All posts by DiggaSlidwell

“Double Bubbble” Ballot Could Give Obama 1% bump in CA

I just did a quick and dirty analysis of Decline to State voters in LA County to see what the possible effect of the Double Bubble ballot could be. My estimate is that counting all possible “Double Bubble” ballots could lead to a statewide shift to Obama of between 0.5% and 1.5%. In LA County the shift would be between 1.8% and 5%. In table form, here’s what I think the change would be to the statewide results:

Current Probable
Hillary 52.0% 51.7%
Barack 42.3% 42.6%

Because this nomination could come down to every last single delegate, I think Debra Bowen and the LA County Department of Elections need to examine all “Decline to State” ballots and count any ballots where the voter failed to fill in the byzantine “Democratic” bubble. I wouldn’t consider this a national emergency because Hillary won Cali by 10%, but the “double bubble” ballot needs to be eliminated. See after the jump for my analysis.

First, here are the total LA results:

HILLARY CLINTON   658,937 (55.01%)

BARACK OBAMA   496,192 (41.43%)

and total CA results:

HILLARY CLINTON   2,132,166 (51.96%)

BARACK OBAMA   1,735,105 (42.29%)

From the LA Election Results text file, we find these totals for voter turnout:

DEMOCRATIC   1,139,072 (57.67%)

NONPARTISAN (NP) 189,438 (23.44%)

Here’s our first clue that there isn’t a massive pool of potential disenfranchised: only 189,438 of the 808,126 “Decline to State” voters actually voted on Tuesday. Let’s look at the most extreme possibility that all of the Democrats and DTS voters attempted to vote in the Democratic primary:

1,139,072 + 189,438 = 1,328,510 potential voters

Total votes counted: 1,197,785

1,328,510 Potential votes – 1,197,785 actual votes = 130,725 possible missing votes

The Exit Polls say that Barack beat Hillary by 2-1 among DTS voters. If we take a rough stab at that, we give Hillary 1/3rd of the possible missing votes and Barack 2/3rds:

130,725 * 1/3 = 43575 for Hillary

130,725 * 2/3 = 87150 for Barack

Adding it all up in LA, we get this for what the most extreme possible effect of the Double Bubble:

HILLARY CLINTON  702,512 (52.88%) a loss of 2.13%

BARACK OBAMA  583,342 (43.91%) a gain of 2.48%

A 4.61% swing to Barack in LA County.

Adding it all up in CA, we get:

HILLARY CLINTON  2,175,741 (51.39%) a loss of 0.58%

BARACK OBAMA  1,822,255 (43.04%) a gain of 0.75%

A 1.33% swing to Barack statewide. I round that up and proclaim that at most, Barack could gain 1.5% in California from fixing the Double Bubble problem.

Now the biggest error I see in this analysis is that most, but not all voters vote for president. A few will pass it up, and some will legitimately mess up their ballots. So for a comparison I looked at my local San Francisco results:

Democratic votes 179,458

Non-Partisan votes 9,776

Total potential votes 189,234

Actual votes cast in Dem Primary 177,408

Percentage who voted for prez 93.75%

Doing a similar analysis for LA finds:

Democratic votes 1,139,072

Non-Partisan votes 189,438

Total potential votes 1,328,510

Actual votes cast in Dem Primary 1,197,785

Percentage who voted for prez 90.16%

My guess is that the Double Bubble effect (how fun is that to say) is somewhere in the neighborhood of the difference between SF’s 93.75% and LA’s 90.16%, which would lead to 47,693 DTS votes being disqualified by the Double Bubble. Repeating all the calculations above for 47,693 votes instead of 130,725 leads me to my final estimate: Barack Obama would probably gain 0.5% on Hillary Clinton in California if all double bubble ballots are counted. The shift in LA County would probably be 1.8%.

In table form, here is what I think counting the double bubble ballots would do to the California results:

Current Probable
Hillary 52.0% 51.7%
Barack 42.3% 42.6%

And to the LA County results:

Current Probable
Hillary 55.0% 54.2%
Barack 41.4% 42.4%

That’s my ballpark guestimate. Fire away in the comments if you think I’m wildly off base. Someone with more time and knowledge than I have might be able to extrapolate possible implications on delegate count, but my bottom line is this: it looks like the Double Bubble isn’t a massive scandal. But our election results should be sacred, and these sorts of election flaws need to be taken seriously and corrected.

San Francisco League of Pissed Off Voters endorsements

I’ve been a proud member of the San Francisco League of Pissed Off Voters (AKA the League of Young Voters) since we were doing bus trips to Reno and Vegas back in 2004. We’ve made voter guides for the last six elections. We print up thousands of them and hit the streets to spread the word. Here’s our mission statement:

We are a national organization that works in key cities and states to make politics relevant, fun, and meaningful to young people. We meet young people where they are, work on issues that affect their lives, and provide tools and training to make them viable players and winners in the political game.

See below the jump for our endorsements on the February ballot. See the complete guide at theballot.org/2008/sf, including a beautiful printable PDF.

