7 ms·

Why California is still counting votes and how long it may take to finish

16 points by donsupreme 2y ago

domoregood 2y ago
https://archive.is/6sX2O https://archive.is/6sX2O
gotoeleven 2y ago
[flagged]
- mint2 2y ago
  As far as groups of people selecting the “dumbest” people for a task goes, wapo’s selection of subject matter experts barely registers in terms of consequentiality compared to a lot of examples.
- elphinstone 2y ago
  Not the dumbest, but the most partisan card carrying leftists.
underseacables 2y ago
I think federal elections should be run by the federal government, not the states. Dramatically increase the number of voting locations, and have the federal government manage all of that under federal rules. That would be the safest and most secure way of doing federal elections. This thing of leaving it up to states and local communities introduces to many opportunities for fraud and mismanagement. Countries the size of California seem to have no problem counting their votes in one night. Delays are not healthy for democracy and there is never enough transparency. I guess Congress could pass a law that every state must have their votes counted within 72 hours, or votes after that will not count.
- jedberg 2y ago
  I agree with you, but I would hope they would enforce California's rules, not Florida's. California's rules are designed to make voting as accessible as possible to the greatest number of people, and to make sure every vote is properly counted. States that finish counting in a day are throwing away and disenfranchising a lot of voters.
  - the_snooze 2y ago
    Having served as a poll worker in California, I've seen first-hand that there are real trade-offs in making things easy for voters vs. making the election resolve quickly. In California, you can vote in any polling place in your county. You just have to fill out a provisional ballot if you're not in your assigned precinct, and you're limited to voting for statewide races and ballot measures. But this paperwork can slow down the line, and each provisional ballot needs to be reviewed for eligibility before being counted. Those are real costs on the back end for making voting convenient on the front end.
    - jedberg 2y ago
      Sure, but that's the sacrifice we're willing to make so that everyone gets a chance to make their voice heard.
      - the_snooze 2y ago
        I'm not making a value judgment here. I'm just pointing out that desirable properties like "making voting easy" and "get results quickly" are often in direct tension with one another. You can't have it all, as a practical matter.
    - jfernandezr 2y ago
      This is what I don't understand. In Spain you can only vote in your assigned precinct. Otherwise, you have to vote by mail. Every mail vote collected by the Postal Service gets delivered on the election day to the assigned precinct. At the end of the day, all those votes are mixed in the ballot box and then counting starts. It takes no more than three hours to get the 99.5% of the votes counted nationwide. In order to vote by mail, you have to walk into any Postal Service office with your valid government ID and explicitly ask for it. The PS agent will verify your identity and will send you the voting papers to the address you register into. Then, you do your choices and go back to any PS office and send the vote to your electoral precinct by certified mail. From the moment you ask for mail voting, you get marked in your precinct as a mail voter, so you cannot go in person and vote anymore. You can, though, on the election day go to your precinct and verify that your vote is there. I don't see the difficulty on this.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  There is no such thing as a "federal election" Representatives and Senators are elected by the people in the states or districts they represent. Presidents are elected by the Electoral College. You are asking for a change in the Constitution, which takes more than Congress passing a law.
  - jedberg 2y ago
    That was great when we were a loose confederation of states. That's not the case anymore. Elections to Federal office have a direct effect on everyone in the country. It's time to modernize past the 1700s.
    - RhysU 2y ago
      Multiple independent systems cooperating to provide operational robustness is modern. The Founders got this one right.
- hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
  > I think federal elections should be run by the federal government, not the states. While I happen to completely agree (I'm old enough to remember the "butterfly ballot" that resulted in George W Bush winning over Gore), your suggestion would require a constitutional amendment.
- the_snooze 2y ago
  >I guess Congress could pass a law that every state must have their votes counted within 72 hours, or votes after that will not count. Other than Delaware, literally every state would fail this standard. Delaware takes two days to certify results. The next-fastest is seven days. https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results_certification_dates,_2024 https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results_certification_dates... There are many legitimate reasons why it takes time: voter accessibility (e.g., mail and overseas voting), risk-limiting audits, and making sure the paperwork is properly organized in case of recounts or legal challenges. We get unofficial results and projected winners on election night, assuming the margin of victory is large enough. But those are just media creations. Proper legally-binding results need deliberate time and effort to get right.
