Slashdot Mirror
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.
The Russian collusion he obviously engaged in was a HOAX! Fake News!
There is no need to protect our country from Russia's ongoing attacks or to even admit they are happening.
We should all do as Vladimir Putin instructs, just like his urine drenched pupped Donald Trump.
Next up, we must eliminated the electoral college, which is a remnant of the founders' deep-seated fear of democracy.
Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.
Paper comes from wood
Wood comes from my dilz
My dilz is attached to my balls
Ergo
my DAMN balls decide elections
I am almost willing to bet at this stage that the bill will be blocked by Republicans, since they know the Russians prefer their particular brand of autocracy over a very angry Democrat party. Furthermore, don't be so confident that the Russians will not try to somehow 'hack' the paper ballot and/or audit trail.
It has become clear that neither the Russians nor the Republicans have a limit to how far they will go to damage the process of democracy in favour of power.
"In addition to Wyden, the bill was sponsored by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (New York), Sen. Ed Markey (Massachusetts), Sen. Jeff Merkley (Oregon), Sen. Patty Murray (Washington), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Massachusetts), Sen. Brian Schatz (Hawaii), Sen. Cory Booker (New Jersey) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut). All are Democrats."
somehow, I knew it would not be the R's that wanted an audit trail.
funny, that...
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
"Any failure to secure our elections amounts to disenfranchising American voters."
OK. Got it. So, how do you feel about requiring voters provide government issued ID in order to vote? Because requiring voters to identify themselves and verify eligibility to vote is part of securing an election. If you oppose that, then you obviously want to disenfranchise voters.
I suspect that many of the people who are going to stand there and beat the drum on this one will also oppose requirements for voter ID. This despite the fact that every US state offers non-driver license state issued ID cards for a nominal fee or free in the case of financial hardship. At least, I am not aware of a state where that isn't the case.
Oh well. If not for double standards we would have no standards at all, it seems.
In 2008, when I touched the 'Obama' button on the touch screen, McCain's name was selected instead, until I tapped Obama a couple more times.
'Blue' state anyway, but the machines are just not reliable.
...of public obsession with all things digital, that software will cure all ills Zuckerberg style, and that schoolchildren need tablets to learn.
As a nerd, I say good riddance. Leave the nerd stuff to us.
There's no way in hell it will pass.
Supported by the paper mill lobby and logging companies?
We still use paper ballots in our elections here in Canada and I'm fine with that. For the most part they work very well, except when they don't have enough ballots. We encountered that in our city elections last year in Calgary, which caused an uproar. Hopefully that doesn't make them decided to go electronic.
Thankfully the Calgary Flames/Gary Bettman/NHL annointed candidate of choice lost, seemed like he was ready to cut them a nice big juicy new arena cheque had he won.
While I think using a paper ballot is a GOOD thing (especially when combined with optical readers and such), I am not sure the Federal Government (Congress) has the authority to impose such a law. My understanding is that the polling/election process is solely a State responsibility and domain. The Constitution assigns such powers to the States and then follows up with the 10th Amendment:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"
So, short of a Constitutional Amendment, I don't see how such a law would be Constitutional. Although I know it is EXTREMELY popular and prevalent for the Fed to simply ignore the 10th Amendment whenever convenient.
If the people want machines with more bells and whistles, the demand will push the companies to invent more sophisticated machines. In the meantime, keep the government out of the marketplace! Laissez faire.
I've voted in, you fill out your votes on paper which is then scanned.
It seems to be an OK process, as long as nobody has messed with the scanning/collation software.
Touchscreens with no accountability or paper trails seem to be asking for "trouble."
Being an established computer consultant, I got to provide input when the US Virgin Islands' election system was upgraded, a good friend on the Board of Elections brought over a bunch of brochures for me to review one evening in the early 1980s. There were chad systems ("Punch cards? You must be joking!") and push-button machines ("Where's the paper trail? Do you know what a 'hacker' is?" "It's available but 'costs extra'. Are these people for real??"). And there were optical zoned page scanners.
My friend and I agreed -- his vote on the Board of Elections -- was to keep the paper ballot. People are used to it. If anything, beef up the security and oversight surrounding transport of ballots cast; use bleeding-edge technology cautiously and wisely: do the counting of paper ballots with optical readers. Because just like the money counter machines, you can do it again quickly to see if you get the same result. And if the machines break and the power goes out -- the election process is 'safe', breezes along as smoothly as ever -- only the results are delayed.
