1. Mayor McGinn is looking inevitable. Although an estimated 30,000 votes remain to be counted, Joe Mallahan would have to win 54 percent of those votes to take the lead—and late ballots have consistently favored McGinn. The Mallahan camp did not return a call this weekend asking whether Mallahan planned to concede, whether he would wait until all the votes were in, or whether he planned to challenge King County Elections’ decision to reject (at least initially) 4,700 ballots whose signatures didn’t match the ones on file at the county.
2. SHARE, the homeless advocacy group that started Tent City, plans to resume sleeping outside city council members’ houses. The group spent two weeks camping outside the houses of city council members and Mayor Greg Nickels earlier this fall to protest the council’s refusal to give them bus tickets to and from shelters without attaching a stipulation that SHARE keep its shelters open all year. A half-dozen SHARE members contacted PubliCola during and after the protests, saying that SHARE was compelling shelter and Tent City residents to participate or lose their shelter beds.
Although SHARE representatives denied people were being forced to sleep outside officials’ houses, SHARE memos indicated that’s exactly what happened. In one, SHARE’s Direct Action Work Group informs residents of SHARE’s indoor shelters that they must “make a decision by majority vote: SHUT DOWN or SLEEP OUT.” A separate memo goes on to stipulate exactly how many people from each shelter and Tent City are required to sleep out each night.
Last week, the group sent out yet another memo indicating that shelter residents will again be required to sleep out or lose their shelter beds. The memo, dated November 6, tells shelter residents that although the protests are “NOT mandatory,” the alternative is to “take a hiatus from SHARE”—that is, find somewhere else to sleep during the time of year when shelters are crowded because of the rain and cold—”and come back when it is over with absolutely NO penalty whatsoever. Shelters may also elect to close down rather than participate.”
Barring what SHARE calls “a miracle,” the voluntary-in-name-only protests will resume in five weeks, starting with Council Member Tom Rasmussen.
3. The Washington Post called out Congressman Dave Reichert (R-8) for taking one of the “toughest votes, politically” against health-care reform on Saturday. The Post‘s Chris Cillizza noted that Reichert’s suburban Eastside district “continues to move further and further from his party (a 15 point win for Obama in 2008),” and that “Democrats continue to run well-funded challengers” against him. This year, Reichert is being challenged by Suzan DelBene, a Microsoft VP with deep pockets and a strong fundraising operation.
4. Meanwhile, three other members of Washington State’s congressional delegation—Jim McDermott (D-7), Jay Inslee (D-1), and Norm Dicks (D-6)—will be touring Swedish Hospital today and talking to hospital officials and the press about the legislation passed Saturday.
5. PubliCola welcomes advertising director Kristy Sandeen, who officially starts today. Kristy comes to us from the Seattle Times, where she specialized in online sales. Interested in advertising with PubliCola? Contact her at kristy@publicola.net.
This morning’s Morning Fizz is brought to you by Worldchanging.
If by Reichert’s “courageous” vote they mean a vote that’s out of step with your district — a funny model of “courage” in a supposedly representative democracy — then doesn’t Brian Baird get some courage points for his inexplicable vote against reform? Would love to see Publicola investigate WTF was up with that.
This year, Reichert is being challenged by Darcy Burner ERRRRRR Suzan DelBene, a Microsoft VP with deep pockets and a strong fundraising operation.
Does the Eastside lack credible Democrat politicians? Reichert simply has to reset the same campaign he ran the last two times and he’ll win comfortably again, because his opponent has the same lack of credibility.
I really don’t get the weird obsession with people conceding. In a clear cut loss it can be the noble thing to do, but the votes will be counted either way and the person with the most wins regardless of speeches.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with Mallahan waiting until the counting is done to decide what to do. Its not like he is down by 10 or 20%.
SHARE’s tactics are, yet again, rather distasteful. I fear that, in the long term, they will do more harm than good for those who rely on their services.
and @3, lest we forget how long it took for Hutchison to concede.
#1 Of course Mallahan isn’t going to concede when he only needs 54% of the remaining votes. Sure, it’s highly unlikely, but crazier things have happened. Notice that McGinn isn’t declaring victory either.
@2
I have no idea, it isn’t as if there are a shortage of Democratic State Legislators who live in the 8th district.
Suzan DelBene may do better than Darcy Burner did, but I’d really rather see someone like Ross Hunter run.
Gomez @3:
The Eastside surely lacks a credible Republican politician at the Congressional level.
(I meant Gomez @2 … sorry if I confused Giffy or anyone else)
7. I can probably find a few thousand voters in the Eastside and the south end who disagree.
Same old shit. I’m not a Reichert fan either, but our biased opinion of the guy doesn’t change reality. If the Dems can’t change their approach, they’ll get the same old result. Making the same old attacks isn’t going to change the result.
