4 ms·

I hope that as part of the design, it will also [optionally] enforce some form of voter identification (passport, drivers license, passport card, or even a cred

by rixrax 8y ago

I hope that as part of the design, it will also [optionally] enforce some form of voter identification (passport, drivers license, passport card, or even a credit card with a chip or apple pay for all I care). I suspect above might be unpopular idea. Especially since obvious downside is that if poorly implemented (or exploited) it could allow establishing who voted what and in any case allow establishing who did and didn't vote. And no, I don't think voter fraud is widespread, or has had any impact of consequence to overall results. But in this age and day, I think we should have a system where a registered voter is first identified by the system before presenting them with the ballot. This way, assuming systems were interlinked, one could vote anywhere in the country, and be given the right ballot for where you live. And then the obvious next step would be allowing voting via browser. One vote for one registered ID. If system thinks your ID has already voted, have an escalation mechanism to re-cast the vote and investigate.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
gruez 8y ago
>[optionally] enforce what's that supposed to mean? it's either mandatory or it isn't. also, all of the options you listed are disproportionately less used by the poor, so it doesn't really address the main issues with mandatory voter id >And then the obvious next step would be allowing voting via browser. electronic voting brings up a bunch of other issues. how do you prevent vote selling? how do you secure a (poorly secured) personal computer from being hacked?
- rixrax 8y ago
  >>>[optionally] enforce >what's that supposed to mean? I was just thinking that some might want to use this software without identification enforcement, or do it some other way (manually via voter list,...). I think it would not be unreasonable to say that in order to vote, you need to furnish some form of approved identification. That some people don't have a valid government issued Id is in my mind absolutely a problem and we should find a way to make sure people do have some Id regardless of their background. >>...allowing voting via browser. >and how does this prevent vote selling? I don't know. But it appears other countries[0] have managed to make this work. I don't see how it could not work here too. [0] https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-governance/i-voting/ https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-governance/i-voting/
  - gruez 8y ago
    >That some people don't have a valid government issued Id is in my mind absolutely a problem and we should find a way to make sure people do have some Id regardless of their background. yet documented instances of voter fraud that could be stopped by mandatory id checks (mainly impersonation) is surprisingly sparse[1]. this either means that the fraudsters are really good at not getting caught, or that this isn't that big of a problem. if you think about it, it really doesn't make sense to commit this type of voter fraud: the penalties are stiff if you get caught, you're putting yourself at risk every time you commit it (as opposed to sitting behind a computer in an extradition unfriendly country), and it scales poorly (each person you recruit can maybe cast 30 votes on voting day if you factor in lineups and driving time, and the chances that one of them snitches goes exponentially as you recruit more people). [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-voter-fraud-commission.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-voter-f... >I don't know. But it appears other countries[0] have managed to make this work. I don't see how it could not work here too. The wikipedia page doesn't seem to put it in a good light... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia#C...
fake-name 8y ago
The problem with enforcing voter ID laws is that it's a solution to a non-existent problem. If you want to increase the bar for people to vote, you HAVE to demonstrate that the current system is problematic. There have been multiple attempts to find ANY significant voter fraud that would have been at all affected by forcing voter-ID requirements. They have universally found nothing. As such, there's no real reason to support voter-ID laws, aside from deliberately trying to disenfranchise low-income voters.
- lkschubert8 8y ago
  I don't think you HAVE to demonstrate that the current system is problematic. You have to demonstrate the current system is potentially problematic. You are describing a reactionary approach to something that definitely should be thought about proactively.
  - rectang 8y ago
    So, to remedy a problem that you have no evidence exists, you would disenfranchise millions of people.
  - specialist 8y ago
    Voter fraud has been exhaustively researched. The occurrences are negligible. Certainly much lower than most other forms of errors in voting systems. The entire issue is manufactured outrage.
    - sgc 8y ago
      I think there is too much hubris in that opinion. Before the recent election there was very little evidence of the vote being gamed by foreign powers. But if there had been proactive safeguards in place, the attempt could have been nipped in the bud.
      - cbsmith 8y ago
        If the foreign powers had actually manipulated actual votes (and if you think this is the first time...), their manipulation would have been nearly impossible to hide. That's not what they did.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> I hope that as part of the design, it will also [optionally] enforce some form of voter identification How would a counting system for traditional paper ballots enforce that? It's not even a component used in the part of the process where that makes sense
timdev2 8y ago
Completely disagree. Absentee ballots work fine already. Who needs the feature creep of a nationwide interlinked voting system. Voting via the browser is such a terrible idea for manifold reasons that ought to be obvious.
specialist 8y ago
TL;DR: Voting in the US is surprisingly complicated. All the facets you mentioned have already been thoroughly ironed out. Most every US voter registration system I'm aware of requires eligible voters to present some kind of identification. Errors do occur, because we're stubborn and won't implement Real ID. The one exception I know of is (was?) North Dakota. Further, voters must present some kind of identification and sign-in to receive a ballot at a poll site. For postal ballots, your receiving address is assumed to be proxy for your identity. Voters can only cast ballots where they're registered. Voting electronically, by any medium, can neither ensure voter privacy or the public vote count. The gold standard is the Australian Ballot, if you'd like to learn more. All voting systems I'm aware of tracks ballots. Rules vary by jurisdiction. But generally this prevents double voting. Some places allow newer ballots to replace a prior ballot (IIRC).
- specialist 8y ago
  Oh, one more thing... The voter ID debate is a red herring. All jurisdictions require ID to receive a ballot. The argument is over what forms of ID are accepted. As the token liberal here, and former poll inspector and election integrity activist, I insist that any required ID (eg drivers license) is provided free on demand to all eligible voters. Otherwise it's a poll tax, which is unconstitutional.

