Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Dearborn County Voting History

Dearborn County Voting History

Data from Secretary of State Election site. 2008 data from Clerk’s office. %age is in red for primary and green for general elections.

2008:

36,254 registered voters. 12,305 (33.94%) voted in the primary election.

2006:

36,239 registered voters. 5,521 (15%) including 208 (4%) absentee in the primary election
13,457 (37%) including 1051 absentee (8%) in General election

2004:

35,153 registered voters. 5,954 (17%) including 330 (6%) absentee in the primary election
36,491 registered voters. 21,290 (58%) including 2,004 (9%) absentee in General election

2002:

35,978 registered voters. 4,548 (13%) including 321 (1%) in the primary election
No General election data viewable on file

2000:
32,942 registered voters. 4,842 (15%) including 420 (9%) absentee voted in the primary election
18,076 (52%) voted in the General election

1998:

26,113 registered voters. 5,494 (21%) including 330 absentees voted in the primary election
27,951 registered voters. 12,112 (43%) voted in General election

1996:

No viewable data for primary
25,286 registered voters. 16,870 (66.72%) including 1,387 absentees in the General election

1994:

19,943 registered voters. 7,755 (38%) including 398 (5.1%) absentees in the primary election
12,401 (62.2%) including 996 (8%) in the General election



Christine Brauer Mueller
Lawrenceburg Township

26 comments:

jb said...

We haven't seen numbers (or percentages ) like this in a primary since 1994.
How accurate is the registered voters list. If the people who have died or moved away are removed frm the list- our turnout might look a lot better. Increasing the percentages of turnout would be a way to make voters more enthusiastic about getting out to vote.
Now if we could just get them INFORMED as well.

politicalpolly said...

just checked Dearborn County census data online for 2000. There are 33,375 residents aged 18 and older. The voter lists 36,254 registered voters. IF EVERYONE 18 and older registered to vote that means 2,874 possibly can be removed. (Assuming no one moved in or out since 2000)But I doubt seriously that all adults are registered. So we may be off by 10% or so on our list.
Maybe the clerk's office needs to send mail or contact the INACTIVE voters. Those who haven't voted in 2 elections or more. People just don't think to notify their election boards when they move and families don't when they die. HOWEVER- the Social security number and death lists could be matched to clean that part up.

Edith said...

The comment section of this blog is really hopping.

Will someone remember to turn the lights off when they leave?

Fortitude said...

Edith, get with the program, what would you prefer , what we have and it will improve or Awad's editorial page that looks like it needs classifieds and cards of thanks, and perhaps some Obits.
Be kind!!!!!!

Edith said...

"perhaps some Obits"

What will be written about the demise of the comment section of this blog?

"Memorials to the 'Be Kind' association?"

It is a little too early to hammer our swords into plowshares.

What good is a plow if you are forced off your land by greedy developers?

Voice of Reason said...

Edith please tell me ONE person who has been FORCED off their land in Dearborn County. If you mean offered so much money that they "couldn't" turn it down, I'm sure you can name a few. But I want ONE name, just ONE, of a person forced off their land by a developer.

Plebeian said...

"But I want ONE name, just ONE, of a person forced off their land by a developer."

Directly or coerced off their land?

Voice of Reason said...

Give me ONE name Pleb. Directly, coerced or otherwise.

Plebeian said...

Several Aurora Stewart St residents will be coersed off their property if they don't pay the exorbant fees from the dcrsd realtors. One property owner on Huseman road was stopped from rebuilding due to dcrsd reators using the Health Dept's Doug Baer to refuse a permit.

Plebeian said...

Voice of Reason,

Why was Dennerline not made to pay any or miniscule fees for the Cole lane sewer upgrade; when all the other dcrsd sewer up grades, Stewart St and Serinity Ridge, cost the people dearly?

Plebeian said...

I'm waiting!
What is your answer Voice of POINTED Questions?

Voice of Reason said...

Sorry Pleb, I have a job! Once again you twist things. Name me ONE person forced off their land by a developer. I've talked to several people on Stewart and one on Cole and they were thrilled to get sewer. But that is not what Edith was talking about and neither was I. GIVE ME THE NAME OF ONE SOLITARY INDIVIDUAL WHO WAS FORCED OFF THEIR LAND BY A DEVELOPER.

Plebeian said...

You don't hneed to apologize. Several people Stewart st feel aggrieved because the forced hook up was unreasonable. The dcrsd put a small line down Stewart street then had Aurora be the enforcer while the dcrsd was looking for other means of revenue in St Leon. If you call what dcrsd did to those people an economic catastrophy at the hands of the dcrd nothing is. Cole lane is another issue. Was Dennerline Aggrieved? Follow the money and you will see who gets the deals from the dcrsd realtor board and who gets the benefits.

