Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Poll Voting 23

Journal by pudge

I am totally serious about this: come voting day this November, for the first time, I will be asked by my government to trust the U.S. postal system to deliver my vote, as there will be no polling places. There will be no no reliable chain of possession of my vote between me and the elections officials, should I do this.

I won't. Instead, I will go to the county auditor's office at noon on voting day to cast my vote. And I am going to encourage everyone else to do the same. And I hope for their sake that they have a lot of employees available to handle the influx.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Poll Voting More

Poll Voting

Comments Filter:
  • Maybe I missed a previous JE, but are you saying that you aren't mailing your vote? And what is this polling place situation?
    • Our county just abolished polling places. Effectively all voting, beginning in November IIRC, will be by mail ballots. However, you can still go to the auditor's office, which is what I will do.
      • That sounds like it has to be in violation of some statutes on vote accountability ... I mean all the stuff Black Box Voting is doing on voting transparency is completely invalidated by that.
        • State law now allows a county to do it. I'd be delighted for someone to make the legal case that mail voting is inherently unreliable and should be limited to those with a demonstrable need (not in area, or physically handicapped). But the momentum on this is overwhelming, we can only hope for change, at this stage, at the county level.
        • That sounds like it has to be in violation of some statutes on vote accountability ... I mean all the stuff Black Box Voting is doing on voting transparency is completely invalidated by that.

          Actually, depends upon if it's done properly. Oregon requires two envelopes surrounding your ballot- the first is your standard security envelope used to protect from prying eyes, the 2nd is your voter verificaiton form. You sign across the closure of the 2nd envelope. Votes are completely invalidated and you are t
          • Okay, so I can see the paper trail, but what about making sure everyone gets the chance to vote? Are you mailed the ballots? Do they call you to see if you sent your ballot if they don't get one from you? The voter database could prevent multiple votes from one person, but what prevents the mailed ballots out of certain districts from disappearing?
            • We're mailed the ballots. It's our problem if we didn't get one- they maintain a hotline for that. But you're right- it's become a problem, especially as they try to weed out the voter registration lists to put them into one big database. Best practice is to re-register after every election, whether you choose to vote or not.

              but what prevents the mailed ballots out of certain districts from disappearing?

              Federal law regulating the mail for one- but there has still been one instance of the Republicans
          • There are two potentials for fraud with such a system- multiple voting in different counties due to multiple registration (fixed by the 2006 federal mandate for a unified voter database)

            It's not fixed. They don't even properly check to prevent multiple registration in a SINGLE county. There were many examples of double voters in King County last year, where the voter's multiple votes were each counted.

            and the lack of a private vote if you choose to give up that right OR if you are strongarmed into voting
            • It's not fixed. They don't even properly check to prevent multiple registration in a SINGLE county. There were many examples of double voters in King County last year, where the voter's multiple votes were each counted.

              I knew there were several states that weren't going to make the federal elections commission mandate- I was not aware that WA was one of them, but to be fair, the actual deadline isn't until November, as that is the first federal election in 2006.

              Would you *expect* to hear about it? Someo
              • I knew there were several states that weren't going to make the federal elections commission mandate- I was not aware that WA was one of them, but to be fair, the actual deadline isn't until November, as that is the first federal election in 2006.

                You don't know the half of it. The elections officials in King County have said it is *not their job* to check for double voters.

                Maybe not in specific individual cases of in-family pressure- but if there were roving gangs of partisans trying to influence the vote,
                • You don't know the half of it. The elections officials in King County have said it is *not their job* to check for double voters.

                  Federal law as of November 2006 disagrees with them- and they've had 4 years of warnings about it, as the single-voter-registry-by-state with internet-enabled automatic double checking was a part of the 2002 laws for the Department of Homeland Security. (The idea being, of course, that such a system can also help provide data for tracking other more dangerous people).

                  What's d
                  • So is the checking of ID specifically exempted for those who are using mail in ballots?

                    On this I am not sure. The ruling came from the Secretary of State, who said that "poll voters" had to provide ID. But I can't find the specifics of it. So if you vote by mail, yes, you need no ID to vote, just your signature, which is essentially not checked (as evidenced by the many examples found of signatures that did not come close to matching).
          • A third danger isn't outright fraud, but the potential to swing the vote. If the mail carrier gets the list of registered voters by party affiliation, easily 10% - 20% of the ballots from the members of the 'bad' party could get 'misplaced' en route. Without feedback that your vote was recorded at all, the system is just blind trust.

            To truly put the man-in-the-middle at risk for getting caught for dropping one side of the count, you would have to telephone each voter and thank them for their vote; and then

            • A third danger isn't outright fraud, but the potential to swing the vote. If the mail carrier gets the list of registered voters by party affiliation, easily 10% - 20% of the ballots from the members of the 'bad' party could get 'misplaced' en route. Without feedback that your vote was recorded at all, the system is just blind trust.

              True, but such an action is against both oath and contract signed by postal carriers- as well as being a felony under federal law. Votes are no different than checks to pay b
              • Your plan of calling the non-voters is actually better than mine. If a mail carrier purposefully lost a ballot, the natural follow up would be to call the person, making them them think their ballot was counted. Calling the non-voters is a better follow-up.

                As far as the postal workers and ethics go; no, I don't trust them. I've posted here before, where my Dad's snail mail was being read because he was a semi-high mucky-muck in one of the state political parties. Complaining to the local postmaster was wor

              • True, but such an action is against both oath and contract signed by postal carriers- as well as being a felony under federal law.

                So too is voter a federal felony.

                you're accusing a system that is so good that "the check's in the mail" is considered proof of payment in court.

                Not accusing them, but stating the fact that our votes are too important to entrust to any outside party, no matter who or what it is. (Which is also why I think "open source" [available to view by all, though not necessarily open for o
                • I think you mean voter fraud- but yes, we certainly need to do more to catch it. I like the idea of this being a partisan, non-governmental thing. I think I'm going to write a letter to the editor about it in the Oregonian- if precinct captains can get voter lists by party, then it's a very simple change to the database query (especially after this April in Oregon when the single state voter list goes live) to give you a list of registered voters who failed to vote after an election (they're checking them
  • Oregon has done this successfully for several elections now- but I don't like to spend $.37 (now $.39!) to vote, so I always do exactly what you are talking about- or something similar (they maintain drop boxes at all the old polling places- the only real difference is that you now get 3 weeks to vote and it's less than a one minute stop to drop off your ballot).
  • If they're anything like Washington County, OR officials- they'll just have a mail slot marked "election ballots" and lock the door....
  • I haven't been home to vote since 1996. Will be voting from Japan this year. Sucks to trust the Post Office with this stuff, huh?

Slashdot Top Deals

Kill Ugly Processor Architectures - Karl Lehenbauer

Close