This year, Reichert is being challenged by Suzan DelBene, a Microsoft VP with deep pockets and a strong fundraising operation.
This basic formula works so well. Mallahan T-Mobile VP with lots of money and the traditional Dem support will be a great mayor.
The thing about the 4700 votes being rejected is flat out untrue. Just because they aren’t being counted right now does not mean that they won’t be counted. I observed the process that KC elections takes, and they ensure that the signatures do not match the ones on file before anything else happens anyways. First step: signature verification. if that doesn’t match, those ballots go to signature reconciliation. if those checkers find the signature still doesn’t match, then a letter goes out to those voters telling them the steps they can take to resolve the discrepancy, followed by multiple phone calls to ensure the voter is aware of the issue. To say that these votes were “rejected” makes it seem as though it was KC elections problem, when it is 100% of the time caused by voter error (not signing at all, completely changing a signature, and so on).
Plus, some of the ballots that were initially waiting for the voter to come in and fix the problem have already been remedied.
You marked Reichert as (D-8) but it should be (R-8)
@6, I thought that was why he really got into the exec race.
My prediction? If the next drop keeps trending toward McGinn, Mallahan will concede. Right now he still has a glimmer of hope (i.e., if all 4700 remaining ballots went to him vs. McGinn, he might just win this thing). Based on how tight the race has been thus far I don’t blame him for holding off on conceding.
Of course, he could concede and always call backsies before McGinn tossed the salt and crossed his fingers.
I’ve had to “correct” my signature twice. It was mildly annoying, but I have terrible and inconsistent handwriting–so I understand.
The real problem I’ve had with KC elections was when both the voters in our home were “de-activated”. We didn’t receive any information/warning about this–we just didn’t get a ballot one election. At the time, we’d both been voting by mail (from the same address, every election) for FOUR years. No one ever explained why this happened. We re-registered to vote and life has gone on.
I still check our status and the progress of our ballot every election. I suggest everyone do the same.
Manipulating homeless people is just a disgusting strategy. SHARE is more of a political organization than a service provider and the city should reassess this situation.
It seems to me that they have gotten so focused on the protest that they have forgotten there are human beings involved. Plus, these protests are stupid and useless – do they not understand how the city works?
Having volunteered on several voter hotlines and voter protection teams, I have become painfully aware of how many people are disenfranchised by mail in voting.
Just in King County alone, thousands are disenfranchised each election because election workers deem that a signature fails to match what is on file. It is not uncommon for the same people to be notified year after year that their signature “does not match.”
Many others, like Melissa’s household, are disenfranchised because unbeknownst to them, they have been deemed “inactive” and don’t receive a ballot, or they have been removed from the voter rolls.
Furthermore, there is no transparency. Election officials are unable to tell a voter the specific reason why that voter has been deemed “inactive” or removed from the voter rolls.
And good luck if you are an out of state student. There is a good chance you will not receive your ballot and therefore you will lose your vote.
@17,
Not sure that’s any more than would be ‘disenfranchised’ by poll voting. If your address is up-to-date (or if you write a correct number where it asks on the envelope) then you’ll be notified and can fix the problem. In fact the length of time between ballots being mailed and the election gives people time to correct problems before election day.
As for out of state students, sure a few are not going to get a ballot, and if they care, they can call elections and get one, but really, aside from setting up polling locations in every college in the country or having them fly home, how else could they vote but by mail?
I would also love to hear a bit from Publicola about Brian Baird’s decision. I haven’t ever given the guy much thought, but I read somewhere (possibly here?) that he was really badgered by the tea party crowd.
I heard Speaker Nancy Pelosi was supposed to be with McDermott, Inslee, and Dicks at Swedish. Is that true, and if so, I wonder about the politics of the visit.
HA! I remember I’ve had more than a few ballots rejected in my day. I used to vote last minute, and would get my letter (in SnoCo) after certification, and didn’t do anything with it. Needless to say, this has hurt my voter score…makes me look like a bad voter.
Now I vote early. This year, I had my primary ballot rejected, and while I got the letter, I never got a phone call. I did get it fixed, though. yay! for voting!
19. I read Eli’s piece. Demanding lockstep compliance with the DNC’s bill is a bit hive minded. While the bill has a positive purpose, I don’t fault anyone not associated with the GOP with holding reservations towards the plan. We have nothing more to answer doubts about premium cost concerns than vaguely reasoned, insubstantial claims based largely in presupposed theories that premiums will go down. The Dems are hard up to push a bill through, almost regardless of its actual content.
While I wouldn’t be surprised if Baird did get a bit of pressure from GOP interests (I mean, shit, he’s in Congress and surrounded by a couple hundred of them), I am fairly sure his reservations about the bill are personal, genuine and reflect the concerns of many of his constituents regardless of party. As a moderate who would stand to benefit from nationalized health care, I have concerns about the viability and impact of the bill as well.
