President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 01, 2011 08:01 AM UTC

Policy wonking through Mail Ballot Elections statutes

  • 8 Comments
  • by: Chickenheed

This mess that Secretary of State Scott Gessler has stirred up has me interested in how Colorado should deal with mail ballots.

I don’t have a background in law or politics, but I do have a background in computer programming and computers can ONLY do what you tell them to do, not what you meant to tell them to do. Legislation has the same rules…mostly. Government SHOULD only do what the legislation tells them to do.

So what does our state statute say about mail ballots? Let’s find out!

According to that one paper the main issue is the mailing of ballots to voters that are considered “inactive/failed to vote”. According to Gessler, “Inactive/failed to vote” voters are the same as “Inactive” voters. Are they the same?

First let’s find out how a voter becomes “Inactive”…

According to CRS 1-2-605 – “Canceling registration – voter information card”

A registered elector who is deemed “Active” but who fails to vote in a general election shall have the elector’s registration record marked “Inactive (insert date)” by the county clerk and recorder following the general election. In the case of a registered elector to whom the county clerk and recorder mailed a confirmation card pursuant to paragraph (a) of subsection (6) of this section no later than ninety days after the 2008 general election and was returned by the United States postal service as undeliverable, the county clerk and recorder shall mark the registration record of that elector with the words “Inactive – undeliverable”.

Basically if you don’t vote in a general election, you’ll be considered “Inactive (insert date)”. If you don’t vote AND your confirmation card was returned as undeliverable, then you’ll be considered “Inactive – undeliverable”. GREAT! But “Inactive – failed to vote” was never mentioned?

The term “Inactive – failed to vote” is used is in CRS 1-7.5-108.5 “Voter information card – verification of active status – designation of inactive status – mailing of mail ballots.”

Not less than ninety days before a mail ballot election conducted pursuant to this article, the county clerk and recorder shall mail a voter information card to any registered elector whose registration record has been marked “Inactive – failed to vote”. For purposes of this section, “Inactive – failed to vote” shall mean a registered elector who is deemed “Active” but who failed to vote in a general election in accordance with the provisions of section 1-2-605

This is where things get muddy. To be considered “Inactive – failed to vote”, you’re “Active” but you didn’t vote in the last general election which means you’re “Inactive”. Um….huh?

Now if it just said “Inactive – failed to vote” shall mean a registered elector who is deemed “Inactive (insert date)” in accordance with the provisions of section 1-2-605 then Gessler would be right and there would be no argument, but it doesn’t so county clerks are going to err on the side of caution and allow people to vote.

This ambiguity is highlighted in CRS 1-7.5-107 “Procedures for conducting mail ballot election – primary elections – first-time voters casting a mail ballot after having registered by mail to vote.”

Not sooner than twenty-two days before an election, and no later than eighteen days before an election, except as provided in subparagraph (II) of this paragraph (a), the designated election official shall mail to each active registered elector, at the last mailing address appearing in the registration records and in accordance with United States postal service regulations, a mail ballot packet, which shall be marked “DO NOT FORWARD. ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED.”, or any other similar statement that is in accordance with United States postal service regulations.

The bold part is the important part, but I wanted to include the whole sentence. If officials are mailing ballots to each active registered elector, then they’re not mailing them to inactive electors. But are we talking about the active electors from 1-2-605 or the active but inactive electors from 1-7.5-108.8?

My solution…

Change any mention of “Inactive (insert date)” or “Inactive – failed to vote” to “Active – failed to vote (insert date)” in section 1-2-605 and wherever else it’s mention.

As it’s written now, if you are considered “Inactive – failed to vote” BUT you’re affiliated with a political party that is holding a primary election by mail, you will receive a ballot for that primary election (CRS 1-7.5-107(II)(A)). If you vote in the primary then you’re back to “Active” status.

This gives electors that are affiliated with a political parties that are having a primary election an unfair advantage over other electors (mostly unaffiliated electors) to regain their “Active” status.

Comments

8 thoughts on “Policy wonking through Mail Ballot Elections statutes

  1. The inconsistencies in the statutes should be cleaned up by the General Assembly.

    But Gessler would rather use ambiguous language to usurp power.

    The other side of the ambiguity, a view taken by several County Clerks and County Attorneys is that “shall mail to each active registered elector” is a minimum standard because it does not specifically prohibit clerks from mailing to inactive voters.

  2. Ralphie and most of us believe that the only rational interpretation is as Ralphie points to.

    Legislators are not expert. The leg needs more staff and a lot more. They need staff to check on this stuff so that proper verbiage is used in statutes they draft.

  3. Shouldn’t it be “after every general election?” Do we have no law on this for subsequent elections?

    And the card to be mailed 90 days before the election – what is its purpose?

    ps – good writeup

    1. your county clerk mails a confirmation card. It seems mostly redundant, but in practice it serves to remind voters that there’s an election and that they can’t go to a polling place because they’re receiving their ballot in the mail. I believe it’s in the same mailing as the postcard that has your voter ID and polling place.

      The clerks also use this to clean up the rolls by determining which addresses are undeliverable. That’s another potential problem in the system in that registration requires a home address and not a mailing address, though the card provides a separate mailing address option.  This means that a potentially significant number of voters can be caged because their home address doesn’t accept mail (many small towns require a PO Box since they don’t provide home delivery)

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

101 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!