(UPDATE) L.A. registrar to re-examine 94,000 DTS ballots

Update [2008-2-7 4:49:32 by baudelairien]: After more than 500 complaints were lodged with California Secretary of State Debra Bowen's office, acting Los Angeles County Registrar Dean Logan ordered an examination of more than 94,000 non-partisan ballots that may not have been counted. Of 189,000 votes cast by nonpartisans in Los Angeles County, only half marked a redundant bubble indicating they were voting in a party primary. Ballots without the extra bubble marked were initially uncounted. The confusing ballot has been compared to Florida's infamous "Butterfly Ballot" of the presidential elections of 2000. (sources: Los Angeles Times, L.A. Daily News)

(Original story) "100s of thousands" of votes may be voided in CA: According to the L.A. Daily News, a confusing ballot design in Los Angeles County could cause hundreds of thousands of votes cast by independent voters to be discarded. Parallels are being drawn to the Florida's infamous "Butterfly Ballot" of the presidential elections of 2000.

Update [2008-2-7 4:49:32 by baudelairien]: In contrast to an earlier statement by California Secretary of State spokesperson Kate Folmar that "very few" problems were reported, 500 complaints were reported as registered with Bowen's office by midday Wednesday. Others who tried to report problems said hotlines set up by the Secretary of State and the Los Angeles County Registrar were "swamped". The Los Angeles Times also received complaints. Acting Registrar Logan said he will try to determine whether uncounted ballots could make a difference in the assignment of delegates to the Democratic National Convention. "If we can clearly identify the voters' intent, we will seek legal authority to count those votes."

(Original story) Over 750,000 voters in Los Angeles County registered their party affiliation as "decline-to-state" (DTS) and may not have had their votes counted if they failed to fill in a bubble (in addition to choice of candidate) indicating that they wanted their votes counted for the Democratic primary. Voters who were registered as declined-to-state had to specifically ask for a Democratic ballot, and some overlooked or were confused by the redundant requirement to fill in the bubble. The machines that tabulate the vote do not count ballots that do not have the extra bubble filled, accepting them without error as an "undervote". Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation said that "hundreds of thousands of ballots" could be affected.

Observers overseas and closer to home are describing the situation as a "voting irregularity" and comparing the "double bubble" ballot to Florida's infamous "butterfly ballot" from the 2000 Presidential election which confused some Gore voters into casting their ballot for Pat Buchanan, and which may have influenced the outcome in Florida, leading to the election of George W. Bush.

Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky DelGadillo asked for an investigation, urging California Secretary of State Debra Bowen and Registrar Logan to "do everything within their power to  see that every vote is counted. [...] Los Angeles' non-partisan voters must not be disenfranchised because of a confusing ballot design."

Rick Jacobs, chairman of the progressive organization, Courage Campaign, described the situation as "Florida in Los Angeles County," and called on Dean Logan, acting Registrar-Recorder of Los Angeles County, to do a 5% manual recount to determine the extent of the problem. He  asked affected voters to contact the Courage Campaign.

Resources for affected voters:


  • Contact the Courage Campaign: info (at) couragecampaign.org

  • Write Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo: Rocky.Delgadillo (at) lacity.org -- or call his office: (213) 978-8100

  • Contact the Election Protection Coalition at 1-866-OUR-VOTE




Display:


Clinton won, must be fraud (2.00 / 1)

The article is from before the primary, as you can tell with all the interviewees saying "could be a problem." You might want to wait for a little more information before crying "butterfly ballot!"


by souvarine on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 06:47:31 PM EST

The article was updated today... (none / 0)

The link to LA Observed is from yesterday, during the primary. And the links to the Guardian and the Huffington Post are from today.

Looks like people saw this coming, but they didn't do anything about it. I first learned about it today when I read a post on a bulletin board from someone whom it affected.

I'm not crying fraud. But I am crying honor voter intent, which is the same way I felt about Florida in 2000.


by baudelairien on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:18:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The article was updated today... (none / 0)

LA should most certainly honor voter intent, but from reports here during the election the problem did not appear to be as bad as it seemed.

As suggested in your diary it is fairly easy to check and correct for. A check of the undervote or manually counting a sample of ballots should show the extent of any problem. CA has paper ballots, and according to the description the undercounted presidential votes would be clear in a manual count.

The problem with your diary, and the reason I don't think voter intent is your real concern, is repeating the "100s of thousands" speculation. Neither you nor the person quoted have any idea if there even is a problem, you are throwing around large numbers just to encourage hysteria.

