Federal judge blocks Michigan ban on 'straight-ticket' voting

[DonViejo]

Source: Reuters



AUGUST 1, 2018 / 3:04 PM / UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO

Scott Malone

(Reuters) - A federal judge on Wednesday ruled Michigan cannot ban “straight-ticket” voting, allowing voters to choose all a party’s candidates with just one bubble on a ballot, saying the law prohibiting the practice was racially discriminatory.

The ruling permanently blocks what U.S. District Judge Gershwin Drain called a politically motivated move by the Republican-controlled state legislature in a state that backed President Donald Trump in 2016 after twice choosing Democratic former President Barack Obama.

The ban did not affect the November 2016 election as a temporary order had blocked the state from enforcing it.

Drain cited research finding African-American voters are more likely than voters of other races to cast a straight-ticket ballot and are more likely to vote Democratic than Republican.

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-michigan-politics-straight-ticket/federal-judge-blocks-michigan-ban-on-straight-ticket-voting-idUSKBN1KM5YI

[DownriverDem]

1. That's great!

I love voting straight ticket for the Dems!

[catbyte]

2. Sweet!

I wasn't looking forward to filling all those little bubbles because of Republican bullshit. Glad I don't have to.

Thank you, Judge Gershwin!

[mwooldri]

3. Great! Now what about other states?

I believe NC has scrapped straight party ballot fill in... Was a Republican measure.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

4. Good decision, makes my voting easier.

But a little (or a lot) insulting, implying a class of people aren't smart enough to vote "all Dem" without a circle that says "all Dem".

The "partisan" part of the ballot is generally less than half the ballot. What on earth are people to do when they get to the non-partisan portion? And, abandon all hope, all ye who attempt to read the proposals.

[dansolo]

9. This has to do with downticket races

Some people may only vote for the higher profile, congressional races. The Republicans are counting on people not bothering to vote for the other offices.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

11. After congressional races, the ballot has state governor and senate,

county commissioner, that's about it for the partisan ballot. I don't think it would bother many people, just slow down the voting line.

The dumb stuff is on the non-partisan ballot that follows the partisan ballot. Things like "vote for no more than 14 of the following for state university board member" and there are 14 names listed. That's the part many people (and sometimes me) will ignore.

I don't think the "straight party" box changes the outcome, just speeds up the voting process a little. I like it.

[MichMan]

13. Supreme Court judges are also non partisan

Wonder how many undervotes for those that occur because straight ticket voters of both parties think they are done and don't bother going to the end to vote for those and the ballot proposals ?

Hope you don't ignore those too.

There are also ballot proposals for legalization of marijuana and to take away gerrymandering from the political parties. All those voting straight ticket need to make sure to vote on both of those as well

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

14. You spell out a danger of the "straight ticket" option

... that some voters will think filling out that one oval is all that's needed: one and done.

The only ones I ignore are when the number of candidates is equal to the number of allowable votes for an office. I vote on the rest.

Yes, killing the gerrymandering (like our 13th congressional district) and legalizing marijuana are on my list. There will be some local issues, too, probably.

I'll be voting absentee, as usual.

[riversedge]

5. damn. In WI, gov Walker and his GOP minons got rid of straight ticket voting in 2011 with

Repugs arguing it favored Dems.


https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/columnists/chris-rickert/chris-rickert-end-of-straight-ticket-voting-the-silver-lining/article_483e4c77-8836-5091-b317-949cd3130507.html

[MichMan]

6. Does this mean the other 41 states that don't have it are now forced to?

Since the court ruled that banning straight ticket voting is by definition discriminatory, does that mean that it is now required by law in the 41 states that currently don't offer it?


The ruling would seem to state that not having straight ticket voting discriminates against African Americans. Can all the other states now be sued and forced to offer it ?

[summer_in_TX]

7. Hope no one is as dumb as I was with straight party voting

One year (I was still fairly young and naive then), I was so passionately for Dems and against any Rs that I not only marked straight party Dem, but then I went and marked a vote for every single Democratic candidate – spoiling my ballot and causing it to be discarded.

It was in the days of paper ballots and I assumed the election officials would go by my clear intent, not realizing that I was "overvoting."

[LiberalFighter]

8. That is not overvoting when it still ended up being a single person for each race.

[MichMan]

10. Depending on the state, it may or may not be counted

I believe that it would be initially thrown out in Michigan

[LiberalFighter]

12. I'm saying the definition is totally wrong.

Overvoting requires voting for more than the number of persons allowed. 2 identical people are not 2 different people.