Blank stare
October 10th, 2008 by Derrick DePledgeLt. Gov. James “Duke” Aiona and Kevin Cronin, the state’s chief elections officer, traded pointed letters this week about the appropriate level of voter education on the fact that blank votes count as “no” votes for a Constitutional Convention on the November ballot.
The state Supreme Court ruled in 1997, in a challenge brought by the Hawai’i AFL-CIO, that both blank votes and over votes count when calculating whether a majority of voters approved calling for a convention in 1996. The decision led to another vote, where a convention failed.
Aiona, who supports calling for a convention this year, asked Cronin on Monday to pursue all viable forms of voter education including:
(1) the placement of large informational posters at all polling places, (2) requiring poll workers to provide this information to voters prior to casting their ballot, (3) a media education campaign that includes newspaper, television and radio ads, and (4) information sent via direct mail or e-mail to all absentee voters.
Aiona wrote that he recognizes the difficulty of spending state money on voter education during tough economic times, but argued that an informed electorate is essential to “maintain the integrity of our election system.”
Cronin responded on Thursday that the small amount of money available this year for voter education has already been used for the primary and to explain voting procedures. He offered to take these steps, however, to explain the meaning of “yes,” “no,” and “blank” votes:
*post on the Office of Elections website, www.hawaii.gov/elections;
*obtain from television, radio, and print media where we can public service announcements that provide;
*print reasonably appropriate posters to place in each polling place around the state, and;
*include in what little precinct official training remaining before the general election
Cronin, who explained that it his duty to remain an impartial referee on election matters, also gave Aiona some advice.
I respectfully invite you to consider calling a press conference or otherwise taking any actions deemed appropriate for the benefit of all voters to provide additional voter education about the meaning of a “yes,” “no”, and “blank” vote for the constitutional questions on the ballot at the General Election.
The Office of Elections used to be controlled by the lieutenant governor’s office but now is governed by an appointed Elections Commission.
October 10th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
[...] post by WP-AutoBlog Import var AdBrite_Title_Color = '0000FF'; var AdBrite_Text_Color = '000000'; var [...]
October 10th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
The Lt. Gov. is worried that the con-con question will fail.
And he's right.
It will fail.
October 11th, 2008 at 6:23 am
The Chief Elections Officer and Elections Office is not beholden to the public. First, there was the fiasco at the candidate filing deadline, and now he is dragging his feet on educating the public about blank ballots. Hold a con con and call for the Chief Elections Officer to be an elected position!
October 11th, 2008 at 10:03 am
So Duke’s borderline ethics violation in using his office and position to secure a “yes” Con Con vote has spilled over into badgering the independent elections bureau into doing his work for him at taxpayer expense. But he asked a guy who has so many ethics problems of his own the last thing he needs is to bow to administration pressure to do anything, much less spend money on what has turned into a partisan political pet project.
What a freak show.
October 11th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Blank ballots should NOT count as "no" votes. They should not count, period.
How many people really know that by not answering the con con question, they will be holding us back from having a concon? We would have had a concon in '96 if the unions didn't sue to make blank ballots count.
Office of Elections has done squat, and it's their job to educate the public about what they're voting on. No wonder nothing changes, and hardly anyone votes anymore in Hawaii.
October 13th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Andy Parx, asking the office of elections to explain the law to voters is not an ethical violation. Also, the Chief Election Officer is responsible for educating voters, not the LG. Where do you come up with the assertion that Duke is trying to get the election's office to "do his work for him?"
October 14th, 2008 at 10:04 am
By “Duke’s work” I meant his personal campaign work, whether for Guv in ’10 or in the pro Con Con campaign Keoki.
To try to use his position and office to further his advocacy for a Con Con is a borderline ethical violation but when he uses that position to pressure the elections office to disproportionately stress one point of voter education at the expense of others he crosses that line.
October 14th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
I agree with CV, blank ballots should not count.
We need a con-con so we can fix this.
October 14th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Andy, asking the office of elections to inform voters of the unique vote-counting laws that apply ONLY to constitutional questions is not an ethical violation, nor is it "advocating." In every other ballot contest, "yes" means yes, "no" means no, and "blank" means blank. If an informed and educated electorate is the basis of our democracy, then voters should know how their votes will actually be treated by the office of elections prior to voting. Moreover, I don't see how you come to the conclusion that such an explaination of the law, once offered, would benefit the pro con con position. Where is your evidence that the typical voter who was previously inclined to leave such a question blank, would now vote "yes" instead of "no"? The only thing I see for sure is that such an explaination would prevent voter apathy from deciding the issue.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
I agree Keoki. When it comes to voting laws, more education is better than less. Whatever one's position is on con con, keeping voters ignorant of the law should never be an acceptable tactic.
October 15th, 2008 at 10:44 am
The constitutional interpretation of the law is 10 years old now and voters have been extensively “educated” every election. Anyone who hasn’t heard that it’s a majority if ballot cast that is counted in the last four elections isn’t paying attention to vote ed anyway at this point.
Yes some education is appropriate every election. But what Duke is asking for- and using his office to try to get- is to change the balance of use of limited vote ed funds and do extensive ed on this one point- which is especially unwise in a year when the whole balloting system has changed. That’s where the bulk of the resources needs to go- to explain difference in the ballot such as the squares instead of circles and other changes.
October 16th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
I disagree Andy. I think your average voter is unaware of this unique and nonsensical variation in our law. Also, because of the presidential election, there will be a lot of first time or non-active voters who will participate. It never hurts to remind them about the law.
Your claim that Duke is using his office to over-emphasize this provision is also off base. The Office of Elections already put out a "how to vote" guide this year with lots of information in it. Unfortunately, it failed to even mention the unique vote counting laws that apply to constitutional questions. I believe Duke is simply saying that if you are going to educate voters, this should have been mentioned.
Finally, please don't forget to supply us with any evidence you have that this sort of voter education would favor the "yes" votes over the "no" votes.
October 17th, 2008 at 11:15 am
You make a lot of good points Kolea especially about the new voters and newcomers although most anyone who lived through the last Con Con vote and SC decision knows the fate of blank votes.
And though it’s pure speculation that it would increase “yes” votes the point is that Aiona obviously thinks it will. It acts as a “if I’m forced to decide” kind of provision and so I suppose it depends on which way people are leaning in the first place. But then it wouldn’t effect people who are voting no anyway, so it would only serve to make essentially undecided yes leaning voters to vote that way. I’ve actually always worried that if someone feels strongly that they don’t want their blank counted as “no” the only way to do that would be to skip voting entirely..
I did not know that the issue was not included in the voted ed so far- what I understood from what Derrick said that Cronin said that Aiona was seeking to increase the proportion of resources spent on that particular point.
October 17th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Thanks Andy. You have made some good points too. But...who's Kolea?
October 18th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Oops- Sorry Keoki- I mis-typed. Kolea is another person who often comments here.