DemocracyFTW2 2y ago
Sounds like they're doing it right to me. Let's not succumb to populist voices that complain paper ballot counting is "archaic", "expensive" and "slow". In fact, it is all three of these—plus, when done correctly, it's also "reliable", "trustworthy" and "provable", none of which can be said of online voting.
- inemesitaffia 2y ago
  The issue is the lack of voter ID
  - locopati 2y ago
    which has historically been used to discriminate again black voters. that's why there's pushback against it even tho it may be a valid idea. in states that do have voter id, they generally make it hard to impossible to get one for marginalized people who may not have the necessary documents yet could prove they are a citizen and have a legitimate address.
    - tzs 2y ago
      To elaborate, around 21 million eligible voters in the US do not have an ID that would be acceptable under current and proposed voter ID laws. In some states the necessary ID is free, but "free" just means that there is no fee for the ID or to apply for it. It does not mean that getting copies of the necessary documents that must be submitted with the application are free. Those can sometimes run to over $100. Here's a collection of links I've saved over the years on this: https://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/AMERICANS-WITH-PHOTO-ID-Research-Memo-February-2015.pdf https://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/AMERI... https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jul/11/eric-holder/eric-holder-says-recent-studies-show-25-percent-af/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jul/11/eric-holde... https://www.aclu.org/documents/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet https://www.aclu.org/documents/oppose-voter-id-legislation-f... https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/Minority_Voting_Access_2018.pdf https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/Minority_Voting_Access... https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a... https://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/11/4/7157037/us-voter-id-requirements https://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/11/4/7157037/us-voter-id-req... https://www.npr.org/2018/09/07/644648955/for-older-voters-getting-the-right-id-can-be-especially-tough https://www.npr.org/2018/09/07/644648955/for-older-voters-ge... https://rewirenewsgroup.com/2014/10/16/well-actually-pretty-hard-people-get-photo-id-just-vote/ https://rewirenewsgroup.com/2014/10/16/well-actually-pretty-... https://www.theregreview.org/2019/01/08/shapiro-moran-burden-voter-identification/ https://www.theregreview.org/2019/01/08/shapiro-moran-burden... https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/10/heres-how-much-it-costs-to-vote-in-states-with-voter-id-laws/458109/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/10/heres-h... https://scholars.org/contribution/high-cost-free-photo-voter-identifications https://scholars.org/contribution/high-cost-free-photo-voter... https://now.tufts.edu/2018/01/23/proving-voter-id-laws-discriminating-intent https://now.tufts.edu/2018/01/23/proving-voter-id-laws-discr... https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/debunking-misinformation-photo-id https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/debu...
hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
I'm particularly curious about this sentence: > Signatures on mail ballots must be verified, and if they don’t match the signatures on file, county election officials are obliged to try to contact those voters to verify their signatures. What does signature verification entail? Is it automated? I'm imagining there must be some sort of manual judgement at some point, but that seems dicey.
- jedberg 2y ago
  Automated first, then kicks out to human. Then they call if the human can't tell.
  - throw755554477 2y ago
    When I was a California resident, I tried voting in the first two elections that I was old enough to vote, both times I got a letter a few months later saying my vote couldn't be counted because my signature didn't match. I never bothered voting again.
    - locopati 2y ago
      you sure showed them
readthenotes1 2y ago
How is it that California does it so much slower than other states? There's not a single thing mentioned in the article that other states aren't doing, and 'more people ya" also means "more functionaries"
- Arnt 2y ago
  Compare it to Germany, which is twice as big and does much the same, except that voting be mail has a different deadline. Germany typically delivers the results during the night after the election, but the votes are counted again in the following week anyway, by people who work nine to five. The big, big difference is that checking someone's identity and eligibility to vote is trivial in Germany. I venture to guess that that affects speed and perhaps reliability.

