Pull Lever, Don't Snap Shutter: It May Be Illegal To Post Your Ballot

An anonymous reader writes "Proud voters are already posting their ballots on Instagram but ProPublica's Lois Beckett reports that you may want to check your state laws first since showing your marked ballot to other people is actually illegal in many states."

Comments

Katy Perry's Dress

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if she will be arrested as she had hers printed on her rubber dress.

http://www.webpronews.com/katy-perry-skintight-ballot-dress-hits-election-rallies-2012-11

Re:Katy Perry's Dress

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, I think she better be strip-searched, she could have some other contraband in there.

Certainly looks like she's smuggling some melons.

Re:Katy Perry's Dress

[Geoffrey.landis]

I wonder if she will be arrested as she had hers printed on her rubber dress.

If it's not her actual ballot, but just a "here's how to vote" sample ballot, that would be ok.

I agree with the concept that you shouldn't photograph and share your ballot, though. The whole point of a secret ballot is destroyed if it is not secret, and that leads to the possibility of very explicit fraud.

Re:Katy Perry's Dress

[GameboyRMH]

I gotta say, it seems more than a little self-serving for an RIAA-signed artist to promote the Democratic candidate...

Re:Katy Perry's Dress

[Reverand Dave]

She's certainly not smuggling any talent in there.

Good reason for it to be illegal

[dkleinsc]

If you can prove how you voted, to anybody, you can demonstrate to some interested third party that you voted the way they wanted you to. Which means you could sell your vote, or be coerced into voting a certain way.

That's also why any voting proposals that involve a receipt showing that your vote for Smith rather than Jones are a bad idea, as are any proposals involving a way to look up your own vote online after the election.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[mrjimorg]

Wish I could mod this up. Absolutely right - especially when unions get involved. Or abusive spouses. Or that pastor who drives you to the polls. Just too many ways this can be abused. Having said that, it does make it difficult to audit the system - how can you be sure that the machine isn't switching your vote after you leave? Ideally, people would be able to go back some other time and confirm that the vote they cast was in the system correctly. I think the only way to do this would be to allow you to go to a secure facility where you could confirm, in private, how you voted and insure that at least your vote was correctly accepted

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[LateArthurDent]

That's also why any voting proposals that involve a receipt showing that your vote for Smith rather than Jones are a bad idea, as are any proposals involving a way to look up your own vote online after the election.

Looking up online later, absolutely. The proposals for a receipt, at least the ones I've seen, you may be talking about something else, don't allow you to take the receipt home with you.

Basically, you vote in an electronic voting machine, it prints out a receipt that is human readable and you can verify, then you drop that receipt in the ballot box. The voting machine does the vote count, recounts are done with the paper receipts. That is actually the type of electronic voting machine I'd approve of.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[The Rizz]

If you can prove how you voted, to anybody, you can demonstrate to some interested third party that you voted the way they wanted you to. Which means you could sell your vote, or be coerced into voting a certain way.

So, you're saying that Congress wants exclusive rights to vote-selling?

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[Nyder]

If you can prove how you voted, to anybody, you can demonstrate to some interested third party that you voted the way they wanted you to. Which means you could sell your vote, or be coerced into voting a certain way.

That's also why any voting proposals that involve a receipt showing that your vote for Smith rather than Jones are a bad idea, as are any proposals involving a way to look up your own vote online after the election.

um, if you want to sell your vote, you can easily provide proof without sharing it on the internet.

These sort of laws are stupid, because they can NOT stop anyone from doing it, unless they decide to start searching everyone, confiscating cellphones, camera's, whatever before they step into the poll booth.

In fact, I never considered selling my votes until I saw this article, now I'm like, fuck, i should be selling my votes. Capitalism at it's finest!

