I was afraid that the EVIL PARTY HACKS had done away with you.

Hawaii voters have not received the multiple ballots described in the article since 1998 when we switched from a punchcard system to an optical scan. For the last ten years, the various party races have all appeared on the same ballot, segregated from each other with a different color border. And the voters never “threw away” the other ballots. They all had to be returned and accounted for.

Hawaii does not have a true “open” primary. It is semi-open. Voters may chose in private which party’s primary they wish to vote in, but they cannot vote in multiple party primaries, as they can in the Louisiana system or in the previous California “blanket” primary.

This year, the voting system contract has changed from ES&S to Hart Inter-Civic. Among the changes with the new system is the “Select a Party” question. The first option in the list of parties is the “Independent Party.” Regardless of how they vote, most Hawaii voters tend to think of themselves as “independent.” The major parties have a legitimate concern that a voter might misunderstand and mark the Independent Party and then proceed to vote either Democratic or Republican. This would void the partisan portion of their ballot, which for most primary voters, is the most important part.

On an electronic voting machine, an initial mistake like this can be rectified by “backing up” and changing the party selection. In a polling place, the ballot would have to be declared spoiled and a new ballot issued. With an increasing portion of Hawaii’s voters choosing to vote by mail, perhaps 25%, a mismarked ballot is virtually impossible to fix. “Whiteout” and marginal comments will NOT work.

What is not yet clear –there have been conflicting reports– is what happens if a voter fails to mark a preferred party, through oversight or a principled refusal to having to identify with only one party, or from a concern that the choice may become a part of a government record.

On the “plus” side, the “Select a Party” question may reduce the number of spoiled ballots. Previously, it was not uncommon for voters to vote mostly in one party’s primary, but also be drawn to cast a vote for a favored candidate from another party. That would void all their partisan choices. With the new ballot, only the votes for the unselected party will be disregarded. If the software is intelligent, it would only rely upon the “Select a Party” question in cases where a voter casts votes in more than one party’s primary. If the software is simpleminded, it will void all a voter’s choices, even if they are all cast for the same party’s candidates, if the voter fails to mark the party choice or if they mistakenly mark another party’s name. For the reasons stated before, we fear a number of people will mistakenly mark “Independent.”

I HOPE I am misreading your article. Towards the end, you appear to find pleasure in the possibility Hawaii voters will be punished by karma because Nader had difficulty attaining ballot status in 2004.

It is ridiculous that a candidate should require six times as many signatures as a new political party. It will take people of good will from all the parties to change that law next session.(I also think it is ridiculous for someone to run for president without working to build a political party, but that is a separate discussion.)