As with the "NH fraud!" hysteria, this is really just about trying to taint Clinton's win. It seems to be a favorite tactic of Obama supporters like the Courage campaign, and it puts their integrity in question.


by souvarine on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:46:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The article was updated today... (none / 0)

Agreed, seems to me that out of 750,000 DTS voters (the total) an unspecified percentage got screwed/screwed it up. That could be as little as 5,000 or as high as 100,000 or anywhere.

Still a statistical sampling recount 5% to see the extent of the issue seems like a good idea.

If the polls don't go the way you want them to, or even as the pollster suggest and the first thing you think of is "FRAUD!" perhaps you should rethink it.


by MNPundit on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:56:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton won California by a secure margin (none / 0)

Because of the margin of Clinton's victory in California, these votes wouldn't have changed the plurality, whoever they fell for.

But it's not right that they're not being counted. And as you point out, it's a problem that's easy to correct -- if enough people stand up and demand a correction. If no one says anything, that's not going to happen, and this ballot may stand as a precedent.

I didn't vote for Gore, but I was outraged about what happened in Florida. Hysteria is counter-productive, but when votes are casually discarded, people ought to be indignant, whomever they ultimately support.

P.S. New Hampshire? I blame the pollsters.


by baudelairien on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:21:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton won California by a secure margin (none / 0)

these votes wouldn't have changed the plurality

yes but because they were concentrated in LA County and therefore in several CDs, they could very well impact the distribution of delegates.


by desmoulins on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 10:03:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Whatever (1.60 / 5)

Where was this "courageous" organization when millions of Democratic voters were disenfranchised in Michigan and Florida this year?

Ho hum. An Obama front group is whining, crying and complaining because their candidate lost in California. There is not even a hint of an allegation that any laws were broken. And, in any event, I'm not going to lose any sleep if some "Democrats for a day" were not able to vote in our Party's primary. They shouldn't be allowed to do so in the first place. But, if they are allowed to, then it should be on them, and on the opportunistic campaign that encourages such carpetbaggers to influence our Party's primaries, to see to it that they fill out their ballots in accordance with the law.


by freemansfarm on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 06:54:54 PM EST

Prev. comment didn't deserve a zero. n/t (none / 0)


While I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work ~ Barack Obama
by bowiegeek on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:08:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Prev. comment didn't deserve a zero. n/t (none / 0)

I'm supporting Hillary Clinton because it's not about whom you want to have a beer with: it's about whom you trust to drive you home.

That is a great quote


I believe in Hillary
by sonofdonkeykong on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:13:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Prev. comment didn't deserve a zero. n/t (none / 0)

I don't get it. What does it have to do with ending the war, changing the priorities of our tax and trade policies, cleaning up the endemic corruption of our elections and political system, or reducing carbon emissions?


by desmoulins on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 10:05:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Prev. comment didn't deserve a zero. n/t (none / 0)

It has to do with choosing the known quantity over choosing a leap of faith. She's made her platform very clear on all of those counts. But it still comes down to: who would be the best president on day one?


While I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work ~ Barack Obama
by bowiegeek on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 01:06:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Prev. comment didn't deserve a zero. n/t (none / 0)

I'm not sure what the rules are, but the language is pretty appalling. (And part of a pattern that's not useful for discussion.)


by OrangeFur on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:33:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Prev. comment didn't deserve a zero. n/t (none / 0)

It was a little harsh, but I think it's a natural reaction against a lot of what we've been seeing. Clinton has ads run against her by the courage campaign for not being a leader. She gets slimed in every state that she wins for having committed some kind of fraud. And meanwhile people sit on their high horse and say Florida and Michigan don't count. Well, so much for giving a shit about voters. Maybe it's only people who vote for Obama that count. It's the way the press seems to spin it.


While I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work ~ Barack Obama
by bowiegeek on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:53:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "100s of thousands" of votes may be (2.00 / 0)

People who want to vote in a Democratic primary should register as Democrats. DTS voters in CA couldn't vote in the Republican primary at all. If they don't want to be Democrats, but want to vote in our primary, they need to read the instructions on their ballot carefully.


by LakersFan on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 07:45:22 PM EST

let's look into it (none / 0)

Clinton beat Obama in Los Angeles County by 55% to 41%, or about 168,000 votes before considering any impact of this possible disenfranchisement.

Here's another account of what's going on:

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot .com/2008/02/groups-to-mount-legal-chall enge-to-los.html


Our Moment Is Now
by mboehm on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 08:03:20 PM EST

Many people did contact the Secretary of State (none / 0)

According to a story just published in the L.A. Times many people did contact them.


Secretary of State Debra Bowen's office said her election hotline had received nearly 500 complaints by midday Wednesday, most from decline-to-state voters who had tried to cast ballots in the Democratic primary.

I'll update the story with the details.


by baudelairien on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 03:50:58 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.