Slashdot Mirror


Federal Judge Says No Right To Secret Ballot, OKs Barcoded Ballots

doug141 writes "A Colorado county put bar codes on printed ballots in a last minute effort to comply with a rule about eliminating identifying markings. Citizens sued, because the bar codes can still be traced back to individual voters. In a surprise ruling, Denver U.S. District Judge Christine Arguello said the U.S. Constitution did not contain a 'fundamental right' to secret ballots, and that the citizens could not show their voting rights had been violated, nor that they might suffer any specific injury from the bar codes."

17 of 584 comments (clear)

  1. LOL, American "democracy"! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    LOL!

    1. Re:LOL, American "democracy"! by mrmeval · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We call it demockracy and that's not what we had. What we have now is an unstable crypto-plutocracy with the trappings of fairness and equality slathered on and maintained through the inertia of habit. We've not had a republic since the civil war which for the most part destroyed the concept of the sovereign nature of the states. There were a few amendments that eased the process. Governments will invariably acquire more power, sometimes it's given to it with great cheering and sometimes it's sullenly forced upon it and sometime it takes it by force.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    2. Re:LOL, American "democracy"! by Sique · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's an often repeated argument, but it is not correct nevertheless.

      A structure is democratic if it provides the means to remove the ruling entity from power without bloodshed or revolution. So a republic can be democratic, if it's possible to remove the rulers of the republic form power using means provided in the constitution of the republic. A republic gets more and more undemocratic if it gets more and more complicated to legally remove someone from power, be it, because the laws build more and more hurdles to do so, or because traditions get more and more entrenched and any changes are frowned upon, or if a group within the structure is completely removed from power.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    3. Re:LOL, American "democracy"! by TheGavster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I personally know at least one person who voted underage through voter impersonation. If I, as someone totally removed from the "inside" of the politcal process run into it, I can assure you that there are many, many cases with much more malicious intent than a 16 year old who really really wanted to be able to say he voted for Kerry. If a fully naturalized citizen must present ID to board an airplane, buy alcohol, or even travel by car near the beach on a holiday weekend (hello, welcome to the checkpoint, papers please!), why is it suddenly "racist" to demand ID to vote? Are minorities somehow incapable of going to the DMV for their non-driver ID cards like everyone else?

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    4. Re:LOL, American "democracy"! by immaterial · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's ironic that conservatives complain about poor, elderly, and disabled people and all their "entitlements," all while acting completely oblivious to how ridiculously entitled they act themselves. " I have no trouble taking time off work to drive my car over to the local DMV, which is open six days a week, and showing them all the paperwork my parents and I stored safely in a fireproof filing cabinet since the day I was born. How could it not be that easy for everyone else??"

      Many poor people work shit jobs (often TWO shit jobs). For some of these, "hey boss, I've got to take a day off" risks being interpreted as "hey boss, I'm a lazy fuck, fire me hire someone else to wash these dishes." And regardless, for all of them taking a day off work is a day with no pay - and that is no small cost to someone living on tiny margins.

      I already hear you getting indignant. But getting an ID at the DMV doesn't take a full day! For you, with your open-six-days-a-week suburban DMV, sure. For you, who can hop into your own car and drive straight there, sure. Many of the poor, elderly, and disabled can't do that; they have to take public transportation (if available in their area; for rural areas this isn't even an option), find someone else to drive them (does that person have to take work off too?), or hire a taxi. In many areas (particularly rural), the DMV is quite a distance away, or is only open four, or two, or 1 day(s) a month (requiring either an expensive multi-hour drive into the city, or dealing with long waits on the few days it is open).

      And having the requisite paperwork at hand isn't the easiest thing for everyone, either. Sure, your parents made sure to keep track of your birth certificate for you; by the time you were 5 your parents got you a passport, at 16 you had a driver's license. You became an adult with a wealth of well-organized paperwork defining who you are. Not everyone has that advantage. Some people have no idea where their birth certificates went; some people never got birth certificates at all, either because their parents didn't handle paperwork properly, or because they were born in a time when such things weren't even available (ie. elderly in rural areas). Most poor people don't get passports for obvious reasons. Many don't have licenses either, if they cannot afford cars (poor), are incapable of driving (disabled/elderly), or have no need to drive (elderly). Some do have birth certificates, but ones that are no longer valid (pretty much every Puerto Rican in this country). Some have ID, but that ID is for various reasons not considered valid under the law (others in this thread have described those already). Getting an ID without already having the requisite paperwork in order is orders of magnitude harder, and requires many more fees and many more days off work to stand in lines at different government offices.

