Showing posts with label voting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label voting. Show all posts
November 5, 2013
Election results... by the numbers
October 17, 2013
Bristol Elks lodge to become a polling place in November
The American Legion polling place is not going to be used this year.
The city's registrars and the secretary of state's office agreed this week to shift the polling place to the Bristol Elks lodge on South Street.
The American Legion was not fully accessible to some handicapped voters because of the steep slope leading from the parking lot to its door on Hooker Court.
The Elks lodge is located at the south end of Main Street in the historic home of clockmaker Chauncy Jerome. It has a large parking lot in its rear and is easily accessible.
October 1, 2013
No voting at Stafford School this year
Everybody who's been voting at Stafford School is going to have to head to a new polling place come Nov. 5.November 6, 2012
Turnout in Bristol is way up from 2008 (updated 5:50)
Update after the 5 p.m. count
The pace of voting in Bristol remains high.
More than half of the city's registered voters had cast a ballot by 5 p.m.
According to figures from the registrar's office, 51.2 percent of the city's 34,791 registered voters had passed through the polls by 5 p.m.
The nearly 18,000 voters topped the 2008 presidential race tally by 369 for the same time, continuing the trend seen all day.
Update after the 10 a.m. count
Voting is still surging in Bristol today.
As of 10 a.m., 23.3 percent of the city's 34,791 registered voters had already cast a ballot.
That is 421 more voters this year than at the same time in 2008, when registration was only slightly lower.
In total, 8,123 people have voted at the city's nine polling places today, as of 10 a.m., a pace that would ultimately lead to more than a thousand extra voters by the end of the day compared to what we saw four years ago.
So much for the cynics who said Americans are sick of this election and want no part of it.
The simple truth, proven every time someone fills in the bubbles on their ballot, is that at least in Bristol, voting is still cherished.
Who they're voting for, though, won't be known until after the polls close at 8 p.m.
Update after the 7 a.m. count
The pace of voting in Bristol remains high.
More than half of the city's registered voters had cast a ballot by 5 p.m.
According to figures from the registrar's office, 51.2 percent of the city's 34,791 registered voters had passed through the polls by 5 p.m.
The nearly 18,000 voters topped the 2008 presidential race tally by 369 for the same time, continuing the trend seen all day.
Update after the 10 a.m. count
Voting is still surging in Bristol today.
As of 10 a.m., 23.3 percent of the city's 34,791 registered voters had already cast a ballot.
That is 421 more voters this year than at the same time in 2008, when registration was only slightly lower.
In total, 8,123 people have voted at the city's nine polling places today, as of 10 a.m., a pace that would ultimately lead to more than a thousand extra voters by the end of the day compared to what we saw four years ago.
So much for the cynics who said Americans are sick of this election and want no part of it.
The simple truth, proven every time someone fills in the bubbles on their ballot, is that at least in Bristol, voting is still cherished.
Who they're voting for, though, won't be known until after the polls close at 8 p.m.
Update after the 7 a.m. count
Four years ago, in the presidential contest that put President Barack Obama in the White House, 6 percent of Bristol voters had traipsed to the polls in the first hour of the day.
That year, 2,214 voters had cast a ballot in Bristol by 7 a.m.
Now for the surprise; in the first hour of voting this year in Bristol, turnout was nearly 15 percent HIGHER. By 7 a.m., 6.9 percent of the city's electorate had already filled in their bubbles and slid their ballots into the counting machines in the city's nine polling places.
That translated to 2,416 voters in the first hour -- 202 more than in 2008 even though the overall registration has risen only slightly during the past four years.
If you have any pictures related to voting today, send them along or bring them to my attention!
November 5, 2012
No sign of voter apathy in Bristol
There’s
no sign of voter apathy in Bristol.
 |
| Voter rolls in Bristol. |
There’s
no indication that voters are especially unhappy with the Democrats either.
Democrats
outnumber Republicans in Bristol by a greater than 2-to-1 margin, claiming the
allegiance of 40 percent of the city’s 34,791 registered voters.
Though
unaffiliated voters make up a larger percentage – 41.9 percent – the Democrats
have made gains since hitting a low point in 2004 when their hold on the electorate
had dwindled to 39.5 percent.
What
the registration numbers translate to when people actually cast their ballots is, of course, the great unknown. Voters are notoriously unpredictable.
