Some People Cure Meat, Voters Asked to Cure Ballots

Share Story :
RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
Twitter

Many people have heard of cured bacon, but not everyone has heard the term “cure a ballot.”

Earlier this week, Governor Gavin Newsom reached out to everyone who might have had a ballot issue, to cure it, ASAP.

At stake is Proposition 1. “This ballot initiative is so close that your commitment to volunteer could mean the difference between people getting off the streets and into the treatment they need… or not,” Newsom stated in his email to supporters. “Truly. It is that close.”

California Governor Gavin Newsom

Politico reported Friday on March 15 “that the governor is recruiting people to the labor-intensive job of contacting Democratic-registered voters who had their mail ballots disqualified. The pricey effort appears to include mailers, phone banks and canvassing efforts targeting up to 30,000 voters whose ballots were rejected.

“By getting some of those Democratic voters to complete new paperwork and get their ballots counted, the governor’s team hopes to ‘find’ more votes in favor of Prop. 1.”

By contrast, those opposing the Prop. do not have the money to reach out to the numerous people who voted against it, but might also need to have ballots cured.

When a ballot has a technical mistake, such as a signature that does not match an election officials record or if there is a missing or incorrect address, the voter is notified that do not match election officials’ records or a missing or incorrect address, the voter is notified.

According to California law, officials have until eight days prior to the April 12 certification date to send notice to voters via first-class mail, providing them with an opportunity to fix their mistake.

Politico reported “Ballot initiative veteran Chris Lehman said Newsom was in a rare situation: staring down a close fight and having the financial might to fight past Election Day.

“‘It’s unusual to have a ballot measure this close,’ said Lehman, who led a 2012 campaign that was tight enough that supporters sought a recount, ‘and it’s unusual to have the means to do a cure statewide.’”

On March 18, it was estimated that about 110,000 ballots were disqualified, and the Proposition was only leading by a thin margin, 20,000 votes out of 7.5 million cast.

Newsom raised about $20 million from supporters, including construction unions, to push this prop. Opponents to the bill were said to raise about $1,000.

If this passes, it would cost taxpayers $6.38 billion for a proposition that has been called a “bloated version of Project Roomkey and L.A.’s Measure HHH.”

The League of Women voters wrote in their opposition:  “Prop 1 does not increase the overall funding for mental health services for counties – the bond money is to build treatment units and supportive housing. Under the changes this measure makes to the Mental Health Services Act, more of the money received by counties must be used for housing of a certain group of patients and for intensive, personalized support services like assistance finding employment and accessing educational opportunities. This reallocation reduces the funds available for other mental health services that counties currently offer to patients, like treatment, crisis response, and outreach.”

Today, March 21, Newsom declared victory with the Proposition that passed with just 50.2% of the vote and 49.8% of the population voting against it – with only 108,000 ballots left to count.  On X (formerly Twitter), Newsom said, “This is a huge victory for doing things radically different when it comes to tackling homelessness.”

(Editor’s note: One would hope the news media would ask Newsom how this approach, “throwing more money at the problem,” will make a difference. The State Legislative Analyst’s Officer 2023-24 California Spending Plan shows the budget package includes $672.5 million in housing and homelessness-related spending solutions (6 percent of overall budget solutions https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4808). It also does include the City funding, and the money from Measure H (quarter-cent sales tax) and HHH. Mayor Karen Bass has allotted $1.3 billion, out of $13 billion) in the 2023-24 budget to address homelessness.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The yes/no votes on Proposition 1 have tightened, so now the ballot that will build more housing for the homeless, while taking on an additional $6.4 billion in bonds is less than 20,000

 

  1. For signature verification, the elections official must compare the signature on an initiative, referendum, recall, nominating petition or paper, signature in-lieu of filing fee, and any other petition or paper must be compared to the voter’s signature(s) in the voter’s registration record. In addition, the elections official must compare the signature on a voted vote-by-mail envelope and a voted provisional ballot envelope to the voter’s signature(s) in the voter’s registration record prior to counting a ballot.

 

Out of the gate, it was clear the measure would come down to a tighter margin that expected. But in the last two weeks, that margin has proceeded to tighten, turning what would otherwise be a negligible amount of votes in such a large state — at last count roughly 20,000 — capable of turning the tide. With more than 219,000 ballots yet to be counted, per election officials’ latest estimation, coupled with efforts to cure rejected ballots, only time will tell.