Check us out IRL:

  • Election Night party: 2192 Folsom @ 18th St. 8pm – midnight. We’ll watch the election results on the big screen, and discuss it all live on Pirate Cat Radio. 87.9 FM or streaming online at piratecatradio.com.
  • League General Meetings: every 3rd Tuesday, starting 2/19. 7-9pm. Red Ink Studios, 1035 Market @ 6th St. Check www.theleague.com/sf for updates.
  • League of Pissed Off Voters Radio Roundtable on Pirate Cat Radio: Fridays 4-6pm, starting 2/8 on 87.9 FM or streaming online at piratecatradio.com.

Democratic Primary: No consensus. Barack just missed the 66% threshold. But if several of our members weren’t scattered around the country working or volunteering on his campaign, he would’ve gotten it. Also we voted before Kucinich and Edwards dropped out. Dennis just nosed out Edwards for second place, and Gravel beat Hillary for fourth.

Green Primary: Cynthia McKinney – She’s a rarity: a true radical with an impressive D.C. resume. And unlike Ralph Nader, she’s actually a Green Party member and working to build the party.

California Propositions

Prop 91: Hell no –
Wants to use the gas tax for new roads only–oh wait, that’s already a law.

Prop 92: Yes – Cap community college fees & guarantee funding.

Prop 93: Yes – Shorter term limits, while keeping politicians focused on lawmaking–instead of alternating elections between the state Assembly and Senate.

Props 94-97: Hell no! – 17,000 more slot machines? Big $$$ for rich tribes, a little $ for the state, and less environmental and labor protections.

San Francisco Propositions

Prop A: Yes –
$185 million bond for City Parks? Sure, charge it to the City’s credit card.

Prop B: No – Early pension $ for old cops? We need young, cops who are from SF.

Prop C: No – Vague wish to turn Alcatraz into a non-specific peace center.

SF League of Pissed Off Voters Endorsments

The League of Pissed Off Voters‘ mission is to engage pissed off 17-35 year olds in the democratic process to build a progressive governing majority in our lifetime. We currently have 17 official chapters around the country.

I’m active in the San Francisco chapter, and I wanted to share our voter guide with you and hear the Calitics perspective on it. In particular, I think Prop 81 and the Controller’s race are interesting ones that aren’t getting any press.

We raised money to print 20,000 of these bad boys, which we’re distributing around town. We haven’t used a dime from candidates or candidate committees.

Governor: Phil Angelides!
Lieutenant Governor: Jackie Speier!
Secretary of State: Debra Bowen!
Attorney General: Jerry Brown
Controller: John Chiang
State Senate District 8: None of the Above
State Assembly District 12: Janet Reilly!

Prop 81 – Library Construction Bond: No
Prop 82 – Universal Preschool: Hell Yeah

Prop A – Stop Homicides Now: Hell Yeah
Prop B – Ellis Act Eviction Disclosure: Hell Yeah
Prop C – Transbay Terminal Authority Shuffle: Yes
Prop D – Laguna Honda Patient Admission and Rezoning: No

See below the jump for our explanations of these.

Governor: Phil Angelides!

Phil Angelides is the anti-Arnold. While Arnold has protected his rich corporate donors, Angelides has a strong history of standing up for children, teachers, and workers. He’s the only major candidate with the guts to call for corporations and wealthy citizens to pay their fair share to rebuild California’s education and social services. Phil also told us he would seriously consider lowering the voting age so that 16 and 17 year olds who pay taxes can get some representation.

Lieutenant Governor: Jackie Speier!

The LT does a little bit of everything, and holds powerful roles on commissions governing California’s universities, environment, and economy. We need an LT who shares our values and has the knowledge to make California’s bureaucracies work for us. Jackie Speier has a strong progressive voting record in the State Senate, and she’s outlined plans to provide Cal Grants to more college students, increase the number of guidance counselors in public schools, and reduce emissions from the state’s buses and trucks.

Secretary of State: Debra Bowen!

The Secretary of State is in charge of our elections. Everyone who remembers Florida, Ohio, and the various Diebold debacles knows how important it is to have a solid Secretary of State. Debra Bowen is a State Senator who has been a leader in technology issues. She was the first Senator with a webpage, and wrote a bill to make legislative info available online. She’s headed investigations into Diebold and it’s her goal to kick their sketchy machines out of California and replace them with secure, open-source voting machines. Amen!

Attorney General: Jerry Brown

We’re going with Jerry Brown, because back in the day, he was the baddest progressive California has ever seen. As Governor, he was a trailblazing environmentalist and he vetoed the death penalty. Then he ran a grassroots campaign for president that refused donations larger than $100. But then some of our friends Oakland aren’t too happy with what he’s done as Mayor, with his “tough on crime” act that hasn’t really involved the community. Brown is running against LA City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo, who seems cool, but also makes up nervous. He supports the death penalty, and he also has a “tough on crime” vibe that might not focus as much on rehabilitation and community involvement as we would like.