      What it boils down to is this: Do these laws help more than they hurt? This country has had (iirc) about a hundred documented cases of in-person voter fraud in the past decade. A hundred. In ten years. There are literally millions of registered voters with no government-issued ID. For your argument's sake, let's assume voter fraud is 100x what it is (10,000) and that only 1/100th of the un-IDed registered voters (10,000) are going to be unable to get IDs due to various hardships: at that point, with everything heavily skewed in your favor, we barely break even in the number-of-affected-votes statistic, and that is after making the poor, disabled, and elderly jump through a bunch of time consuming and expensive hoops.

      It is clear to anyone with even half a brain that this is not about insuring the integrity of the voting process, since in will clearly disenfranchise far more people than it will stop from committing fraud. It's about intentionally disenfranchising the poor, who tend to vote Democrat.

      And Republicans are happy to admit it.

    5. Re:LOL, American "democracy"! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure there is: don't buy their products.

      We tried that with GM and it didn't work very well

    6. Re:LOL, American "democracy"! by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Corporations deserve/require a voice in government too.

      No, they don't. Their owners already have a voice. Why would they deserve to speak with additional voices through entities that only exist as legal fiction? Should I be able to vote once for every pseudonym I use on the Internet?

      Our system of investment would crumble along with our economy if it wasn't there. The government has to be conducive to business if you expect jobs and/or a middle class of people.

      When corporations get a voice in the government they don't have any incentive to make things conductive to business. They have an incentive to make things hard for their competitors and conductive to the kind of financial games that led to the current crisis. Oh, and to allow employee abuse.

      If anything, giving corporations a voice in government would make it harder to start new ones since the existing ones have every incentive to pre-emptively fight against competition.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  2. This is going to the supreme court by InPursuitOfTruth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fundamental problem is that lack of anonymity creates pressure to change one's vote not due to one's personal beliefs, but rather due to pressure from an outcome of what another might think. In the extreme case, we are talking potential retaliation by a regime or political part. This has happened repeatedly through history, and happens today. While the extreme case doesn't appear to apply in the US today, in pre-WW II German, it did. If civilized countries can change quickly to oppress, then how, if our inherent right to vote does not come with an obvious need for protections such as anonymity, can our constitution protect us indefinitely?

  3. Barcodes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Don't eliminate identifying marks if you can download an app to decode the mark into a number, then run an algorythm against it to transform the number into names, and figure out how that individual voted.

    Which they did.

    On a local radio station.

    With a county comissioners barcode, they told him how he voted.

    This should be interesting seeing how Colorado is voting this year to legalize marijuana...

  4. Re:Federal Judges Need to Go Back to School by u38cg · · Score: 5, Funny

    The world of Constitutional Law was rocked today by an anonymous posting on the well known geek website, Slashdot. In a few eloquent lines, an anonymous coward swept away centuries of misguided thought and ushered in a new era in constitutional thought. "I'm blown away," said Chief Justice Roberts. "My life has been wasted." Other members of the court could not be reached for comment.

    --
    [FUCK BETA]
  5. Re:Freedom by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, I say "I think" as I'm not American, nor am I an expert in American law, but I was under the impression that you do have the right to a secret ballot to protect you from having your vote coerced. If the barcode is tied to you voter registration number, it easily allows a machine to do what a human readable voter number would do, and tie your vote back to you.

  6. The judge is right. by rjh · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is no Constitutional right to a secret ballot.

    In the State of Oregon, all voting is done by absentee ballot. There's no privacy screen around you as you cast your vote. Your employer can stop by and say, "I'll pay you $1000 for your unused ballot, so I can fill it out how I want and submit it." If you're in an abusive family, your domineering alcoholic bipolar parent might force you to fill out the absentee ballot in front of them so they can control how you vote. There is no way the absentee ballot is considered a secret ballot, and yet we have no trouble when an entire state converts to voting by absentee ballot.