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[DrgnDancer]

That's also why any voting proposals that involve a receipt showing that your vote for Smith rather than Jones are a bad idea

You're completely correct up to here, but I kind of disagree with this bit. I think a receipt you take home is a bad idea, but a paper receipt you can review and stuff into a physical ballot box for use in situations when there's a discrepancy in electronic totals makes a lot of sense to me.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[Nadaka]

The way you make sure the machine does not switch your vote after you leave is that the machine prints out a prefilled paper ballot for you that is exactly the same as a paper ballot. And this paper ballot can be visually verified and validated normally before it goes into the same pile as all the other ballots to be counted normally.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[TheGratefulNet]

we already buy peoples' votes.

don't you guys get it?

money is embedded in politics. at the lower levels, its not nearly the issue as with the superpacs and such.

low lying fruit is not significant. but the high hanging fruit is 'off limits' for the media and press. afterall, THEY (their radio/tv/print stations get ad revenue when A fights B on commercials).

tl;dr: voters are not the problem.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[Hatta]

Basically, you vote in an electronic voting machine, it prints out a receipt that is human readable and you can verify, then you drop that receipt in the ballot box. The voting machine does the vote count, recounts are done with the paper receipts. That is actually the type of electronic voting machine I'd approve of.

With one more stipulation: No Touch Screens. Use real physical buttons next to an LCD display, like we've all used on ATMs for decades now. Touch screens go out of calibration, leading to opportunities for all sorts of shenanigans.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[ackthpt]

If you can prove how you voted, to anybody, you can demonstrate to some interested third party that you voted the way they wanted you to. Which means you could sell your vote, or be coerced into voting a certain way.

That's also why any voting proposals that involve a receipt showing that your vote for Smith rather than Jones are a bad idea, as are any proposals involving a way to look up your own vote online after the election.

Let's just hand them a receipt with a checksum on it, which can't be decrypted, but can show whether vote was tampered with by some Diaboldical CEO who promised to deliver votes to a certain candidate.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[Belial6]

I agree, but I would add one more stipulation. The human readable receipt should be printed on stiff paper and be machine readable as well. This way, third party auditors could recount electronically extremely quickly. A group like the ACLU should be able to walk in with a small card reader, and under official supervision, they should be able to recount all of the votes by just putting the cards in their reader and letting them run through.

If the votes don't come out the same, it would make it much easier to track down legitimate technical errors, or shenanigans. Since they are human readable, anyone wanting a hand vote could still do it.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[MitchDev]

Not like your vote matters, Politicians say what you want to hear to get elected, then do whatever they want anyway :) Might as well make a few bucks on it yourself.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[flink]

With one more stipulation: No Touch Screens. Use real physical buttons next to an LCD display, like we've all used on ATMs for decades now. Touch screens go out of calibration, leading to opportunities for all sorts of shenanigans.

Funny thing about those old ATMs with the physical buttons: many times I'd walk into the ATM to find the screen had physically shifted in its housing so those nice physical buttons no longer matched up with the on screen choices. In fact it wasn't uncommon for the buttons to be exactly between the choices. Other times the actual display would be set back and behind such a thick layer of shatter-proof glass that what button lined up with what choice depended on your viewing angle.

The point is that *any* voting machine is going to need proper calibration. A touch screen as an input modality isn't necessarily bad, but you can botch the implementation just like with any other tech.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[danlip]

I keep hearing all the news about touch screens being out of calibration. I have a 2 years old iPhone with no problems. Has anyone had calibration problems with their smart phone? I think there is a problem with shitty programming, but I doubt it really has anything to do with touch screens, and machines with physical buttons can have shitty programming (or deliberately corrupt programming) as well.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[danlip]

Of course if you are using a mail-in ballot you can show it to anyone you want before dropping it in the mail. They could even watch you seal the envelope and drop it in the mail for you. And mail-in ballots are becoming much more common and encouraged by the major parties.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

just got a brilliant idea, how about if you got a piece of paper put a cross next to the candidate you want to vote for and then put that paper in box
when voting is done a number of people could then empty said box and count how many crossed each candidate
I'd the event that someone claims fraud you could even count them again

and to commit any significant fraud you'd have to have containers full of prefilled ballots, and dumpster to fill with ballots you don't like

why haven't anyone thought of that before

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[vlm]

Let's just hand them a receipt with a checksum on it, which can't be decrypted, but can show whether vote was tampered with by some Diaboldical CEO who promised to deliver votes to a certain candidate.