Controller: John Chiang

The Controller is California’s Chief Financial Officer, responsible for keeping an eye on our money, running the state’s payroll, and conducting audits to make sure nothing shady is going on. We like both of the major Democratic candidates, but we’re going with John Chiang because he has the most experience with these kind of technical but important issues. Chiang has worked for the IRS, and he serves on the Board of Equalization, so he knows all the crazy details about how California’s tax system works. He’s never held office before, but he’s worked for Democrats like Gray Davis, Barbara Boxer, and Don Perata. Chiang is running against Joe Dunn, a State Senator from Orange County with an impressive progressive voting record. He was knee deep in the investigation into how Enron ripped off California. But by a hair, we’re going with Chiang.

State Senate District 8: None of the Above

We hate to leave this one blank, but we can’t get behind any of these candidates. We like some things about Leland Yee, like how he opposes the death penalty and the work he’s done for immigrants. But he has a horrible record on renter’s rights, he’s made some sketchy enivormental votes, and he hasn’t really accomplished much in the State Assembly. Mike Nevin is a San Mateo County Supervisor who has some good things to say about “smart growth” and affordable housing. But he supports the death penalty and we’re not convinced that he’ll look out for renter’s rights.

State Assembly District 12: Janet Reilly!

She may not have much political experience, but you’d never know it if you hear Janet Reilly talk about her plans for fixing California. She has detailed proposals for providing health care to every Californian, restoring our environment, and improving our schools. She’s against the death penalty, for tenant protection, and would consider giving 16 and 17 year olds the right to vote. Meanwhile, her opponent, Fiona Ma, has accomplished little on the Board of Supervisors, has a lousy record on tenants’ rights, supports the death penalty, opposes lowering the voting age, and has offered few details on what she would do in Sacramento. Fiona even ducked the Bay Guardian, refusing to meet with them to talk about her campaign!

Prop 81 – Library Construction Bond: No

This one sounds simple: Why wouldn’t you support a $600 million bond for building libraries? Well, here are a couple reasons:
– Prop 81 allocates money only to the construction of libraries- the money can’t be used for librarians, books, computers, or other resources, only building.
– Also, the funds allocated in Prop 81 must be matched by the city trying to use them. This means that the strapped cities that need new libraries the most wouldn’t be able to access Prop 81 funding because they wouldn’t be able to spare the money necessary to match the funds. Meanwhile, Prop 81 would subsidize library construction in more affluent communities, thereby increasing the digital divide.

Our low-income communities absolutely need the access to books, computers, and other technological resources that libraries provide, but brand-new, empty library structures? Not that helpful, and this is all Prop 81 promises.

Prop 82 – Universal Preschool: Hell Yeah

Prop 82 provides free preschool to all kids by raising taxes only 1.7% for only the super rich (individuals who make over $400K or couples who make over $800K). It’s pretty simple: kids who go to preschool do better. A study showed that every dollar we invest in preschool will save $2.62 in juvenile hall and other costs related to dropouts.

Prop A – Stop Homicides Now: Hell Yeah

Our city is facing a crisis of homicides and gun violence, with young people in low-income communities (like Western Addition, Mission, and Bayview/Hunter’s Point) particularly impacted. Prop A creates a citizens council to address the systemic causes of homicide. This council will be in charge of $10 million a year for the next three years for innovative violence prevention programs including job training, after school programs, and summer internships, as well as a fund to support the families of homicide victims. Prop A is a critical step in addressing homicide in our city proactively and thoughtfully.

Prop B – Ellis Act Eviction Disclosure: Hell Yeah

Prop B requires real estate sellers to tell potential buyers if there were any Ellis Act evictions on a property, and if any of the tenants were disabled or elderly. The Ellis Act allows landlords to get out of the rental business by evicting their tenants. But it’s being abused by real estate speculators who buy rental properties because they want to kick out the tenants and convert the rentals into condos. Prop B protects renters without restricting real estate sales.

Prop C – Transbay Terminal Authority Shuffle: Yes

This one’s a little wonky, so stick with us. The Transbay Joint Powers Authority is in charge of building the Transbay Terminal to link BART, MUNI, and CalTrains, which is crucial to the future of public transit in the Bay Area. Prop C would do three things to shuffle the Transbay Authority: 1. It requires the Mayor him/herself attend TJPA meetings (instead of the Mayor’s designee) 2. It replaces the MUNI director with the Supervisor who heads the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. 3. It puts the Board of Supervisor who represents the neighborhood (financial district, SOMA, etc.) on the Transbay Authority. The Transbay Terminal is important enough that we think the Mayor should be personally involved. We also think it makes sense to have the Supervisor in charge of public transit there also instead of the MUNI director, because the Transbay Terminal is a lot bigger than just MUNI.

Prop D – Laguna Honda Patient Admission and Rezoning: No

Laguna Honda is supposed to a hospital for seniors. Recently they’ve been admitting a lot of patients suffering from mental illness and substance abuse problems, some of whom have gotten violent and caused a lot of trouble. We understand that this is a problem that needs to be fixed, but Prop D isn’t the way to do it. Prop D doesn’t provide for how to care for the patients it would remove from Laguna Honda, meaning a lot of them would get kicked out on the street. The sketchiest part about Prop D is how it rezones public land all over the City to allow for private nursing homes to be built. Huh? What’s that got to do with Laguna Honda?