Washblog

  I would find no practical need for precincts in an all VBM statewide scenario. I wouldn't even need special officers for hand delivery, I'd just use City and County Clerks, who are at least nominally under oath to serve the public without fraud or bias.
  If fact, fewer precincts mean less paperwork, when people move within the County or LD, there wouldn't be a need to change their registration when they move across the street into a different precinct.
  From an efficient and maybe even verifiable election standpoint, a central department under the Secretary of State with actual professionals would make more sense than depending on the people qualified for the office of County Auditor (50%+1 vote).

  But as Tyler says, the precincts and PCOs are the bedrock of the Party State Central Committees for the major parties, and really also the National Committees at the next level. The RCW's which establish the PCO's and the Major Parties were originally established to lend some formality and accountability to what was previously determined in "smoke filled rooms". Then again, sometimes I miss the simplicity of that system.

Dave Gibney Pullman

by gibney on Sun May 28, 2006 at 12:18:22 AM PST

---

Hi Noemie! Thank you so much for taking this issue and running with it.

As everyone knows by now, I oppose forced mail voting (100% Vote by Mail). Secret vote counts are bad, and all that. I doubt we'll be able to dissuade King County Council from shooting their collective foot off. So we better plan for the new reality.

If the PCOs are the bedrock of the party, what the hell is the plan? (Rhetorical question.) The Democrats are behind the switch to forced mail voting. Wouldn't it be clever to coordinate with the LDs and PCOs?

I'm also concerned that consolidation will make it easier to hide fraud and mistakes. Right now, results by precinct are very granular. If the precincts are bigger, it'll be comparatively easier to fudge the numbers.

And, of course, we'll loose the ability to directly compare election results from year to year (before change and after change).

by zappini on Sun May 28, 2006 at 06:48:00 AM PST

---

The 2006 proposed ordinance for revising the precincts , Ord. 2006-0234, is on the King County Council agenda for their meeting this coming Tues., May 30th.  However, it looks like the only decision that they will be making at that time is to refer it to the Law, Justice, and Human Services Committee.

The documents related to this proposed ordinance http://tinyurl.com/gqd3s show that 30 precincts will be altered and 22 abolished.

There is no mention if any of these changes relate to Vote By Mail.  It appears that these may just be the regular, annual changes due to annexation, population changes, etc.

by Cherisse on Sun May 28, 2006 at 12:30:52 PM PST

---

I wonder if would matter to a certain subset of the ruling Dem establishment if there were not PCOs?

Unlike the other side, where people willingly do what their betters and their higher ups tell them to do

Dems who are active enough to be PCO's are opinionated, independent, questioning individuals.

What we get from the state Dems is ... a button and a certificate? snail mail?

When I talk to other PCOs about some campaign or some cry for us to do A,B,C, the typical response is "huh? - Oh, I must have missed that piece of mail."  If the request is something people disagree with they state that they won't do it.

Maybe the state Dems would be better off without us!

The Coordinated Campaign had a canvass in Ballard / Crown Hill last weekend, and I got NOTHING about how the decision to canvass was made or when it was made or who made it - I just got a few emails a week or so out asking me to help !!

What is the point of the 36th Dems? Heck, what is the point of me electing all those great people in the 36th if we are just going to be steamrolled?

Maybe PCOs really don't matter?

rmm.

http://www.liemail.com/BambooGrassroots.html

by rmdSeaBos on Sun May 28, 2006 at 05:41:00 PM PST

---