Just WHEN was it decided that election results needed to be tallied in hours or minutes? From where did the pressure arise such that hand counting of paper ballots (or in the least, optical scan of same) is too slow? That we instead impose few-vendor centralized no-paper systems that are inherently hackable?
Here's the test I impose. A paper ballot system may also have its problems -- BUT -- any given layman you bring in off the street to observe the tally process will have a clear view of a ballot box's chain of custody. Any layman observing the subsequent counting of those ballots (by hand or optical reader, with verification of random batches to test the reader) has a clear grasp of the process, and can tell whether the system is honest. No one can say if a wholly computerized system is honest. And even if you find someone who claims they are sure, no one can tell whether they are being honest.
If it's Democracy you want, use as simple a voting/tally system as possible; for the tally process use as many human beings as possible, local volunteers as participants and observers. If it's Oligarchy you want, go ahead and totally castrate the process of transparency by implementing insecurity through obscurity, touch screen BS with no hope of verification or recount.
The idea of all-electronic voting really should have been laughed out of the room, once upon a time. This is coming from a techie who favors modernization in other areas of society. xkcd agrees.
My friend on the Board was voted down: they decided to purchase push-button machines from Shouptronics... but at least each station had its own built-in battery backup and built in receipt-type printer that ran a paper tape. Unlike most today.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
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.
With Mid-Terms just around the corner the timing of this is basically grandstanding. This is simply something they'll use to generate hate for the other team.
If they were serious about security, they would have introduced this bill years ago.
This from the team that basically rigged their primary to ensure the " right " candidate would get the nod.
I notice that all the sponsors are democrats. So what clause in the bill preserves the right of the dead to vote.
Wait. I got it. Paper ballots make it harder to tabulate votes and catch voter fraud. Not to mention all those ballots that Democrats conveniently find in the trunk of cars a day after the election.
Electronic vote tallying could be much safer and cheaper. Keep the machines off the internet, except for write only reporting or highly secure connections. Start a commission, through some high level CIA technicians on it and design a system.
If the anti-Russian paranoia gets US to dump electronic voting, at least it would have served a good cause.
Seriously, this is a big mistake. Instead of stepping us backwards to paper ballots, the bill should require that any election machine has to kick out a paper ballet, that the voter than verifies quickly. At the end of the day, initial results can come from the machines, and if we have close elections, then we compare ballots to machines.
The good news is that the GOP controls CONgress at the moment and they will block this quickly (though I question their motives). Hopefully a decent bill will then be forthcoming.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I vote by mail anyway. Going back to paper ballots for now is a good idea while we're waiting for someone to get off their ass and fix the security issues. Paper ballots may not be foolproof either, but it's more of a chore to fake them and you more or less have to do it in person.
...those same Senators agree to support legislation requiring proof of citizenship and residence for voting.
If the impetus is to truly secure our electoral process then let's not do half the job.
Social Media Handywoman at Texas Boys Balloo
Having been a "real time software" developer way back when that was what we were called, and called an "embedded developer" today, and having been a poll worker, I have a few observations:
* Voting is much like a real time data acquisition application: There is exactly one chance to record the transition from private vote to public count. It's deceptively easy to say and deceptively hard to get right.
* Voters MUST have the ability to see that the legal record of their votes is recorded as they intended, without "translation" or "electronic" conversion out of their sight or control.
* In close elections, it MUST be possible for recounts to be performed in full view of unaugmented interested observers.
* It is entirely reasonable for the paper ballot to be scanned to provide early but informal estimates of the aggregated vote through election evenings.
* It is entirely reasonable to use technological means, including touchscreen voting machines to help voters make their choices, to produce legible printed ballots that constitute the legal record of the voters' choices.
So: Machines are fine, as long as the true legal record is visible, recountable and auditable.
It takes more people in more places to conspire to fix an election recorded on individually recorded media, in contrast with voting systems where single programs/computers/subsystems that may be hacked are replicated throughout many precincts. The naturally distributed nature of paper ballots makes them surprisingly more robust against tampering.
We use simple paper ballots in Canada. Here's your ballot, mark an X, put it in the ballot box. Try hacking that!