Voters
in Bristol: 2012
Total
registered to vote: 34,791
Democrats:
13,907
Republicans:
6,048
Unaffiliated:
14,568
Other:
268
Want to know where you should vote? Check out this link.
Want to see a sample ballot? Here are the links:
And if you want to study up on the charter question, here's an explanation of it.
The polls are open Tuesday from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. These are Bristol's polling places:
November 7, 2011
Problems at the polls?
Are you having a problem at your polling place? You can keep your neighbors and key public officials informed about voting irregularities by publicly documenting them in real time here with SeeClickFix, CTNewsJunkie and the Bristol Blog. The map below is designed to help you report problems experienced during voting. It is not a way to report life-threatening emergencies — just problems casting your ballot. Click on “Report an Issue” and drag the marker to the rough location of your polling place in your town, and then click “Report Here” to fill out the form. The address does not need to be exact, but be sure to list the name of your polling place in your report.
Do not include your personal information in your report unless you are OK with that information being published on the Internet and visible to readers here.
Thanks to Doug Hardy and Lon Seidman for sharing this tool with websites across Connecticut!
Copyright 2011. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
For information on Connecticut’s voting identification requirements, click here.
For Spanish language forms and voting requirements for people with disabilities,click here.
Remember, if for some reason your name was omitted from the list of registered voters in your town, request a provisional ballot and vote before you leave your polling place.
If you would like to contact the Secretary of the State Denise Merrill’s office directly about your problem, you can call 860-509-6100 or email them here. The Secretary’s office will be monitoring issues reported here. If you feel you have spoken to everyone available at your polling place and still need to file a formal complaint, notify the moderator at your polling place, and then call Elections Enforcement at 866-733-2463 (Press 5). The U.S. Dept. of Justice can be reached at 1-800-253-3931.
When you report an issue below, include your first name, polling place, and any or all of the following keywords in your report to be sure it gets through to the right people: voting vote “polling place” “election day” poll election ballot ballots “missing ballots” “missing ballot”
Thanks to Doug Hardy and Lon Seidman for sharing this tool with websites across Connecticut!
November 4, 2010
Can't anybody count?
It's crazy that we still don't know the vote count in the governor's race.
The secretary of state, Susan Bysiewicz, tossed out unofficial numbers and declared Democrat Dan Malloy the winner yesterday.
But the Associated Press yanked back its claim that Malloy had won after totalling 98.5 percent of the vote and finding Republican Tom Foley ahead.
The simple truth is we have no idea who won.
And Bysiewicz should clam up until she has all the numbers. Already, no matter who wins, there are going to be voters who don't trust the results.
This is simply nuts given how easily everything can be checked with the new machines. In Bristol, for example, we know the precinct totals within minutes of the polls closing. How come statewide it takes 36 hours and counting?
Our incoming secretary of state, Denise Merrill, should fix this problem ASAP so that it never happens again.
Update at 9:15 a.m.: Officials results due at noon.
It does appear that the AP got the results from New Haven wrong and that Malloy probably won by enough to avoid a recount.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
The secretary of state, Susan Bysiewicz, tossed out unofficial numbers and declared Democrat Dan Malloy the winner yesterday.
But the Associated Press yanked back its claim that Malloy had won after totalling 98.5 percent of the vote and finding Republican Tom Foley ahead.
The simple truth is we have no idea who won.
And Bysiewicz should clam up until she has all the numbers. Already, no matter who wins, there are going to be voters who don't trust the results.
This is simply nuts given how easily everything can be checked with the new machines. In Bristol, for example, we know the precinct totals within minutes of the polls closing. How come statewide it takes 36 hours and counting?
Our incoming secretary of state, Denise Merrill, should fix this problem ASAP so that it never happens again.
Update at 9:15 a.m.: Officials results due at noon.
It does appear that the AP got the results from New Haven wrong and that Malloy probably won by enough to avoid a recount.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
November 2, 2010
Turnout down from 2006
During the last midterm election in Bristol -- featuring the hotly contested reelection fight by Sen. Joe Lieberman in 2006 -- some 27.1 percent of registered voters had turned out at the polls by noon.
This year, only 24 percent had voted by noon, despite the nice weather.
But there are some 2,000 more registered voters this year than in 2006 so the total number of voters casting a ballot by noon is down only a little from 2006's level.
The registrar's office reports that voting so far today has been "smooth as butter," which is exactly what everyone hopes for.
