Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Elections
 
Board
State Board of Elections
 
chapter
Absentee Voting [1 VAC 20 ‑ 70]
Chapter is Exempt from Article 2 of the Administrative Process Act
Action 2014 Absentee Material Omissions
Stage Proposed
Comment Period Ended on 7/21/2014
spacer
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
7/20/14  9:27 am
Commenter: Richard and Eleanor Bochner

Reject These Unnecessary Proposals
 

July 20,.2014

The SBE has proposed two unnecessary and restrictive regulations involving a generational suffix (Jr., Sr., I, II, etc.) and a street identifier.

A generational suffix is not currently required, but would be required if the voter of the same names are registered at the same residence and the identity of the voter cannot be determined. The proposed regulations also require the street identifier. Failure to include an identifier such as “Lane” or “Drive” will invalidate the ballot.

We strongly object  to these changes because the information distinguishing the voter from another is already on the return mailer, which should be sufficient.

A voter's failure to include a generational or street identifier should not be considered "material omissions" especially when these sources of confusion can and should be clarified during the General Registrar’s review of absentee ballot application. Failure to determine the generational suffix or the street name type during the application review process should be considered the fault of the General Registrar, not the voter.

These two proposed regulations should be rejected.

 

Sincerely

 

Richrd J.Bochner

Eleanor B. Bochner

9402 Colonade Drive

Vienna, VA 22181

(Registered Voters in the Commonwealth of Virginia)

CommentID: 33418