Mideast Secret Ballot Public Consultation

[Peter]

First of all, I would like to thank the Governor for holding this consultation.

Second, I would like to state that I voted against the adoption of the secret ballot in the Mideast in the first instance, and I will vote against re-adopting it in thepresent circumstances. Whilst federal elections are to a degree afflicted by tactical voting, our regional elections never have been - the principal argument in favour of secret voting is to prevent tactical voting.

Its principal detraction is that it creates a bureaucratic process that delays certification of election results - we seem to have gotten all the negatives with none of the positives.

Nonetheless, I will assist to create the best possible secret ballot system if it is what people want.

PMing to five persons has been shown to be unwieldy, especially as the District Senator for Maryland isn't in the Mideast - this needs to be reduced to either 2 or 3. One person creates too much potential for corruption, and 4 or more is still unwieldy. The Maryland Senator should definitely not be one of these, and realistically I think it can safely be restricted to simply the Governor or Lt Governor, or if one of these is absent, also the Superior Court Judge. If there is further absenteeism, then the statute should simply state that secret voting is not required in that instance.

The Voting Booth Administrator (usually the Governor) should be given a degree of latitude in how he informs voters of the presence of secret voting - clearly a separate thread as was previously stipulated is not necessary.

Whilst I believe that we should reduce the rigidity of the mechanism involved, I must however continue to advocate strong penalties for actual corruption - if the administrators do throw the vote, they should be punished strongly. However, more discretion for situations where there is no corruption and just minor technical problems should be introduced.