Oregon's 'Motor Voter' Law A Success, With A Hitch = three-fourths cannot vote in primary Tuesday

[L. Coyote]

You snooze, your candidate loses!

What does this statistic say about voter participation from the new motor voters?

Oregon's 'Motor Voter' Law A Success, With A Hitch
by Kristena Hansen AP | May 15, 2016 9:07 a.m. | Portland

Oregon’s landmark new automatic voter registration system added nearly 52,000 voters in just four months this year, more than double what the state has normally seen for an entire year.

That sounds impressive, but there’s a hitch. The so-called “motor voter” law — a first in the nation widely hailed as a way to boost voter participation — hasn’t made it much easier to participate in Oregon’s closed primary on Tuesday.

November general election when all voters can participate, the presidential primary in Oregon and some other states is restricted only to voters who are registered as Republican or Democrat.

Under the new law, Oregonians 18 and up are automatically registered to vote while renewing or applying for a driver’s license or state ID card, but they can’t pick a party at that time. Instead, they’re registered by default as nonaffiliated, and a few days later they can choose a party or opt out on a form sent by mail.

Most people, however, don’t return their forms. .............

[center]


Oregon Gov. Kate Brown signs an automatic voter registration bill in March, 2015.

People had plenty of time, and there were plenty of deadline warnings.

[CurtEastPoint]

1. ALL FIFTY STATES should have the same rules, policies for voting. Ridiculous.

[enlightenment]

2. Why automatically register people

without giving them the option of choosing an affiliation. Particularly in a state with a closed primary system.

Warnings and deadlines are ridiculous stopgaps when the system itself is unfinished in an important way.

Of course, if we got rid of this party driven primary nonsense and went to open, blanket primaries it wouldn't be a problem, but that would never do . . .

[MH1]

3. From the OP it sounds like they DO have an option to pick a party,

but most don't bother to do so, which would involve filling out a form and returning it.

[enlightenment]

6. What I am saying is that it should be part of

the process when they get their driver's licence/id/whatever it is that automatically registers them.

One line of text on a printed form. A few lines of code for an online application. Making this the fault of the voters who are "automatically registered" is passing the buck.

If you were given a form to register to vote and told that you would need to fill out a separate form that would arrive at a later date to indicate your affiliation, would you consider that efficient? I doubt it.

This is an interesting idea, but they haven't worked it through.

[L. Coyote]

4. Because government isn't in the political party business. Nor should they be.

I want everyone registed to vote, but the Oregon government has things to do in the interest of the people and should not spend any time acting on behalf of any or all political parties. It is bad enough that they hold primaries for political parties and give party nominees a free pass to the ballot. I'd prefer if Trump does not beat both Hillary and Clinton, he not get on the Oregon ballot. But that doesn't work with 50 separate states doing elections.

If primaries were non-partisan, Sanders and Clinton would be the candidates in the two general election!

[Igel]

5. Most of the "free pass"

is because those parties got a large enough segment of the population to turn out in the previous election to get their nominees on a ballot.

It's probably possible for other parties to be included, but they'd have to show sufficient support via petitions. I've been in states where the "state primaries" weren't restricted to the two main parties, but included a third or fourth party.

[enlightenment]

7. The

states have been in the "party" business since they started registering people to vote. Whether it is a paper form or an online application, the majority of states (I won't speak for all, as I haven't looked up all 50 plus territories) provide a place for applicants to indicate their party preference - or none. I've been voting in this country for over 40 years and lived in quite a few states. When I register in the state (whichever one it is) I am given the option of choosing an affiliation. I don't have to do so - in fact, I have never registered as a member of a party except to vote in closed primaries - but the OPTION is there.

Not providing the option places an additional and bizarre burden on the voter - a two-step process they shouldn't have to undertake.

[alarimer]

8. You do in Maryland

They let you choose a party, but I don't think they tell you whether the primary is closed or not. But you do have to choose, R, D or I.

Re-registering was really easy when I moved to a new place and updated my driver's license.

I am personally in favor of open primaries. I think, because more people are independent from either party, they should be allowed to vote in one primary or the other. Choosing one at the last minute is still choosing, even if they otherwise choose to remain unaffiliated.

[L. Coyote]

9. Open primaries create a lot of strategic cross-voting, not a good thing when

the best candidate in a party gets knocked out in the primary by the other party so the other party's candidate can win the general.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. So a group of 52,000 that had never even bothered to register produces 13,000 new Party

affiliations first time out of the gate, that's not a bad result at all. At the same time we've had over 140,000 people either change Party or affiliate with a Party out of the pool of already registered voters....
But they should allow for people to pick a Party when they are registered. Got to change that. I still expect a good chuck to never vote, some of them are not registered because they do not wish to be.