Alaskans incensed by letters publishing their voting records

a reply to: Montana

From what I have seen in my research its coming from a conservative PAC and not liberal this go around... however his tactic is used by both sides going back to 2012.

a reply to: Xcathdra

This tactic of encouraging people to vote by the use of public records?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xcathdra

This tactic of encouraging people to vote by the use of public records?

Apparently so...

its one thing to keep track of who votes... A permanent record available to PACs on how a person voted is a bit disconcerting. Especially if the info is being used in this manner.

apparently its nicknamed "shame voting".

a reply to: Xcathdra

A permanent record available to PACs on how a person voted is a bit disconcerting.

And are such records available? Do you have reason to believe they are?
Knowing if someone voted is a far cry from knowing how someone voted.

a reply to: Phage

The article states its just a list of who voted but not how a person voted. That's easy enough to rectify by the PAC's looking to see which group a person is affiliated with. Its to easy to determine how a person voted based on party status.

Alaska also has a mix when it comes to primaries -

In 2012, the Republican Party chose to have only Republican candidates on its Primary ballot, and ONLY those voters registered Republican, nonpartisan and und eclared had access to the Republican ballot. This ballot was referred to as the Republican Candidate and Ballot Measures ballot.

The Alaska Democratic Party, the Alaska Libertarian Party and the Alaskan Independence Party agreed to be on a combined party ballot available to all registered voters. This ballot was referred to as the Alaska Democratic, Alaska Libertarian and Alaskan Independence Candidate and Ballot Measures ballot.

The third ballot type contained ballot measures only and did not include any candidates. This ballot was for voters who did not want to vote for any candidates. The Measures Only ballot was available to all registered voters.

Here is an article from USA Today from 2012 talking about this issue:
USAToday - Shaming voters to vote: How groups use peer pressure

I dont mind a get out the vote campaign... However, allowing PACS access to voter rolls, imo, should not be allowed unless the person allows it. As we see from the article the list is not always accurate.

If you want to know who I voted for then I want to know every single person who has donated money / items to your campaign.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You make a seemingly reasonable argument. That's not reality though, the SCOTUS already decided that you have no right to know who is funding a particular PAC. Your registration is public record though. If you don't like it you should change it.

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Xcathdra

You make a seemingly reasonable argument. That's not reality though, the SCOTUS already decided that you have no right to know who is funding a particular PAC. Your registration is public record though. If you don't like it you should change it.

All fair and valid points...

However just because that's the way it is does not mean the people cant change Alaskan election laws to prohibit the information from being released to 3rd parties.

Remember, the States are responsible for how elections occur in their state, not the feds. When SOTUS rules on a state election law its based solely on the impact to the federal election portion. States and the Federal government are separate sovereigns.

Kansas is looking (if they have not already passed the law) to hold 2 elections. On one day they would hold state elections only. On another day they would hold Federal elections. By separating them Kansas an enforce stricter standards for ID retirements for voting in state elections..

The Federal election day would follow SCOTUS rulings.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: beezzer
Who you vote for is a secret.
Whether or not you cast a ballot is not.

says who?

originally posted by: lynxpilot

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: beezzer
Who you vote for is a secret.
Whether or not you cast a ballot is not.

says who?

In this thread Alaskan State Law.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

However just because that's the way it is does not mean the people cant change Alaskan election laws to prohibit the information from being released to 3rd parties.

That's kind of what I meant when I suggested you change it. Lobby your state representatives, etc. I think having two separate election days is a really, really bad idea though. Even if it's some sort of flex of states rights, or whatever. We should be encouraging people to vote more and not making it any harder than it already is.

a reply to: links234

I agree with one exception... I think its important that the people who vote are lawfully allowed to do so since voting and who wins can determine where funding goes.

I am all for immigration - so long as it is legal.

From the Comment section of the OP:

My son received this letter - what makes me mad was that he wasn't voters age the last 2 elections - had our address, our other daughters address - then had about 10 more people, we recognized the names & they were under 18 too. Had addresses listed. Not good

I, personally, would be starting a class action lawsuit against legislation that allowed the documents to be released. What a terrible oversight.

a reply to: AlaskanDad

They are stopping at nothing this go round. I have stopped answering my phone if I don't recognize the number because it hasn't stopped ringing for months. I'm so happy the election is less than a week away and it will stop soon.

It may be a matter of public record, but it's still shady that an out of state organization is going to so much trouble for our candidates. Especially when they can't even get all of their information straight. These ads are beyond stupid too, I just saw one last night saying it was Sullivan's fault that Flint Hills shut down. Mapco dumped that mess years ago, and Flint Hills and the city of North Pole have been fighting with it ever since. Flint hills could no longer afford to contend with the remediation and basically went bankrupt. What does that even have to do with Sullivan? That's only one example that I know of directly. That's why I'm voting for Mark Fish, he's a good guy, and a libertarian at heart. I've known his family for a very long time and enjoyed my conversations with him. I'm so tired of the status quo. All of our incumbents need to go.

I'm so sorry, I didn't mean to turn this into a mini rant, I just can't wait for it all to be over.

a reply to: 0bservant

That should be criminal to release names and addresses of minors. That's obviously not voting record.

originally posted by: woodsmom
a reply to: AlaskanDad

They are stopping at nothing this go round. I have stopped answering my phone if I don't recognize the number because it hasn't stopped ringing for months. I'm so happy the election is less than a week away and it will stop soon.

If you have GCI you can add a phone number blocker for I think $3 a month, you can only block 10 numbers but 2-3 months ago I used the list up because of political calls, it's ridiculous, if they aren't calling you, ads are playing on radio or tv, if it's not that internet ads, then if your not tired of that, I get about 5-7 ads in the mail everyday.

This is the worst I have ever seen it.

a reply to: WeRpeons

Was all the bad press true? It seems funny in 2007-2008 her aproval rating was in the 90% range.

a reply to: sandman441

I don't, but that makes me wish I did.
It's beyond ridiculous at this point. The local radio announced today that both of the big party candidates have had $7,000,000 of outside money on advertising.

a reply to: Xcathdra

That's easy enough to rectify by the PAC's looking to see which group a person is affiliated with. Its to easy to determine how a person voted based on party status.

Are you sure that information is provided? In any case that is a major assumption on your part. I'm a registered Libertarian. It has little to do with the way I think or vote.
Non-partisan primaries and a blank ballot is still a ballot.

originally posted by: woodsmom
a reply to: sandman441

I don't, but that makes me wish I did.
It's beyond ridiculous at this point. The local radio announced today that both of the big party candidates have had $7,000,000 of outside money on advertising.

I thought that would be higher, It's insane I wonder if it will get worse a few days before the election?

originally posted by: guitarplayer
a reply to: WeRpeons

Was all the bad press true? It seems funny in 2007-2008 her aproval rating was in the 90% range.

no she was very popular here, she was even more popular in Wasilla I believe. The reason most of Alaska turned on her is that she quit being governor and that is really when people started to not like her, And then after that everything she did basically embarrassed Alaska. I don't even think she lives here anymore, I know atleast a few years ago she was living in Arizona.

Honestly though from Wasilla to Governor she changed, she was always kind of quirky but good at what she did, but once she was chosed to run as vice president her whole personality changed.

The Iowa Republican National Committee is now doing this;



They are contacting your Facebook friends and informing them if you voted or not.