by rixrax 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

gruez 8y ago

>[optionally] enforce what's that supposed to mean? it's either mandatory or it isn't. also, all of the options you listed are disproportionately less used by the poor, so it doesn't really address the main issues with mandatory voter id >And then the obvious next step would be allowing voting via browser. electronic voting brings up a bunch of other issues. how do you prevent vote selling? how do you secure a (poorly secured) personal computer from being hacked?

rixrax 8y ago
>>>[optionally] enforce >what's that supposed to mean? I was just thinking that some might want to use this software without identification enforcement, or do it some other way (manually via voter list,...). I think it would not be unreasonable to say that in order to vote, you need to furnish some form of approved identification. That some people don't have a valid government issued Id is in my mind absolutely a problem and we should find a way to make sure people do have some Id regardless of their background. >>...allowing voting via browser. >and how does this prevent vote selling? I don't know. But it appears other countries[0] have managed to make this work. I don't see how it could not work here too. [0] https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-governance/i-voting/ https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-governance/i-voting/
- gruez 8y ago
  >That some people don't have a valid government issued Id is in my mind absolutely a problem and we should find a way to make sure people do have some Id regardless of their background. yet documented instances of voter fraud that could be stopped by mandatory id checks (mainly impersonation) is surprisingly sparse[1]. this either means that the fraudsters are really good at not getting caught, or that this isn't that big of a problem. if you think about it, it really doesn't make sense to commit this type of voter fraud: the penalties are stiff if you get caught, you're putting yourself at risk every time you commit it (as opposed to sitting behind a computer in an extradition unfriendly country), and it scales poorly (each person you recruit can maybe cast 30 votes on voting day if you factor in lineups and driving time, and the chances that one of them snitches goes exponentially as you recruit more people). [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-voter-fraud-commission.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-voter-f... >I don't know. But it appears other countries[0] have managed to make this work. I don't see how it could not work here too. The wikipedia page doesn't seem to put it in a good light... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia#C...

fake-name 8y ago

The problem with enforcing voter ID laws is that it's a solution to a non-existent problem. If you want to increase the bar for people to vote, you HAVE to demonstrate that the current system is problematic. There have been multiple attempts to find ANY significant voter fraud that would have been at all affected by forcing voter-ID requirements. They have universally found nothing. As such, there's no real reason to support voter-ID laws, aside from deliberately trying to disenfranchise low-income voters.

lkschubert8 8y ago
I don't think you HAVE to demonstrate that the current system is problematic. You have to demonstrate the current system is potentially problematic. You are describing a reactionary approach to something that definitely should be thought about proactively.
- rectang 8y ago
  So, to remedy a problem that you have no evidence exists, you would disenfranchise millions of people.
- specialist 8y ago
  Voter fraud has been exhaustively researched. The occurrences are negligible. Certainly much lower than most other forms of errors in voting systems. The entire issue is manufactured outrage.
  - sgc 8y ago
    I think there is too much hubris in that opinion. Before the recent election there was very little evidence of the vote being gamed by foreign powers. But if there had been proactive safeguards in place, the attempt could have been nipped in the bud.
    - cbsmith 8y ago
      If the foreign powers had actually manipulated actual votes (and if you think this is the first time...), their manipulation would have been nearly impossible to hide. That's not what they did.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> I hope that as part of the design, it will also [optionally] enforce some form of voter identification How would a counting system for traditional paper ballots enforce that? It's not even a component used in the part of the process where that makes sense

timdev2 8y ago

Completely disagree. Absentee ballots work fine already. Who needs the feature creep of a nationwide interlinked voting system. Voting via the browser is such a terrible idea for manifold reasons that ought to be obvious.

specialist 8y ago

TL;DR: Voting in the US is surprisingly complicated. All the facets you mentioned have already been thoroughly ironed out. Most every US voter registration system I'm aware of requires eligible voters to present some kind of identification. Errors do occur, because we're stubborn and won't implement Real ID. The one exception I know of is (was?) North Dakota. Further, voters must present some kind of identification and sign-in to receive a ballot at a poll site. For postal ballots, your receiving address is assumed to be proxy for your identity. Voters can only cast ballots where they're registered. Voting electronically, by any medium, can neither ensure voter privacy or the public vote count. The gold standard is the Australian Ballot, if you'd like to learn more. All voting systems I'm aware of tracks ballots. Rules vary by jurisdiction. But generally this prevents double voting. Some places allow newer ballots to replace a prior ballot (IIRC).

specialist 8y ago
Oh, one more thing... The voter ID debate is a red herring. All jurisdictions require ID to receive a ballot. The argument is over what forms of ID are accepted. As the token liberal here, and former poll inspector and election integrity activist, I insist that any required ID (eg drivers license) is provided free on demand to all eligible voters. Otherwise it's a poll tax, which is unconstitutional.