Your receipt has ten random ballot numbers and votes on it. Each receipt is guaranteed to have a vote for each candidate. Only you know which ballot number was actually yours.

Your receipt shows that ballot #10 voted for Johnson, published list on a website shows ballot #10 voted for Johnson, your receipt lists 10 ballots only one of which was yours, #10. You're the only guy in the world who knows ballot #10 is you. Feel free to look down the column of other voters to tell an intimidator your ballot number was any # who voted for who the intimidator wants you to vote for. As long as you can't PROVE you've voter #10 its all good. Elderly voting helper tosses three serial numbered ballots on the table, pick one. Then he tosses another on the table, 3-card monte's them, next guy picks one. Repeat. About all you know for certain is if I'm the 500th person to vote, my number is 500 or below.

How do you prove the ballot box isn't stuffed? anyone can sit on their rear and count the people thru the door, and if 700 people walk thru the door there better not be serial numbers on receipts like "2352". Simplest way is each voter punches a big counter machine when they pick up a ballot. Or any private citizen can measure the height of the stack of ballots at any time, or something like that.

Bootstrapping the first ten ballots is an exercise for the implementor (hmm... don't print any 10 checksum receipts until 20 people vote?)

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[cdrguru]

What language is this paper ballot printed in? English? Or the language the person selected when requesting a ballot?

You see, the US does not have an official language that is used for all government interaction like many other countries have. Partly because of this it is a requirement in many locations to supply ballots in any language the voter requests. This includes Navajo, Spanish, Russian and a whole bunch of other languages. This is one of the main reasons why electronic voting machines are required in some places. Printing ballots in obscure African languages was not going to happen.

One way out of this is for English to become the official and only government interaction language for the US. Another is for all government interaction to be done in some electronic fashion with the screen displaying whatever language the user selects, probably up to and including Klingon.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

If you have an abusive spouse, by definitiuon you're going to be abused regardless of what you do.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[iluvcapra]

(nit) Unless there's a tie in the Electoral College.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[readin]

One way out of this is for English to become the official and only government interaction language for the US. Another is for all government interaction to be done in some electronic fashion with the screen displaying whatever language the user selects, probably up to and including Klingon.

Making English the official language is a good idea, but making it the "only government interaction language for the US" goes a bit too far. We still want to be able to interact with our government in various languages for purposes like dealing 911 operators, the police, and the fire department. On the other hand, making English the official language would say that a city or county can provide foreign language services if it wants to, it doesn't have to do so and can't be sued for not doing so. Services provided by the government should be required to be available in English, and English should be considered sufficient to say that the government did its job in providing the service, but there should be no bar to a government providing services in additional languages if there is a reason to do so.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[Qzukk]

That's too hard to refute. You've got to at least print the boxes to cross on the opposite side of the page with each box printed a half line below the name of the candidate with rules lawyers spending weeks deciding whether crosses are x shaped or + shaped and whether the lines have to meet at 90 degrees in order to count and whether a cross that doesn't extend to the edges of the circle counts as a vote or if they extend past the edge of the circle is it a spoiled vote and so on. Otherwise, what would the loser get to scream about?

I've advocated for voting systems like the kind Nadaka proposed many times in the past. There are excellent reasons to use electronic voting (eg magnification and/or verbal prompts for the hard of seeing) but these reasons are not why we're using electronic ballots so calls for a better system fall on deaf ears.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[cayenne8]

You see, the US does not have an official language that is used for all government interaction like many other countries have.

This really is a serious problem...and we need to remedy this.

It would encourage quicker assimilation into the greater American culture, if everyone new coming in, has a little more incentive to learn the common language of the country.

