Tulsa County 2010 general election ballots
Tulsa County is printing up 23 different ballots for the November 2, 2010, general election -- each of them 10" x 19" -- and you can see samples of each on the Tulsa County Election Board website, arranged by precinct. Use the Tulsa County Precinct Locator if you need help finding your precinct number.
Each ballot will be two-sided -- candidates for federal, statewide, legislative, county, and judicial offices on one side, and the 11 Oklahoma state questions on the back side.
I'm happy to see that in all the races on the ballot -- including the district judge elections -- the Republican candidate is listed first.
In addition to the state bedsheet ballot, Tulsa voters will have a separate ballot with two charter amendments: Prop. 1 establishes a "rainy day" fund that will be filled when revenues are pouring in, so that we'll be able to manage city expenses when revenues dry up. Prop. 2 fixes (sort of) a problem created with last year's charter amendment that created three-year staggered council terms with a September primary that conflicted with the even-year state election calendar. The amendment moves the primary in even-numbered years back to August. The better solution would have been to repeal the ill-considered amendment and go back to a two-year schedule, but short of doing that, we need at least to get Tulsa back in sync with the state election calendar to avoid having to develop a separate city election infrastructure. I plan to vote for both.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Tulsa County 2010 general election ballots.
TrackBack URL for this entry: https://www.batesline.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5789
Subscribe to this blog's feed:
Thanks for posting this information and the links, Michael.
Do you know of any studies concerning the order in which candidates' names are listed on ballots influencing election results? How is the order determined, anyway?
I haven't decided how I'll vote on Proposition 2 yet. To me, complete repeal is the proper solution to a problem that was never a "problem" until the City Council began toying with what was a perfectly good provision of the charter. The extra expenses associated with oddball elections don't make sense for a city in financial straits.
Agree with you, Mike, on city questions
Quick scan of state questions...wow. Several with some very powerful possiblities of unintended consequences and need for debate. Not know of any debate going on. Eg, term limits (in general I oppose), gerrymandering (always tough, but change proposed still means party in power does what it always has, so question is whether change limits gerrymandering more than exisiting system).