...laura
WASHINGTON — President Trump on Wednesday abruptly shut down a White House commission he had charged with investigating voter fraud, ending a brief quest for evidence of election theft that generated lawsuits, outrage and some scholarly testimony, but no real evidence that American elections are corrupt.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-voter-fraud-commission.html Jan. 3, 2018
Bobbied can't admit what everyone knows, HE'S A LYING CUNT
and has been ruled as such multiple times. The scam isn't even that complex. Women tend to lean a bit left so it's beneficial to make it harder for them to vote (when they marry and their names change they need new Ids). It's easy to close the DMVs and other places where a voter could get Id. Finally fees can be attached to getting an id creating a defacto poll tax that seems small unless you're poor.
Multiple emails have leaked where Republican leaders didn't just talk about how these factors made voter Id a suppression technique but where they did the research to prove that it was before they put the effort into passing it. Those leaked emails have been what's caused voter Id to be thrown out where ever it's been tried. The Republicans have noticed this and are working to stack the courts with judges who will ignore the rule of law. So far they're succeeding.
If you're involved enough in politics to know about voter Id laws you are probably aware of all this. If not then I trust you no longer favor voter Id. If you are somehow still in favor of voter Id knowing all this then it's clear you oppose democracy. If that's the case then just come right out and say it. I'm tired of listening to dog whistles.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
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.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
...of free and fair elections.
... this is how a narrative is constructed.
Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election has elevated concern over the security of the country's voting systems.
Russians did not "hack" voting machines; they did not "hack" the election, no matter how convenient a narrative that would be for those who lost.
But there's a smooth attempt here to conflate concerns about small Russian linked ad buys on Facebook with notions of voting machines being "hacked".
(obDisclaimer: I like paper ballots, etc. I'm referring to the narrative here, not the concept of paper voting itself. Again, the attempt is to slip a false narrative in there - "we didn't really lose; it was stolen!" - with a packet of sensible ideas that sensible people won't disagree with.)
Not satisfied that Muellers investigation has found no evidence whatsoever that "the Russians" influenced even a single vote in the election they are now trying to introduce this pointless bill. This is an obvious attempt to make it appear as if there is some sort of widespread fraud in the election process. Completely unfounded accusations and this bill is nothing more than political grandstanding.
Rosenstein said. “There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.". You would think that would close the book on this witch hunt yet it continues.
Look - I'm not a big Trump fan but the more the Democrats pursue this the more desperate and unhinged some of them appear. My advice to the Democrats would be to suck it up, admit they lost, and focus on winning the next election.
> . So, how do you feel about requiring voters provide government issued ID in order to vote? Because requiring voters to identify themselves and verify eligibility to vote is part of securing an election.
I don't know of any country which allows you to vote without an ID.
My country does not.
> The right to vote is a constitutional right.
> Nowhere in the constitution does it say that presenting a government issued ID
You've got that precisely backwards. Please go spend a few minutes reading the Constitution. It isn't very long. Here's the relevant portion:
--
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors
--
The only people who have a vote under the Constitution are those APPOINTED by the state, not just issued an ID.
States have used different methods for choosing electors. Currently, there are two different systems in use for the "first choice" method, with other methods in place in case the first method doesn't work out.
In 11 states plus DC, the first-choice method is to choose electors who promise to vote for the candidate who received the highest number of votes NATIONWIDE. That method is to be used if and when a few more states pass the same law.
Two states, Nebraska and Maine, choose electors proportionately to the results of an election by the citizens.
In the other 37 states, at the moment the first-choice method is to hold an election in which citizens can vote for electors who intend to vote for a certain candidate, and the state sends electors who are expected to probably support which ever candidate received the most citizen votes in the state. That's a STATE LAW saying they'll have an election, and specifying how that election will be conducted. The US Constitution makes no mention of average people voting.
Individual rights that ARE specified in the Constitution include:
Freedom of the press
Freedom of religion
Freedom of assembly
Right of petition
Right to bear arms
Right to remain silent
Right to a fair trial
That list isn't exhaustive. The states and the people also have a Constitutional right to be free of any interference by the federal government outside of the items that the feds are authorized to do in Article 1, section 8. Article 1 says, and the tenth amendment repeats, the the federal government may not do any other things. All other rights and powers are reserved to the states ans the people.
It's about time that we got serious about security our voting systems. Too many elections have been decided by "discovered" boxes of ballots, or where 200% of the registered voters in a precinct all voted the same way. Or precincts where the election monitors were kicked out by gang members, and 100% of the votes were for the gang's preferred candidate.