There have been on reports of any problems at the polls.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
This year, only 24 percent had voted by noon, despite the nice weather.
But there are some 2,000 more registered voters this year than in 2006 so the total number of voters casting a ballot by noon is down only a little from 2006's level.
The registrar's office reports that voting so far today has been "smooth as butter," which is exactly what everyone hopes for.
There have been on reports of any problems at the polls.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
October 29, 2010
Tuesday's ballots -- online
Want to see the ballot in Bristol? You can see PDFs of all four of the ballots that will be used in Bristol on Tuesday by clicking here.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
October 26, 2010
Go ahead and wear political garb at the polls -- but be prepared for possible headaches at the polls
The Republicans are making an issue out of a misguided directive that poll workers might want to prevent voters from wearing World Wrestling Entertainment garb when they're casting their ballots. I don't blame them.
But I don't understand why nobody's focusing on the larger issue: why do we allow election officials to prohibit political buttons and other paraphernalia at the polls at all?
The law in Connecticut says that "no person shall solicit in behalf of or in opposition to the candidacy of another or himself or in behalf of or in opposition to any question being submitted at the election or referendum, or loiter or peddle or offer any advertising matter, ballot or circular to another person within a radius of seventy-five feet of any outside entrance in use as an entry to any polling place or in any corridor, passageway or other approach leading from any such outside entrance to such polling place or in any room opening upon any such corridor, passageway or approach...."
But the law clearly flies in the face of the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and the state's own Constitution, which proclaims that "every citizen may freely speak."
While few of us would want to be harassed by party workers as we cast our ballots, it's plain silly that supporters of Linda McMahon, for example, can't wear a shirt with her campaign logo on it when they go to vote. Who's harmed?
Moderators at every polling place already have the discretion to prevent people from causing any problems that might hinder the voting process. Heck, they can even throw out a too-pushy reporter if they must.
But since when is a political button or a leaflet in someone's hand or a Dan Malloy hat or a Ann Brickley t-shirt undermining anybody's ability to do anything?
This law amounts to a dress code policy for voters. It's an absurdity that is patently unconstitutional and, even worse, just plain dumb.
In this country, we have faith in free speech. We shouldn't chuck it come Election Day.
Update: After reading the entire section of the code dealing with polling places, it's pretty clear to me the whole thing is ridiculous. Students are allowed to watch only between noon and 3 p.m. and only if no more than four of them are present. Children are only allowed to accompany a parent or guardian until they turn 16, then I guess they're not to be there, though even that's a little unclear. Violators face up to $50 fines and three months in prison. God forbid a fifth student comes down to watch! And why would we care if a 17-year-old watches his mom vote? I'm perplexed by the logic of all of this.
By the way, the only penalty in the statute for wearing political garb is to get booted from the polling place so don't worry about going to jail for three months if you decide you just can't take that John Larson t-shirt off before you go to vote.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
But I don't understand why nobody's focusing on the larger issue: why do we allow election officials to prohibit political buttons and other paraphernalia at the polls at all?
The law in Connecticut says that "no person shall solicit in behalf of or in opposition to the candidacy of another or himself or in behalf of or in opposition to any question being submitted at the election or referendum, or loiter or peddle or offer any advertising matter, ballot or circular to another person within a radius of seventy-five feet of any outside entrance in use as an entry to any polling place or in any corridor, passageway or other approach leading from any such outside entrance to such polling place or in any room opening upon any such corridor, passageway or approach...."
But the law clearly flies in the face of the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and the state's own Constitution, which proclaims that "every citizen may freely speak."
While few of us would want to be harassed by party workers as we cast our ballots, it's plain silly that supporters of Linda McMahon, for example, can't wear a shirt with her campaign logo on it when they go to vote. Who's harmed?
Moderators at every polling place already have the discretion to prevent people from causing any problems that might hinder the voting process. Heck, they can even throw out a too-pushy reporter if they must.
But since when is a political button or a leaflet in someone's hand or a Dan Malloy hat or a Ann Brickley t-shirt undermining anybody's ability to do anything?
This law amounts to a dress code policy for voters. It's an absurdity that is patently unconstitutional and, even worse, just plain dumb.
In this country, we have faith in free speech. We shouldn't chuck it come Election Day.
