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

[NotUrsula]

..but that office was only open every fifth Wednesday of every month — or just four days in 2016

If this wasn't such a serious topic, I'd be LMAO ... it had to have taken some serious cojones to propose lining it up with THAT schedule. Most people's knee-jerk reaction would be to think, "but doesn't a month only have 4 weeks?"

 

[Gumbo4x4]

The federal court case in Wisconsin had an estimate of 9% of the registered voters in the state not having an ID acceptable under their new law. This is a population that’s overwhelmingly eligible, but where people never had or no longer have a current, valid ID in line with the requirements.

We can certainly see simply that a residential address requirement was targeted at a specific voting population of native voters who tended to not have one. It might not have made that much of a difference because that population went through extraordinary measures to obtain residential addresses.

That gun permits, but not student IDs are acceptable voter ID in Texas says a lot about the intent.

We’ve relied for years on a system where picking a name on a list and illegally voting in that person’s name is risky. One runs the risk of being recognized as being someone else. Perhaps a neighbor of that registered voter is standing in line and notices. Or the poll worker is from the same neighborhood and knows the registered voter. Someone would really risk a felony violation to vote multiple times?

You’re really missing my point which is simply that if the potential for a problem exists, it’s as important to address that just as one would an active problem. And that applies to more than just elections, or government in general. I wasn’t trying to prove the level of “problem” or “potential”.

We’ve already covered intent. That said, a gun permit is an official gov’t document where a student ID is not.

 

[Floridaman999]

Be proactive instead of reactive.

 

[Colleen27]

With Texas, it's not a gun permit but a Handgun License. There's a huge difference between one of those and a college ID. One is issued by the state, the other is not. Many ineligible voters can obtain a college ID. I had 3 college IDs by the time I was 17, though obviously my age would have made me ineligible to vote, though my IDs never stated my age, whether I was a citizen, etc.

But the point of showing ID at the polls isn't to verify eligibility. That is verified when you register to vote. All you're trying to prove at the polling place is that you are the person whose name appears on the list... a student ID (or a state ID without an address, as in ND, or any number of other name-and-photo IDs) should be enough proof of that.

 

[tvguy]

I do think that every voter in Florida should be required to take a class on how to cast a ballot.

 

[MrsPete]

So, scammers are so savvy that they do this frequently but somehow almost never accidentally vote in the place of someone who just so happened to not vote? Amazing coincidence.

Not what I said.

Don't you think that we, as a society, should not only be helping people get out of immediate survival mode, but also finding every way possible for them to exercise their right to have a say in the governance of the country we all live in?

Yes, of course we should try to help those who are in "survival mode" -- especially through the education system; however, I don't believe the majority of the people who are currently in that "survival mode" would vote.

I don't mean that to sound uncaring, but voting is a long-term thought process and doesn't do anything to help RIGHT THIS MINUTE. By definition, people who are in "survival mode" are not thinking about what this or that politician might do next year.

That's not correct. In the cases that have gone before the courts, numbers have been determined. In Texas I believe it was estimated that at least 600,000 registered voters in Texas would lack the ID needed under the new laws. In Wisconsin it was about 300,000. Here's one of the federal court decisions (from Wisconsin):

Key word being "estimated". We have no idea whether these estimates are correct, nor do we know how many of these people would've voted anyway -- no one's talking about voter apathy in this thread, but it's a real thing too.

It also doesn't address the question of how many people would obtain an ID, if they knew it would be required next November. I'm thinking about my grandmother, who lived 100 years. She let her driver's license go, but she cared a great deal about voting. IF she had owned no other photo ID (which wasn't the case), I am 100% sure she would've gone to the trouble to get an ID -- and would've had months and months of advanced notice in which to do it.

One thing I've noticed in this thread that troubles me ... is the frequent repetition of rumors.

I'd like to think that people would trouble themselves to seek out the actual rules in their states, but -- you're right -- all too many people would listen to rumors.

Maybe we should just adopt the standard practice from Africa, and provide purple stamp pads at all the polling sites. You have to roll your thumb on the pad after you get a ballot, and it is very difficult to wash off that ink; it takes days of regular washing to fade it off. The idea is to show that you have already voted and and prevent duplicate voting. Perhaps that would satisfy those who are convinced that duplicate-voting is common.

I didn't know about that -- it's an interesting method. Of course, it doesn't take into consideration early voters.

But who will check your ID if you vote by mail?

I hadn't considered that, but it's a good question.
So many things are secure online -- I wonder if voting couldn't be done via internet with Social Security numbers insuring only one vote per person?

They mail the ballots to your house. They check signatures. It would be very difficult to conduct voter fraud on a large enough scale to swing the election with vote by mail.

I find it difficult to believe -- logistically, I mean -- that the election people can /have time to check signatures. Of course, not that many people vote via mail. Still, why would they go to so much trouble for mail-in ballots and essentially none at all for in-person ballots?

