Strong argument here. The precinct committee vacancy data realy exposes the operational gap that gets ignored in reform rhetoric. I ran a rural voter turnout project back in 2019 and we couldn't even find enough volunteers to staff a single-day canvasing operation, let alone year-round election infrastructure. Dismantling a working system before buliding its replacement is how you get worse outcomes, not better. The trust issue cuts both ways but at least vote-by-mail has audit trails.
2019 was not a significant election year for Oregon voters. Rural homeowners voting on county/local issues that impact taxes don’t particularly want to be canvassed about their votes nor are they interested in prodding their neighbors about how they vote. That is why they move out to live apart from others. They mostly want to be left alone. Canvassing works in cities. However, the residents of my rural town were lined up and eager to sign petitions recently and so your canvassing experience is not comparable.
Thank you Natalia, I have not heard of any "Party" unofficial vetting process. Meetings are required to be open to all elected PCP's and party organization is grass roots and even protected by Oregon law:
A person must be registered in Oregon as a member of a major political party (e.g., Republican or Democratic).
OregonLaws
The candidate must have been a registered member of that party for at least 180 days before the filing deadline for the candidacy declaration.
Oregon Secretary of State
Must have an active voter registration in Oregon.
Apart from the above 3 legal qualifications, a county party cold reorganize with a caucus of newly elected PCP's with whatever changes they feel need to be made to the county bylaws, and organization structure.
Where you are correct, is internal faction fractioning is real. Our founding father warned against factions, and in the ORP we have factions within factions causing fracture and infighting. The now shorter ORP platform is an opportunity to find common ground on broader 80% issues and unify, but will that happen. It's really up to the minority stop sicking on issues that are not more broadly supported, and unify behind issues that have wide support across oregon. We did this on the NoTaxOregon referendum. Join the Oregon Freedom Coalition and make a difference.
Thank you for responding to my comment and the invitation to join Oregon Freedom Coalition. I was excited to hear about it when it formed and want to congratulate its leadership for a successful NoTaxOregon petition initiative. I was a circulator of the petition in my area and happily contributed to this effort. Many who signed the petition also voiced a concern that this referendum is prone to failure if we use the current election system which many voters don't trust, even in such progressive county like Multnomah.
Unfortunately, the election integrity is not in OFC mission, and for this reason I can't commit my time to another organization which is too hesitant to address the serious issues with our mail-in voting system which IS fraudulent and IS one of main reasons for all failures the OFC seeks to redress.
The "vetting process" for PCPs takes its place. Although you won't find it in any Oregon laws, I hear about it at almost every other executive meeting and had undergone this process myself before becoming a PCP. And Multnomah GOP is not the only one who has these unspoken rules. They violate the bylaws, but these rules help to retain the power and control the organization. The local GOP leadership doesn't want PCPs. They want volunteers who will have no voice in decision making process but will collect petition sigs and donate money. How many conservatives are ok with that? You've seen the numbers.
I do think that the County Clerk of each county should be in charge of the voter roles for that county and it should not be the job of the SOS. This could be accomplished by way of legislation.
The legislature should also reverse course and stop counting ballots that haven't been submitted or postmarked by midnight of election day. Their action did undermine public confidence in elections.
I think all available PCP's should volunteer for temporary jobs with local elections offices and work there year after year. I have worked part time in Lane County's office for many years now.
Sure, but did you see the numbers in Portland? How can you trust election results if you turn over counting to PCP's in Portland? That is the root of my point.
It's been the same in Lane County for at least 25 years. Authorized about 475 PCP's the Lane GOP gets about 200 and not all precincts have one. Then they have meetings and sometimes in the past they couldn't get a quorum of 37 present to conduct business. Lots of PCP's never show up for the meetings and they don't support the local GOP or local candidates with money. In fact, a lot of PCP's are too low income to be expected to make contributions and for those few who do it is $20 here or there. You can look at the campaign committee filings for your local GOP on the SOS website and see who gave money. It's not much. By comparison, the Lane Democrat party has a number of PCP's who give $100 or more monthly to the local organization. They are true believers and they may not be rich but they contribute regularly. You can look them up too. The bottom line is that the Democrats in Oregon have built a statewide network of relatively successful local party offices and the GOP has not. Never has over a period of many years.