Update: After reading the entire section of the code dealing with polling places, it's pretty clear to me the whole thing is ridiculous. Students are allowed to watch only between noon and 3 p.m. and only if no more than four of them are present. Children are only allowed to accompany a parent or guardian until they turn 16, then I guess they're not to be there, though even that's a little unclear. Violators face up to $50 fines and three months in prison. God forbid a fifth student comes down to watch! And why would we care if a 17-year-old watches his mom vote? I'm perplexed by the logic of all of this.
By the way, the only penalty in the statute for wearing political garb is to get booted from the polling place so don't worry about going to jail for three months if you decide you just can't take that John Larson t-shirt off before you go to vote.
*****
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
July 12, 2010
Don't stay on the sidelines as primaries approach
This year's primaries in both parties are about as hard fought and important as they ever are.
And the only people who can vote in them are registered Democrats and Republicans. Unaffiliated voters are out of luck.
Many people register as an independent because they don't want to sign on with either party. Given the way the parties operate, that's hardly surprising.
But the reality is that people who don't pick a side don't get to pick the candidates either. In a fundamental way, they are actually giving more power to the party regulars by refusing to side with the either the Democrats or the Republicans.
Voters have until noon on Monday, August 9 to enroll as a Democrat or a Republican. Don't wait that long. Go do it soon.
Quite honestly, it's silly to give up your right to vote in the August 10 primary. Take a stand. It matters.
*******
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
And the only people who can vote in them are registered Democrats and Republicans. Unaffiliated voters are out of luck.
Many people register as an independent because they don't want to sign on with either party. Given the way the parties operate, that's hardly surprising.
But the reality is that people who don't pick a side don't get to pick the candidates either. In a fundamental way, they are actually giving more power to the party regulars by refusing to side with the either the Democrats or the Republicans.
Voters have until noon on Monday, August 9 to enroll as a Democrat or a Republican. Don't wait that long. Go do it soon.
Quite honestly, it's silly to give up your right to vote in the August 10 primary. Take a stand. It matters.
*******
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
February 23, 2010
Bristol a key city for both parties in state election
Because it has relatively high voter turnout in state races and a more conservative bent than most cities in the state, its votes are up for grabs to a degree rarely found.
In the 2006 gubernatorial race, when Republican Jodi Rell defeated Democrat John DeStefano, Bristol provided the 10th highest vote total for Rell and also the 10th highest number of votes for DeStefano.
Most municipalities leaned more to one or the other.
West Hartford is probably the top battleground. It provided the second highest tally for DeStefano and the 5th most votes for Rell, who won the town.
Only Norwalk, Stamford, Waterbury and West Hartford gave more votes to both Rell and DeStefano than Bristol did.
Though Bristol leans Democratic in local races, it's no sure thing for either party in any given year. Rell, for instance, won the city easily with 11,129 votes compared to 6,741 for the Denocrat.
The city that gave Rell the most votes was Stamford. New Haven, not surprisingly, gave DeStefano, its mayor, his highest tally.
New Britain, by the way, gave DeStefano only a couple hundred more votes than Bristol did because of its lackluster turnout. Rell, however, got 5,000 fewer votes in New Britain than Bristol.
Given Bristol's capacity to swing races to one side or the other, it's surprising that it's not on candidates' radar screens to a greater degree than it has normally been.
*******
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
October 29, 2009
Election offers voters a choice
After a campaign remarkable only for its civility, voters will head to the polls Tuesday to decide whether to stick with a mayor who has guided the city through hard times.
If he is reelected to a second two-year term, Democratic Mayor Art Ward would be the first mayor to return to office since 2001, when Frank Nicastro won the last of his five mayoral races.
Voters will also decide the fate of four incumbent city councilors, two Democrats and two Republicans, and perhaps whether to hand control of the council to the GOP for the first time since 1991.
Also on the ballot are races for the treasurer’s post, the Board of Assessment Appeals and constables, as well as an economic development referendum considered routine.
The Democrats start with a built-in advantage in terms of registration, claiming the allegiance of 41 percent of the city’s 34,142 registered voters. The Republicans have just 16 percent.
But after a blip last year where the Democrats outnumbered unaffiliated voters, those registering as independents again outnumber either party, with 42 percent of the total.
The GOP is counting on capturing not just independent voters but also many Democrats.
In the three-way mayoral contest, Republican Mary Alford and independent Gary Lawton are likely to split some of the anti-Ward vote, making it even more likely that Ward will return to his $98,000-a-year job at the helm of City Hall.
In the council contests, though, the Republicans have a shot at grabbing a majority if they can keep their two incumbents – Ken Cockayne and Mike Rimcoski – and snatch a couple of open seats in the 3rd District.
Despite a Democratic lock on the district for three decades, GOP contender David Mills is widely considered to have a reasonable chance of winning one of the 3rd District’s two seats. He had raised more money than any other council hopeful at the last reporting deadline.
Mills may even be strong enough to pull the other Republican candidate in the district in with him, political insiders said, giving Derek Czenczelewski a better shot that he would otherwise have.
The Democrats, though, are counting on their 3rd District candidates, Kate Matthews and Terry Parker, to succeed in recapturing the district for the party.
Two Democratic council incumbents, Kevin McCauley and Cliff Block, are aiming to keep their seats as well.
In the 1st District, Block and Rimcoski have to fend off challenges from two newcomers, Democrat Kevin Fuller and Republican Eldianne Bishop.
In the 2nd District, Cockayne and McCauley are in the sights of Democrat Allen Marko and Republican Richard Scarola.
In the race for the part-time treasurer’s slot, first-term incumbent Democrat Bill Veits is hoping to fend off Republican newcomer Rose Parenti.
Republicans have held the allegiance of 15 to 20 percent of the voters for many years. Their numbers have slipped only a little during the past five years.
Democrats, on the other hand, once had a commanding hold on the electorate.
In 1984, for example, 49 percent of city voters called themselves Democrats and only 32 percent were unaffiliated.
By 2004, just 39.5 percent of the city's electorate registered as Democrats, but during the past five years, the Democrats have made gains.
The polls are open Tuesday from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Polling Places in Bristol:
Council District One
77A– Edgewood School – 345 Mix Street
77B – Northeast School - 530 Stevens Street
77C – Mountain View School – 71 Vera Road
Council District Two
78A – Chippens Hill Middle School – 551 Peacedale St.
78B – Clara T. O’Connell School – 120 Park Street
79A – South Side School – Tuttle Road
Council District Three
79B – American Legion – 22 Hooker Court
79C – Greene Hills School – 718 Pine Street
77D & 22 - Stafford School – 212 Louisiana Avenue
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
October 27, 2009
Today is the last day to register to vote
If you're not registered and you want to vote next Tuesday, you need to go in person to the registrars' office today on the first floor of City Hall and sign up.
Don't miss your chance to make a difference.
*******Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
November 8, 2008
Citywide recount needed for two proposed charter changes
The city will do a recount of votes on two routine ballot questions that were exceptionally close, said Democratic Registrar Bob Badal.
Badal said state law mandates a recount of questions three and four that would, if passed, change the city charter.
Question three, which appears to have passed, would extend the term of the registrar of voters from two years to four years.
Question four, which appears to have fallen short, would create a four-year term for the assistant city clerk and make technical changes to provisions covering the clerk's office.
The state mandates the recount because the vote was so close.
"It's within the guidelines of one half of one percent," said Badal.
The preliminary results showed that question three passed by a 10,678 to 10,070 margin.
On question four, 10,226 voted yes and 10,641 voted no, according to preliminary results.
The two proposals headed for a recount generated no controversy at all during an extensive charter revision process that began last year at City Hall. The Charter Revision Commission unanimously endorsed both changes and city councilors backed them without dissent months ago.
Officials expected both measures to pass overwhelmingly and several expressed surprise when the votes turned out to be so close.
Typically, the city's voters approve by wide margins charter revisions that carry the council's backing.
The recount will be overseen by Mayra Sampson, who was the chief moderator of this year's election, said Badal.
Sampson said there will likely be four ballot counters, two Republican and two Democrat, at the recount.
Badal said he and Republican Registrar Ellie Klapatch will assist Sampson with the recount.
"We will be there," he said.
The recount will start Wednesday, Nov. 12 at 10 a.m., according to Badal.
About 27,000 votes were cast in the city in the Nov. 4 election, he said.
"It will be by scanners," said Badal. "It's citywide."
But he said the recount will be limited to those two questions and not any other part of the ballot.
Sampson said any ballots that had some kind of flaw – if someone tried to vote for the same candidate on two party lines, such as the Democrats and the Working Families – would have to be recounted by hand.
She said she didn't know how many would have to be counted by hand.
Sampson said both questions were decided by fewer than 100 votes each.