It isn’t until April 12 that all votes from all primary elections are officially certified.

 

 

I have no preference but most people call me Thad. My brother Emmett and I wrote a feature length screenplay called The Golden Valley. We’ve recently submitted it to a handful of festivals. I’ve always admired the art of storytelling and have always had a desire to be creative. One day Emmett and I decided we should just try and write a movie and we discovered a passion.

 

Governor Gavin Newsom is reaching out to everyone who might have had a ballot issue, to cure it, ASAP.

At stake is Proposition 1. “This ballot initiative is so close that your commitment to volunteer could mean the difference between people getting off the streets and into the treatment they need… or not,” Newsom stated in his email to supporters. “Truly. It is that close.”

Politico reported Friday on March 15 “that the governor is recruiting people to the labor-intensive job of contacting Democratic-registered voters who had their mail ballots disqualified. The pricey effort appears to include mailers, phone banks and canvassing efforts targeting up to 30,000 voters whose ballots were rejected.

“By getting some of those Democratic voters to complete new paperwork and get their ballots counted, the governor’s team hopes to ‘find’ more votes in favor of Prop. 1.”

By contrast, those opposing the Prop. do not have the money to reach out to the numerous people who voted against it, but may also need to have ballots cured.

When a ballot has a technical mistake, such as a signature that does not match an election officials record or if there is a missing or incorrect address, the voter is notified that do not match election officials’ records or a missing or incorrect address, the voter is notified.

According to California law, officials have until eight days prior to the April 12 certification date to send notice to voters via first-class mail, providing them with an opportunity to fix their mistake.

California Governor Gavin Newsom

Politico reported “Ballot initiative veteran Chris Lehman said Newsom was in a rare situation: staring down a close fight and having the financial might to fight past Election Day.

“‘It’s unusual to have a ballot measure this close,’ said Lehman, who led a 2012 campaign that was tight enough that supporters sought a recount ‘and it’s unusual to have the means to do a cure statewide.’”

On March 18, it was estimated that about 110,000 ballots were disqualified, and the Proposition was only leading by a thin margin, 20,000 votes out of 7.5 million cast.

Newsom raised about $20 million from supporters, including construction unions, to push this prop. Opponents to the Prop. 1 were said to raise about $1,000.

If this passes, it would cost taxpayers $6.38 billion for a proposition that has been called a “bloated version of Project Roomkey and L.A.’s Measure HHH,” according to the L.A. Daily News March 20 Editorial (“Newsom Loses Even if Prop. 1 Ekes Out a Win”).

The League of Women voters wrote in their opposition:  “Prop 1 does not increase the overall funding for mental health services for counties – the bond money is to build treatment units and supportive housing. Under the changes this measure makes to the Mental Health Services Act, more of the money received by counties must be used for housing of a certain group of patients and for intensive, personalized support services like assistance finding employment and accessing educational opportunities. This reallocation reduces the funds available for other mental health services that counties currently offer to patients, like treatment, crisis response, and outreach.”

Share Story :
RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
Twitter
This entry was posted in Community. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Some People Cure Meat, Voters Asked to Cure Ballots

  1. Neven Karlovac says:

    Hi Sue,
    I always thought that the secret, anonymous balloting was an essential part of democracy and a free society. So I assumed, naturally, that that’s the voting system we have in this country but your article alarmed me and led me to question it. To the point: if the Governor is spending this amount of money and effort to “cure” voter information of the kind you described and if cured for a given voter and his ballot thus validated it must mean that the government knows exactly that this ballot was cast by this voter and they can tally it to the YES column. That is bad enough but I realized that it means that the California Government can tie my name to my ballot and the same for any Californian. Thus no confidential, secret voting in California. This conclusion is profoundly disturbing to me and I would hope that you and your readers would show me where my reasoning is wrong.
    Sincerely,
    Neven Karlovac
    nevenk@protonmail.com; 310-897-2096

  2. Sue says:

    Neven,

    My understanding was the Governor targeted any registered democratic ballot that was sent back to be cured–under the assumption that if someone was a democrat, they would automatically vote for Prop. 1.

    Sue

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *