Do we really need instant election returns? (About voting, not politics.)

[Gumbo4x4]

It's "simple" to show ID if you have the economic means to get to the place that issues them, and then the means to pay for it when you've done that. Your assertion that it is "simple" comes from a position of privilege. I'll also note that students (college I mean) have a difficult time producting an ID (driver's license) that shows they "live" in the precinct where they are voting. When I was in college, I voted in the town I went to college in. My driver's license never matched where I lived because I moved every 6-9 months to a new address. Getting a new license every time I moved would have been ridiculous, and an expense that I could not have handled on my student's budget. It wasn't until I was out of law schools (25 years old) that I consistently had a license that matched my residence address.

That being said, I agree that MOST people have a simple time getting an ID, but most is not all.

I do think we need to think outside the box to make our elections secure. I'm curious what "issues" have arisen in Oregon which has gone to all mailed ballots.

Minnesota does a pretty decent job with voting, and we use scanned paper ballots, with "no excuse necessary" absentee ballots. Our ballots were largely all counted by the next morning....indeed, mainly by 10 at night. My name was on the ballot for a local race, and I knew results (with 100% counted) before 10. My town is about 10,000 people, with about 4000 voters in this cycle. The absentee ballots are counted as of close of business (when they are due), which is 3 hours before polls close, so that was also immediately factored in. We have very little problem with "fraud" or getting things counted on time, and we've got the highest (percentage wise) vote turnout in the country (nearly every year). One big reason why is NUMEROUS precincts, and all close by. We make voting EASY. Longest line I've ever stood in was less than 10 minutes. I see these horrendous lines in other states and just say "why?" People shouldn't have to stand in line for hours to vote. That's ridiculous and clearly designed to suppress voting. Make voting easy and people will do it. There's no reason for it to be painful. And, ideally, every person eligible to vote would do so, every time. I've never missed an election no matter where I lived. And, I've never had big problems doing so....but then again, I've never lived in Georgia or Florida, which seem to have big problems many years in a row. Maybe they could look at what other states are doing who don't seem to be as plagued.

When I was in college, I always voted based on my “permanent” address, not where I was living on or near campus.

 

[robinb]

I don't have a problem with the media calling races in the first couple of hours as long as it's pretty crystal clear that person is going to win. In my state the Senator was called the winner within minutes while it took 5 more hours for the governor and until the next day (or maybe longer) for the AG. Those two races were much closer. We are blessed with paper ballots which can be manually recounted if necessary. I voted absentee at the local library on a machine that PRINTED OUT a paper ballot that was put in an envelope and fed into the tabulator on election day. In our city the vast majority of votes are counted on election day and only a few stragglers (mostly military votes that came a bit late and provisional ballots that were okay'd) that are counted during the Board of Canvass meets on Friday after the election.

 

[mnrose]

When I was in college, I always voted based on my “permanent” address, not where I was living on or near campus.

In Minnesota, you can do either. Where your permanent address is or where you reside. My daughter voted absentee in our home community because she wanted to vote for me (local race) but otherwise she felt much more closely aligned with the races in the town where she goes to college. That's the way I was too when I went to college. The ads I saw, the brochures I received were for races in the college town. I felt much more knowledgable and aware of the issues and candidates in that community which is why I voted there. I also never "lived" again in the town where I was raised after I went to college, even though my driver's license had that address until I was out of law school. Made very little sense for me to vote in the races in that town.

 

[bcla]

When I was in college, I always voted based on my “permanent” address, not where I was living on or near campus.

There's nothing unusual about a student opting to vote at a temporary address. The only legal requirement is that one doesn't vote and/or register twice in different jurisdictions for the same election. One can still stay on the voter rolls in another jurisdiction. My state specifically addresses this.

https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/voting-california/students/

At least in my state there's no specific requirement to provide a driver license. You just fill out the registration form where false information can be prosecuted.

 

[rickybobby]

Do you agree we need rules, and that they be followed?

 

[robinb]

In Minnesota, you can do either. Where your permanent address is or where you reside.

