Ogden's voter challenges
Text 
No Comments [ Add Comment ]A
t some point today, the voters of Ogden should know for certain whom their next mayor will be: Matthew Godfrey will be re-elected, or Susan Van Hooser will take his place come January.
But no matter which way the pendulum swings, the Election Day voter challenges were, in some instances, a low political tactic. Godfrey says he did not know in advance that his supporters were assembling nearly 150 names of voters to challenge at the polls.
If that's the case, shame on that thin slice of his supporters.
Targeting, among others, family members of candidates who disagree with Godfrey, or who have publicly opposed him in the past, is voter intimidation. Making it difficult for voters to cast their ballots runs contrary to what it means to be an American.
We should be encouraging participation at the ballot box, not trying to thwart it.
This maneuver was compounded by ill-informed county election officials who didn't realize that challenged voters who were able to produce identification shouldn't have been made to cast provisional ballots -- they should have been allowed to vote normally.
If the count is finished today, as promised, everyone should know whether or not any of the challenges were authentic -- a provisional ballot would be disqualified because, for example, the voter's address is not legitimate. If those numbers are significant, it may vindicate the challenges. If not, they would be discredited.
But regardless of the fate of those provisional ballots, it's obvious the county's training should be more thorough. Furthermore, state lawmakers should review the statute allowing voter challenges to decide if it needs to be strengthened against vulnerability to abuse.
Add Your Comment
