Voting Issues

[Stavros]

Although not the only component of democracy, the moment when 'the people decide' is of profound importance in the process of democracy in the socieites that practise it. Since in the real world Democrats and Republicans will use whatever legal means they can to improve their tally, I see no point in continuing here the arguments that have raged in General Discussion.

I think it would be more interesting to hear from Americans how you think the practical business of registering to vote, and then voting can be improved. Because it happened, we must acknowledhe that in the 21st century a State can fail to manage something as important as a vote for the Senate without satisfying the parties concerned -I refer of course to the Minnesota election of 2008 which resulted in litigation dragging on for nearly a year during which time Minnesota had only the one serving Senator in office. What has emerged from that election is that the State was surprised at the increase in volume of 'absentee ballots', and failed to deal with them fairly; while in Florida in 2000, famously/notoriously, there were endless arguments about the Equipment in polling stations and the way in which it did, or did not, puncture the ballot card sufficiently to record a definite vote.

In the UK it is relatively simple, because every constituency in the UK has almost the same procedure: registration papers are sent to households, a register is compiled from its results. Parliamentary constituencies are sub-divided into Wards, polling stations created ad hoc from schools, church halls, council offices in that ward. Voters are sent Polling Cards which tell them precisely where to vote, in only one of those neighbourhood schools, or church halls, or offices. Trust is the basis of registration -you sign the registation form confirming the information is true, and this makes you liable to prosecution if it is false. The only real difference I am aware of is that in some parts of the UK, Northern Ireland and rural Scotland, the count need not follow on the same day as the election.

The ballot paper is usually just one piece of paper -in the UK the only votes outside of very rare referenda, are for Parliament or the Local Council, but in those cities that have them, there are mayoral votes too. That's it. You go to the polling station, show your polling card (but if you have lost it or forgotten it this does'nt matter as it is not a legal requirement to vote with it) or tell them who you are, they cross off your name on the electoral register as having voted, give you the ballot paper, and you privately put your 'X' in pencil next to the name of your chosen candidate, fold it and then put it into the black box.

In the US, as I understand it, there are federal, state and local offices to vote for, and ballot papers I have seen photos of are enormous A4 size documents. I don't know why you can't separate elections: why not have a separate ballot paper for the office of President, another for State offices, a third for local county ones...?

But right now, the process of Registration seems to be the most controversial, so I think a debate on the best way of handling this would be useful. We don't have photo ID in the UK, you do in the US. We both have postal votes/absentee ballots -but should these be restricted as they are open to suspicion/abuse...?

[NYBURBS]

Well, this is what our Constitution says about it:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators.

(The election of a president is done by electors and would be a far more complicated discussion).

For the most part, States have chosen what type of voting system to use (booths, paper ballots, etc), but as far back as I can recall there has been a uniform day for elections. There are other amendments in the federal constitution that prohibit denying the vote to those 18 or older, on the basis of gender, or because of race, or the failure to pay any poll tax or other tax; as well as one that changed the method of electing senators from state legislature votes to popular vote.

You hear differing opinions as to how wide spread voter fraud is, but small or large it still has the potential to dilute legitimate votes, and that shouldn't be tolerated. As far as the issue of IDs go, I think it's perfectly reasonable to have to show that you are who you say you are when going to vote, but I would want people to have the ability to obtain the ID at no cost, otherwise we're essentially back to a poll tax. I wouldn't be in favor of doing away with absentee balloting, but better safe guards could be helpful, such as having to go to the county board of elections to show your ID before picking up the ballot or having it sent to a military base in the case of service members.

As for federal elections, it's probably time to have a uniform method of recording the votes and resolving disputes.

[trish]

As far as the issue of IDs go, I think it's perfectly reasonable to have to show that you are who you say you are when going to vote, but I would want people to have the ability to obtain the ID at no cost, otherwise we're essentially back to a poll tax.I would add that at a reasonable time period should be allowed to elapse between the announcement of new restrictions on voting procedures and the time when they go into effect...perhaps a year or more depending on the relative ease of acquiring the requisite ID.


I wouldn't be in favor of doing away with absentee balloting, but better safe guards could be helpful, I think I agree, but absentee voting is by far the most vulnerable to fraud. In-person votes cannot be bought as no one can go into the booth with you and confirm their purchase. Not so with absentee ballots. In-person voting fraud is not worth the price of getting caught. Absentee fraud is less risky and might be more profitable.

More and more precincts are using computers. They are way to readily hacked. The software currently used is priority protected meaning we can't even be sure the manufacturer isn't loading the dice.

Every election, people stand in line and are turned away from the polls when the voting period runs out. We need a federal holiday set aside for voting. Every election you read about bags full of ballots being lost, misplaced and found again. Then there's the chads and the interference of the Supreme Court. When it comes to voter fraud, ten cases of in-person fraud is the very least of our worries.

[Odelay]

Voting is just an inherently messy business. I once worked as a poll worker alongside the normal group of geriatrics you usually see at voting precincts. It was interesting and gave me insight into the process.

Trish, I do like your idea of a longer period of waiting time before implementing changes to voting procedures.

I don't think we have used technology in a very prominent way, to date. One idea is to have automated machines for verifying identity and then spitting out a ballot like an ATM. Airports are great this way... swipe any credit card or passport, the machine confirms your identity, and then spits out a boarding pass. For illiterate voters, automated voice and speech recognition could be used to identify the voter through a series of questions. There's a lot of room for change without invading people's privacy.

[Stavros]

In the UK we have 'traditionally' voted on a Thursday. This is a convention, not a rule -after the First World War, the so-called 'Khaki Election' was held on Saturday 14th December 1918 (but they didn't start the count until the 28th), and the election which brought us the 'National Government' -a coaltion formed in the wake of economic crisis, took place on Tuesday October 27th 1931. On the Continent, France has the best method: a first round of votes on a Sunday, a second round on the following Sunday with Presidential candidates who fail to get 12.5% of the vote. I don't know why we can't have a Saturday or Sunday vote in this country; just as in the US Tuesday as the voting day should be replaced by Saturday or Sunday or both.

The aim must be to get the maximum number of people to vote.

In the US, if you have to pay for the Photo ID required to vote, doesn't that mean you are, in effect, being forced to pay before you can vote, and that it is a 'Poll tax'?

[buttslinger]

Only about 55% of eligible voters actually vote in presidential elections, 38% in non-presidential years. Lots of registered voters don't vote either. There's an issue for you.
Voting districts are routinely changed by the party in power to give themselves an edge.
The Census will go door to door to find people, so there are lists out there of where people are.
The electoral college? Who thunk that one up?
Like I said before in another post, tueday voting goes back pre Civil War when people drove there buggies to the polls. It should change to the first weekend in November, when traffic is light, schools are availible, people don't work.
The whole thing is a game, if you went door to door most people don't even know who's running for the House, politics in general is a scam, if Thomas Jefferson and Samuel Adams had met Sarah Palin, we would have a completely different way of electing our leaders. Should some wino in the gutter determine the leader of the free world?

[NYBURBS]

In the US, if you have to pay for the Photo ID required to vote, doesn't that mean you are, in effect, being forced to pay before you can vote, and that it is a 'Poll tax'?

Arguably it would be a form of poll tax, though I'm sure otherwise would try to claim otherwise. Though my understanding is that at least some states that want to require photo ID have also designed it so people could get the ID for free.

[Stavros]

I see your point. Would it be splitting hairs to argue that if someone had to pay the cost of driving to, or being transported to an office to get their ID it would not be free unless they had those costs remitted? In the UK, you can go by choice to the council office, but most of the time it is the council that bears the cost of mailing voters the forms.