surprised to read today's paper and
find the city council had voted 8 to 1 to return to a polling place election in
the 2005 election. The only dissent being from the lone Democrat on the
council. Better news would be to have the city council ban mail in elections
permanently, but we'll take what little victories we can get.
The same issue of the Gazette also reported (p. A5)
that in Oregon,
the only state that conducts all
mail in elections, that voter turnout in the 2002 election and this year's
primary elections was among the lowest in the state's history. Increasing voter
turnout has always been trumpeted as a primary reason for allowing mail in
elections. Simply one more lie.
Mail-in voting gets the ax
By ED SEALOVER - THE GAZETTE http://pm.gazette.com/
Reproduced under the Fair Use exception of 17 USC § 107 for
noncommercial, nonprofit, and educational use.
Colorado Springs' experiment with
mail-in voting has ended after one city election.
City Council members decided overwhelmingly Monday to return to a polling-place
vote for the April 2005 election. The decision came even though City Clerk
Kathryn Young told members a traditional election would cost $170,000 more.
For the council, though, the choice was all about giving voters who complained
last year an option for casting ballots. Those who want to vote by mail can
request an absentee ballot, and those who want the privacy of the voting booth
can get that, council members said.
The 8-1 informal vote was done quickly and without comment by a council that
appeared to have made up its mind well before Young gave her presentation. A
formal vote is not needed.
Councilman Darryl Glenn said negative reaction to the mail ballot was one of
the most unanimous messages he heard while running for office in 2003. The
other was the public's desire for the council to eliminate benefits to same-sex
partners of city workers - a move it made in May 2003.
"There were two issues that came across loud and clear in the 2003
election," Glenn said. "One was already taken care of, and the other
is taken care of now."
A sharply divided council approved the city's first mail-in ballot election two
years ago - and upheld it a few weeks later after then-Vice Mayor Lionel Rivera
called an emergency meeting to try to reverse the decision.
Some residents praised the ease of the process.
A louder portion of the city electorate complained, though, about mail-in
envelopes on which they had to sign their names and list their birth dates.
Some said this would enable identity theft, and others fumed that election
workers could open the ballots and see how they voted.
Voters also reported getting multiple ballots in their names or ballots for
people who had moved from their addresses long ago.
The issue of fraud didn't appear to play as highly on the council's mind Monday
as the idea that people just didn't like the ballot.
Council members also disagreed with Young's opinion that mail-in balloting
brings in more voters. The 2003 city election attracted a record 33 percent of
voters, but this year's primary also had a high turnout, despite its
traditional status, several members said.
Young estimated the mail-ballot election would cost $500,000 and the
polling-place election about $670,000. The difference is that the city will
have to pay El Paso
County to conduct the
polling-place vote because the city does not have the machinery to do it.
Not only did a council known for its fiscal conservatism not flinch at the
extra cost, it added to it. Young was prepared to mail absentee-ballot
applications to active voters, but the council insisted she send them to voters
who hadn't cast ballots in years, as well.
"Freedom shouldn't have a price tag," Rivera, now the mayor, said
afterward.
The only dissenter was Vice Mayor Richard Skorman, who also supported the mail
ballot in 2003.
"I like a mail ballot," Skorman said. "I think you have a higher
vote turnout. I think it's cheaper. And we have control of it."
The four district council members - Glenn,
Jerry Heimlicher, Scott Hente and Margaret Radford - are eligible for
re-election April 5. Several proposed changes to the city charter also are
expected to be on the ballot.
--
NOTE: If you would like to be removed from our
mailing list please respond to this message with REMOVE in the subject line. Comments or criticisms of our
policies or Web sites should be addressed to mailto:comments@xxxxxxxxx
The Equal Justice Foundation is a
member-supported, non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation.
Contributions are tax deductible and can
be made on the Web at http://www.ejfi.org/Join.htm
You are receiving this message because (1)
you asked to be added to our mailing list; (2) you sent the EJF an e-mail or
requested help from us; (3) you are known to work on issues related to men's or
father's rights; (4) you are known to be interested in civil liberties and
equal justice for all; (5) your name and address appeared as an addressee on
email sent to us; or (6) you are a member of the Equal Justice Foundation.
The mailing list of the Equal Justice Foundation is not distributed to third
parties. Occasionally members are put in touch with other individuals on our
mailing list when there are known common interests or problems. In normal
circumstances permission is requested of the third party before disclosing
their e-mail address. Prior permission is not sought if referral is made to
another group or individual working on the same, or related problems, and that
group or individual is known to seek such referrals.
______________________________________________
Charles E. Corry, Ph.D., F.G.S.A.
President, Equal Justice Foundation http://www.ejfi.org/
455 Bear Creek Road
Colorado Springs, Colorado 80906-5820
Telephone: (719) 520-1089
Domestic violence against men in Colorado:
http://www.dvmen.org
Personal home page: http://corry.ws
Curriculum vitae:
http://www.marquiswhoswho.net/charleselmocorry/Default.aspx
The good men may do
separately is small compared with what they may do collectively.
Benjamin
Franklin