Letter from the President: Stop Dorr

2009 June 30

In a letter to Governor Samuel Ward King regarding the Dorr Rebellion of 1842, President John Tyler discusses his perspective on the situation in Rhode Island and his opinions regarding the use of troops against the people.  He writes:

…I have to (inform) your Excellency that if resistance is made to the Execution of the laws of Rhode Island by such force as the Civil-People shall be unable to overcome, it will be the duty of his foremost to enforce the Constitutional guarantee- a guarantee given and adopted mutually by all the original States of which number Rhode Island was one, and which in the same way has been given and adopted by each of the states since admitted into the union…  I sincerely hope however, that no such exigency may occur, and that every citizen of Rhode Island will manifest his love of peace and good order, by submitting to the laws…

This excerpt from President Tyler’s letter communicates his reluctance to use troops against the people, and also his belief that if the situation progressed it would be the Governor’s job to use necessary force to maintain order.

Curriculum Update

2009 June 23
by FairVote RI

Educators should be aware that we’ve updated the curriculum. Click here for the lesson plans. The new version fixes typos and adds details about Civics GSE standards met.

Russell DeSimone: Early Rhode Island Election Tickets

2009 June 22

Following up on last week’s post about Dorr Rebellion election tickets, we invited scholar Russell DeSimone to write this post about election tickets. Click here for DeSimone’s survey of tickets.

Young Rhode Island voters have firsthand experience with the election system currently in use in which paper ballots are electronically tallied. Older voters well remember the large voting booths with the drawn curtain, mechanical levers, and the cumbersome master handle. Invariably modern day voters know little about the voting process used in earlier times.

Rhode Island, as a corporately chartered English colony, directly elected its governor and other government officials. This differed from royally chartered and proprietary colonies that had their governors appointed. The earliest Rhode Island elections were held viva voce and general officers were elected on an annual basis. Officers included governor, deputy governor and ten assistants. Freemen, those who could vote, were adult males who met certain property requirements and their eldest adult sons. Elections required the freemen to travel to Newport, the capitol town, in order to cast their votes.  This travel represented a significant burden to many of the freemen since most were farmers and election day came in the early spring when they were occupied with planting their crops. By the late 1640s the requirement to travel to Newport was removed “forasmuch as many may be necessarily detained, that they cannot come to the General Court of Election, that then they shall send their votes sealed up unto the said Court, which shall be as effective as their personal appearance”. Thus Rhode Island’s unique proxy elective system was established and the use of paper ballots or election tickets became the norm. To vote the freeman signed his name on the back of the prox. These tickets were collected by the town clerks, sealed in an envelope and sent to Newport to be counted on election day.  In effect the freemen were voting by proxy and each paper ballot was referred to as prox.

Proxy ballots were initially handwritten but by the 1740s printed proxs began to be used. The earliest known surviving example is in the collection of the Rhode Island Historical Society and dates to about 1744. Early state proxs differ from their colonial counterparts in that the offices of deputy governor and the ten assistants were replaced by the office of lieutenant governor and ten senators. The statewide prox would again change following the turmoil of the Dorr Rebellion and the adoption of a state constitution in 1843 when the only offices to appear on the prox were that of governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer. State senator candidates were thereafter to appear on local election tickets. Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries printed ballots were not issued by the state but were provided by the candidate or his party. In addition to state office elections in April, Rhode Island freemen voted for their US Representative in separate semi-annual elections held in August and for electors of President of the United States in quadrennial elections in November. Proxs from this early period often provided the name of the party in which the candidates were affiliated and on occasion included slogans representative of the party’s platform (see figure). Taken in their entirety election tickets chronicle Rhode Island’s rich political history spanning state and local politics, political factions  from the Ward-Hopkins controversy of the colonial period to political factions during the War of 1812, the Anti-Masonic period of the 1830s, the Law and Order coalition of the 1840s following events of the Dorr Rebellion, the temperance movement of the 1850s, the pro-Union tickets of the Civil War, and Greenback party and Prohibitory factions of the 1870s and 1880s.