That gun permits, but not student IDs are acceptable voter ID in Texas says a lot about the intent.

Well, to get a gun permit one must apply through a government agency and have a background check -- and the whole point is to be SURE of who the person actually is.
Of course, I've paid THOUSANDS of dollars for my college junior's student ID, and it was issued by a state college. Why would anyone attend college under someone else's name? It would result in earning a degree in someone else's name. While it doesn't require a background check, a student ID's pretty secure too.

That raises an interesting question...are voters notified if their ballot is rejected? From hanging chads at the polling place to supposed mismatched signatures on mail-ins, how do people know if their ballot wasn't counted? I honestly don't know.

I don't see how anyone COULD notify a voter his ballot was rejected: when we vote here, we are checked off in a book, and then we're given a ballot with no personal identification on it. How could my personal ballot ever be traced back to me?

I can imagine that some people would be VERY uncomfortable if their ballot were traceable.

 

[lifesavacation]

Not what I said.
Yes, of course we should try to help those who are in "survival mode" -- especially through the education system; however, I don't believe the majority of the people who are currently in that "survival mode" would vote.

I don't mean that to sound uncaring, but voting is a long-term thought process and doesn't do anything to help RIGHT THIS MINUTE. By definition, people who are in "survival mode" are not thinking about what this or that politician might do next year.
Key word being "estimated". We have no idea whether these estimates are correct, nor do we know how many of these people would've voted anyway -- no one's talking about voter apathy in this thread, but it's a real thing too.

It also doesn't address the question of how many people would obtain an ID, if they knew it would be required next November. I'm thinking about my grandmother, who lived 100 years. She let her driver's license go, but she cared a great deal about voting. IF she had owned no other photo ID (which wasn't the case), I am 100% sure she would've gone to the trouble to get an ID -- and would've had months and months of advanced notice in which to do it.
I'd like to think that people would trouble themselves to seek out the actual rules in their states, but -- you're right -- all too many people would listen to rumors.
I didn't know about that -- it's an interesting method. Of course, it doesn't take into consideration early voters.
I hadn't considered that, but it's a good question.
So many things are secure online -- I wonder if voting couldn't be done via internet with Social Security numbers insuring only one vote per person?
I find it difficult to believe -- logistically, I mean -- that the election people can /have time to check signatures. Of course, not that many people vote via mail. Still, why would they go to so much trouble for mail-in ballots and essentially none at all for in-person ballots?
Well, to get a gun permit one must apply through a government agency and have a background check -- and the whole point is to be SURE of who the person actually is.
Of course, I've paid THOUSANDS of dollars for my college junior's student ID, and it was issued by a state college. Why would anyone attend college under someone else's name? It would result in earning a degree in someone else's name. While it doesn't require a background check, a student ID's pretty secure too.
I don't see how anyone COULD notify a voter his ballot was rejected: when we vote here, we are checked off in a book, and then we're given a ballot with no personal identification on it. How could my personal ballot ever be traced back to me?

I can imagine that some people would be VERY uncomfortable if their ballot were traceable.

We’ve had two instances where we were notified our ballots were rejected. This is in WA state where everyone gets an absentee ballot. My dad’s girlfriend works for the State of WA in elections. In the 2016 election, my husband forgot to sign his ballot. She saw his name on list and contacted us so he could provide his signature using a special form. In the same election, my son’s signature was rejected and she let us know his ballot needed verification. So it happens but it did feel a little strange to have an almost family member contact us. I’m assuming she didn’t know how we voted, not that I care. The ballot goes in a privacy envelope and then that goes in the mailing envelope that is signed on the back. It has the voters name and I think address printed on the mailing envelope.

 

[kandb]

QUOTE: "They mail the ballots to your house. They check signatures. It would be very difficult to conduct voter fraud on a large enough scale to swing the election with vote by mail."

I am all for Mail-In ballots, with some requirements and oversight.
No problem at all....

However, Isn't it being alleged in FL that only/mostly certain ballots, specifically from one party, were mailed back, to be 'corrected'. (and, IMHO, mailing back shouldn't be allowed or considered to be constitutional.... If there is a re-do, then EVERYONE should get a re-do. EQUALITY AND EQUAL ACCESS, RIGHT????)
There seems to have been absolutely no oversight or double-checking of any of this, with ballots going missing, destroyed, and found many districts away,
Again, none of these checks matter if there is no real oversight, and rampant and ongoing corruption.
THAT kind of thing is my problem...
Not the requirement of ID...
Not making sure that every single person has so-called and 'created' equal access. (which IMHO is just another argument of the entitled)

It's funny, when you question a political party about possible issues that are happening, they laugh and brush off your concerns. I am getting used to it but sadly a lot of people are in denial.