We need paper ballots, ink on fingers, and 100% voter ID.
Completely agree. I'd mod you up if I had mod points today.
PS - if you do decide to refresh your memory by reading the Constitution, it may help to make things clear if you remember it's the Constitution of the United States, not the United People. It's a document describimg how the states can work together, uniting for such things as military defense. That's why the STATES get a vote on who the president is.
Individuals are mentioned mostly in the context of what the federal government isn't allowed to do. The federal government can't make any laws choosing a particular religion, the federal government can't make any laws disarming citizens, the federal government may not prosecute someone without a fair trial, etc. It's phrased as "Congress shall make no law ..."
In WA state, candidates with strange names like "GoodSpaceGuy", "Loony Larry", "Billy Bob", "Genghis Kahn" etc. are printed on the ballots I receive in the mail. I round-file them. The system is a joke. No WA state citizen should waste their time voting.
If these Democrat senators are so concerned about election purity then why are none of them supporting having to show proof of citizenship at the polls in order to cast votes?
1. Touchscreen for voters to input their selections. This information is stored digitally in this system.
2. Based on this input, a paper ballot is printed out in human readable form with clear printed marks next to selections for voter to verify.
3. This paper printout is then optically scanned by a 2nd system (independent of the 1st system). This information is also stored digitally.
4. The two computer systems cross check the data and verify that they match.
5. As a bonus, you now have a paper printout to go back to if there are any irregularities.
6. You are welcome. Enjoy your democracy...
The federal government doesn't really have authority over state voting procedures. The court systems do, in that they have to ensure that people's constitutional rights aren't stomped on. But when it comes to the nuts and bolds of voting, the Feds don't really have a say.
What it says is that a militia can have firearms you twat.
"Because requiring voters to identify themselves and verify eligibility to vote is part of securing an election." - They do that. There were fewer than 300 instances of in-person voter fraud per the last election. The system works.
What doesn't work is allowing Republicans to close polling places, reduce hours, redistrict/jerrymander intentionally, and send misleading illegal robocalls on election night to try to confuse people and reduce turnout. That's treason.
No, getting an ID is not a Constitutional requirement to vote, nor the only way to affirmatively establish identity for the purpose of casting a provisional ballot. You're a moron trying to force a false dichotomy, shove it up your ass traitor.
Ballot counting is something that is extremely available. In Canada, we count the paper ballots by had (in triplicate) and have our federal election results back within 4 hours of the polls closing. The same could easily be achieved in the US. Yes, the US has 10x the population, but that just means you use 10x the number of people to count the ballots, 10x the number of people from the parties to scrutinize the count process, and Bob's your uncle.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
... let's also elect presidents by the popular vote.
The Electoral College shit sucks tater toes.
That idea worked well back before the Pony Express days, but in this technologically connected country, we don't need a middleman hacking the election process.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
It's largely because of FPTP. Only 2 UK parties can actually win and have won every single election for a century.
And the smaller parties need about 100x more votes to win a seat than the two incumbents.
Neither the US not the UK system have anything more than a passing resemblance to democracy.
when they marry and their names change they need new Ids)
in Italy and other countries they simply don't change name. They are treated as what they are, adult humans, not as an appendix of their husband
Australia. Register to vote with ID but actual voting no ID required. They ask for your name and it gets checked off. Each region has their own book of registered voters. You can still vote in another area but it's a pain in the butt.
This works for me. But also, just give me a paper receipt from the electronic voting machine that I can verify my votes with, from a third party. Use blockchain for verifiability. Just use the word blockchain and govts will buy it.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
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.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Most recently in a state election, a paper slip with my details was mailed to me shortly before voting day.
At the (federal) election prior (and every election prior to that), I think it was just a verbal ID of my name and address, which was then crossed off a hardcopy printout of all voters in that jurisdiction.
We'll have another federal election in the next 6 months I think, so it will be interesting to see if there's been more requirements to prove identity.
You are flat wrong. Australia, Denmark, New Zealand and the United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland) do not require voter ID. Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden only require ID if voter identity is in doubt. India accepts non-photo IDs. Etc
Also, if you want to stop people voting more than once, just mark their fingers with a dye that takes a couple of days to wear off.
So 4 countries out of 200 don't require ID to vote?
machines print paper ballots have been proven they can also be easily hacked. If you over printed ballots, this means the machine need to be able to cancel a vote and create a new vote with the correct information supplied by the user.
Thus the machine could by itself cancel vote and create a new vote after the user has left.
I had no idea women were so incompetent.
Buy Beer-> ID Required
Enter Courthouse -> ID Required
Drive -> ID Required
Collect EBT -> ID Required
Attend DNC Convention -> ID Required
Enter Federal Buildings -> ID Required
Vote -> no ID because its racist
WOW look at how much of the US is racist. You are an idiot.
Franken unexpectedly picked up 37 votes due to a combined machine malfunction and human error on Election Day that left 171 Maplewood ballots safe, secure but uncounted until Tuesday’s final day of recounting in Ramsey County. Secretary of State Mark Ritchie’s office immediately asked county officials to explain what had happened, and U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman’s campaign said it sent its own experts to Ramsey County to review the situation and said it was “skeptical about [the ballots’] sudden appearance.”
----------
Stealing elections is an old game politicians play. Lyndon B. Johnson, the 36th president, got to the U.S. Senate in 1948 by “winning” the closest race in Texas history by a margin of 87 votes out of more than a million cast. An election judge in tiny Alice, Texas, said he counted more than 200 names on the voting roll for Box 13 that were written in alphabetic succession in the same hand, same color of ink. When a federal court subpoenaed Box 13, it was discovered to be “lost.” LBJ took his seat in the Senate. Voting machines were supposed to put an end to such election-night chicanery, but Earl Long, the colorful governor of Louisiana, where fraud is the national sport, boasted that “I can make a voting machine play ‘Home on the Range’ all night long.”
------------
Logan announced on December 13 that 561 absentee ballots in the county had been wrongly rejected due to an administrative error.[14] The next day, workers retrieving voting machines from precinct storage found an additional 12 ballots, bringing the total to 572 newly discovered ballots. Logan admitted the lost ballots were an oversight on the part of his department, and insisted that the found ballots be counted. On December 15, the King County Canvassing Board voted 2-1 in favor of counting the discovered ballots.
Upon examination of the discovered ballots, it was further discovered that, with the exception of two ballots, none of the ballots had been cast by voters whose surnames began with the letters A, B, or C.[15] There was a further search for more ballots, and on December 17, county workers discovered a tray in a warehouse with an additional 162 previously uncounted ballots.[15] All together, 723 uncounted or improperly rejected ballots were discovered in King County during the manual hand recount.
After all other counties submitted their recount votes, it was revealed on December 20 that at least five other counties besides King County had included ballots that had been discovered after the initial count. For example, Snohomish County included 224 missed ballots that had been discovered underneath mail trays. The outcome of the State Supreme Court hearing regarding King County's votes could have potentially affected those counties' counts as well.
------------------
When election officials brought two master personal electronic ballots – or PEBs, small devices inserted into voting machines – back to the Franklin County Board of Elections from a Worthington polling location, one was uploaded into the final, unofficial total of a super-tight congressional race.
The other was not.
The next day, as bipartisan members of the board of elections were reviewing the race, they realized the PEB's results were missing.
That PEB and its 588 votes were found. The breakdown was 198 votes for Republican Troy Balderson, 388 votes for Democrat Danny O'Connor and two for Green Party candidate Joe Manchik.
The mistake is embarrassing for Franklin County election officials, but they caught it quickly and the PEB was always in a secure location. Those 588 votes will be included – along with additional absentee and provisional ballots across the district – in the final tally, which must be tabulated by Aug. 24.
Is voter fraud a problem in any of those countries?
This has nothing to do with you guys constantly "finding" extra ballots, right? As for tapes, we have your guys on tape talking about decades of voter fraud.
Every other country in the world can manage an ID to vote. You use an ID for almost everything in life but voting.
If you're really concerned about it being hard to get ID, then fix that, instead of trying to keep your fraud active. But you won't, you'll just invent some new reason why ID is racist or whatever every time. Have you ever noticed that you get completely different reasons about this every time someone explains it? It's almost like the reasons are constantly fabricated...
There are plenty of idiots that think school ID are worth something. I carry around a fake one for use at places that require picture identification or that want you to leave identification. I previously used my actual one,long after I graduated, then I out grew that picture.
Hunting licenses have anti-forgery protection, are checked against the person, and unless you are old expire.
Those leaked emails have been what's caused voter Id to be thrown out where ever it's been tried.
