-
ANR
Dear Editor:
I congratulate the Aurora News-Register for last week’s front-page article titled “County election results as yet unofficial,” where they defined the seldom used words “Overvote” and “Undervote.” I will primarily address the word “Undervote” as my specific subject for this letter to the editor.
I will use a hypothetical event where I assign the letter A to one candidate and the letter B to a second candidate who are both incumbents running unopposed for two open positions on the “Peach Purchase Preservation” board of Pleasantville in the State of Grace. This board is a body politic and corporate invested with powers and duties of government. Surprisingly, my Ouija Board had me select “City/village boards” as the voting category for one particular election shortcoming, the grouping together of unopposed incumbents.
Expanded Tutorial on “Overvote” and “Undervote:” An “Overvote” indicates an exuberant electorate who voted for more people than the choices allowed. According to the News-Register, this is called a “spoiled vote” and is not counted in the final tally. An “Undervote,” however, could represent either of two possible expressions from the voter. First it could mean they simply do not know the individual(s) listed, such as some names appearing in a category where the candidate does not live in the local community and is not well known to local voters. Second it could mean they know the candidates well but do not think an individual is qualified and dedicated to the duties of the position sought. These voters have no way to indicate this on the ballot other than not voting for that candidate. Therefore, not voting, i.e., an “Undervote,” when the person is well known, should indicate to everyone, and especially to the candidate, that their performance on the “Peach Purchase Preservation” board is not acceptable to the public. Individual listing with yes or no voting would provide a much clearer picture of the public impression of the incumbent’s performance.
Remember, a “no vote” in an election can be the same as a “no” vote regarding retention.
In my hypothetical example let’s say that the voting public cast 4,150 total votes with candidate A getting 1,135 votes and candidate B getting 1,008 votes and the “Undervotes” totaled 1,315. This would indicate that each candidate had received less votes for their “election” than the number of “Undervotes” for their “unelection.” Also, candidate A received only 27 percent and candidate B received only 24 percent of the total possible votes which, although they are labeled as a “winner,” belies the significance of such a title.
Evaluating the various subtle implications regarding the outcome of any election is as mind boggling as listening to an enthusiast providing baseball statistics. As described earlier, in the future the Airport Authority candidates for re-election should be separately listed on the ballot, as the candidates are when you vote for the retention of judges, so that a strong YES or NO vote could be registered. A separate line for “write-in’s” could easily be included. This would be a veritable “vote of confidence” for the candidate’s edification. It would allow the ambiguity of the “Undervote” to be laid to rest and may well make the individual a better candidate in the future.
If this hypothetical example had been applied to Aurora on Nov. 8, it makes one wonder what the “Undervote” number for the Airport Authority members who were just re-elected might have been lowered too if the ill-gotten historically significant rotating beacon and wind-tee were now the property of our beloved Plainsman Museum instead of having been conveyed by a secret and silent selection to a private citizen. That is a long sentence, but there is a lot of “food for thought” there.
D. Ross Beins,
Aurora
Pro Life signs
appreciated
Dear Editor:
I want to publicly thank the gentlemen who, through Knights of Columbus, put up the Pro-Life sign on Hwy 34. God blesses those who take a stand for righteousness! He even promises to bless their children.
I just read in Deuteronomy where Caleb had obeyed God; ‘wholly followed the Lord,’ that he and his children would enter the land taking possession of the very ground upon which he had walked. Yes, he did have to go back into the wilderness for 40 years with the others, but God kept him alive and healthy while the others, except Joshua down to the age of 20, died in the wilderness.
Actions have consequences, good or bad. Yes, we do suffer to an extent, because of others who made bad choices. What these men have done brings blessing to our community and to their own households. I am so proud of them! May God bless the work of their hands, making them to prosper at whatever they do. (3 John verse 2, Isaiah 54:17)
Caroline Epp
Giltner