Wisconsin too. I am a poll worker for an all-student ward (everyone lives in a dorm) and the students can vote back at home by absentee or they can register to vote at school. I have helped plenty of kids from Minnesota vote . There are special voter IDs for University of Wisconsin students since their student IDs don't have expiration dates.

 

[moon]

Do you agree we need rules, and that they be followed?

Of course. The rule in Florida is that if the margin of victory is 0.5 percent or less, a machine recount is ordered. If that margin is 0.25 percent or less, the state will trigger a manual recount, where the “over votes” and “under votes” are counted by hand, so whoever is trying to interfere with that is not following the rules.

 

[ChrisFL]

regarding Voter ID, in North Dakota, the one candidate who was the incumbent who was suppored by a lot of native americans. so the other party decided to require physical addresses which the native americans mostly didn't have....it was literal voter disenfranchisement because they mostly supported one party over the other. That's just one problem with voting ID laws, etc.

 

[Colleen27]

We don't need them. But enough people want fast over accurate that I don't see the practice changing any time soon. I work for a small town weekly and we try to get election results out by midnight on election day - usually not a big deal because we're dealing with jurisdictions with a few thousand voters - but OMG did I catch hell from some readers about a race I didn't report until around lunchtime the day after the election because at 2 am when I called it a night it was still only around 65% reporting. By the time I got in the next day, the internet pot-stirrers had decided that it going unreported was a case of bias in favor of an incumbent who was voted out... because the idea that a three-man newsroom might not be staffed for 24/7 real-time results was just implausible. It makes me VERY glad I don't deal with races of statewide or national interest!

I think the whole country should be on the same kind of voting system and every voter should have to show ID at the polling station and if not at the polling stations, they should have to show it before they get a mail in ballot every year. It makes sense. People need to show their ID at the doctors office these days to keep them honest, so why should people not show ID to vote? Why are so many people against having to show ID??? It's very simple to show ID.

I think the North Dakota case shows that it isn't always that easy. There are plenty of people in our country who can't easily meet the requirements to get a state-issued ID, and cost is only one barrier of many. One of the kids living in my house right now is struggling to get sufficient ID to get a real (not under the table) job. If you don't have your paperwork, it is a maddening circle - you need a birth certificate to get a photo ID but you need a photo ID to get a replacement copy of your birth certificate, never mind figuring out proof of an address when you're basically couch-surfing without a place of your own and aren't getting mail anywhere.

It is a very middle-class perspective to think ID is just something everyone has or can easily get.

 

[sam_gordon]

I think the whole country should be on the same kind of voting system

This. Heck, even in my state, the voting process varies based on COUNTY. Doesn't it make more sense to have everyone use the same voting system (at least in the same state if not the entire country)?

 

[mnrose]

This. Heck, even in my state, the voting process varies based on COUNTY. Doesn't it make more sense to have everyone use the same voting system (at least in the same state if not the entire country)?

Sure. As long as we use a "best in class" voting system instead of, say, Florida or Georgia. We definitely don't need THAT imported to the rest of the country. Choose a system where large numbers of people vote successfully, year after year, without massive hoopla.

 

[mnrose]

Do you agree we need rules, and that they be followed?

Again, the concept is a no-brainer....so long as the "rules" (like the one in North Dakota requiring a street address on an ID to vote, when they bloody well know that most reservations have NO street address to put on an ID) are not designed to disenfranchise voters. That's where the rub comes. Automatic registration should occur when you reach 18. Automatic. 100%. They knew when my son turned 18 in order to register him for the draft, my guess is we can "know" where he is to register him to vote. And, we need a method that allows easy voting for everyone who cares to vote. No long lines. No remote precincts. If in person voting is required, it should be within a few miles, at most, of a person's residence. Otherwise, mail voting should be allowed.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Automatic registration should occur when you reach 18. Automatic. 100%.

I don't agree with automatic. In countries where voting is mandatory sure but here it's a choice. I know people who are not registered to vote for a wide variety of reason and wouldn't appreciate being automatically registered to vote.

I do understand what you're saying about the issues regarding addresses.