16 points by donsupreme 2y ago

domoregood 2y ago

https://archive.is/6sX2O https://archive.is/6sX2O

gotoeleven 2y ago

[flagged]

mint2 2y ago
As far as groups of people selecting the “dumbest” people for a task goes, wapo’s selection of subject matter experts barely registers in terms of consequentiality compared to a lot of examples.
elphinstone 2y ago
Not the dumbest, but the most partisan card carrying leftists.

underseacables 2y ago

I think federal elections should be run by the federal government, not the states. Dramatically increase the number of voting locations, and have the federal government manage all of that under federal rules. That would be the safest and most secure way of doing federal elections. This thing of leaving it up to states and local communities introduces to many opportunities for fraud and mismanagement. Countries the size of California seem to have no problem counting their votes in one night. Delays are not healthy for democracy and there is never enough transparency. I guess Congress could pass a law that every state must have their votes counted within 72 hours, or votes after that will not count.

jedberg 2y ago
I agree with you, but I would hope they would enforce California's rules, not Florida's. California's rules are designed to make voting as accessible as possible to the greatest number of people, and to make sure every vote is properly counted. States that finish counting in a day are throwing away and disenfranchising a lot of voters.
- the_snooze 2y ago
  Having served as a poll worker in California, I've seen first-hand that there are real trade-offs in making things easy for voters vs. making the election resolve quickly. In California, you can vote in any polling place in your county. You just have to fill out a provisional ballot if you're not in your assigned precinct, and you're limited to voting for statewide races and ballot measures. But this paperwork can slow down the line, and each provisional ballot needs to be reviewed for eligibility before being counted. Those are real costs on the back end for making voting convenient on the front end.
  - jedberg 2y ago
    Sure, but that's the sacrifice we're willing to make so that everyone gets a chance to make their voice heard.
    - the_snooze 2y ago
      I'm not making a value judgment here. I'm just pointing out that desirable properties like "making voting easy" and "get results quickly" are often in direct tension with one another. You can't have it all, as a practical matter.
  - jfernandezr 2y ago
    This is what I don't understand. In Spain you can only vote in your assigned precinct. Otherwise, you have to vote by mail. Every mail vote collected by the Postal Service gets delivered on the election day to the assigned precinct. At the end of the day, all those votes are mixed in the ballot box and then counting starts. It takes no more than three hours to get the 99.5% of the votes counted nationwide. In order to vote by mail, you have to walk into any Postal Service office with your valid government ID and explicitly ask for it. The PS agent will verify your identity and will send you the voting papers to the address you register into. Then, you do your choices and go back to any PS office and send the vote to your electoral precinct by certified mail. From the moment you ask for mail voting, you get marked in your precinct as a mail voter, so you cannot go in person and vote anymore. You can, though, on the election day go to your precinct and verify that your vote is there. I don't see the difficulty on this.
SoftTalker 2y ago
There is no such thing as a "federal election" Representatives and Senators are elected by the people in the states or districts they represent. Presidents are elected by the Electoral College. You are asking for a change in the Constitution, which takes more than Congress passing a law.
- jedberg 2y ago
  That was great when we were a loose confederation of states. That's not the case anymore. Elections to Federal office have a direct effect on everyone in the country. It's time to modernize past the 1700s.
  - RhysU 2y ago
    Multiple independent systems cooperating to provide operational robustness is modern. The Founders got this one right.
hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
> I think federal elections should be run by the federal government, not the states. While I happen to completely agree (I'm old enough to remember the "butterfly ballot" that resulted in George W Bush winning over Gore), your suggestion would require a constitutional amendment.
the_snooze 2y ago
>I guess Congress could pass a law that every state must have their votes counted within 72 hours, or votes after that will not count. Other than Delaware, literally every state would fail this standard. Delaware takes two days to certify results. The next-fastest is seven days. https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results_certification_dates,_2024 https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results_certification_dates... There are many legitimate reasons why it takes time: voter accessibility (e.g., mail and overseas voting), risk-limiting audits, and making sure the paperwork is properly organized in case of recounts or legal challenges. We get unofficial results and projected winners on election night, assuming the margin of victory is large enough. But those are just media creations. Proper legally-binding results need deliberate time and effort to get right.

