When I think of the value of tradition, I think of things like hula. Making a fine ukulele, or a hand-made timepiece. Perhaps small batch whiskey, where the buyer is promised traditional incredients made in the traditional style. Here, it’s fine to say, “we’ve always done it this way,” and the buyer will likely appreciate the difference.
Operating a well run modern election system is not one of those areas where tradition should reign, especially where those past practices are contrary to existing law. That’s the main takeway I can see from yesterday’s unanimous Hawaii Supreme Court ruling invalidating the recent runoff election in the Honolulu City Council’s District 4 race, where Trevor Ozawa held a very narrow 22-vote margin after the votes were counted. A new election will now have to be held within the next few months.
The Supreme Court decision overruled state election officials, who repeatedly hid behind the “but we’ve always done it this way” defense.
Justices keyed repeatedly during oral arguments on the issue of handling last-minute ballots delivered by mail, which were required to be “received” by election officials by the 6 p.m. deadline set by law. Waters, in his legal challenge, argued that a sweep of these ballots at the post office well after that deadline should not have been allowed, and the ballots should not have been counted.
Justices at several points directly questioned attorneys representing election officials about why their “past practice” explanation should be accepted when the late pickup was contrary to the plain language of the election law. They apparently found the answers unpersuasive.
That issue of the handling of that small batch of ballots became the basis for a narrow court ruling. However, in the process of working through the issues in this case, the justices–aided by the questions highlighted by Waters and the voters who joined the election challenge–managed to touch on other areas where election law and practice need to be more carefully reviewed by those who are not insiders in the current system.
For example, absentee ballots accounted for 56% of all ballots cast statewide in the 2018 general election. Election officials presented data showing nearly 5% of all absentee ballots were discarded because of problems validating voter’s signatures. Voters were never notified that their ballots had been invalidated or given an opportunity to confirm their identification and votes. That seems to be an issue waiting to blow up in the next tight election campaign.
It was noted during oral arguments that election officials made use of the Department of Motor Vehicles signature database, while election law and administrative rules say the only valid comparison is to the voter’s absentee ballot affidavit or voter registration. Another apparently conflict between law and practice.
Is it time for a more robust evaluation of election administration practices along with an overall review of the state’s election laws in light of recent experience?
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The issues covered are basic knowledge to any neighborhood board, women’s bake club, or high school class election. And yet, no governement official will suffer any consequences for their repeated flagrant screwups at such a high level.
This is why things will always be screwed up in Hawaii.
I have felt uncomfortable about the signature comparisons and possible discarded ballots. People’s signatures do change, due to illnesses, old age, injuries….whatever. There should be some way to assure such ballots are counted.
The law and practice was always a strict 6:00 PM deadline on absentee mail ballots.
How or when was this secretively changed?
Or was this special technique only used when elections needed to be swayed, until a prefered candidate won. Heads need to roll to clean this disgusting mess! All of these election officials are appointees of political selection, The City Clerk by majority of City Council and the State Elections Director by a State Elections Commission of a majority of State legislature hacks. Wonder what the result was?
Thanks to all who are bringing to light, addressing this obvious incompetent, unfair State practice.
Aloha Lei. In my humble opinion, it does not help to call public officials hacks.
Let’s focus on improving the election system where needed. And you are free to run for office to help improve things.
Follow up – news tonight, Councilman Ozawa is contesting the authority and failure of recusal by a majority of the Hawaii State Supreme Court.
The whole situation is destroying What little respect in local government that was left.
Maybe, The City Clerk should be an elected office to seperate an unbeoldant election process reasponsability?
Jim,
The aituation warrants villagers to raise pitch forks and flaming torches and march to Honolulu Hale, with our last Police Chief, Prosecutor, Corporation Council and City Clerk in deep trouble. It its time to demand correction…being nice got this mess. We cant wait for the rail.
A hack by definition is an appointee.
Ballot harvesting. Last minute batches delivered to the airport post office. Signature-checking with rejects not noticed to the voter. Private, unobserved opportunities to unduly influence, even fill in ballots for easily influenced folk. Mislaid mail from districts not likely to support one or another candidate.
