True the Vote

When I first started to "Blog" Observations I stated the following in my very first blog:

"At least a few of you may want to join me in some interactive discussion with others via the blog.

So some of you are probably still thinking.......OK but can you give me some additional "meat" to these 4 bullets because if you find "interesting" a discussion of soil dynamics and fungal infections of the Brazilian rain forest you are likely "out (and if that prose is not witty to you consider that as well).  So what does interest me?  What is "Topical"  Let me try to frame this out in a specific way.

What I find interesting includes social, economic, demographic  and religious trends, and (yikes) of course politics.

Topical means my subject matter will be stimulated by something that catches my eye.  While it may be a "news" item I hope it is more often from a specific personal observation  that is stimulated by a personal event, or correspondence.  Goodness knows we all get bombarded by news items on TV in newspapers and blogs even Facebook." from my introduction first blog post.

So, today's "Observations" have been stimulated in just such a way, prompted by a  "Notice of Jury Duty" my "Faithful and Obedient Companion received last week from the Vermont District Court in Burlington to report for jury duty....despite the fact we left Vermont in several years ago to move to Salt Lake City.    See notice:

 Barbara proceeded to call the Jury Clerk who explained they used voter registration records to select jurors.  She agreed to release her from serving but suggested we notify our Stowe Town government to "take her off" the registered voter list.  Barbara explained that we were already taken off the resident tax rolls so we had to pay higher local real estate taxes but apparently that was not "good enough" .  It seems these two local bureaucracies apparently do not talk to each other.  So, for fun I checked some voter registration records on both of us.with similar results.  I found we are currently registered to vote as follows:

Stowe Vermont-Yes

Winter Park Colorado-Yes

Utah- No we have been removed

Hmmm, how can this be?

Well I first remembered that in a previous post from way back I noted that when applying for a Utah Drivers License I was amazed at Utah's efficiency in virtually all things of governance, while I also mocked the Vermont DMV which "forgot" to give me a basic eye test. Kudos to Utah once again.

Then I started to wonder: "is there something about Vermont's voter rules that would be something besides pure incompetence"?

Now here is Vermont's actual voting rules on "voter ID"

If you’ve voted in Vermont before or if you’re voting for the first time and provided ID when you registered, you do not need to show ID to vote.


So it seemed clear to me that both of us could in fact vote here in Vermont still...despite having residence elsewhere.  In fact maybe we could vote both in Colorado and Vermont in the next election.  Hah but really...who would be so devious. 

Well it so happened that this week we had  a dinner at our Stowe place  with several friends (one couple staunch Republicans-he is a town selectmen in Norwich Vermont, the other staunch Stowe democrats-remember my faithful and obedient and I thrive on diversity when we host dinner because despite our differences we are all friends).  The Democrat gentlemen was born in Vermont and  lived here his entire life, while his wife has lived here since 1972. When I broached this subject  this couple immediately chimed in....first the wife who believed she knew where I was going and said "oh boy here goes our republican friends with the their usual complaint".  Now actually my intent was to start a discussion about my favorite topic- Vermont's incompetence, not one about voter fraud.  However suddenly (and I would add, interestingly) the husband got a sly smile on his  face and proceeded to tell us he used to routinely vote twice, both in the City of Burlington where he was  a resident and in his old hometown of Winoski .  Now maybe he was kidding because he quickly added that all us Vermont  Democrats know this loophole.  However it was out of his revelation (kiddingly or not) that I began to wonder.

So I started some basic research on voter ID' laws around the country versus Vermont.

First here is a sample of  from one of my favorite Vermont politicians on voter ID


Senator Bernie Sanders stance on voter ID laws:

Voter ID Laws Bernie Sanders

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

"The Pennsylvania Supreme Court  on Tuesday  said a new state law must be voided if would-be voters are denied easy access to photo ID cards needed to cast ballots. Sending the case back down to a trial judge, the justices said the law could stay in force only if the lower court finds there is no voter disenfranchisement.  The Pennsylvania statute was one in a wave of voter ID laws intentionally designed to keep voters away from polls. Sen. Bernie Sanders has asked the Government Accountability Office to investigate what he called an "alarming number" of new state laws that would make it  "significantly harder" for millions of eligible voters to cast ballots this November.

The GAO plans to release a report later this month detailing current voter registration requirements and voting laws in all 50 states and how these laws have changed over the past decade. A second GAO report will be issued next year analyzing the impact that these changes have had on voters' ability to exercise their voting rights."

Hmmm.Utah has voter ID requirements to help  prevent fraud.  For Senator Sanders this is a travesty. Now Utah may be "backwards" to Senator Sanders but for sure there is no doubt that people cannot vote "twice" for their favorite candidate. 

OK so we know how Bernie feels versus Utah.


For those interested here is a website I could not cut and paste on: Voter ID Laws .

So now why is it that Republicans do tend to be "suspicious" about voter fraud and voter ID?

Hmm it seems that states like California, Oregon, New York and Illinois, and many "progressive states" have liberal ID laws.  They like Vermont tend to elect Democrats. 

So today's Observation is to simply ponder this, do such rules make a difference in our democracy?  If so how? After all we all know how our political parties differ on this topic.

I, who tend to think the "best" of most of my fellow countrymen never really thought about it much..  But now that friend, a lifelong Vermonter, has made me wonder (even if he was just "pulling my chain") yes maybe it does.  Perhaps Barbara and I should even start requesting a absentee ballot just for to "fun "! Unlikely for sure.   Why? Well not only would it not change Stowe's (and certainly not Vermont's) results in any meaningful why , and we would also be obligated to report for Jury Duty when called!

For the rest of you I will let you ponder the issue and maybe share your thoughts as you see fit.

With that I bid you

Adieu