Ritchie calls for early voting, fewer recounts

  • Article by: KEVIN DUCHSCHERE , Star Tribune
  • Updated: February 11, 2009 - 2:42 PM

Secretary of State Mark Ritchie spelled out his proposals to make voting easier and more efficient for eligible voters.

  • 34
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
skarjoeFeb. 11, 09 3:08 PM

More voting less counting. Thanks Mark!

18
6
gman40Feb. 11, 09 3:37 PM

How about instant runoff voting for instances (such as the recent close elections) where there are more than two major candidates? This would most likely have given us a winner of the current senatorial race on the night of the election.

8
17
BloodyGoodFeb. 11, 09 3:38 PM

Add one more requirement to voting. You have to be smart enough to fill in an oval in order to be considered smart enough to pick an elected official. Any ballot that is not electronically readable is not valid. A recount would mean only that all ballots are collected and run through another scanner to verify the count. No one should ever sit down and argue about what a voter intended.

16
19
pubnafFeb. 11, 09 3:44 PM

Mark Ritchie, are you getting walking orders from ACORN.

14
20
fwallenFeb. 11, 09 3:51 PM

The only thing I would add is to make the ballot as easily understood as possible and reinforce for each voter that they can have a new ballot if they make a mistake and they can have all the time they need. Trying to "determine voters intent" is where all the subjectivity comes into play and leads to a lack of faith in the system, a waste of time and added expense.

19
4
svennyFeb. 11, 09 3:53 PM

MN needs to totally get rid of the "voter intent" rule...if a ballot is not marked legibly, it should not count. Period. There should be no way that somebody can "interpret" the way that a vote is cast - that is the way Third World countries operate - and look how absurd and obscene their elections are. Additionally, there is no such thing as an impartial election judge. These people do it because they believe in the election system, participate in it, and have their own preferences towards the ultimate outcome. (and no, I am not saying they are dishonest), it just allows for them to see things differently than the voter did in fact intend. Short of asking people how they voted, there is no way to accurately determine voter intent, so get rid of it!

20
12
svennyFeb. 11, 09 4:06 PM

Since all of his proposals will end up saving money, Ritchie's next budget request should include a smaller operating budget, right? Right??? I guess we'll have to wait and see...

18
9
dcatworkFeb. 11, 09 4:06 PM

This would only open another avenue for potential fraud.

17
10
sarazs1Feb. 11, 09 4:08 PM

Vote often!

11
13
RipAndersonFeb. 11, 09 4:41 PM

Yup. "Intent" doesn't work scoring school tests, why should it count in voting.

15
7

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT