You want a ballot? Here, read this first
By HOWARD TROXLER
Published October 28, 2007
When the voters of St. Petersburg show up for city elections on Nov. 6, a poll worker will hand them an unusual letter.
Voters will be asked to read the letter before voting, then to hand it in before leaving. There will be 50 copies circulating at each precinct.
The letter, written by the city's government, spells out the consequences of voting a certain way in one of the races for City Council.
The choices in that race are between an incumbent council member, James Bennett, and an option on the ballot labeled "New Election."
This unusual choice has arisen because Bennett's opponent pulled out.
The city's letter explains that if "New Election" gets the most votes, there will be a new primary election in January and a new general election in March.
Then there is a clause informing voters that such an election would be held...
... at an estimated cost to the City of approximately $248,000.
Now, let's hold on a second.
I believe the city's intention is honorable. After all, this is a confusing situation.
But there's plenty of opportunity beforehand for voters to become informed.
And the inclusion of the warning about the cost - who gets to calculate it, by the way? - crosses the line into editorializing.
If you vote this way, it's gonna cost you.
As it so happens, warning voters about the expense of a new election is a key part of Bennett's own re-election campaign as well.
If you go to his Web site (www.electbennett.com), you'll see a box warning about the cost of a new election.
Bennett's Web site even has a list of stuff that $248,000 would buy - school programs, law enforcement, fire trucks, youth programs, sewer and park improvements.
And you know, good for him. The expense is a fine political argument against voting for "New Election."
I asked Bennett on Friday about the city's letter, and he said it was the first he'd heard of it. As a candidate, he's working hard to make sure voters know what's going on. He's even mailing out 13,000 brochures this weekend.
As for the problem with a government letter doing the same thing inside the polling place, Bennett said, "I know what you're saying."
In this instance, there's no organized campaign in favor of "New Election."
But what if there were? Would that side of the issue be entitled to have its own rebuttal in a letter issued to voters in the voting booth?
We have had several examples around here lately of local government using tax dollars to "educate" the voters.
Now this itch by the government to "educate" voters is reaching inside the polling place itself. This would be illegal for any individual candidate, party or group.
Well intentioned, yes.
But this road leads to only one destination, and there's an old saying about what that road is paved with.
* * *
There's a copy of the city's letter and the instruction sheet to poll workers for its use on TroxBlog. On the blog you'll also find lots of stuff about other recent issues, along with many reader comments.
Click on the "Blogs" link at www.tampabay.com, or use the direct address, blogs.tampabay.com/troxler.