www.ditl.org

To be fair, a lot of the government jobs in places where my family is from... are still hereditary.

Tyyr wrote:Pretty much what Graham said. I voted for:

President
Senator
Congressman
Sheriff
3 Florida Supreme Court Justices
6 State Constitutional Amendments
4 County Bylaw Changes
3 Local Judges
Tax Collector
Several other minor local officals

And again, given our status as a "battleground" state with 29 electoral votes and a bad history with the counts they take their time, double check, and run down allegations of wrong doing BEFORE we certify the results.

I would find it difficult to believe that all the other states don't do all of these things. It's not as if you have the largest population either. California is almost double that of Florida and they've already reported.

I also don't understand what voting for a "Tax Collector" is. Surely they just employ someone to do the job, the IRS comes to mind?

Mikey wrote:There are counties in more rural areas in which county coroner is an elected position. No, really.

What, can anybody stand? I know a few goths that would love that job.

IanKennedy wrote:I would find it difficult to believe that all the other states don't do all of these things. It's not as if you have the largest population either. California is almost double that of Florida and they've already reported.

I also don't understand what voting for a "Tax Collector" is. Surely they just employ someone to do the job, the IRS comes to mind?

Different states run things differently - no idea if that extends to posts being elected in one state but not another, though. How many people choose to stand is also factor. A lot of the really obscure jobs, it's entirely possible that a person can run unopposed so there is literally just one name on the ballot to vote for in that slot. The next state over you might get fifty people running, so the paper has to be longer to list them all.

Plus, the referendum questions get on the ballot because people collect petition signatures to put the proposition on there. Some states put loads on, some few.

It seems wacky to us that people stand election for offices that really aren't political - I think it's particularly absurd that judges and police officers should run for election. But different countries have different cultures, and what seems weird and strange one place is perfectly normal in another. And hey, it does seem to work for them overall!

Judges are unique, at least in Iowa. They're appointed to their position, like the Judges on the US Supreme Court, but they then have to have a retention vote, meaning that we (the citizens) have the ability to remove them from their position if we feel like they're not doing the job right. I remember it was a big deal when the Iowa Supreme Court made a ruling on Gay Marriage (in support of), since that was a governor election year there was a lot of talk about voting them out, voting in the Republican Governor candidate, having him appoint new judges to fill the vacancies and bringing the issue back in front of the court to get the decision overturned.....fortunately most of that didn't happen.

GrahamKennedy wrote:

IanKennedy wrote:I would find it difficult to believe that all the other states don't do all of these things. It's not as if you have the largest population either. California is almost double that of Florida and they've already reported.

I also don't understand what voting for a "Tax Collector" is. Surely they just employ someone to do the job, the IRS comes to mind?

Different states run things differently - no idea if that extends to posts being elected in one state but not another, though. How many people choose to stand is also factor. A lot of the really obscure jobs, it's entirely possible that a person can run unopposed so there is literally just one name on the ballot to vote for in that slot. The next state over you might get fifty people running, so the paper has to be longer to list them all.

Plus, the referendum questions get on the ballot because people collect petition signatures to put the proposition on there. Some states put loads on, some few.

It seems wacky to us that people stand election for offices that really aren't political - I think it's particularly absurd that judges and police officers should run for election. But different countries have different cultures, and what seems weird and strange one place is perfectly normal in another. And hey, it does seem to work for them overall!

Yes, but do they have to count them all at once. Short answer, no, they could prioritize the important one.

I think it's part of the "Fuck Yeah! Democracy!" attitude we have in our represenative republic. Vote on fucking everything and at times it does get out of hand. Personally though I'd rather see the default be "vote on it," and then reason why it shouldn't be as in cases of property appraisers, tax collectors, police chiefs, judges, etc. Hell, especially judges and police. They need to be enforcing the law, not pandering to voters.

Yes, but do they have to count them all at once. Short answer, no, they could prioritize the important one.

Actually they do. Ballots are certified in their entirety, not piecemeal.

Tyyr wrote:I think it's part of the "Fuck Yeah! Democracy!" attitude we have in our represenative republic. Vote on fucking everything and at times it does get out of hand. Personally though I'd rather see the default be "vote on it," and then reason why it shouldn't be as in cases of property appraisers, tax collectors, police chiefs, judges, etc. Hell, especially judges and police. They need to be enforcing the law, not pandering to voters.

Yes, but do they have to count them all at once. Short answer, no, they could prioritize the important one.

Actually they do. Ballots are certified in their entirety, not piecemeal.

Are you are saying that if you don't bother voting for the little people your vote for the important ones doesn't get counted? If so that's very wrong, they are separate elections and should not bias each other in any way.

No, you vote for whatever you want. You can just pick one candidate in one race on the whole ballot. It's not seperate ballots though. You have one ballot with everything being voted on. They don't count each individual section seperately. The entire ballot is counted at once all the votes for everything totaled. Election results have to certified as in everything was conducted properly which starts at the local polling place level with being sure that everything was done right and the physical ballots are secured and taken care of. The state doesn't certify their election results until they are sure everything is kosher. So it takes a few days, big fucking deal. I'd rather it be on the up and up than have another round of bullshit like in 2000.

Tyyr wrote:No, you vote for whatever you want. You can just pick one candidate in one race on the whole ballot. It's not seperate ballots though. You have one ballot with everything being voted on. They don't count each individual section seperately. The entire ballot is counted at once all the votes for everything totaled. Election results have to certified as in everything was conducted properly which starts at the local polling place level with being sure that everything was done right and the physical ballots are secured and taken care of. The state doesn't certify their election results until they are sure everything is kosher. So it takes a few days, big fucking deal. I'd rather it be on the up and up than have another round of bullshit like in 2000.

And yet every other state doesn't have the problem...

Every other state wasn't the center of a month long debacle three elections ago.

Again, big fucking deal.

Tinadrin Chelnor wrote:England is introducing elections for Police and Crime Commisioners. I have my election on the 15th.

The fact that we're adopting similar stupidity does not make it less stupid.

Deepcrush wrote:To be fair, a lot of the government jobs in places where my family is from... are still hereditary.

We've got a job like that here. It's great - it means we avoid all the nonsense you've just had to go through.

#1 - I have never heard of a justice/judge or a police officer being elected. Justices may have to undergo a retention vote, as Staplic mentioned, but I've never heard of a justice achieving her position through anything other than appointment. County sheriffs are often elected, but that's not the same as police.

#2 - @ Ian, if I read you correctly - often, there are local elections which are separate both in ballot and on the calendar from the national and state elections. While in this last election I voted both for federal positions and county/district positions, things like city council positions and school board positions are often voted on at other times during the year.

I want to say there are states that elect judges onto their State Supreme Court. I couldn't tell you where off the top of my head, but I feel like i had to know them for my AP Gov class a few years ago.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Tinadrin Chelnor wrote:England is introducing elections for Police and Crime Commisioners. I have my election on the 15th.

The fact that we're adopting similar stupidity does not make it less stupid.

Deepcrush wrote:To be fair, a lot of the government jobs in places where my family is from... are still hereditary.

We've got a job like that here. It's great - it means we avoid all the nonsense you've just had to go through.

On that first point the shame is that out of everything the UK could learn from the US they picked a bad habit.

On the second point, it does in an old fashioned way make sense. Family and community tasks being divided even and skills being passed down and improved over generations has value. The flip side is that change is really slow in coming made worse by the lack of political options that could encourage change. The DNP points to the cities and says "hey look at how everything is falling apart! Don't you want to have that happen to your town?". GOP follows up with some religious nut bag who likely never read a bible or Quran preaching about something crazy.