3 ms·

> you can determine on election day whether someone's already voted or not before they cast a vote. Can you suggest a specific mechanism to do it that would be

> you can determine on election day whether someone's already voted or not before they cast a vote. Can you suggest a specific mechanism to do it that would be transparent to the public? I don't know about the US specifics but in Russia people voting multiple times was the main strategy of fraud in 2010s (that is before they gave up all the pretence). Before this scheme came into being, the system of isolated voting points where every action was observable and verifiable based solely on the local context had worked reasonably well, to the displeasure of authorities.

pmontra 2y ago
You should apply a large permanent mark to people that already voted. It must last one day or so. But that could infringe the right of not to vote, unless voting is mandatory. Or make impossible to vote twice because everybody is tied to exactly one anonymous ballot. See my reply to parent, about the voting system in Italy. However if some party control a part of the voting system, they can do whatever they want in several ways. For example vote with the ballots of people that didn't go to vote. In my country they'll have to get the photo id number of those people but it's not difficult to get if they have access to official data.
- alexey-salmin 2y ago
  > However if some party control a part of the voting system, they can do whatever they want in several ways. For example vote with the ballots of people that didn't go to vote. They did that in my country at scale. Physical presence is a must-have if you ask me.
PeterisP 2y ago
Some time ago every election or referendum simply put a stamp in the passport when voting, but that was before plastic ID cards. Now they have an online verification process before handing you the ballot papers; this also reports your ID for the invalidation of any pre-election votes (e.g. mail-in ballots) elsewhere.
- Thorrez 2y ago
  You used to need a passport to vote? 42-47% of Americans have passports currently. In 1990, only 5% of Americans had passports.
  - PeterisP 2y ago
    That comes from a time/place where it was issued to 100% adult citizens and it was illegal not to have it - i.e. you have a duty to get one when you come of age or become a citizen or your old one expires, and it's a misdemeanor with some fines if you don't, plus quite a few other legal interactions will be simply refused until you get that sorted out. Now an ID card is a valid option so some people have only the ID card and not a proper passport; but there is an expectation that everyone (who isn't e.g. actively hiding from the authorities as an outlaw) would have a valid ID and if they don't it's acceptable to require that they get one before they can fully interact with the rest of the society e.g. government, banking, driving, owning real estate or cars, any legal contracts such as rent or credit, etc.
- alexey-salmin 2y ago
  > Now they have an online verification process before handing you the ballot papers How can a voting observer ensure that double voting is actually blocked by this system? Government can whitelist people 10x-voting the right way (real case from Russia). Issuing 10 passeports to these people is orders of magnitude harder to scale and will have negative consequences (fraud elsewhere) a government is typically less willing to take.

pmontra 2y ago

You should apply a large permanent mark to people that already voted. It must last one day or so. But that could infringe the right of not to vote, unless voting is mandatory. Or make impossible to vote twice because everybody is tied to exactly one anonymous ballot. See my reply to parent, about the voting system in Italy. However if some party control a part of the voting system, they can do whatever they want in several ways. For example vote with the ballots of people that didn't go to vote. In my country they'll have to get the photo id number of those people but it's not difficult to get if they have access to official data.

alexey-salmin 2y ago
> However if some party control a part of the voting system, they can do whatever they want in several ways. For example vote with the ballots of people that didn't go to vote. They did that in my country at scale. Physical presence is a must-have if you ask me.

PeterisP 2y ago

Some time ago every election or referendum simply put a stamp in the passport when voting, but that was before plastic ID cards. Now they have an online verification process before handing you the ballot papers; this also reports your ID for the invalidation of any pre-election votes (e.g. mail-in ballots) elsewhere.

Thorrez 2y ago
You used to need a passport to vote? 42-47% of Americans have passports currently. In 1990, only 5% of Americans had passports.
- PeterisP 2y ago
  That comes from a time/place where it was issued to 100% adult citizens and it was illegal not to have it - i.e. you have a duty to get one when you come of age or become a citizen or your old one expires, and it's a misdemeanor with some fines if you don't, plus quite a few other legal interactions will be simply refused until you get that sorted out. Now an ID card is a valid option so some people have only the ID card and not a proper passport; but there is an expectation that everyone (who isn't e.g. actively hiding from the authorities as an outlaw) would have a valid ID and if they don't it's acceptable to require that they get one before they can fully interact with the rest of the society e.g. government, banking, driving, owning real estate or cars, any legal contracts such as rent or credit, etc.
alexey-salmin 2y ago
> Now they have an online verification process before handing you the ballot papers How can a voting observer ensure that double voting is actually blocked by this system? Government can whitelist people 10x-voting the right way (real case from Russia). Issuing 10 passeports to these people is orders of magnitude harder to scale and will have negative consequences (fraud elsewhere) a government is typically less willing to take.