It would be a benefit in those coming in, not a detriment or incentive to discriminate.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[Obfuscant]

Of course if you are using a mail-in ballot you can show it to anyone you want before dropping it in the mail. They could even watch you seal the envelope and drop it in the mail for you.

No, of coure that's silly. That could never happen. It would never happen. No spouse would ever fill out a ballot for his SO, nor would anyone sell an empty, signed ballot to anyone. Nor would anyone be a "helpful Hank" and stand near a busy ballot drop box, helping drive-by voters by taking the ballot from their car window and putting in the box (or saving it for later to modify). I live in Oregon, and that's the official policy towards our vote-by-mail system.

Nevermind that there have been reports of people who get their ballots someplace like the post office, decide they don't want to vote, and then throw them in the trash where anyone can pick them out and vote... No, that would never happen either.

And most of all, nobody would have their vote silently thrown away because the county election officials didn't think your signature was close enough to the one on record, and since they didn't throw it away until after the polls close you have no chance to contest the matter and actually get your vote to count. No, not at all. Never happens.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[jonbryce]

What about the actual natives of the USA who will be forced to learn a language used by one particular set of immigrants who arrived a few hundred years ago?

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[goodmanj]

Oh, I dunno. Maybe by watching something like this?

http://noticias.univision.com/destino-2012/

Or reading one of these?

http://www.eldiariony.com/
http://www.mittromney.com/es
http://www.barackobama.com/es/

There's an entire media industry serving tens of millions of people which you seem to be ignorant of, you racist twit.

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[shutdown -p now]

I love how you label me as a "racist twit", given that I'm 1) not an American citizen, and 2) not a native English speaker.

There's nothing racist about asking people to learn the language of the society they are trying to integrate into. And if they're not trying and have no desire to do so, then what the fuck are they doing there?

Oh, and websites are good, but how about debates? And a wealth of other information that's not official propaganda from either candidate?

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[cryptizard]

This is a well-researched topic and there are already good solutions. One way to do it is print a random number on every ballot (random for each individual ballot that is) underneath each candidate and have the voter copy down the numbers corresponding to the candidates they voted for. Afterwards, the codes that correspond to the recorded vote for each ballot are posted online and you can verify that the vote they recorded matches the one you wrote down. That way you can check that your vote was recorded successfully but no one (not even you if you can't remember) can know which candidate you voted for.

To make sure that the codes actually correspond to the correct candidates you have the voting authority cryptographically commit to all the code-candidate relationships. You then allow voters to "spot check" the ballot they were given and request that all the codes be decommitted and published (they would get a new ballot afterwards). Add in a mix-net which allows anyone to verify the final tally from the published codes, without revealing any individual votes, and you have http://scantegrity.org./

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[nitehawk214]

>

One way out of this is for English to become the official and only government interaction language for the US. Another is for all government interaction to be done in some electronic fashion with the screen displaying whatever language the user selects, probably up to and including Klingon.

Obligatory

Re:Good reason for it to be illegal

[CohibaVancouver]

Time to crack your schoolbooks again. The Queen of Canada (Elizabeth II) reigns, but she does not rule.

What shutter?

[Kenja]

In many places it is illegal to bring any sort of electronic device into the voting booth.

As it should be.

[Anonymous Coward]

As it should be.

Before people rant, let's make this simple, cut and dry.

If I am allowed by law to prove who I voted for -- then people with guns can coerce me to prove I've voted for their candidate.

This is about electoral integrity, not speech.

Now -- to be blunt, it would be nice to be able to snap a picture of my ballot up until the moment I hit "submit" or "vote" or pull the lever. But never during or after.

Re:As it should be.

[VortexCortex]

OK, fuck. I'll play devils advocate. I put the gun to your head. I tell you to vote via mail so I can watch you fucking vote. Now what, dipshit?

Re:more government overreach

[dkleinsc]

AFAIC every law is corruption.

How about that one that says that I can't shoot you just for the heck of it? How about the one that says that I can't smash the window of your house, go in and grab your stereo and laptop, and leave?