Unfortunately, that's not quite true (or your wording is confusing me). According to Wikipedia, Voter ID is not only the law in some states, at least one version of it has survived a Supreme Court challenge, and 8 state currently require a photo ID to vote.
Everything else you said is accurate.
Enter Federal Buildings -> ID Required
This is also racist, and abusive to the poor.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Those leaked emails have been what's caused voter Id to be thrown out where ever it's been tried.
I'm not sure if you genuinely believe that statement, are intentionally lying, or are misrepresenting the truth. A majority of states have laws that require either photo or non-photo ID to vote. The main difference between those states is where the voter will have to take any steps after casting their provisional ballot after presenting ID. Ten states require the voter to present a valid ID after casting the ballot for it to be counted. The remainder will do additional cross checks or have other means to avoid requiring the ID.
Voter ID Laws
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
TIL buying beer is a constitutionally protected right.
Dipshit.
clearly shows me who is the real enemy of the United States of America.
10 seconds after voter ID is used, all problems evaporate.
You've got that precisely backwards. Please go spend a few minutes reading the Constitution. It isn't very long.
So should you, since the right to vote is found in the 15th, 17th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th Amendments.
Two states, Nebraska and Maine, choose electors proportionately to the results of an election by the citizens.
Nope. What they do, is use their existing Congressional Districts to allot individual votes per their House apportionment, while keeping the two Senate votes statewide.
The US Constitution makes no mention of average people voting.
Except in the places it does. I already mentioned them.
The states and the people also have a Constitutional right to be free of any interference by the federal government outside of the items that the feds are authorized to do in Article 1, section 8. Article 1 says, and the tenth amendment repeats, the the federal government may not do any other things. All other rights and powers are reserved to the states ans the people.
Dear RayMorris, you need to read the Constitution again, it has Amendments that have given Congress authority to pass laws.
It isn't that hard. You should be able to do it.
Except you know, you have a documented history of not reading the Constitution accurately. Or a lot of things. Your reading skills are subpar.
in my state a utility bill is enough. If Voter Id laws already existed we wouldn't be talking about passing them. Voter Id laws mean a state issued Id. It's been shown repeatably that State Issued Ids are intentionally difficult to get and maintain for poor people. Again, spend some time on google and you can confirm this. You don't have to take my word for it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Hi there, Briton here. I have voted in every election since 2003 and not once have I been asked to show ID.
First, no requirement to be a citizen exists to get an ID or DL. Permanent residency **is** required, which makes sense.
It was the FEDs who have required more stringent ID card requirements. Many states didn't want it, but were forced into it.
At least 1 state had 50 yr drivers licenses, which have all been reduced to 5 yrs, thanks to the RealID act.
I've had a 10 yr DL and haven't had to get a new DL since 2009. I haven't been physically to a DMV since 1996. All renewals have been performed by mail.
I get to bring all the proof with me next year when I get a new DL. Fortunately in my state, I don't have to visit the closes DMV, so I'll go to a small town office that doesn't have any lines. Why? Because I'm not stupid.
Paper ballots are only 1/3rd of the problem. Clear, reasonable voter registration requirements and voter ID requirements are also mandatory. The bill needs to include those for federal elections, which will probably be used for state elections too.
In my state, there is a rural county with 9 polling places. Their election board is voting this week on whether to close 7 of those locations because they don't meet the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). It is a very poor part of the state, so their tax revenue doesn't support widening doors, putting in ramps, etc. for locations that are used 2 days a year, at most for govt stuff. Here, most of the polls are at churches and schools. The schools meet ADA, but those are 2 locations. If the election board doesn't close the 7 non-compliant locations, they are in violation of US law. If they do, then lots of elderly people will have problems getting to a poll. Political parties are going crazy complaining, but haven't offered money to make these locations ADA compliant.
I say, be part of the solution or STFU.
The machine that prints the ballot doesn't need to be the same machine that counts the ballot. If you wanted touch-screen systems for improved accessibility, you could have them print out the same type of paper ballot that gets fed into an existing optical scanning machine.
How about a finger print scan before you vote. One fingerprint one vote. If your fingerprint doesn't show you as being a citizen you GTFO.
As for tapes, we have your guys on tape talking about decades of voter fraud.
Citation needed.
