If anyone has to wait approximately an hour to vote....

[kentuck]

It is voter suppression and should be investigated and prosecuted. In this nation, there is no reason not to have enough voting machines and there is no excuse for holding people up to check their "credentials' to see if they are a legitimate "Democrat..

Edited to satisfy the clock watchers...:)

[Freddie Stubbs]

1. So, 59 minutes is fine but 60 minutes is vote supression?

How did you determine that was the majic number? :shrug:

[StClone]

2. Ok 59 minutes is voter suppression!

Works for me.

[ohioan]

4. What about 58 minutes?

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. What exactly is a reasonable wait?

:shrug:

[kentuck]

3. It came to me in a vision...

:)

[forgethell]

5. That's ridiculous!

Men have fought and died for our right to vote and waiting in line is too much?! It may be incompetence, but vote suppression? Oh, Come on!

If someone doesn't value his right to vote enough to wait in line, then I'm not sure that he needs to vote. 4 hours, maybe, 1 hour, no.

Just my personal opinion.

Merry Christmas :-)

[ohioan]

10. Exactly -

in some countries, people walk dozens of miles and patiently stand in line for hour after hour after hour in order to exercise their right to vote. Of course, we must do all we can do to make voting as easy as possible for everyone and that means working to keep the lines faster and shorter. But equating an hour's wait with voter suppression is way beyond the pale.

[Cicero]

6. I was in line a total of an hour and a half...

...but this was in a very heavily Republican district. And since the county Board of Elections where I live is controlled by Democrats, does that constitute voter suppression of the Repubs? Hmmm??? :eyes:

I just saw it as massive voter turnout. Plus, they only had a total of 7 machines, 2 of which were devoted exclusively to handicap voters, of which I saw maybe 1 during the whole time I was in line. They could have taken one of those machines and had it for general use.

So, at least for me, it was a combination of turnout and poor planning choices, not voter suppression.

Later,

[bullimiami]

8. wife and son and many others

waited 3 hours at the early voting site. ridiculous lines the whole early voting period and then long lines in our precint on voting day.

[kentuck]

9. OK...I withdraw my comment...there was no voter suppression...

Because we cannot decide on a time limit...There was no effort to suppress the vote. Bush won fair and square.

[ohioan]

11. Now you're being ridiculous

No one is claiming that there was no voter suppression. But an hour wait hardly qualifies. Huffing that people's failure to buy into your demand that an hour's wait = voter suppression means that we're claiming that Bush won fair and square is childish. Perhaps you should consider the possibility that your idea is far-fetched.

[rinsd]

13. No one said that....

It's just that saying waiting an hour on line is voter suppression is silly.

Comparing the amount of machines/polling stattions available vs. average amount of voters would be much better indication of possbile voter suppression.

[Minstrel Boy]

12. Absolutely agree.

I can only speak from my Canadian experience, but I have never needed to wait in a line. And it's not because there are so darn few of us. I vote in downtown Toronto, and our polling stations serve very high population densities.

Hours waiting in line, and too-few machines distributed to concentrations of Democratic supporters, is voter suppression.

Also, I might add, paper ballots rock.

[cattleman22]

14. I waited almost 2 hours

I voted in Ohio. My preceinct had approximately 3 times more voting machines than normal. I don't blame the precinct for the long lines. I blame a very long ballot with lots of elections and measures coupled with a large turnout.

[Eric J in MN]

15. What type of machines?

With optical-scan (SAT-style) ballots, they can put dozens of tables in a room and dozens of people can vote at once.

Only one scanner (one machine) per precinct is needed with optical-scan ballots.

[cattleman22]

17. I don't recall the type. I pressed a button for each candidate or measure

[Eric J in MN]

21. With Optical-Scan ballots, people don't need to press buttons.

A dozen or more people can fill-in ovals on pieces of paper at once, and so the line moves faster.

[Eric J in MN]

16. When whites can vote in an hour, and blacks have to wait

several hours, as in some neighborhoods in Ohio, it is unconstitutional.

It violates the Equal Protection of the Law.

This election was unconstitutional.

[cattleman22]

18. Letter to the Edditor in Columbus Dispatch

This letter said that on a per voter basis, majority black precincts had more voting machines. Do you know know where I could find data to disprove that statement?

[Eric J in MN]

20. The issue is per REGISTERED VOTER, not per VOTES-CAST

If there aren't enough machines in a black neighborhood, there will be the same number of votes as in a white neighborhood per machines because of the blacks who have to go home without voting.

The author of that letter was trying to mislead people by representing votes-cast as the number of voters.

http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3/2004/995

In precinct 55-B on Columbus’ near east side, there were 1,338 registered voters and, according to Franklin County Board of Elections estimates, 956 active voters who had voted in the last two federal elections. Despite voter registration being up 17%, and by the BOE’s own guidelines the polling place requiring ten machines (one per 100 voters), the polling site had only three machines, one less than for the 2000 elections.


The Election Protection Coalition that visited the voting site between 7:30-8:30 a.m. documented a dozen people leaving the polls, six to go to work and six who were either elderly or handicapped. But things were worse in other areas of Columbus.

In precinct 1-B where there were 1,620 registered voters, a 27% increase in voter registration, the precinct had five voting machines in 2000 and only three in 2004. Where did they go? Out to Republican enclaves like Canal Winchester, where two machines were added since 2000, for a total of five to service 1,255 registered voters? Or were they re-routed to Dublin 2-G where 1,656 registered voters apparently needed six machines, twice the number of Columbus’ 1-B?

Nearby in Dublin precinct 3-C, 910 registered voters were allocated four voting machines. No doubt machines were shifted from precincts like Columbus 44-G with 1,620 voters and registration up 25%, which lost one machine from the 2000 elections to 2004.

[The Flaming Red Head]

19. This all sounds like the separate but equal argument to me

These people would have you think that as long as it was only minority/democratic precincts that were the ones shafted and left without adequate equipment, then it was OK. They have their own places to vote.

NO it's not OK.


I'm pissed.

[kentuck]

22. With the modern technology, a person should be in and out in 10 minutes

Who wants to stand in a fucking line for 2 hours to vote ! Fifteen minutes at the max !