I mean, if "every" law is corruption, then you have to be prepared to back that up and explain what you have to offer that might be better.

Re:1st Amendment

[AdmiralXyz]

No, there is a very good reason for this law: if you can show which way you voted to third parties, then it's possible for you to sell your vote to those third parties. As it stands, it's not possible to "sell votes" (at least, not in the direct sense), because you could just take the money and say you voted a certain way, when you didn't.

(Incidentally, I see a lot of people proposing reformed voting systems that include a hard confirmation that your vote for X was counted. Voting reform is good, but that particular idea is bad, for this exact reason. Cut it out).

If someone tried to defend their right to post a picture of their ballot on First Amendment grounds, I'd be willing to bet that a court would rule that a fair election represents the overriding concern and would still prosecute.

employers like this trend

[a2wflc]

Think of the emails we've been seeing that employers have sent to their workers. I think many of those employers would love to see how everyone votes. If showing your ballot becomes the norm, I'd expect "someone" at the business to start throwing a "we voted" party with a slideshow of everyone's ballot. You may want to keep yours secret, but "everyone does it" so make sure to send your pic to the party organizer to prepare the slideshow. And if you don't care about employers seeing votes, maybe you care about unions, churches, schools, bar owners, or neighborhood thug. Best to not allow proof of votes if we care about keeping them secret.

Not a problem

[Okian Warrior]

Although posting your ballot may be illegal, it's unenforceable as a matter of law.

There's no way to prove that an image is your ballot.

The state has to prove chain of custody. Can they prove that you actually took the image (as opposed to, for example, downloading it off the internet)? Can they prove that you snapped your actual vote (as opposed to taking a picture and then changing the vote)? Can they prove that you didn't snap a picture of someone else's vote?

Can they prove that you didn't photoshop the image?

Even if they can make a good case for chain of custody (a video of you actually casting the vote would take a lot of effort to fake), would the state actually prosecute? The bad publicity for prosecuting this while taking time away from more serious crimes (murder, rape) would be a big disincentive.

There's also the personal freedoms angle. Certainly no one can be forced to prove their vote, but if someone wants to proudly show their vote, could this not be considered a freedom of speech issue?

There may be some grumbling from government about this, and some websites could be asked (without a warrant) to take some pictures down, but that's about all that will happen.

Government is powerless to prevent this, and they know it.

Re:Not a problem

[preaction]

Thats why it is illegal to take a photo of ANY ballot, not just your own.

It's easy to sell your vote

[killmenow]

It's unfortunately all too easy.

1. Request absentee ballot
2. Receive absentee ballot
3. Sign absentee ballot
4. Receive payment from buyer
5. Hand over absentee ballot to buyer
6. Walk away while they fill it out however they like and mail it in for you

IMHO, this is the easiest, simplest, and most commonly abused form of voter fraud. Yet none of the supposed "voter fraud" measures proposed predominantly by Republicans address this at all. It's all a smoke screen for suppressing voters that typically lean Democrat.

"Preventing Democratic Votes" under the guise of "Preventing Voter Fraud"

Re:It's easy to sell your vote

[BlackSnake112]

There is the dead voting thing. I know of two examples. We received a voter ID card for two of my grandparents. Both registered Democrat. One died 19 years ago and the other died 20 years ago. Only this year we received their new voter ID cards. Odd since I know both were not registered Democrats. When we called it in saying that these people have been dead for a while now, we were initially told to let it be. Why were we trying to take away their right to vote. Even after stating that these people were dead for 20 years and offering to mail or fax in their death certificates we were told to leave it alone. A few other calls and getting managers we got it straightened out. Also both people died in different states. They never lived in the state where we received the voter ID cards for them. How many other people would just leave it alone?

I believe voter fraud is more common then is being reported. Not many people look into it. If no one is looking no one is reporting it. Also look at the black panthers in Philadelphia. Even this year they are outside polling places. isn't voter intimidation against the law as well?

Re:1st Ammendment?