Every effort to find evidence of voter fraud has come up with bupkis. Even the recent one appointed by Trump, and helmed by Mr. Voter-Suppression himself, Kris Kobach. All they ever find is a handful of isolated cases, mostly mistakes or misunderstandings (eg: voting in the wrong precinct).
If these "tapes" you refer to actually exist, I think we'd have all heard them by now. Meanwhile, on the other side of the debate, here's a video of Paul Weyrich, one of the "godfathers" of modern conservatism, clearly expressing his preference for reducing the number of people who are eligible to vote.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
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.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Ah, back in the day, when the Demo's almost lost the Governor's Race, they "found" bags of ballots that weren't counted. Wonder how you audit that?
Requiring audits without providing funding for those audits will get thrown out of court as an unfunded mandate (and I checked, there is no funding provision in the bill)
So it is an empty requirement.
Washington DC isn't actually a person.
The 23rd amendment says
-- ... A number of electors (3)
The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint
--
The three people appointed vote. Those three voters could be appointed by the DC mayor, or by lottery, or any other method. The 23rd doesn't require that DC hold a popular election.
The other amendments you mentioned say that IF a state chooses to have an election, they can't select voters on the basis of:
Race
Unpaid taxes
Age (over 18)
They can have the state legistlature or governor choose the electoral college electors, without ever having an election, and they are fine by all of those amendments. In fact states DO have laws saying the legistlature will appoint electors in certain situations.
The exception is the US Senate. Originally, the Constitution said senators were appointed by state legistlatures. A later amendment made senators elected by the people.
Also note in the most recent presidential election, even though Trump wonthe popular vote in Texas, multiple electoral college electors from Texas chose not to vote for Trump. Even though there was a popular election, it was merely advisory and the 38 electors from Texas could vote for whichever candidate they chose.
I think making people show ID before they vote is only reasonable. You know, most other countries do this.... (I'm Canadian and in Canada you can't vote without some kind of ID and proof of residency - like a utility bill in your name.) Stop drinking the conspiracy theory koolaid.
that's poor information. The reason they're not coming anymore is they fixed their Databases and they're not wasting their time trying to get out the vote to the wrong people.
I don't "say voter suppression". You make it sound like a difference of opinion. It's not. I'm sorry, but it's like we're arguing if the sky is blue. There is overwhelming. You living in a state that is intentionally suppressing the vote. They're doing this to support a right wing, pro-corporate agenda. You might agree with that agenda and be willing to ignore the suppression. But it doesn't make the suppression any less real or the sky any less blue...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Uhh.Women don't become stupid after they become married, what fucking crack are you smoking? You re-register when the get a new license. Its not rocket science.
That's the best you could do?
What so many others? You are just lying again.
like you always do
I don't know of any country which allows you to vote without an ID.
I have never had to show an ID in the US to vote. Certainly not now, because there isn't even anyone who I could show it to.
Yea, "leaked". Bullshit. Some one made that memo to "leak" it. Just like manufactured bullshit 1960s era memos about McCain, remember that? How about Harry Reid and his claim about Romney not paying taxes and he says - well it worked, didn't it? I hear this all the time. Such as their mother doesn't have an ID. Then I found out his mother has been dead since the 1990s. In fact, almost 30 years ago. Everyone has an id. You need it to do anything any more. Banking, driving, even my 85 year old mother in law had to get one or she couldn't do squat. No social security, no medical care, banking, nothing. No kidding. So to say people don't have an ID is pure bullshit. It's nothing more than a way for the lefties to steal elections. Sometimes you even see them on NBC being real smug about how they voted over 70 times in Chicago.
Get over it, it's not racist. We need to demand that anyone voting must show an ID and must be a US Citizen that owns land. Just as the Constitution says. I don't think we need to the restriction they had, any land will do. As long as they are on a deed, not time share.
Which of your 200 countries have had a voter fraud problem that would have been prevented by ID?
which is why it's called "Voter Suppression". Some states do charge a fee. Some don't. It's a question of how much they think they can get away with before the courts notice.
We could make it easy to get an Id, but that would defeat the purpose. Remember, in person voter fraud is astonishingly rare. The people pushing voter id laws know this. So do you now.
Are you doing this on purpose? If you're just a troll that's fine. Shine on you crazy diamond. But otherwise you're doing actual harm to this country's voting system by supporting what you know are suppression techniques. Stop it. I don't know what you think you're doing, but whatever it is it will bite you in the ass eventually.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/