3 ms·

>This is no different than postal balloting, which only requires a signature In principle I don't oppose postal balloting. As implemented, I don't support it,

by rsj_hn 8y ago

>This is no different than postal balloting, which only requires a signature In principle I don't oppose postal balloting. As implemented, I don't support it, as I think it's not a secure voting system. It would be possible to make it into a secure protocol, though. I am a bit worried about it, frankly. > All those other nations provide a free national ID. Do you support that in the USA? Yes, of course. It's crazy we didn't have this 50 years ago. > And now you've lost me. We don't have a national id system, or a national voter registry. We don't use a national e-verify system for employment. We don't have national standards for elections. We don't have national standards for voter registration. In one place, there is same day registration, in another you need 60 days. One place uses paper ballots, another doesn't. The system is run by county clerks in backwater places rather than experts at the national level. We are piggy backing social security numbers as a form of authentication, when they are really identifiers and not secrets. These were all standardized systems adopted in Europe a long time ago. We are completely disorganized in the most important things that are necessary to support the functioning of our democracy. We're even backwards when it comes to simple things like chip and pin.

specialist 8y ago
FWIW, I oppose postal balloting, except where it improves enfranchisement (eg on demand for disabled, military, overseas). It has all the pitfalls of electronic voting and adds a few new ones. It lowers turnout. [1] It leads to ballot chasing, driving up the costs of campaigns, and alienating voters. The Oregonians get fluffed up in defense. But everyone thinks their baby is beautiful. [1] Mail ballots in Washington State now have prepaid postage, which appears to have boosted turnout 3%, restoring turnout to the pre-all mail voting levels. We'll see if that holds. -- We have national standards. Enforcement is spotty. It sounds like what you want is national administration. At one time, most of us election integrity activists would have probably agreed with you, before the Voting Rights Act was gutted. If our elections could somehow be administered in a non-partisan way... But I just don't see it on the horizon. -- Chain of custody for paper ballots and gear is the norm. But the best laws, regs, rules mean nothing without civic participation. Administrating and observing elections is a mountain of work. We just don't have enough people stepping up. And election administration nationwide is chronically, notoriously underfunded. -- Despite the opposition to Real ID, we do have national identifiers. The NSA, Lexis/Nexus (nee Seisent), ChoicePoint, Google, Facebook, others have uniquely identified everyone living and dead, tracked in near real-time. But the US Federal government refuses to leverage, license, nationalize these demographic databases for anything other than terrorist watch lists. Why? For one, it'd completely moot the current debates around the census, voter registration databases, immigration, Social Security, etc. You can't manage what you don't measure. And there are powerful interests who thwart all efforts to measure.
- rsj_hn 8y ago
  Well, I am a supporter of Federalism, but I think national level concerns do need to be managed at the national level. To me, basic identification of citizens and holding elections is a national concern. By the way, I understand the fear that many on the left have for ID cards. I think it's out of date and overblown, but I get it. However, having elections be managed locally does far more to disenfranchise people. Imagine how much more enfranchised people would be with natiowide short term registration (same day if possible, otherwise say 24-48 hours notice), nationwide free ID, and the same standards for availability and access to poll booths. No more shuttering polls in minority areas, no more unwieldy registration requirements. It seems to me that such an overall package of election reforms should appeal to everyone concerned with the poor voting, and they should be able to concede the ID card issue. It's just a strange thing to fixate on, when the real obstacles to voting are not the ID, and when almost everyone else is able to handle having IDs just fine, and in fact IDs are required for the most trivial things nowadays. I do think, there are privacy and civil liberty issues that need to be addressed, but as you point out, this stuff is happening now anyway, and I'd be much more comfortable with a standardized national ID and registration system that was democratically controlled than by what is happening now and the resulting chaos of our elections. I am not going to even bring up Florida and the hanging chad debacle.

by rsj_hn 8y ago

specialist 8y ago

FWIW, I oppose postal balloting, except where it improves enfranchisement (eg on demand for disabled, military, overseas). It has all the pitfalls of electronic voting and adds a few new ones. It lowers turnout. [1] It leads to ballot chasing, driving up the costs of campaigns, and alienating voters. The Oregonians get fluffed up in defense. But everyone thinks their baby is beautiful. [1] Mail ballots in Washington State now have prepaid postage, which appears to have boosted turnout 3%, restoring turnout to the pre-all mail voting levels. We'll see if that holds. -- We have national standards. Enforcement is spotty. It sounds like what you want is national administration. At one time, most of us election integrity activists would have probably agreed with you, before the Voting Rights Act was gutted. If our elections could somehow be administered in a non-partisan way... But I just don't see it on the horizon. -- Chain of custody for paper ballots and gear is the norm. But the best laws, regs, rules mean nothing without civic participation. Administrating and observing elections is a mountain of work. We just don't have enough people stepping up. And election administration nationwide is chronically, notoriously underfunded. -- Despite the opposition to Real ID, we do have national identifiers. The NSA, Lexis/Nexus (nee Seisent), ChoicePoint, Google, Facebook, others have uniquely identified everyone living and dead, tracked in near real-time. But the US Federal government refuses to leverage, license, nationalize these demographic databases for anything other than terrorist watch lists. Why? For one, it'd completely moot the current debates around the census, voter registration databases, immigration, Social Security, etc. You can't manage what you don't measure. And there are powerful interests who thwart all efforts to measure.

rsj_hn 8y ago
Well, I am a supporter of Federalism, but I think national level concerns do need to be managed at the national level. To me, basic identification of citizens and holding elections is a national concern. By the way, I understand the fear that many on the left have for ID cards. I think it's out of date and overblown, but I get it. However, having elections be managed locally does far more to disenfranchise people. Imagine how much more enfranchised people would be with natiowide short term registration (same day if possible, otherwise say 24-48 hours notice), nationwide free ID, and the same standards for availability and access to poll booths. No more shuttering polls in minority areas, no more unwieldy registration requirements. It seems to me that such an overall package of election reforms should appeal to everyone concerned with the poor voting, and they should be able to concede the ID card issue. It's just a strange thing to fixate on, when the real obstacles to voting are not the ID, and when almost everyone else is able to handle having IDs just fine, and in fact IDs are required for the most trivial things nowadays. I do think, there are privacy and civil liberty issues that need to be addressed, but as you point out, this stuff is happening now anyway, and I'd be much more comfortable with a standardized national ID and registration system that was democratically controlled than by what is happening now and the resulting chaos of our elections. I am not going to even bring up Florida and the hanging chad debacle.