Inching toward action on military ballots (updated)

I have been trying for the past several days to discover whether the Tedisco campaign will actually address issues referred to in this post from last week, about the potential disenfranchisement of military absentee ballots from combat zones. The basic issue is that it appears many of these ballots may come in after the April 13 deadline, but so far no one has asked a judge to extend that deadline. Today, the Tedisco campaign released "an open letter on the New York congressional election" from 24 veterans, including a retired general and admiral, two Medal of Honor recipients, and several former POWs including Orson Swindle. This is how the letter ends: "Every effort should be made to ensure that every vote cast by members of the U.S. armed forces serving overseas is counted - in this election and in every election. But in New York, only minimal steps were taken by state and Federal authorities to get the ballots overseas early enough to have a chance to make it back in time to be counted. Votes cast by men and women serving in our armed forces overseas may not be counted because of this failure. That is shameful, and an embarrassment to us as a nation. We can and must do better. We urge you to ensure that every one of those votes be counted. It is the least we can do for those who answered the call to serve, who defend rights that we take for granted, and who represent the best in all of us."

(On a personal note, I and other family members will be traveling this Easter weekend to meet with my daughter, an Army private who is scheduled to be deployed to Afghanistan next week.)

Update: The deadline for military absentees was extended to April 13 by a consent order between the U.S. Department of Justice and the state Board of Elections, an extension deemed inadequate by the writers of this letter. There is apparently a legal problem for the campaign (either campaign) not having standing to intervene, since they were not a party to the consent order.  But I expect the Tedisco campaign to raise the issue publicly tomorrow, which could put pressure on the federal and state governments to reconsider it.

Comments

[Brian]

It's very cute that Tedisco wants electoral law to be ignored when it might disenfranchise his potential followers but demands that electoral law be respected to an absolute T (a principled stand, of course) when it might disenfranchise those of one of his opponents.

An embarassment indeed!

All citizens are equal but some are more equal than others.

[ind_voter]

knock it off brian. it could be argued that the people who are fighting for our country so that we don't have to, should have more of a say about who is running our country. but when the absentee ballots go out late because of 3rd party's interest these military folks do not have a chance to receive it in time much less send it out in time.

think before you speak!!!

[ind_voter]

BTW, i can't imagine Murphy, or anyone who wants to represent our country, would want that.

[Brian]

Ind Voter: The whole reason this country was founded was so we didn't have different classes of citizens, at least under the law, like the lords and commoners of Britain.

Soldiers deserve respect. They deserve to be supported. They deserve medical care once discharged. They get free health care while active. They can get a free (or heavily subsidized) college education. I begrudge them none of this.

But their votes don't count extra and shouldn't. Fortunately, I've never heard an actual active military member suggest this nonsense.

My brother and father have both served in the military and I guarantee you they'd be appalled by the rubbish that is your second sentence.

[Brian]

Bob: I read somewhere (probably either the PS or TU) that in one county, they'd counted 65 absentee ballots, 40 of which were challenged by Murphy and Tedisco campaigns, on technicalities no doubt. So Tedisco has no problem silencing voters for Murphy and supporters of Sundwall but when it comes to his likely supporters, him making sure their vote is counted isn't self-interested, it's "principled." (wink)

Will you speak out on this? Or do you agree with the double standard advocated by your candidate?

[Brian]

"...they'd counted 65 absentee ballots, 40 of which were challenged..."

By the way, with ratios like this, you know the process is going to last forever. I wouldn't be surprised if the winner wasn't seated until a quarter or even a third of his term had expired.

[Brian]

By the way, I have actual experience (two years worth) living in a country where the military ran things. I definitely would not recommend it.

[Brian]

" . but when the absentee ballots go out late because of 3rd party's interest"

By the way, this statement is factually incorrect. The calendar is set by electoral law, which I've stated many times should be overhauled.

[Brian]

Just so there's no confusion and this is my last note on this entry I promise. Electoral law should be overhauled to make it more democratic for non-major party candidates to participate. And it should be made harder to disenfranchise ALL citizens, including but not limited to soldiers abroad. If that means extending the time period for absentees to arrive or that they should be sent out earlier, then so be it.

Right now this is not the case. But there should always be a bias in the law toward counting votes unless there's a compelling reason not to. There should always be a bias toward including American citizens (be they soldiers, Libertarians or anyone else) in the electoral process.

[Brian]

I know earlier ind voter was taking shots at me for taking shots at Tedisco. But I got to thinking about the more practical aspects of this problem. In an earlier entry, I believe one commenter (a soldier serving I believe in Europe) said she got her absentee only a week before the election. I know when I served abroad in the Peace Corps in the mid-90s, I got my absentees about a week before as well, and that was a general, not special, election. Overseas absentees normally must be received two weeks after the election date, but has been apparently extended to two and a half in this case. This means that at the bare minimum, there were three and a half weeks allotted for ballots to be marked, mailed and delivered. In the year 2009, this should be more than enough time for mail to be delivered from an American-run military base back stateside. It seems if there are any issues, it seems like it would be soldiers actually out on the battlefield. Why can't it be set up so soldiers in the field mark their ballots and they get delivered to the US embassy in that country who diplomatic pouches it back to the US? If necessary, it could be extended to all Americans living abroad. There are legitimate reasons to not want counting to go on forever (such as us having no representation in the House) but no one (soldiers or otherwise) should be disenfranchised. This seems like a sensible solution.

[ind_voter]

sorry brian, you are mistaken. the absentee ballots went out late because the counties were waiting on Sundwall. they waited until the last possible time and then only 1 county sent them out express mail. i am not suggesting sundwall did anything wrong - it is what it is.

And, i don't believe military votes should have more weight - i simply said it could be argued. Reading and thinking first before responding, no matter how upset the blog gets you, is usually preferable.

I am guessing you are about 19 years old. Good for you for getting into politics and standing up for a greater good. i wish more young people would take your lead. Good luck

[Brian]

Actually, they were waiting for a judge to rule on the challenges by Tedisco's hacks to Sundwall's petitions.

[Brian]

Sorry to disappoint you but I stand by what I said.

Though there's nothing like a little elitist condescension to spice up a debate.

[Brian]

Ind guy: Incidentally, when I was 19, I was much like yourself: beholden to the two party system. It wasn't so much that I couldn't wrap my mind around alternatives from outside that system, but more that it never occurred to me that such alternatives even existed. Fortunately, I ended up spending two years living abroad and it opened my mind to the possibilities that a political system can offer more possibilities than dark vanilla and regular vanilla and regular brawls about how self-evidentally superior one is to the other. It was an enlightening experience. You should try it some time. With an open mind, you might learn something too!

[ind_voter]

i have lived abroad and i have also been a registered no party. between the two of us, you are the only one who has used name calling as a method of debate. if you are not 19, then you ought to be ashamed of yourself.