Jefferson County Invites Texans to Vote in Local Election and the Wall Street Journal Has the Story

by | Aug 2, 2020 | Politics | 0 comments

Former Port Townsend Free Press contributor Scott Hogenson has an article in the August 2, 2020 edition of the Wall Street Journal. Scott and his family have moved to Texas. But he and his wife received ballots inviting them to vote in the August 4 primary election—in Jefferson County, Washington.

The WSJ story is paywall protected (sorry) at this link.

The Hogensons lived on Mats Mats Bay until late spring this year when they moved to Texas. As he points out, the fact they received Jefferson County ballots raises the question of how many nonresidents are voting in Washington state and local elections. The Hogensons won’t be among them. They know that would be fraud.

The article explores the problems with vote by mail. Hogenson writes, “Even if every bureaucrat and election volunteer involved in every part of the process of vote by mail was honest and efficient, it is still fraught with problems. In my case, I don’t suspect any sort of malfeasance on the part of election officials. It takes time to purge voter rolls and it’s entirely reasonable for this to not happen in the month between my moving away from Washington state and receiving my ballot in Texas.”

Two votes here, two votes there, two more over yonder. They could be enough to decide an election, for example the recent neck-and-neck Hospital Commission and PUD races.

The featured photo for this story is a shot of the envelope delivered to Hogenson’s house.

In an email to The Port Townsend Free Press, Hogenson writes: “I did not mention this issue [in the WSJ article] but a look at the envelope shows that it is labeled ‘Address Service Requested.’ Because this is an election ballot with a number of federal, state and local issues, shouldn’t the envelope be labeled, ‘Change Service Requested,’ or ‘Return Service Requested’ so the ballot is returned to the sender instead of being sent to an ineligible voter?”

The point of his questions is that when the Jefferson County Auditor’s staff sent the ballot with “Address Service Requested,” it gets forwarded, in this case to an illegible voter. If Jefferson County election officials had instead requested “Change Service Requested and “Return Service Requested,” the ballots would have been returned to sender and not delivered in Texas. But because county election officials sent this and presumably other ballots out with the “Address Service Requested” instruction people no longer living in Jefferson County can vote in county elections.

From the USPS website:
  • Address Service Requested provides forwarding and address correction services when possible. If the mail is undeliverable and not forwardable, it is returned to the sender with the reason identified on the mailpiece.
  • Change Service Requested provides address correction services without forwarding or return. If undeliverable, either the new address or the reason it is undeliverable is provided to the sender.
  • Return Service Requested provides address correction services and always returns the piece.
Because the Auditor’s Offices is now closed, I am unable to publish their response to the story. I will update this as soon as I can contact them.
UPDATE: I sent an email the morning of 8/3/2020 asking for comment and have yet to receive a reply.

 

Jim Scarantino

Jim Scarantino

Jim Scarantino was the editor and founder of Port Townsend Free Press. He is happy in his new role as just a contributor writing on topics of concern to him. He spent the first 25 years of his professional life as a trial attorney, then launched an online investigative news website that broke several national stories. He is also the author of three crime novels. He resides in Jefferson County. See our “About” page for more information.

Comment Guidelines

We welcome contrary viewpoints. Diversity of opinion is sorely lacking in Port Townsend, in part because dissenting views are often suppressed, self-censored and made very unwelcome. Insults, taunts, bullying, all-caps shouting, intimidation, excessive or off-topic posting, and profanity do not qualify as serious discourse, as they deter, dilute, and drown it out. Comments of that nature will be removed and offenders will be blocked. Allegations of unethical, immoral, or criminal behavior need to be accompanied by supporting evidence, links, etc. Please limit comments to 500 words.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.