1835 Election Ticket

Figure – Election ticket from the contested 1835 statewide election.

With the advent of the election prox opportunities for fraud occurred. One of the earliest contested elections occurred several years after the proxy voting method was first adopted in the 1640s. Frauds consisted of everything from altered ballots to ballot box stuffing. Opportunities for fraud continued through the centuries until the Rhode Island General Assembly passed a law at its March 29, 1889 session which adopted the Australian secret ballot method. Henceforth ballots were issued by the state and the freeman placed his ballot in a specially provided envelop.  Election tickets continued in use for local offices for the remainder of the 19th century, however, for all intensive purposes, after lasting nearly 250 years the age of proxy voting  in Rhode Island came to an end with the close of the 19th century.

Running a Mock Election

2009 June 19
by FairVote RI

(CC) freeparking

(CC) freeparking

Here’s an idea for civic educators hoping to bring home the real-life excitement of voting to their students: mock elections.

Particularly useful during the course of ongoing campaigns, you can also hold a mock election any time of the year to focus student energy on the physical process of voting. The National Student/Parent Mock Election organization has created a mock Rhode Island Ballot (.DOC) for you to use in class. (NB: this is not the actual ballot we use here in RI).

Even better, you can also contact the Rhode Island Secretary of State’s office to get an actual voting machine placed in your school to simulate an election. Click here for the SoS website.

While your running yoru mock election, be sure to use it as an opportunity to discuss more than just candidates. The mechanics of voting are also very important (remember those butterfly ballots in Florida in 2000?), and this article from the Boston Globe gives good background on that issue here in Rhode Island:

The infamous recount fight in Florida during the Bush-Gore race in 2000 - butterfly ballots, hanging chads, and a protracted legal dispute decided by the US Supreme Court - prompted the next round of revisions.

Appalled by the partisan wrangling in Florida, Rhode Island lawmakers in 2004 passed laws that keep humans far from the ballot-counting process. The General Assembly eliminated manual vote recounts, relying exclusively on optical scanning machines.

They also enacted a strict new definition of what qualifies as a vote. Unless voters mark their choices by drawing a horizontal line connecting the head and tail of an arrow-like symbol on the ballot, their votes do not count.

Anything else, for example, circling or underlining a candidate’s name, does not qualify as a vote.

Can States Experiment With Alternative Voting Methods?

2009 June 11
by FairVote RI

Image (CC) Jonathunder.

Image (CC) Jonathunder.

As blogger Matt Yglesias notes, “We have fifty states, but in some ways remarkably little institutional diversity between them.” Only Nebraska, for example, has a unicameral legislature–but Maine is now considering it as well.

Across the country FairVote has also backed another election reform. It’s called instant runoff voting, and it allows voters to rank their choices for an elected official. Here’s FairVote’s primer on how it works:

IRV allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference (i.e. first, second, third, fourth and so on). Voters have the option to rank as many or as few candidates as they wish, but can vote without fear that ranking less favored candidates will harm the chances of their most preferred candidates. [...] The weakest candidates are successively eliminated and their voters’ ballots are redistributed to next choices until a candidate crosses a majority of votes.

Instant runoff voting (often abbreviated as “IRV”) is already used in places like San Francisco and Burlington, VT, and Minneapolis and Memphis will soon be implementing it as well. Opponents had brought suit against IRV in Minneapolis, but the Minnesota Supreme Court just ruled today that the city is free to try out the alternative voting method:

Instant Runoff Voting as adopted in Minneapolis is not facially invalid under the United States or Minnesota Constitution, and does not contravene any principles established by this court in Brown v. Smallwood, 130 Minn. 492, 153 N.W. 953 (1915).

Now cities and towns across Minnesota can continue the lively American tradition of democratic innovation. And reformers across the country can follow their lead.

For more information visit posts tagged “IRV” at the national FairVote blog, or the FairVote Minnesota homepage.