Interesting read and lots of facts in it about Multnomah Republicans are correct.
However, I strongly disagree that the republican voters in Portland are too weak to provide a credible replacement to the current election system and I find your suggested solutions detached from reality and naive.
It’s not the fault of conservative citizens of Portland that many precincts have zero republican PCPs.
The real reason behind such low numbers are the ridiculous unofficial vetting rules put in place by local republican leadership which disenfranchises many good conservatives from participating. ORP is aware of these rules but refuses to intervene.
Another reason for low PCP numbers is a lack of unity withing the ORP and constant betrayal of its conservative base by republican representatives in Salem who have conceded to Democrats on almost all major issues. Republicans just don’t trust its own party anymore.
The Real reform shall start with the ORP first, not the local volunteers many of whom have spent years trying to help to rebuild the trust but are repeatedly betrayed by its own party, myself included. I personally dedicated three years of my life to Multnomah Republicans as a PCP and currently serve as HD 28 Captain.
Do you want more representation inside the system? Then get rid of the vetting system. How? Make the number of county delegates in ORP be based on the current number of active PCPs and not on the number of registered republicans, and you will see a drastic change in grassroots participation and many volunteers who will staff the polling places, verify the voter rolls, run the election booths and count the ballots.
Your skepticism on ENDVBM movement maybe right but its unfair to blame it for the lack of reform plan. ORP had 5 years to create such a plan and educate and persuade the Oregon voters on election reform. However the ORP decided to remain silent and distanced itself from the election problems. And this is another reason the citizen republicans distrust the party.
Vote by mail was established in Oregon through an initiative pushed by Governor John Kitzhaber and Secretary of State Phil Keisling. This measure made Oregon the first state to conduct elections exclusively by mail. To say that vote by mail was created to reduce apathy suggests that all states would be much better off if they instituted 100% VBM. Interesting how we haven’t had a Republican governor since they instituted cheat by mail. The Kitzhaber machine is still working perfectly as designed.
Ending VBM reduces voting by low information voters. Isn’t the point that we want passionate and educated people involved as part of this process? Ending VBM would also reduce corruption where more ballots are received than the number of people living in a district. Ending VBM is a start in the people taking back the voting system. The government of Oregon runs the entire voting system now except for the part the USPS plays. I am old enough to remember going to vote at my polling place in Oregon, and the system worked with even less people than we have today.
While single day, precinct level, wait in lines voting is likely to reduce the "low information" and low propensity vote harvesting, but it will also disinfeanchise the families who sit around the kitchen table and vote together with a ballot and voter pamphlet in hand. Not all conservative voters distrust the county clerk we elect. Oregon one of only 2 states that keep ballots securely only on paper and don't use voting machines. I have observed election ballot counting, and see the process. Have also talked to Republicans in states with polling place elections and they find fraud in those states as well. I'm not a believer that precinct level elections can be more secure. Especially not in Portland.
How the hell does voting in a voting booth “disenfranchise” families? Disenfranchise is one of those fav words leftists throw around suggesting that conservatives are taking away rights. The fact is Dems buy votes through social services given to illegals. Are you referring possibly to families that only Habla Espanol and aren’t legal citizens??
The fact is that even people in nursing homes, and military personnel can vote by requesting an absentee ballot in states where people vote in person, so the argument of disenfranchisement doesn’t hold. In Oregon we have zero conservative media except for people like Lars Larson. Low information voters are always going to be voting according to what they hear from Oregon’s Radical Lib MSM. Until that changes, we will never get on top of the problem. Less and less interest in voting is the result. Even Democrats are worried about apathy. With New Democrats like Cyrus Javadi, what’s the use in voting? I have only missed one special election for well over 20 years, but I rarely end up voting with the majority. Apathy no. Aggravation and concern, yes. VBM and voting corruption may not be the problem it is in WA state where they count the ballots till they get what they want, but people are voting who can’t read even traffic signs because we have motor-voter fraud going on.
