Senators Introduce Bill That Would Require State and Local Governments To Use Paper Ballots in an Effort To Secure Elections (cnet.com)

From a report: On Tuesday, nine Senators introduced a bill that would require state and local governments to use paper ballots in an effort to secure elections from hackers. The bill would also require rigorous audits for all federal elections to ensure that results match the votes. "Leaving the fate of America's democracy up to hackable election machines is like leaving your front door open, unlocked and putting up a sign that says 'out of town,'" Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, said in a release. "Any failure to secure our elections amounts to disenfranchising American voters." The Protecting American Votes and Elections Act of 2018 was drafted amid intense scrutiny of voting systems ahead of the mid-term elections in November. Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election has elevated concern over the security of the country's voting systems. The senators said rigorous audits will ensure votes are legitimate. Currently, 22 states don't require post-election audits, according to the release.

Comments

Re:What about voter ID?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problems with voter ID laws is that then politicians close down DMVs in areas where they want less voters. Also, DMVs require more documentation for IDs than is necessary to vote. If implemented properly, voter ID laws would be fine - in reality, that's never happened:

Alabama:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/01/alabama_closes_dmvs_in_majority_of_black_belt_counties_passed_voter_id_law.html

Wisconsin:
https://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsin-is-systematically-failing-to-provide-the-photo-ids-required-to-vote-in-november/

Can work

[ixuzus]

We use paper ballots in Australia and usually the result is known within four hours of votes closing. I wasn't aware of some of the other protections that go into the process until I was early to vote one year. I was invited into the polling centre and asked to inspect the empty ballot boxes before they were sealed and signed to confirm that the serial numbers of the seals matched. This has to be done by a member of the public - it can't be done by an electoral official. I believe another member of the public must verify the seals again when the boxes are opened. I was also told that each polling centre has to account for all the ballot papers issued to them. Remaining blank ballot papers plus spoiled ballot papers (people made a mistake and exchanged for a fresh paper) plus votes cast must be very close to ballot papers issued or there is cause to dispute the result. At one election 1400 ballot papers went missing for the senate. The whole senate election was rerun. That's the sort of protection you want.

The other thing I really like is optional preferential voting. As a voter you can vote for as many candidates as you want in order - or not. All the first preference votes are counted and the candidate with the lowest number of votes is eliminated and their ballot papers are distributed to the next preference on the ballot paper. This is repeated until only one candidate remains. You can vote for an independent or minor party but if they don't get elected your vote still counts toward which of the major parties gets elected.

Re:A good start

[asackett]

Well, okay, depending upon which idiots we're talking about. In reading Madison's Notes it's important to keep in mind that the "minority" whom the founders spoke of protecting was their own class, the moneyed elite. Which made everyone else the idiots.

I oppose it

[rsilvergun]

because:

a. It's been shown to be unnecessary. Voter fraud is not the problem. The problem is the election officials cheating. Go google the actual research on voter fraud and you'll find this out.

b. It's also been clearly shown to be a suppression tactic. Republican official have been caught several times doing research to prove that it targets their opposition (minorities and women mostly), that the fees associated with the Ids are defacto poll taxes and that the laws exist only to prevent legitimate voters. This is why the laws have been struct down over and over again.

Anyone who suggests voter Id is a solution to fraud is lying to you and opposes democracy. You should be highly suspicious of them and their motives. Again, spend a few hours on google and you can corroborate all this yourself. If you want voter Id to stop the "wrong" persons from voting then I can't really argue with that. But if you actually believe in democracy then you should oppose it.

Re: What about voter ID?

[Anonymous Coward]

And nowhere does it give the federal government the authority to mandate how states run their elections.

Except in Article I, Section 4, and in the 15th, 24th, and 26th Amendments.

You should really review the law instead of making false claims.

You don't even need optical machine

[aepervius]

You just need to have distributed counting like many other countries do. The one I was born to, slice the voting places by about a few thousand electors. Then during election days they ask for volunteer. Usually they get around 20 from many political affiliation. I was one for many election. Then each is separated in a small group, then we get each a part of the ballot to count, then we note the number, then the ballots get shifted to another table then it get recounted, and finally the results which only officials can see until recount are finished, are compared (to avoid bias and people simply telling the same number). At that point maybe 1 hour has passed after the election, number are put on a board then summed, and result toldf loudly. Then the results are sent/cascaded/tabulated by region so everybody in the voting county can check the number they found is correct. Within 1 or 2 hours the results are in for 95% of all places, with recount already going on if there are problems. Then the paper ballot are kept under key for some times, with the name of the county. And yes the number of potential elector while not being 200 million , is around 1/5 of that so it ain't a micro island where that happens. You get the results without expansive optical readers, AND you get transparency to the voters.

Again, google

[rsilvergun]

see here. 538 is a well respected political blog. They've got plenty of research to back up how voter Ids laws disproportionately impact minorities and in turn disproportionately benefit Republicans.

If you're OK with voter suppression then by all means, support voter Id. Just understand that you're opposing democracy. You may have your reasons. You may earnestly believe those people shouldn't be allowed to vote. But you should at least be aware of what your support for Voter Id laws is actually doing and not delude yourself into thinking you're protecting democracy.