Failure, in other jurisdictions, to appreciably increase voter turnout. Lengthy voting period far less amenable to observation by volunteer non-partisan observers. The entire process run by employees of the government disinclined to object to anything that serves the existing governing party.
These are features, not bugs, in the ‘absentee ballot’ program pushed by our betters.
Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
Some interesting information from the
U.S. Justice Dept. – Voting Rights Act
The F.B.I. On its web site “What we investigate”:
Category of Voter Ballot Fraud –
“An Elections official corrupts his or her office to benefit a candidate or party”.
Fyi
A close call foul is called during a popular basketball game, verified by instant replay, officials booed by partican fans, but the game goes on.
In my role as a minor vote day volunteer, of which there are many, never saw an opportunity to cheat or misstep and more understand the pressure to get the count out for the tv reporting and candidate acceptance speeches. Did note the whole process certainly has room for updating.
I like this footnote from the court in the 55 page ruling:
“The court notes that the response that Waters and the 39 voters
received from the State Defendants and the City Clerk in answer to their
inquiries shortly after the election put them at a disadvantage in meeting
their burdens in this election contest. Less than one day after the November
15, 2018 “Final Summary Report” was generated, Waters sent questions to the Office of Elections and the City Clerk about the election. Notwithstanding Waters’s status as a candidate with a clear interest in the outcome of the race, the Office of Elections and the City Clerk did not respond to all of the questions, particularly with respect to the pickup or delivery times of the mail-in absentee return envelopes on election day, the margin of error for the voting machines, and the manner in which a voter’s intent is ensured in a close election without a manual hand count. Similarly, the 39 voters allege that their inquiries were directed to a deputy attorney general who was unable to provide any of their requested information. Further, some of the information that Waters and the 39 voters sought and were not provided appears to have been readily available, as it appeared in a newspaper article shortly thereafter. We note that timely and complete responses to valid election day inquiries help to ensure a meaningful and transparent election process.”
Just goes to show that the Office of Elections and City Clerk where hiding things trying to get this case dismissed and then in their own admission in the Star Advertiser-they exposed their process which showed they were picking up ballots after the 6pm legal deadline! I hope this case forces the OE and City Clerks office on all islands to look at their processes and correct how they collect ballots in the future.
Three years ago when I moved to California my Hawaii mail was forwarded to me and I received an absentee ballot. I notified Office of Elections that I was no longer a resident and take my name off the list. I could have voted but I didn’t. Thought everything was settled then I got another absentee ballot in the mail at my old PO Box. The biggest crime of the century–hardly not. BUT, like so many other comments on this topic, there sure seems to be a lot of room for eye raising practices. By the way, I strongly support mandatory voter ID laws. No ID, No Vote!
On behalf of the 39 voters who petitioned the court, I’d like to thank our attorney, Thomas Otake, who did a great job of presenting our case. As Ian pointed out, we have learned that the process needs close review and correction.
It can make things easier for some in the short run to ignore problems, selectively enforce laws, and just make up policies on the fly as needed, but that rarely works out well in the long run. It usually ends up creating a much bigger and more expensive mess. Hawaii simply has not learned that lesson, despite various federal lawsuits and consent decrees, problem-plagued education, law enforcement, mental health, housing, and prison systems, not to mention the incredible problem of homelessness.
The traditional way of dealing with problems is to ignore them until they are totally out of control to the point where ignoring them is no longer an option.
It seems to me the fix with respect to picking up ballots at the post office is pretty easy — either pick them up by 6 p.m. or have a representative from the clerk’s office or office of elections on site to supervise the handling of the ballots.
One point that came up during the hearing that I haven’t seen discussed is how the Office of Elections monitors the clerks’ offices with respect to the handling of mailed-in ballots after 6 p.m. Apparently one county could make arrangements to pick them up at 10 p.m. (or any other time) while Honolulu picked up theirs at 6:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. The rules should be consistent throughout the state.