    The State of West Virginia guarantees, in its state constitution, every resident's right to cast a public ballot. There's no mention of the secret ballot.

    The secret ballot wasn't in use anywhere in the United States until it was first adopted by the city of Louisville, Kentucky, in 1888. The State of Massachusetts followed soon after. The first President to be elected by secret ballot was Grover Cleveland, in 1892.

    We didn't use secret ballots to elect Washington, Jefferson, Jackson or Lincoln.

    So, yeah. Anyone who claims we have a constitutional right to a secret ballot has an uphill road to hoe. History clearly shows that at no point in our nation's history has any court held the secret ballot to be a right.

  7. Re:California already does this by Nkwe · · Score: 5, Informative

    In Oregon (which is 100% vote by mail), there is also a bar code on the mailing envelope. You sign the mailing envelope and your signature is verified against the one on file. The bar code is not a problem however because your actual ballot is in a separate "secrecy" envelope that you put inside the mailing envelope. There are no identifying marks on the secrecy envelope or the ballot itself. At the elections office one person verifies your signature, marks the record that you have voted, and takes the secrecy envelope out of the mailing envelope. The secrecy envelope is placed in a big box. Next, someone else take the big box, extracts the ballots from the secrecy envelopes and feeds the ballots into a scanner (they are "bubble sheet" ballots), where they are tallied. Representatives from the political parties and the public are encouraged to watch the process in person.

    For those that don't like the concept of paying postage to vote, there are a wide variety of locations where you can hand deliver your ballot.

    For those not in the US, Oregon is a state in the Northwest portion of the country.

  8. We are not slaves by jabberw0k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The U.S.A. is a free country, we do not require Identity Papers. I did not have a drivers license until age 33 and lived my whole life just fine. For you to say that I would be required to carry identity papers, would be to say that I live as a slave in a totalitarian government. I only carry my drivers license when driving, and only show it to a police officer in regards to a driving offense. That is all it is to be used for.

    1. Re:We are not slaves by RabidReindeer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The U.S.A. is a free country, we do not require Identity Papers. I did not have a drivers license until age 33 and lived my whole life just fine. For you to say that I would be required to carry identity papers, would be to say that I live as a slave in a totalitarian government. I only carry my drivers license when driving, and only show it to a police officer in regards to a driving offense. That is all it is to be used for.

      I can tell you don't fly. Or are papers required to take the bus/train these days, too?

  9. "appropriate measures" by pepty · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Odd how republicans campaign on slashing and eliminating unnecessary regulations while simultaneously adding burdensome regulations without bothering to demonstrate that they solve an actual problem.

    If these were health, safety, or environmental regulations republicans would be screaming that the cost of implementing the regulations is a waste of tax dollars, that citizens have to be reimbursed for the "takings" (lost income, expenses) these regulations forced them to incur, and overall would blather about the rules being another example of intrusive big government. They would go on to say that any effect of improper voting is speculative and demand to see evidence of actual harm (thrown elections) before allowing any such regulations.

    Amazing how republicans' math skills invert if you switch from talking about arsenic in drinking water to improper voting.

  10. Try "zero" hours a week for the DMV by davidwr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In George W. Bush's home state of Texas, voter-ID laws are on hold in part because dozens of counties have NO place to get a driver's license or photo ID card. Everyone in those counties has to drive to the next county to get one.

    Voter registration can be done by mail, which is a much lower burden on those with no car or who work basically the same hours as the DMV office is open.

    By the way, the impact on minorities is not BECAUSE they are minorities, but because being a minority is, for now at least, highly correlated to being poor, lacking good access to transportation, and other impediments to getting to the DMV office to get a photo ID or drivers license. If poverty and lack of access to good transportation were both uniformly distributed over ethnic and racial groups and other "minority" groups, then voter-ID laws would still hurt the poor and those without access to good transportation, but it would not have a disproportionate effect on any particular racial or ethnic group.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.