Secretary of State Catbert Hosemann issued the following press release:
Democratic Presidential Primary Ballot for the March 8, 2016 Primary
On Thursday, February 25, 2016, the
Mississippi Supreme Court ordered the Secretary of State’s Office and
effectively every county in Mississippi to add Willie Wilson’s name to
the Democratic Presidential Primary Ballot. The
Supreme Court found the Mississippi Democratic Party violated Mr.
Wilson’s due process in not placing him on the ballot. The Secretary of
State’s Office appealed on Friday, February 26, 2016, specifically as
it applied to restricting votes by military and
overseas voters. The Mississippi Supreme Court issued a revised
decision on the same day. By reason of this revised decision, Wilson’s
name was required to be placed on the Democratic Primary Ballot for
March 8th as a presidential candidate and
Wilson’s name was not required to be added to any absentee ballots prepared or issued to voters.
This case is totally the
result of a failure by the Mississippi Democratic Party. Mississippi
Circuit Clerks, Election Commissioners and the Secretary of State were
not at fault in this matter. Unfortunately,
the Democratic Party’s mistake is estimated to cost Mississippians Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars.
After discussions with the U.S.
Department of Justice and the Attorney General’s Office, the following
determinations have been made:
1)
Uniformed and Overseas Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) Democratic voters have been sent a new ballot.
In order to comply with UOCAVA, it was necessary for the Secretary of
State to promulgate an administrative rule extending the
deadline by which to receive UOCAVA absentee ballots for the March 8,
2016 Primary Election in all counties. To comply with federal law,
UOCAVA voters who request a Democratic Primary absentee ballot between
today and Tuesday, March 8,
will be provided the
revised Democratic Primary absentee ballot. If the UOCAVA voter
chooses to cast the second ballot, the first absentee ballot will be
replaced with the second absentee ballot, with only the second absentee
ballot counted on Election night. If the UOCAVA voter
chooses not to cast the second ballot, the first cast absentee ballot
will be counted on Election night. The UOCAVA voter may return the cast
absentee ballot by e-mail, fax or mail. The ballot, if returned by
e-mail or fax, must be received by the UOCAVA
voter’s Circuit Clerk no later than 7:00 p.m. CST on Tuesday, March 8, 2016.
The ballot, if returned by mail, must be postmarked no later than Tuesday, March 8, 2016,
and must be received by the UOCAVA voter’s Circuit Clerk no later than
5:00 p.m. CST on Thursday, March 17, 2016.
2)
All absentee ballots will continue to exclude Willie Wilson’s name.
13 comments:
Isn't this a rerun?
Dilbert seems to be hanging his whole argument on the Uniformed Voters Act. Someone should ask him how many overseas votes have been requested or returned for this election cycle. Betcha it is measured in the low hundreds at best; maybe not even a hundred.
Lots of huffing and puffing by Gilbert over nothing. He could have achieved the same result last January without the million dollar cost to the counties.
He is correct - the beginning of this screwup was the first mistake, that being by the Democrat Party. They have the same thinking mentality of McDaniel/Tyner that deadlines spelled out in law don't apply to them. But once Ricky and his buddies fixed their mistake, our wonderful Secretary thought he would prove his moxie - and refuse to do anything about it. He successfully stretched the process out for over a month and after all the costs had been incurred.
Thank you Mr. Secretary, screwed up another one. Just like when you told McDaniel that there were no deadlines and the Court had to straighten you out then.
(1) The party absolutely screwed this up, but so did the SOS, as the Court held. Dogbert is assuming no one will read the Supreme Court's decision.
(2) It is false to say that the absentee ballots don't have Wilson's name on them. I voted absentee, and his name was on there.
Did I read that right? Willie Nelson? The redneck hippie? He'd sell pot to reduce the national debt!
OH wait--willie wilson. who the heck is that? does he drive a truck?
4:59 - you might have gotten an absentee with his name on it if you voted in the last few days. But if you voted more than a week ago, your ballot could not have had his name on it.
A few counties print their absentees 'on demand'. There, you could have had the opportunity.
But the more interesting question is - did you vote for Hillary, Bernie, or Willie.
Just watched the movie RECOUNT. A chronicle of the weeks after the 2000 U.S. presidential election (Bush/Gore) and the subsequent recounts in Florida. I suggest you check it out. This will get your juices up for the 2016 election. Let the good times roll!
During 2000 issues went all the way to the State Supreme Court than rolled over into the US Supreme Court.
I see some similarity with this issue. One is political parties love to use the court system to get their way.
Free Willie!!!!
If we got away from these ridiculous paper ballots that are later read by a machine, this change would cost $0.
Hosemann is a hack.
8:33. sorry, but you are wrong. there would still be substantial cost. Those touchscreen voting devices require significant programing, and then L&A testing. All that had to be done again. And even with touchscreens, you must have paper ballots at each precinct (emergency, curbside, and affidavit ballots).
The 'ricidulous' paper ballots are actually an improvement to the touchscreen process. Counties all over the country that are having to replace their touchscreens (they have an average life of 10 years) are going heavily to the optical scan ballots - mainly due to the cost savings and simplicity of maintaining the machines.
Everyone can have their own opinion of scan ballots to touchscreens - but there is a major cost to redoing either.
Pete Perry is correct on both counts.
The touch machines were a real mistake - optical scanning is the way to go. I'm glad that is the trend all across the country now.
And yes, the precincts will need a supply of paper ballots for those votes that cannot be cast on the touchscreen for various reasons.
I love the touch screens. I think the security is better for them too. I have seen how the process works and they are secure.
The optical scan ballots are as secure, and arguably more secure than the touchscreens. I actually believe both are very secure - that is not the question. But the scan ballots do leave a much better paper trail for any questions that exist after the election - a true way to answer any questions that may be raised.
But the reason for changing is not so much security. It is overall cost. And the assurance to the voter that their vote is being counted as they intended.
Not sure why this site isn't running an open thread on the Billingsly/Michel race. If memory serves, last time this seat was open there were multiple threads running with candidate input and all sorts of jabs running amok. Other than paid advertisements, perhaps this contest is of relative non-value.
Post a Comment