The New York Times…

by sam on 11/5/2004

…confirms my anecdotal experience. Namely, that that election procedures in New York are some of the worst in the nation. (It’s something they’ve written about before, as well). As I’ve mentioned before, I think the reason no one pays attention to it is that in federal elections, there’s really not a lot of surprise as to who is getting New York’s electoral votes (Manhattan voted over 85% for Kerry? At least I’m living in the right place (and hey, does anyone notice that the people who actually got attacked on 9/11 overwhelmingly think Bush has done a crap job?)). Heck, even Schumer won by such a large margin that they’re already speculating as to what office he really wants next (governor?).

At just my polling place on Tuesday, I experienced broken machines and confused and overwhelmed poll workers. As I wrote about in August, I’ve actually witnessed poll workers threaten to disrupt the voting process. A colleague of mine who used to be a New York City cop before he became a lawyer (and who is another Republican) has told me stories of how when he worked at elections (in New York, it’s the responsibility of the police to get the voting records back to where they get counted), they weren’t taught what part of the machine actually needed to be removed and brought in (in his case, I think they just took most of the machine, so that the election officials would be sure to have the right "part").

But local elections, particularly the "non-partisan" city council elections, are often much closer, and in a low turnout year the voting irregularities here could have a significant impact on the outcome. I seem to recall a local election from a while back (in Queens?) that needed to be decided by a coin toss because the result was an actual tie. You don’t get much closer than that.

Tags: