Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Exercising My Right Not To Vote

... for Simon Leis, that is.

I took the time to fill out my absentee ballot tonight, googling to find information from various sources on the candidates that I was unfamiliar with. I especially liked this page on the League of Women Voters website. One of the things that has always bothered me when voting is the judicial races. First, almost every one of them is running unopposed. That's a different rant and we will return to it shortly. Second, you usually don't hear anything about the candidates, so you don't know what their record is, what their positions are, or anything else about them, really. There are rare exceptions, such as the judge who sentenced the parties in a domestic abuse case to get married to each other, prompting a media uproar and public scrutiny of his record as a judge. Third, even if you take the time to inform yourself about all the races, complete information on the judicial slates can be difficult to find. Minor and maybe even petty, but I hate not knowing what I am voting for (or against).

One candidate who I particularly liked stated in his political philosophy statement that he is opposed to the current system for financing judicial campaigns because it is effectively "buying a judge" and compromises the impartiality of the judicial system, especially at the State Supreme Court level, where millions of dollars have been spent on the campaign this year. In accordance with that view, he has limited contributions to his campaign to $10 per person. I agree with his view on the campaign finance rules and like that he puts his money where his mouth is.

And as for races where people are running unopposed:
Why does this happen? I could see that there might be some situations where the public is so deliriously happy with the performance of a given public servant that they would never dream of voting him out. But really, even then there are bound to be dissenters. Their voices should be heard, too.

I just don't see how it can be healthy for local government to have 9 of 31 offices be filled with candidates who ran unopposed. You may say that even an unopposed candidate could be sent a clear signal if a large portion of the electorate chose not to vote for him anyway. But how many people are aware that you don't have to vote in every category for your other votes to count?

Which brings us full circle to Simon Leis. He makes my hometown look ridiculous and acts like more and more of a whack job every year. I do not want him to be the Sheriff. But for the last several elections he's run UNOPPOSED. I mean, seriously, is there no other party out there that could float a candidate for this job? Libertarians? Green Party? Anyone? So I left his field blank. I am so happy to live in a place and time where I get to vote-- even if I chose not to vote for a candidate who's a shoo-in to win because he's running unopposed.

Punching the card was oddly exhilarating. It was like popping bubble wrap. PUNCH! PUNCH! and I totally wanted to keep going and punch out all of the holes, then call the Board of Elections to request a new ballot because I ruined my old one. But I was pretty sure that wouldn't go over too well and my vote is too important to throw away, even for the sweet satisfaction of another round of PUNCH! PUNCH! PUNCH!

Then I made sure to TURN OVER THE BALLOT so that I could CHECK TO BE CERTAIN THAT NO CHADS REMAIN PARTIALLY ATTACHED. It was clean as a whistle (although my desk and carpet are covered with tiny little chads. Makes me wonder what clean up of the rooms where they did the recount in Florida must have been like. Probably a real pain in the tuckus. Those things are worse than confetti.) and my vote for John Kerry is not imperiled by any ambiguous dimples or hanging chads.

HEY! GET READY TO VOTE! If you requested an absentee ballot, take a minute to fill it out and get it in the mail before you miss the deadline. If you're going to vote in perosn on Election Day, do your research now. Find out what the candidates support. Find out what their records show. Decide who will do the best job of protecting your interests and the interests of society as a whole. Then find a way to get yourself to the polls on Tuesday. There is NO EXCUSE not to make your voice --or your silence-- heard!

2 Comments:

At 12:53 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Katze...I too voted this evening...love absentee ballots! No chads here. This district uses scantron style forms. In the 1988 election (my FIRST!), the polling place actually handed out special pens to use for filling in the bubbles. Yes, special "Mark-A-Vote" pens. I don't know how different they were from a generic black felt tip, but it made a cool souvenir.

Here's a question for your sharp legal mind...if a candidate is running unopposed, and received NO votes, would he/she be elected? (I also left blank the unopposed races..) I think the only reason that an unopposed race would even be on the ballot is because it still gives the voters a chance to vote for a write in candidate. (In a local election two years ago, an unopposed candidate lost because of an intense last minute campaign for a write in candidate.)

I never got my voter's guide, but at least all the information was on line. Hey, I got my ballot--that's all that matters. Things are calm here, for two reasons. I don't live in one of swing states, so we are below the candidates' radar. Second, I don't watch TV news, so I escape the media circus atmosphere. It must be CRAZY in your neck of the woods...Ohio, PA. I do hope you are voting against Issue 1? I hope 50.01 percent of the Ohio population does... (I'm just assuming that your absentee ballot is from Ohio, but I could be totally, totally wrong.)

May that warm and fuzzy feeling you got from exercising your civil rights linger through the cold, autumnal evening...

Lee

 
At 8:23 AM , Blogger katze said...

Oh, yes, I voted "no" on Issue 1, after reading and re-reading the proposition and the local alternative paper (which usually does phenonmenal election coverage) to be certain that "no" means I'm against the issue. There was a big ruckus a few years back about the trend in Ohio (and I assume other states as well) for such ballot initiatives to be misleadingly worded-- essentially saying "I vote not to not vote against Issue X" so that people weren't sure whether to vote Yes or No if they wanted the ballot initiative defeated.

I did a quick Lexis search for information about what would happen if a candidate received zero votes and couldn't find any relevant statutes or case law, so I can't cite to authority. What I would guess would happen is that it would end up in the courts, just like any other disputed election. There would be lots of fuss and expense and then the outcome would depend on the current make-up of the Supreme Court. (Or the State Supreme Court. But I would think this would rate a grant of cert from The Supremes.)

Wow, that was semi-lawyerly. I'm vaguely frightened of myself now.

I feel sorry for you that you didn't get to punch a card to vote. But then, your vote is more likely to be counted accurately, so I guess that evens things out.;)

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home