A petition that all Oregonians should sign. It addresses a problem that could have had M92 pass

[cascadiance]

http://oregonrighttoknow.ngpvanhost.com/form/1618489203248924416

It looks like that for the most part Oregon voting systems were accurate enough to not allow for enough "errors" to overturn the no vote on Measure 92, even though it was only a little over 800 vote difference.

But the practice of disqualifying votes because a person's signature "doesn't match" what is on file seems like a potentially big problem in terms of a lot of subtle voter suppression that could occur if not monitored properly. Apparently there were around 4600 ballots thrown out for this. It would seem that in a recount, if voters who had their votes disqualified were to step forward and say that there vote was incorrectly not counted (which arguably it was), then these votes should be allowed to be counted. A better system needs to be put in place or those counting votes will perhaps use this as a weapon in elections like the close Measure 92 vote or other close races to swing it the wrong direction, if they disqualify votes based on political preferences in the guise of a signature "not matching".

Vote by mail for the most part is a better system than other systems out there, but this is something that needs fixing!

[0rganism]

1. what is the current procedure for voter notification when a signature doesn't match?

Last edited Mon Dec 8, 2014, 03:38 PM - Edit history (1)

Is the voter notified by mail, how long does it take, would a response/petition for consideration be handled in time to participate in recounts?

Seems like there's a lot I just don't know about our system.

Edit: google is my friend, looked it up. Here's the procedures: http://sos.oregon.gov/elections/documents/vbm_manual.pdf
pages 44 and 45 are relevant. Looks like if there's a mismatch, the voter gets notified by mail, and has to respond within 2 weeks of the election - kind of a tight timeline. If the voter doesn't respond, they get put on the inactive list -- so better respond pronto!

[classof56]

2. I signed the Yes on 92 campaign's petition to Sec'y of State Kate Brown about this issue.

I just went on her website to check out online registration, which may or may not preclude the signature requirement. I need to research that further. As I see it, vote by mail would resolve those so-called "voter fraud" claims going on in other states, and in my opinion should be done nationwide.

Again, I'm researching this further, because disqualifying 4600 votes is serious stuff, and I'd hate to see it undermine what I view as an excellent way to get out the vote and forestall the "disenfranchising" effort.

Glad this was posted, Cascadiance, and I encourage all Oregon voters to sign the petition to Kate Brown.

[cascadiance]

3. Yes, perhaps there needs some way to make sure that we can validate signatures but...

... I really wonder if they are "selectively" validated in places like Clackamas County where we had incidences of tampering with ballots last election. That's one problem that is perhaps a bit harder to do right when people aren't present to insure that their identity is validated when they vote, unlike a back room where mailed in ballots are counted.

I think this vote should serve as an example of why it is important that the process is done right and adequate oversight is provided for the counting process, since with that number of ballots being thrown out, it shows clearly that there is room for election fraud to have taken place, that could make a real difference in how a vote goes, whether there was fraud or not.