Wicked Local’s Emily Costello reports that turnout in Newton for Tuesday’s special elections was well above state average
Voter turnout in Newton was significantly better than statewide averages — with 40 percent of voters coming out to the polls versus approximately 27 percent statewide.
Perhaps Newton voters are not as ‘tired’ of elections as predicted. But given that the Ward 1 At Large Election was uncontested (and we still only have 23 aldermen), was the original election commission recommendation to delay this vote until the fall the right one?
No, the charter provisions might be screwy, but they are what they are.
Perhaps we an learn from this though and reexamine the provisions?
Greg, I voted to have the special election, and I voted for Scott Lennon, even though there was no contest. And I would do it over again. The Charter says when there is a vacancy in the first 16 months of the term, the Board “shall forthwith” call a special election. Had there been a contested race, we would not be having this discussion.
That said, I docketed a proposed amendment to the Charter which would make special elections optional rather than mandatory to allow the Board discretion in these cases. We’ll see whether that flies with my colleagues. But it ought to.
Now I’m really confused, why was there so much talk about Charter reform when the BoA can simply amend it (apparently)? I thought the Charter was similar to a trust approved by the Commonwealth where only the Commonwealth can approve changes, not the BoA alone?
Absolutely not. I’d love to know though if this was as much of a hassle for the Elections Department as then Acting Elections Commission Secretary Peter Koutoujian said it would be.
Congratulation to Scott, but with all due respect, it was the Senate election that that generated almost all of that 40% turnout in Newton. I didn’t do as much in this campaign as I have in past ones, but Newton was a prime turnout target for the Markey Campaign and the 16,000 to 5,000 wipe out for the Republicans here probably balanced off Gomez’s margin in at least a score of small conservative leaning towns. My one big criticism of the Markey campaign is that the Congressman did little to excite the Democratic base here or elsewhere. His caution made sense on one level, but I found overwhelmingly that Democratic and many independent voters respected his record and personal honesty, but there was little of the passion I found for President Obama, Barney Frank or Elizabeth Warren. My one suggestion for him would be to become more passionate to galvanize an excited base for what could be a more difficult run less than 18 months from now.
Given that there was no way to know that this would be an uncontested race before setting the election, I think it was the right decision.
I work as a warden in one of the precincts, and having two elections at one time was quite a challenge–although I’m proud that our poll workers pulled it off with aplomb, despite working without a/c!
I’m curious–and assume Scott Lennon will be also–about how many of the municipal voters chose to blank (not vote their ballots) or write-in (I’m assuming that other precincts also only had spontaneous write-ins–that is, no organized candidate who qualified).
That said, giving voters the choice to vote on a legislator is always better than what we had before-crony appointees. Don’t know if history would repeat itself, but better safe than sorry!
Andreae, I checked with the City Clerk, David Olson, because I heard from several people that their ballots were rejected by the voting machines. He confirmed that blank ballots are rejected by the voting machines so there is no way to know how many people chose not to vote for anyone in the municipal race, although you can figure out how many people voted in the special election for US Senate and subtract the number who voted in the municipal election to get a ballpark estimate. Anecdotally, while I was in line I saw several people who returned their yellow municipal ballots because the election was uncontested.
@Ted: Different voting spots had different ways of handling the “blank” ballots–some had voters put them in the “hand count” slot, some returned them to the warden’s desk–there may be more.
But simply subtracting the number of votes cast in the Municipal election from the Senate election won’t get you a blanks number, since some voters wanted to remain anonymous. By checking in and getting a Municipal ballot, but leaving it blank, you ensured that no one could tell if you did not vote for Scott. It’s a slightly different count, but it is possible, if you collect and count the un-voted ballots.
I agree, Andreae. But I am guessing that the vast majority of people who came to the polls pulled ballots for the statewide special election for US Senate, so subtracting the number of people who cast a vote for Scott at least gives you a ballpark idea of the number of people who chose not to vote. Not to start trouble, but perhaps “none of the above” should be on all ballots.
Apropos of nothing, Australia is one democracy which actually mandates that all registered voters participate by voting in every election by law. It would never work in the US, and I wouldn’t want a law like that anyway, but it is an interesting concept nonetheless.