DemocracyFTW2 2y ago

Sounds like they're doing it right to me. Let's not succumb to populist voices that complain paper ballot counting is "archaic", "expensive" and "slow". In fact, it is all three of these—plus, when done correctly, it's also "reliable", "trustworthy" and "provable", none of which can be said of online voting.

inemesitaffia 2y ago
The issue is the lack of voter ID
- locopati 2y ago
  which has historically been used to discriminate again black voters. that's why there's pushback against it even tho it may be a valid idea. in states that do have voter id, they generally make it hard to impossible to get one for marginalized people who may not have the necessary documents yet could prove they are a citizen and have a legitimate address.
  - tzs 2y ago
    To elaborate, around 21 million eligible voters in the US do not have an ID that would be acceptable under current and proposed voter ID laws. In some states the necessary ID is free, but "free" just means that there is no fee for the ID or to apply for it. It does not mean that getting copies of the necessary documents that must be submitted with the application are free. Those can sometimes run to over $100. Here's a collection of links I've saved over the years on this: https://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/AMERICANS-WITH-PHOTO-ID-Research-Memo-February-2015.pdf https://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/AMERI... https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jul/11/eric-holder/eric-holder-says-recent-studies-show-25-percent-af/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jul/11/eric-holde... https://www.aclu.org/documents/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet https://www.aclu.org/documents/oppose-voter-id-legislation-f... https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/Minority_Voting_Access_2018.pdf https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/Minority_Voting_Access... https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a... https://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/11/4/7157037/us-voter-id-requirements https://www.vox.com/xpress/2014/11/4/7157037/us-voter-id-req... https://www.npr.org/2018/09/07/644648955/for-older-voters-getting-the-right-id-can-be-especially-tough https://www.npr.org/2018/09/07/644648955/for-older-voters-ge... https://rewirenewsgroup.com/2014/10/16/well-actually-pretty-hard-people-get-photo-id-just-vote/ https://rewirenewsgroup.com/2014/10/16/well-actually-pretty-... https://www.theregreview.org/2019/01/08/shapiro-moran-burden-voter-identification/ https://www.theregreview.org/2019/01/08/shapiro-moran-burden... https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/10/heres-how-much-it-costs-to-vote-in-states-with-voter-id-laws/458109/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/10/heres-h... https://scholars.org/contribution/high-cost-free-photo-voter-identifications https://scholars.org/contribution/high-cost-free-photo-voter... https://now.tufts.edu/2018/01/23/proving-voter-id-laws-discriminating-intent https://now.tufts.edu/2018/01/23/proving-voter-id-laws-discr... https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/debunking-misinformation-photo-id https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/debu...

hn_throwaway_99 2y ago

I'm particularly curious about this sentence: > Signatures on mail ballots must be verified, and if they don’t match the signatures on file, county election officials are obliged to try to contact those voters to verify their signatures. What does signature verification entail? Is it automated? I'm imagining there must be some sort of manual judgement at some point, but that seems dicey.

jedberg 2y ago
Automated first, then kicks out to human. Then they call if the human can't tell.
- throw755554477 2y ago
  When I was a California resident, I tried voting in the first two elections that I was old enough to vote, both times I got a letter a few months later saying my vote couldn't be counted because my signature didn't match. I never bothered voting again.
  - locopati 2y ago
    you sure showed them

readthenotes1 2y ago

How is it that California does it so much slower than other states? There's not a single thing mentioned in the article that other states aren't doing, and 'more people ya" also means "more functionaries"

Arnt 2y ago
Compare it to Germany, which is twice as big and does much the same, except that voting be mail has a different deadline. Germany typically delivers the results during the night after the election, but the votes are counted again in the following week anyway, by people who work nine to five. The big, big difference is that checking someone's identity and eligibility to vote is trivial in Germany. I venture to guess that that affects speed and perhaps reliability.