 

[sam_gordon]

I don't agree with automatic. In countries where voting is mandatory sure but here it's a choice. I know people who are not registered to vote for a wide variety of reason and wouldn't appreciate being automatically registered to vote.

I do understand what you're saying about the issues regarding addresses.

How does being registered to vote affect anything? OK, maybe you get some mailings around election time. But being registered doesn't require you to vote. I don't understand the concern over being registered.

 

[NotUrsula]

How does being registered to vote affect anything? OK, maybe you get some mailings around election time. But being registered doesn't require you to vote. I don't understand the concern over being registered.

The most common reason that I hear is a wish to avoid jury duty. Really doesn't hold up these days, when most communities use DL databases and tax rolls to draw pools.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

How does being registered to vote affect anything? OK, maybe you get some mailings around election time. But being registered doesn't require you to vote. I don't understand the concern over being registered.

From what I understand it's more of something being forced upon them when it's their choice to exercise their ability to vote.

But I'll be honest I get so sick and tired of the mailings I get and it's a lot more than just some, plus you have the text messaging this year which I was quite annoyed you had to opt out rather than opt in to getting them in the first place (hopefully that opt out sticks the next time an election occurs in my area).

I also think an issue might actually occur with respects to the address issues brought up. Just where are you registering these individuals at? Many people have expressed opinions regarding knowing so and so who doesn't have a permanent address to get voter information, etc. Unless you're saying we should do away with voter registration based on where one lives (which is used for voting in one district over another and voting for who is representing your area where you live in) and instead do it based strictly on a particular person.

 

[Hikergirl]

Actually my state has all races certified. So much for that assumption. And your post is non responsive. You failed to address the issue. It's a lot easier to count a low population state with no close races than it is to count a state where five of its counties out populate said state that also has a huge amount of mail ins to count and then goes to mandated recounts in multiple races because they're close.

It is easier to count when the rules and procedures don't allow room for complications. There is obviously a way too do that, even in high populated states.
Besides that, my comment was tongue in cheek but you obviously missed that........

 

[Gumbo4x4]

In Minnesota, you can do either. Where your permanent address is or where you reside. My daughter voted absentee in our home community because she wanted to vote for me (local race) but otherwise she felt much more closely aligned with the races in the town where she goes to college. That's the way I was too when I went to college. The ads I saw, the brochures I received were for races in the college town. I felt much more knowledgable and aware of the issues and candidates in that community which is why I voted there. I also never "lived" again in the town where I was raised after I went to college, even though my driver's license had that address until I was out of law school. Made very little sense for me to vote in the races in that town.

How does that apply to out of state students?

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

The most common reason that I hear is a wish to avoid jury duty. Really doesn't hold up these days, when most communities use DL databases and tax rolls to draw pools.

TBH that's never been a reason from the people I've heard it from though I understand it may be the most common reason you hear.

 

[NotUrsula]

I think the North Dakota case shows that it isn't always that easy. There are plenty of people in our country who can't easily meet the requirements to get a state-issued ID, and cost is only one barrier of many. One of the kids living in my house right now is struggling to get sufficient ID to get a real (not under the table) job. If you don't have your paperwork, it is a maddening circle - you need a birth certificate to get a photo ID but you need a photo ID to get a replacement copy of your birth certificate, never mind figuring out proof of an address when you're basically couch-surfing without a place of your own and aren't getting mail anywhere.

It is a very middle-class perspective to think ID is just something everyone has or can easily get.

Very true about ID. I've been a librarian for decades, and one of the most common extra services public libraries offer is voter registration. I've been on that front line, and I've seen the hoops some jurisdictions force people to jump through in order to exercise a basic Constitutional right. (BTW, librarians also routinely help people get birth certificate and military records copies.)

It seems to me that the DMV should do registrations along with licenses (automatically, with an opt-out, rather than just posting a sign saying that it's offered), and states should be required to offer periodic mobile/remote non-driver ID services in communities that are a certain percentage below the poverty level. Sending a mobile office to high schools a few times per year would be a good way.

If you have no fixed address, but do work or attend school, I think it would be fair to let those locations serve as your "residence" for voting purposes.