3 ms·
> There's also nothing to prevent bad actors from destroying ballots in large quantities. Around here (WA state), you can check to see if your ballot was recei
by toast0 10mo ago
> There's also nothing to prevent bad actors from destroying ballots in large quantities.
Around here (WA state), you can check to see if your ballot was received and accepted. If a bad actor destroys ballots in large quantities on their way to voters, many voters will notice and complain. If a bad actor destroys ballots in large quantities on their way to to the counting facility, some voters are likely to notice and complain.
Same goes if you return ballots for other people. Either the actual voter notices their ballot is missing or the vote counters notice they got two ballots from the same voter or a larger than usual number of bad signatures.
Is it foolproof? No. And there's usually no established procedure to cure a tampered election, either. But large scale tampering is likely to leave signs. And small scale tampering would only rarely make a difference in results.
In person voting might be more secure, but it takes a lot more people, and if you want an ID requirement, you need to figure out how to make ID acheivable for all the voters or it's really just a tool to disenfranchise people who have trouble getting ID. In the US, there is no blanket ID requirement, so there are a lot of eligible voters without ID.
- what 10mo agoNo one has trouble getting an ID. You need an ID to drive, to work, to open a bank account, to buy liquor or tobacco, etc. The idea that someone can’t get an ID is absolute nonsense.
- habinero 10mo agoIt's not. Plenty of people do none of those things.
- robomartin 10mo agoNot a problem. We should pay for them to get proper identification. This is likely an infinitesimally small percentage of the population qualified to vote. As the other commenter said, you need identification for most important things in life. Yet, again, if someone does not have ID and they want to vote, it should be easy and free. If they can't drive, we pay for an Uber. If they don't understand the process, we pay for a coach. Etc. This is the kind of process that reduces to zero over time. If you process 100K people on year one, there might only be a couple of thousand people the following year...and down to zero it goes.
- habinero 10mo agoVoting is much more fundamental to a democracy than Uber lmao, therefore it's worth it to make the effort to make sure as many people as possible can participate. We have essentially ~no voter fraud in the US, so the only reason to change it is because you want to prevent other people from voting for selfish reasons.