Strong argument here. The precinct committee vacancy data realy exposes the operational gap that gets ignored in reform rhetoric. I ran a rural voter turnout project back in 2019 and we couldn't even find enough volunteers to staff a single-day canvasing operation, let alone year-round election infrastructure. Dismantling a working system before buliding its replacement is how you get worse outcomes, not better. The trust issue cuts both ways but at least vote-by-mail has audit trails.
2019 was not a significant election year for Oregon voters. Rural homeowners voting on county/local issues that impact taxes don’t particularly want to be canvassed about their votes nor are they interested in prodding their neighbors about how they vote. That is why they move out to live apart from others. They mostly want to be left alone. Canvassing works in cities. However, the residents of my rural town were lined up and eager to sign petitions recently and so your canvassing experience is not comparable.
Thank you Natalia, I have not heard of any "Party" unofficial vetting process. Meetings are required to be open to all elected PCP's and party organization is grass roots and even protected by Oregon law:
A person must be registered in Oregon as a member of a major political party (e.g., Republican or Democratic).
OregonLaws
The candidate must have been a registered member of that party for at least 180 days before the filing deadline for the candidacy declaration.
Oregon Secretary of State
Must have an active voter registration in Oregon.
Apart from the above 3 legal qualifications, a county party cold reorganize with a caucus of newly elected PCP's with whatever changes they feel need to be made to the county bylaws, and organization structure.
Where you are correct, is internal faction fractioning is real. Our founding father warned against factions, and in the ORP we have factions within factions causing fracture and infighting. The now shorter ORP platform is an opportunity to find common ground on broader 80% issues and unify, but will that happen. It's really up to the minority stop sicking on issues that are not more broadly supported, and unify behind issues that have wide support across oregon. We did this on the NoTaxOregon referendum. Join the Oregon Freedom Coalition and make a difference.
Ben,
Thank you for responding to my comment and the invitation to join Oregon Freedom Coalition. I was excited to hear about it when it formed and want to congratulate its leadership for a successful NoTaxOregon petition initiative. I was a circulator of the petition in my area and happily contributed to this effort. Many who signed the petition also voiced a concern that this referendum is prone to failure if we use the current election system which many voters don't trust, even in such progressive county like Multnomah.
Unfortunately, the election integrity is not in OFC mission, and for this reason I can't commit my time to another organization which is too hesitant to address the serious issues with our mail-in voting system which IS fraudulent and IS one of main reasons for all failures the OFC seeks to redress.
The "vetting process" for PCPs takes its place. Although you won't find it in any Oregon laws, I hear about it at almost every other executive meeting and had undergone this process myself before becoming a PCP. And Multnomah GOP is not the only one who has these unspoken rules. They violate the bylaws, but these rules help to retain the power and control the organization. The local GOP leadership doesn't want PCPs. They want volunteers who will have no voice in decision making process but will collect petition sigs and donate money. How many conservatives are ok with that? You've seen the numbers.
Regards,
N
I do think that the County Clerk of each county should be in charge of the voter roles for that county and it should not be the job of the SOS. This could be accomplished by way of legislation.
The legislature should also reverse course and stop counting ballots that haven't been submitted or postmarked by midnight of election day. Their action did undermine public confidence in elections.
I think all available PCP's should volunteer for temporary jobs with local elections offices and work there year after year. I have worked part time in Lane County's office for many years now.
Sure, but did you see the numbers in Portland? How can you trust election results if you turn over counting to PCP's in Portland? That is the root of my point.
It's been the same in Lane County for at least 25 years. Authorized about 475 PCP's the Lane GOP gets about 200 and not all precincts have one. Then they have meetings and sometimes in the past they couldn't get a quorum of 37 present to conduct business. Lots of PCP's never show up for the meetings and they don't support the local GOP or local candidates with money. In fact, a lot of PCP's are too low income to be expected to make contributions and for those few who do it is $20 here or there. You can look at the campaign committee filings for your local GOP on the SOS website and see who gave money. It's not much. By comparison, the Lane Democrat party has a number of PCP's who give $100 or more monthly to the local organization. They are true believers and they may not be rich but they contribute regularly. You can look them up too. The bottom line is that the Democrats in Oregon have built a statewide network of relatively successful local party offices and the GOP has not. Never has over a period of many years.
