4 ms·

I don't know all the details but I think the issue is not so much people confirming their own vote as much as states validating all the votes. Many states have

• SllX 2y ago
  I don’t know where you’re getting the idea that this isn’t checked, but States have about a month to certify results under the laws set by Congress, well technically for Presidential elections they have to have them certified six days before the Electoral College is due to meet and for their own elections States fix their own certification deadlines. Regarding provisional ballots, I have yet to see any evidence that double-counting is an issue, and if you cast one, there’s a toll line you can call per the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to check on your ballot. From my own State’s Secretary of State website (https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/provisional-voting https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-resources/provisiona...): > The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) requires each state or local elections official to establish a "Free Access System," such as a toll-free telephone number for voters to call or an Internet website that voters can access free of charge, to ascertain if they voted a provisional ballot at the polls, whether or not their vote was counted, and, if it was not counted, the reason why it was not counted. Other than having to verify the ballot cast is valid in the county, provisional ballots are just counted during the canvassing process. > and challenging the results is not straight forward, very contentious and political for no reason. Election night lawsuits happen all across the country any time a campaign wants to challenge any election irregularities they come across. Yeah it’s political, but it’s also lawful and courts are setup to accept these challenges, often under an expedited process. This is as much a cornerstone of American democracy as the secret ballot, I wouldn’t get worked up about it like some do. > All states should have immediate provable results with redundancy checks. This would be nice but balancing it with the secret ballot and with the general distrust people have to rely entirely on computers which can be compromised and thus a need to retain the human accountability factor, we’re not there yet. Maybe someday. My State has some more information on its own process here: https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/upcoming-elections/vote-counting-process https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/upcoming-elections/vote-cou... However I wanted to highlight the following three paragraphs for you: > Election results posted on Election Night are semi-official results based on the in-person ballots cast at voting locations on Election Day, any early voted ballots cast in person prior to Election Day, and any vote-by-mail ballots received and processed prior to Election Day. > The complete tally of votes is never finished on Election Night as vote-by-mail ballots postmarked on or before Election Day and received within seven days after the election, as well as any provisional ballots cast, must still be counted. These ballots are always counted during the official canvass period in the 30 days after Election Day. > While media outlets and others may “call” an election contest, or candidates may “concede” to their opponent, on Election Night or the in days following, these calls and concessions are based on the semi-official results and not the final election results. The election results are never final until the Secretary of State has compiled the official statewide results after all county elections officials have reported their official canvass of the votes. I feel like people just kind of forget that the election is never technically finished on election night itself. While there’s a lot of emphasis on calling it for one candidate or another and the media usually gets it right on the night of the election, their calls are not the actual results, they’re the presumed the results with available information.
  • proc0 2y ago
    Right, I think you're basically highlighting what I'm trying to say. The fact that election results are not official until potentially a month later, is a problem. > These ballots are always counted during the official canvass period in the 30 days after Election Day. How is this not an issue when it comes to trusting an election? If elections come down to a few thousand votes (per swing state), then even a small margin of error has a chance of casting huge amounts of doubt on who the real winner is. This already happened in 2000, and again in 2020, yet somehow it doesn't seem like a priority issue. We can talk about all the technicalities but at the end of the day it's about reassuring the entire population that the votes are legitimate and valid. This is more than just having a process. That process has to be efficient, and extending the official results for weeks and months does not accomplish that. You don't have to be cynical to see that the more inefficient the counting is, the less trust there is in the election results, and it all contributes to political turmoil and civil unrest.
    • SllX 2y ago
      It’s better to be accurate than fast. Fast would be nice too, but Federal, State and local elections occur simultaneously with all their various offices and ballot initiatives. Elections occur a full two months before the soonest anyone new is sworn into office, so we have the luxury of time if any serious discrepancies occur, as in 2000. Note that after 2000, Florida got really really good at managing their elections, so it’s not been a recurring issue there either. But hey, if we were to massively cut down on the number of elected positions, force political parties to spend their own money running their own primaries and eliminate ballot initiatives, that would also make elections more efficient. I’d like that.