And I think it shows an ugly side of Eli Sanders’ psychology and personal beliefs that he insists that Brian Baird has to vote in blind lockstep with his party as a form of thankful compliance.
@18, a difference is in the nature of the communication.
If you show up at the polling place you are in direct face to face contact with a polling official. If your name is not on the rolls you can do something about it there, locally. The mail in ballot, if you did not get one, relys on you to communicate over distance and time.
Some of the other things are the same.
Main menu:
Press 1 if you would like Democracy
Press 2 to return to the main menu
Also, one thankful side effect of moving every year or two (hooray for renting!…?) is that it forces me to regularly update my voter registration, which ensures that my recorded information is current and that my vote gets counted.
Welcome Kristy!
@ 18
I have done open records requests to determine how many voters are disenfranchised through vote by mail, and, at least in King County, it is much greater than poll voting.
Regarding out of state students, I have worked on voter hotlines. We receive many calls from students who do not receive their ballots. We instruct them to call the elections office to ask for a second ballot and then they don’t receive the second ballot or receive it too late. In cases like this, WA law permits election officials to fax or email a ballot to the affected student (along with an oath that must be signed and returned). However, many election officials refuse to do this, KC being one of them, at least in 2008. I have been told that historically KC did fax/email ballots in these cases. Instead, KC required the student’s parent to come to the KC election office, pick up a ballot, and then send it via Fed Ex to the student. In several cases that I was made aware of the cost of doing so was in the range of $65. Fortunately, in these cases ballots could still be returned in time because they only needed to be postmarked by election day. However, if Republican Secretary of State Sam Reed gets his way, he will require that ballots be returned by Election Day (as opposed to post marked), further increasing the likelihood of disenfranchisement.
It never ceases to amaze me how cavalier people are about disenfranchising voters.
@23 No you’re face to face with a senior citizen going on a half day of training. I much prefer having a few weeks to get problems resolved then hoping that the poll workers understand provisional ballots and the like.
And really, phone vs. face to face (though you could drive to elections), eh, I don’t see the problem.
@26 How is that a problem of vote-by-mail? They are out of state, it is there only option. I am all for making that easier and less prone to error, but that is a much different issue. And really you can send a ballot overnight via USPS for under 20 bucks so 65 is way out.
Lets update the system and make it better for sure, but those a problems of a different sort then the type of election we have.
@ 27
“….but those a problems of a different sort then the type of election we have.”
I don’t know what you mean.
I am talking about King County elections. I am just telling you my experience and more than one parent paid $65 to overnight a ballot to their child attending school in another state. Not to mention the difficulty it is for some to get to the election office to pick up the ballot when time is of the essence.
Well, as I said, I have done open records requests and compared numbers. More people are disenfranchised by all vote by mail, at least in KC.
And, based on my hotline experience, voters from all over the state call in to say they have not received their ballot.
It is not what YOU prefer, it is what happens in actual practice.
Re: “How is that a problem of vote-by-mail? They are out of state, it is there only option.” You are correct, in this case the same problem occurred prior to moving to all vote by mail. My frustration here is the unwillingness of election officials to make the extra effort to ensure that people are not disenfranchised.
Why do more people vote if there are more people disenfranchised? By my understanding of it, vote by mail elections have a higher turnout than waiting at a polling place. To say that more people are therefore disenfranchised doesn’t follow, and seems like a flaw in your reasoning. Please inform me if I am mistaken.
@ 29
Of those that vote, a greater percentage is disenfranchised with all vote by mail.
Also, one needs to look at the stats. If there is an increase in turnout but a larger number disenfranchised, does it become a wash? Do we still gain voters or do we lose the number of voters after taking into account the disenfranchised due to signature problems, not receiving ballot, ballot never being delivered (somewhere around 1% of all mail is not delivered)? Election officials don’t ask or answer those questions.
@ 20 — Yes, the Speaker is in town, carrying the flag, and the topic is health care. (Swedish in Ballard, right about now.)
My biggest beef with mandatory voting by mail is that the postage becomes, in effect, a poll tax. Yes–we have ballot drop-boxes. They are not in every neighborhood the way polls used to be. Why not have postage-paid envelopes? There was a ballot a few years ago that required more than one first class stamp–how many ballots were returned for insufficient postage?
I’d like to see something offered that blends the best of both worlds: polls open on election day in neighborhoods (staffed with skilled volunteers who speak the language of the neighborhood). People could check their voter registration status and/or vote in person. They could drop off ballots. We could get “I voted” stickers.
Sam Reed’s “must be returned by election day” efforts are ridiculous. The entire idea of an election day is that you have up until *that moment* to decide how you’re going to cast your vote.
SHARE's tactics are, yet again, rather distasteful. I fear that, in the long term, they will do more harm than good for those who rely on their services.
and @3, lest we forget how long it took for Hutchison to concede.