Interesting read and lots of facts in it about Multnomah Republicans are correct.
However, I strongly disagree that the republican voters in Portland are too weak to provide a credible replacement to the current election system and I find your suggested solutions detached from reality and naive.
It’s not the fault of conservative citizens of Portland that many precincts have zero republican PCPs.
The real reason behind such low numbers are the ridiculous unofficial vetting rules put in place by local republican leadership which disenfranchises many good conservatives from participating. ORP is aware of these rules but refuses to intervene.
Another reason for low PCP numbers is a lack of unity withing the ORP and constant betrayal of its conservative base by republican representatives in Salem who have conceded to Democrats on almost all major issues. Republicans just don’t trust its own party anymore.
The Real reform shall start with the ORP first, not the local volunteers many of whom have spent years trying to help to rebuild the trust but are repeatedly betrayed by its own party, myself included. I personally dedicated three years of my life to Multnomah Republicans as a PCP and currently serve as HD 28 Captain.
Do you want more representation inside the system? Then get rid of the vetting system. How? Make the number of county delegates in ORP be based on the current number of active PCPs and not on the number of registered republicans, and you will see a drastic change in grassroots participation and many volunteers who will staff the polling places, verify the voter rolls, run the election booths and count the ballots.
Your skepticism on ENDVBM movement maybe right but its unfair to blame it for the lack of reform plan. ORP had 5 years to create such a plan and educate and persuade the Oregon voters on election reform. However the ORP decided to remain silent and distanced itself from the election problems. And this is another reason the citizen republicans distrust the party.
Vote by mail was established in Oregon through an initiative pushed by Governor John Kitzhaber and Secretary of State Phil Keisling. This measure made Oregon the first state to conduct elections exclusively by mail. To say that vote by mail was created to reduce apathy suggests that all states would be much better off if they instituted 100% VBM. Interesting how we haven’t had a Republican governor since they instituted cheat by mail. The Kitzhaber machine is still working perfectly as designed.
Ending VBM reduces voting by low information voters. Isn’t the point that we want passionate and educated people involved as part of this process? Ending VBM would also reduce corruption where more ballots are received than the number of people living in a district. Ending VBM is a start in the people taking back the voting system. The government of Oregon runs the entire voting system now except for the part the USPS plays. I am old enough to remember going to vote at my polling place in Oregon, and the system worked with even less people than we have today.
While single day, precinct level, wait in lines voting is likely to reduce the "low information" and low propensity vote harvesting, but it will also disinfeanchise the families who sit around the kitchen table and vote together with a ballot and voter pamphlet in hand. Not all conservative voters distrust the county clerk we elect. Oregon one of only 2 states that keep ballots securely only on paper and don't use voting machines. I have observed election ballot counting, and see the process. Have also talked to Republicans in states with polling place elections and they find fraud in those states as well. I'm not a believer that precinct level elections can be more secure. Especially not in Portland.
How the hell does voting in a voting booth “disenfranchise” families? Disenfranchise is one of those fav words leftists throw around suggesting that conservatives are taking away rights. The fact is Dems buy votes through social services given to illegals. Are you referring possibly to families that only Habla Espanol and aren’t legal citizens??
The fact is that even people in nursing homes, and military personnel can vote by requesting an absentee ballot in states where people vote in person, so the argument of disenfranchisement doesn’t hold. In Oregon we have zero conservative media except for people like Lars Larson. Low information voters are always going to be voting according to what they hear from Oregon’s Radical Lib MSM. Until that changes, we will never get on top of the problem. Less and less interest in voting is the result. Even Democrats are worried about apathy. With New Democrats like Cyrus Javadi, what’s the use in voting? I have only missed one special election for well over 20 years, but I rarely end up voting with the majority. Apathy no. Aggravation and concern, yes. VBM and voting corruption may not be the problem it is in WA state where they count the ballots till they get what they want, but people are voting who can’t read even traffic signs because we have motor-voter fraud going on.