5 ms·
I do consider at-home mail-in voting as a bad risk - locally we have a solution that involves separate 'voting stations' (just as any other voting station, offi
by PeterisP 3y ago
I do consider at-home mail-in voting as a bad risk - locally we have a solution that involves separate 'voting stations' (just as any other voting station, officials + observers from opposing parties monitoring) visiting the people who for various reasons are unable to come to vote, and collecting a secret ballot on-site from e.g. bed-ridden sick people; and special voting stations for people who can't leave - e.g. hospitals, prisons, army bases. Of course, that won't help if large numbers of people aren't coming to vote because e.g. the lines are too long or they have to work and can't get to vote, but then you should fix these problems directly.
It is important that people are able to vote without being controlled by their family members or employers, so any unconstrained remote voting should be an exception that's minimized as much as possible.
- snkline 3y agoIndeed. I supported the absentee voting push during the pandemic, but one thing a lot of my friends don't understand is my opposition to absentee voting being normalized going forward.
- astrange 3y ago> Of course, that won't help if large numbers of people aren't coming to vote because e.g. the lines are too long or they have to work and can't get to vote, but then you should fix these problems directly. The issues are: 1. young people don't vote because they don't care, so it should help to make it easier for them. 2. once you're in the voting booth, it's too hard to remember who you decided to vote for when there's tens of choices and ballot props, like in California. Mail-in voting also helps prevent the issue of local governments trying to sneak stuff past the voters by having offseason elections for it. Machine politics has died off in most places, but it's still strong in New York for instance. If everyone gets a mail ballot they'll notice.