Voice of Reason said...

And I repeat, name just one person in Dearborn County who has been FORCED off their land by a developer.

Plebeian said...

You are being fallacious.

Voice of Reason said...

You can't think of one, because it has never happened. The system works. If someone wants to buy your land and you want to sell, fantastic! If someone wants to buy your land and you don't want to sell it, you keep it. America is a truly wonderful place!

NorthWest said...

Oh, not so Reasonable Voice.

You certainly got Plebeian to bite but I'm not having it. Your avenue of discrediting opposition to DCRSD action by trying to divorce it from developers, per se, is disingenuous.

By definition, "developers" lack the power of lethal force that governments have, but that hardly means that they are incapable of gaming the system to have government agencies act as their proxies. Just ask the victims of the Kelo v. New London decision.

It is not necessary for us to wait for someone to be divested of their property at a Sheriff's sale to be able to determine that the abusive ordinances the board proposes are unacceptable. Nor does it take a Nostradamus to figure out who will benefit from the activities that board is inclined to pursue.

Just because a developer dare not come stick a gun in my face, that does not mean that he is incapable of causing it to happen and benefiting from the event.

Wisdom is learning from the mistakes of others, and history is replete with atrocities that could have been avoided but the victims waited too long. They, too, probably fell for the line, "You're not in any danger! Show me someone I have harmed".

Plebeian said...

I'm damn glad somebody was able to deal with the "voice of Treason".

LOL

jb said...

Voice of Reason-
Have you ever taken a long hard look at how the machinery of government works?
People "lose" pieces of their land when they have to sell to pay for taxes. There are farmers who are being hit with higher valuation of farm land now PLUS the state market assessment for their homes. I wonder how many people in Jackson, Kelso, and Manchester saw SIGNIFICANT increases in their taxes. I wonder how that figures into the desire for cheap land to develop. Do you think there's a connection?

Voice of Reason said...

Take the time to find out the assessment process. You'll find that there's no grand plan for taxing people off their land. Property taxes went up significantly throughout the county, and state for that matter. A good portion of the increase in the northern part of the county was due to the addition at EC. Was an indoor track a necessity, I don't think so. Taxes are a serious problem and I hope it all gets worked out. But once again, will someone please give me the name of the poor little old lady or man, that John Maxwell or Jerry Tucker kicked out of their home and took their land?

NorthWest said...

Voice, I don't think you are paying attention.

It isn't about who has been, it is about who might, or more likely, will be. And again, it won't be John or Jerry at the door with a bulldozer - that comes after the lawyer gets the judge to impose a financial burden on behalf of the sewer district that the landowner can't pay, which the Sheriff shows up with a gun and an eviction notice to enforce. Of course it usually doesn't come to that. The owner usually "willingly" sells his land first.

But, hey, that fits right in with your world view, doesn't it?

Voice of Reason said...

And Oswald didn't act alone, right?

NorthWest said...

Tell it to the folks being sued by St. Leon...

...what's the matter, Voice, run out of Reason? Think snarky, smug insults will succeed, instead?

I doubt the readers will be impressed.

Voice of Reason said...

Northwest- Snarky, smug insults? I didn't insult anybody. You invent insults the same way you invent people who lost their land to developers.

NorthWest said...

Ok, One last try with you, Voice, and then I am done with this.

We'll take it in order.

Perhaps I misinterpreted "And Oswald didn't act alone" as dismissive (thus smug and insulting) when I read it to mean that you think my chain of logic represents some sort of conspiracy theory. Perhaps you can elaborate on what you really meant.

Further, since you apparently just have to be right in the detail while ignoring the thrust of the debate, put this in your diary - "Dear Diary, today NorthWest conceded that nobody we know of has yet been forced off of their land directly by a developer". Happy now?

The fact of the matter is that this UNELECTED sewer board is about to give itself the authority to create financial chaos for rural landowners. That financial burden has the potential to force either sale of the land or legal judgement leading to forfeiture if the landowners pockets aren't deep enough to withstand the assault.

It is a fact that while the proposed system will provide little or no personal benefit (while maximizing individual cost) to a rural landholder with a working septic system, it would greatly benefit a developer holding that same land as it would allow high density subdivision that would otherwise be impossible.

It is further a fact that Mr. Maxwell, an individual active in land development, sits on this same board. I have no reason to believe that Mr. Maxwell is other than an honorable man, but this is unseemly, and if not currently a conflict of interest, most certainly raises the specter of decisions made in the present and capitalized on unethically in the future.

If you cannot see the connection and the risk to disenfranchised citizens, then your Voice of Reason should rightly fall on deaf ears for it is less than worthless for its lack of Vision.

"None so blind as those who will not see"

Plebeian said...

Bravo Northwest! Bravo!