[DrgnDancer]

The court typically rule that our right to a free and fair election trumps our right to speech in this case. There's very good reasons for these laws. Because, you know, that's a very nice house you have there an it'd be a shame if something happened to it. Voting for candidate "a" is a great way to protect your investment, why don't you bring me a picture of your ballot?

Re:It can indeed be illegall

[jittles]

I believe the point of it is to prevent media, reporters, mobsters and one else who may be interested in seeing how people vote. The ban is a blanket ban because you could easily pretend to be taking a picture of yourself when you snap a picture of someone else. It makes sense. You can broadcast how you vote all you want, but there should be a level of privacy inside the actual room that you vote in. Note that the media and others are welcome to wait outside for you to come out. They just can't go inside to film you.

State-By-State List

[guttentag]

Legal to Photograph Your Marked Ballot
Alabama
Delaware
Maine
North Dakota
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Vermont
Wyoming

The Law on This is Unlcear
Arkansas
Connecticut
DC
Hawaii
Idaho
Kansas
Kentucky
Maryland
Ohio

Illegal to Photograph Your Marked Ballot
All Other U.S. States

Source

Re:In Soviet Russia ....

[ackthpt]

... ballot marks you!

That's Putin it mildly...

I'll get me coat

Re:It can indeed be illegall

[Jeremi]

So, you can show a picture of yourself with an "I voted" sticker, and you can type up a list of every single thing you voted on, and how you voted, but somehow a picture (that says it all faster) is illegal. Sure, that makes a lot of sense...

Actually, it does make sense if there's a possibility that you might be coerced or bribed.

The difference is that you can put anything you want on your typed-up list, whereas a picture of your ballot (to the extent that such a thing is hard to fake) would be actual evidence that you voted one way or another. So your abusive husband (or controlling boss) could demand the latter (and threaten punishment if you don't provide it) as a way to control your vote, but with the former you could easily keep control of your own vote by making up whatever choices he wants to see.

Congress has a monopoly on vote selling

[MDMurphy]

This rationale means that citizen votes that carry a little more weight than throwing a coin in a wishing well can't be "sold". But a senator/congressman who votes on something that has a much more direct effect can and are sold every day.

Conveniently, keeping voters from having a receipt prevents them from verifying how (or if ) their vote was recorded. This suggests the question: Who are we more worried about, the people who want to pay us for votes, or the people who count the votes?

If you're in the election fraud business, which would be tougher? Buy raw votes and require validation from each voter, or buy a person or persons involved in the tallying of those votes? (or hire a 3rd party to tamper with electronic voting systems )

Re:Iidots

[skids]

In all seriousness, one must be careful with headlines these days. Next thing you know some numbnut "True-The-Vote" fanatic will be insisting that taking the picture is illegal, even if it is the act of posting it. And that might keep people from documenting problems with badly tuned touch screens.

fight to the death?

[Shakrai]

Another is for all government interaction to be done in some electronic fashion with the screen displaying whatever language the user selects, probably up to and including Klingon.

If Klingon culture comes to voting, can I challenge the winner to a fight to the death if I don't approve of his policies? I'll wager that neither BHO or WMR have experience handling a Bat'leth.

Re:more government overreach

[dkleinsc]

Did you do any business of any kind this Saturday, including shopping or housework? If so, I'm afraid we're going to have to stone you to death.

Punchscan

[Captain_Chaos]

There are very cleverly designed systems that allow you to take home a receipt that will allow you to verify that you vote was counted, yet will not divulge who you voted for to anyone, so it cannot be used to bribe or coerce you.

One example is Punchscan, a system where you vote by marking your choice on a double sheet of paper with holes punched through the top sheet so that you simultaneously mark both sheets. The top sheet, which has the candidates' names on it, is destroyed, the other is scanned and then taken home. The sheets you take home doesn't have the names of the candidates on them (they are referred to by randomly ordered letters), so nobody can tell who you voted for, but you can later look up the scanned version online to verify that the markings match and your vote was counted.

http://punchscan.org/