 

[kandb]

Here's a whole bunch of sources proving voter fraud is virtually non-existent:

https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/debunking-voter-fraud-myth

Who is checking to make sure the voting is legitimate? You can post anything you want BUT who is checking legitimate votes and cross referencing voting? (Example-if someone gets a license from a state who is not a legal citizen and goes and applies for a voting card and marks they are a legal citizen and they go and vote, do you think anyone is checking these votes??? ) Everyone here dismisses that people are voting that should not be BUT who is checking it??? If someone can answer this for me, I would love to know.

 

[CarolAnn856]

It's funny, when you question a political party about possible issues that are happening, they laugh and brush off your concerns. I am getting used to it but sadly a lot of people are in denial.

I know, right? I really wish it wasn't just one party fighting for the rights of voters who have been disenfranchised due to lack of access to polls, voter ID requirements, etc.

 

[bcla]

You’re really missing my point which is simply that if the potential for a problem exists, it’s as important to address that just as one would an active problem. And that applies to more than just elections, or government in general. I wasn’t trying to prove the level of “problem” or “potential”.

We’ve already covered intent. That said, a gun permit is an official gov’t document where a student ID is not.

There’s got to be some other way than requiring something that many eligible voters will give up on trying to get. Maybe facial recognition? Voting is a public act (anyone can look up when I’ve voted), so perhaps facial recognition?

 

[bcla]

Who is checking to make sure the voting is legitimate? You can post anything you want BUT who is checking legitimate votes and cross referencing voting? (Example-if someone gets a license from a state who is not a legal citizen and goes and applies for a voting card and marks they are a legal citizen and they go and vote, do you think anyone is checking these votes??? ) Everyone here dismisses that people are voting that should not be BUT who is checking it??? If someone can answer this for me, I would love to know.

The standard for registration for federal elections is to provide a DL/state ID number or last 4 digits of SSN. At least in my state, last 4 digits of SSN is required to be collected for DLs unless it’s an “AB60” license that’s not valid as federal ID. It’s supposed to be matched up by the Social Security Administration.

https://www.ssa.gov/open/havv/

 

[MillauFr]

I find it difficult to believe -- logistically, I mean -- that the election people can /have time to check signatures. Of course, not that many people vote via mail. Still, why would they go to so much trouble for mail-in ballots and essentially none at all for in-person ballots?

I've gotten the signature questioned twice on my ballot. Someone must be checking.

 

[MillauFr]

I know, right? I really wish it wasn't just one party fighting for the rights of voters who have been disenfranchised due to lack of access to polls, voter ID requirements, etc.

The other party will start fighting the second they realize many of the disenfranchised vote for them.

 

[MillauFr]

It's funny, when you question a political party about possible issues that are happening, they laugh and brush off your concerns. I am getting used to it but sadly a lot of people are in denial.

Don't you think that voting fraud is a red herring designed to distract what the real problem with our political process is? Anyone who spends any time studying the political process in the US realizes that nefarious forces on both sides of the political spectrum buying influence is the most pressing problem.

 

[kandb]

I know, right? I really wish it wasn't just one party fighting for the rights of voters who have been disenfranchised due to lack of access to polls, voter ID requirements, etc.

I believe BOTH parties want people to vote, BUT both parties should make sure the votes are legitimate and legal. Nobody wants to limit access to the polls, that is a myth, we all want to make sure person voting is supposed to be voting and they are who they claim to be. Right now where I live in NJ, ANYONE could go and vote for me, just by signing my name and NO the people at the polls are not checking signatures. VOTER ID should be required. That is my humble opinion and seeing the political climate these days, I do believe it is a necessity. It is not hard to obtain an ID. Everyone should have a valid ID.

 

[skyblue17]

I believe BOTH parties want people to vote, BUT both parties should make sure the votes are legitimate and legal. Nobody wants to limit access to the polls, that is a myth, we all want to make sure person voting is supposed to be voting and they are who they claim to be.

Are you sure about that? I am pretty sure I saw a story floating around this week about a specific senator saying that making voting difficult for people that her party does not want to vote would be advantageous. That story was reported by many news outlets.

 

[rickybobby]

I know, right? I really wish it wasn't just one party fighting for the rights of voters who have been disenfranchised due to lack of access to polls, voter ID requirements, etc.

And those tax breaks only for the rich. No, wait. I and all my co-workers got tax breaks. We even got pay raises that were explained as coming because of the strong economy.

 

[rickybobby]

In 2012, a voter proved how easy it was to commit voter fraud when he showed up at Eric Holder's polling station, and asked the pollworker if Eric Holder was on that voter roll. She then tried to hand him a ballot for Eric Holder to vote under that name. (Obviously, she did not know Holder was the attorney general). The guy was very careful to not claim he was Holder, to protect himself from being arrested for voter fraud.[GALLERY=][/GALLERY]

 

[rickybobby]

I do think that every voter in Florida should be required to take a class on how to cast a ballot.

Methinks you are pointing the finger at the wrong people. The people in charge of the voting for the county are the culprits, specifically in Broward County (always Broward County)