"They're close, but I don't think there's enough to change the outcome," said Sampson.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
November 5, 2008
Bristol's election results
Here are the numbers for each party in each precinct, in PDF format. They are not the final tallies because some or all of the absentee ballots are not included, but they're close.
Eventually, I'll get the final results online for anyone who's particularly politically obsessed.
*******Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
November 4, 2008
Wear your buttons if you want
In a press release just issued, Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz "is also reminding voters that although no one can be prevented from voting if they wear a campaign button or shirt to the polls, Connecticut General Statutes Section 9-236 prohibits solicitation on behalf of any candidate or question within 75 feet of any polling place. This would prevent an individual from wearing a campaign button, t-shirt or hat into the polling place. However, once the individual removes the button or article of clothing from plain sight, the individual would be allowed to enter the polls and to vote. Once the individual leaves the polling place and the 75 foot restricted area, they could again wear the button or article of clothing.
“We want to make sure that voters are properly informed of their rights,” said Bysiewicz. “In interpreting the law, we also want to ensure that polling places remain neutral zones where voters can go and vote their conscience free of real or perceived intimidation. We understand that many voters feel passionate about the candidates they support and will want to express their opinions through their attire. This expression is protected by the Constitution; however it must be limited to areas outside the 75’ boundary for the polling place.”
I love that disconnect.
Your right to wear a button, shirt or hat touting a candidate is "protected by the Constitution," except that it's not.
You can't wear them in when you go to vote, she says in the next line.
But the First Amendment clearly trumps that ridiculous state law. People have a right to express their political opinions, the very essence of the First Amendment, everywhere they go, including the polls.
I have no problem with the rules setting a distance for those who are there only to advertise their candidates and causes -- the political parties, mostly -- but telling voters they can't wear a button or a hat or a shirt is unconstitutional. It's also stupid.
There's a law that ought to be revised to make it both constitutional and reasonable. The way it's written is way over the line.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
“We want to make sure that voters are properly informed of their rights,” said Bysiewicz. “In interpreting the law, we also want to ensure that polling places remain neutral zones where voters can go and vote their conscience free of real or perceived intimidation. We understand that many voters feel passionate about the candidates they support and will want to express their opinions through their attire. This expression is protected by the Constitution; however it must be limited to areas outside the 75’ boundary for the polling place.”
I love that disconnect.
Your right to wear a button, shirt or hat touting a candidate is "protected by the Constitution," except that it's not.
You can't wear them in when you go to vote, she says in the next line.
But the First Amendment clearly trumps that ridiculous state law. People have a right to express their political opinions, the very essence of the First Amendment, everywhere they go, including the polls.
I have no problem with the rules setting a distance for those who are there only to advertise their candidates and causes -- the political parties, mostly -- but telling voters they can't wear a button or a hat or a shirt is unconstitutional. It's also stupid.
There's a law that ought to be revised to make it both constitutional and reasonable. The way it's written is way over the line.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Turnout as of noon = at least 32 percent
By noon, more than 32 percent of the city's voters had already turned out, election officials said.
And that doesn't count those who voted at the American Legion, where a scanning machine is down and the tally of those who have voted is not yet available.
If people there voted at the same rate as the rest of the city, the total turnout was probably over 36 percent by noontime. It might have even reached 37 percent.
The polls close at 8 p.m.
*******Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Any lines at Starbucks?
Starbucks is giving away cups of coffee today. Any long lines there?
They started off with a plan to give them to voters, but had to hand them out to one and all because there's a federal law against providing any inducement ot vote.
*******Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Mayors sees packed polling places
Mayor Art Ward got to his polling place at Northeast Middle School at 5:40 this morning, 20 minutes before it opened.
There were already 60 or 70 people in line, the mayor said.
But when the doors opened at 6 a.m., Ward said, things moved along smoothly. He was all done by 6:20, he said.
By then, though, the lines were even longer.
"It was loaded," Ward said.
He headed over to Edgewood School and found the same situation there, with long lines.
Ward said that both polling places had pro and anti chief operating officer representatives out front to answer questions from voters trying to make up their minds on the major local ballot question.
Ward said that the nice weather is helping, of course, but there's some real excitement at the polls.
He said he's concerned that some people might not have had time to wait in line. Ward said he hopes everybody who wants to vote, gets the chance.
The only problem Ward could see in a couple of hours at the two locations was the length of the lines.
And that's the kind of problem that's good to see -- people enthusiastic about voting and willing to wait a few minutes to get their chance.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)