UPDATEx2: A Little Bit of Math

Okay, since the MD State Board of Elections hasn’t yet come to the final count, I thought I would try a little comparison.

So the figures I am now working with are as of “Last updated: 11/23/2010 8:35:05 PM.”

The only reason I make this comparison is to demonstrate how the percentages may shift. That, and the fact that the line of reasoning for one constitutional question shows the inconsistency when looking at other constitutional questions in recent past (2008). The prime reason for this comparison is that, at least, I can get an approximation of total vote counts (from 2008) to use as if they were 2010 (we will see how close this can be once we get the final numbers for 2010).

All that is being done is comparing the total votes for questions 1, 2 and 3 against total votes cast for each question. Then comparing the total votes “For” against the total votes cast for the winner in the 2010 Governor’s race, the total votes cast for all Gov./Lt. Gov. candidates [ed: updated] and, then, making the comparison of the “For” votes against the two winning questions on the 2008 ballot as well as the Presidential race.

In this way, you will see how the percentages fall when calculated against ever increasing totals.

Notice that, should the 2010 grand total votes cast (statewide) approach that of 2008, the majority votes for 2010 Question 2 falls well below 50%.

So, one question is – at this point, why is Question 2 considered a win when the totals haven’t yet been achieved and posted publicly?

Likewise, applying the “double majority” rule against all three 2010 ballot questions it looks like question 2 should not be declared a winner at all – given the grand totals have yet to be achieved and publicly posted. One last point to make here – the Constitutional Convention question only asks to determine if a convention is wanted. The other two ballot questions are actually determining changes to the Constitution. One question’s sense of majority is different from the other two. Allow me to be even more blunt. Questions 2 and 3 are being accepted by a simple majority, regardless of the overall number of electors. Question 1 is not being accepted by a simple majority.

Is that what you want? Is that acceptable?

Updatedx2: Let’s put another spin on this, shall we? As of the latest posted vote counts 209,418 voters have disenfranchised 897,239 voters that wanted a Constitutional Convention. Those 209,418 failed to mark For/Against for ballot Question Number 1. And this assumes that the grand total of statewide voters actually voted for a candidate in the Governor’s race. Just saying. That could well be true, but I wonder.

Hey, I’m just doing a little math here and posing questions. Anyone have a better answer? Anyone that is, except a member of, or working for, the General Assembly?

Remember now, the section in the Maryland Constitution (Article XIV Sect 2) reads as follows:

It shall be the duty of the General Assembly to provide by Law for taking, at the general election to be held in the year nineteen hundred and seventy, and every twenty years thereafter, the sense of the People in regard to calling a Convention for altering this Constitution; and if a majority of voters at such election or elections shall vote for a Convention, the General Assembly, at its next session, shall provide by Law for the assembling of such convention, and for the election of Delegates thereto. Each County, and Legislative District of the City of Baltimore, shall have in such Convention a number of Delegates equal to its representation in both Houses at the time at which the Convention is called. But any Constitution, or change, or amendment of the existing Constitution, which may be adopted by such Convention, shall be submitted to the voters of this State, and shall have no effect unless the same shall have been adopted by a majority of the voters voting thereon (amended by Chapter 99, Acts of 1956, ratified Nov. 6, 1956).

Here is the screen shot (click on the picture to enlarge):

Advertisement

UPDATE: Aftermath So Far

Several new articles:

UPDATE: MD Constitution Convention Question Gets Majority Vote, But Not So Fast

Fate of MD Constitutional Convention win unclear

Constitutional Convention unlikely, but up to MD General Assembly

“But Maryland’s constitution provides that a convention be called only when it has the support of a majority of all voters in the election, not just those who voted on the proposal, said Assistant Attorney General Daniel A. Friedman, counsel to the General Assembly.”

‘No vote’ was a ‘no’ vote on MD Constitutional Convention

Seems to me, all we ever get is double speak on this issue. For decades. What a shame.

Maybe?

Early returns show promise for Constitutional Convention, other MD ballot Questions
Posted: 10:30 PM TUE, November 2, 2010
By Steve Lash
Daily Record Legal Affairs Writer

If early election results hold, Maryland will engage in a full scale review of the state’s constitution for the first time since 1967.

Wow A Supporter

Thank you, Brian. From Red Maryland.

I happen to agree with your assessment. Good job.

Pro And Con: Does MD Need ConCon?

An article in The Daily Record by Steve Lash

Another Better Article on ConCon

Last evening’s article on this topic of holding a convention gives a bit more of an explanation why past attempts fell short of actually having a convention.

Here’s the key (paraphrased): most voters select the candidates they wish to vote for, but skip the bottom ballot where questions may be. So, as an example, if statewide 5,000,000 vote and only 5,000 of them answer the ballot question then the definition of a majority is not considering those who voted on just that ballot question but all ballots. In short, 5,000 out of 5,000,000 is not a majority.

Here is where the voting public needs to understand how important it is to answer/vote on everything that appears on the ballot come November. Leave nothing unanswered.

Particularly if you feel strongly about needing to have new legislation by way of this Constitutional Convention.

Do you feel the need for voter referendums on local/statewide issues?
Do you feel Maryland needs a recall mechanism/process for elected officials?
Do you feel it is necessary for elected officials to have terms limited?
Do you feel we need to be a Shall Issue (instead of May) state when it comes to applying for concealed carry permits?
Do you feel we need to provide photo ID when voting?
Speed cameras??

If you believe we need any of the above (or other issues) then remember to vote your entire ballot come November 2, 2010.

Here is another article on the subject published today by the Baltimore Sun. Although I feel the need to explain (in case you don’t know) that a constitution is never ‘shredded’ and started from scratch. Any constitutional changes made always show everything that has been written within it. Recent amendments that affect prior amendments do not erase or remove anything that has been written into the document. Just to be clear, and that everyone understands how this is done.