Vote

[cerving]

CA recently went to a touch screen electronic voting system, apparently it prints out a tape for backup/auditing. I suppose that's OK too... but I miss the simplicity of the ink-a-vote ballots. They still have to run all the mail-in ballots through a tabulator, so I don't know where they are saving any money by going high-tech...

 

[cwbullet]

CA recently went to a touch screen electronic voting system, apparently it prints out a tape for backup/auditing. I suppose that's OK too... but I miss the simplicity of the ink-a-vote ballots. They still have to run all the mail-in ballots through a tabulator, so I don't know where they are saving any money by going high-tech...

Me too, but I do not miss hanging chads.

 

[Buckeye]

The scanner, called a tabulator is not normally connected to anything.
It prints out a paper strip which is signed by the chief judge and two party judges.

Then there is also a USB drive that is handled by all three judges.
Then there is also all the paper ballots that are locked under the machine.

The tabulator is a really good system with several checks and balances.

I thank you for what you do. The checks and balances sound good, but the collection system sounds arcane. Personal automobile trunks filled with ballots? Paper strips? Handling of thumb drives? Wow. I always thought the tabulator had a wired connection to somewhere.

 

[Nytrunner]

CA recently went to a touch screen electronic voting system, apparently it prints out a tape for backup/auditing. I suppose that's OK too... but I miss the simplicity of the ink-a-vote ballots. They still have to run all the mail-in ballots through a tabulator, so I don't know where they are saving any money by going high-tech...

TX has the e-voting machines too. I worked them 3 times as a clerk in highschool/college

The head judge has the master key/token that reads the totals for each machine, plus each machine gets hooked to a portable printer that spits out a long cvs-receipt with the each ballot cast selection+plus totals at the end.

At the end of the day maybe it just speeds up the counting of the on-day voting (+ early voting with the same machines)

 

[SDramstad]

Me too, but I do not miss hanging chads.

Hanging Chads. Great name for a rocket!! Or male stripper......

 

[boatgeek]

I thank you for what you do. The checks and balances sound good, but the collection system sounds arcane. Personal automobile trunks filled with ballots? Paper strips? Handling of thumb drives? Wow. I always thought the tabulator had a wired connection to somewhere.

I think computer security is a good argument for *not* having a wired connection to somewhere. Barring a carjacking or a fiery wreck, there's not much in terms of accidents that can happen to the ballots and data on the way to the central elections office. Deliberate malfeasance is possible, I guess, but is vanishingly uncommon and also is pretty limited in terms of the numbers of polling places that can be affected. If you're connected to the internet in any way, it's a lot easier to get into a county-wide system.

CA recently went to a touch screen electronic voting system, apparently it prints out a tape for backup/auditing. I suppose that's OK too... but I miss the simplicity of the ink-a-vote ballots. They still have to run all the mail-in ballots through a tabulator, so I don't know where they are saving any money by going high-tech...

I really like the "ink a circle next to the name" style ballots. It's easily scanned and you have a physical ballot that you can look at afterwards if there are questions or if it's a close recount.

 

[Buckeye]

With that new reality in mind, there are a handful of states that really need to get it together in order to refine their policies with regard to speed and accuracy of vote tabulation. (I'm looking at you, Rust Belt!)

Agreed. How come Florida (lots of people, big urban centers, and many seniors voting absentee) has their **** together and can make a fast, thorough, and accurate count, while PA, MI, and WI halt their counting last night and will continue to fumble along for days?

 

[boatgeek]

Agreed. How come Florida (lots of people, big urban centers, and many seniors voting absentee) has their **** together and can make a fast, thorough, and accurate count, while PA, MI, and WI halt their counting last night and will continue to fumble along for days?

Because Florida is allowed to start processing* their mail-in ballots starting several days before the election, and PA (at least, don't know for sure about MI and WI) wasn't allowed to do that until sometime between Election Day morning and after polls closed. They tried to change the laws on that in PA, but one of the parties refused to consider the notion. [edit] MI and WI have the same rules as PA. The big deal on this is verifying signatures and sorting. My county (1.5 million voters, expecting 85%-90% turnout) does everything but counting before the election. They were able to count a hair over a million votes by 8pm on Election Night. They'll be through the backlog today and just dealing late-arriving ballots after that. If MI, WI, and PA were able to do that, we'd have pretty complete results right now. [/edit]

* Processing ballots meaning verifying signatures, sorting, and counting ballots. FL allows early ballots to be run through the counting machines but don't allow the totals to be calculated until polls close.

 

[Senior Space Cadet]

I dropped my ballot in a drop box a couple weeks ago. Sometimes it feels like a waste of time, but it's the only real power we have.

 

[jrap330]

I strongly disagree with this being a problem. With the parties as polarized as they are right now, allowing either to run roughshod with no opposition is a recipe for disaster. The Supreme Court can't do anything either unless a case is brought before them, and that isn't exactly an easy or cheap process. I am praying either the senate or the presidency remain in republican hands after tonight. With all they are threatening right now (ending the filibuster, packing the supreme court, etc.), democrats gaining control of both houses of congress and the presidency would be a nightmare.

: We need both parties to work together. I am tired of Congress doing nothing.....

 

[Senior Space Cadet]

Agreed. How come Florida (lots of people, big urban centers, and many seniors voting absentee) has their **** together and can make a fast, thorough, and accurate count, while PA, MI, and WI halt their counting last night and will continue to fumble along for days?

Remember the Gore-Bush election?

 

[Not Quite Nominal]

: We need both parties to work together. I am tired of Congress doing nothing.....

I'm not.

The only thing I fear more than Congress doing nothing is Congress doing something.

 

[kuririn]

Agreed. How come Florida (lots of people, big urban centers, and many seniors voting absentee) has their **** together and can make a fast, thorough, and accurate count, while PA, MI, and WI halt their counting last night and will continue to fumble along for days?

Boatgeek nailed it.
More in depth explanation here:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...a-were-counted-so-late/ar-BB1aHdRP?li=BBnb7KzExcerpt:
"Take Pennsylvania. The Republican-controlled legislature refused to change state law to allow county election officials to start processing mail-in ballots until 7 a.m. on Election Day. That left local election officials with mountains of absentee ballots to process and count on top of the in-person vote cast on Tuesday. "

Kind of ironic since POTUS is saying that any votes counted after Nov. 3 shouldn't be included.
Or was that the plan?

 

[kuririn]

While we're on the subject of voting, any thoughts about abolishing the Electoral College System?
Might have had it's usefulness 240 years ago, but in this day of electronic tabulation shouldn't each Americans' vote count equally? Why should someone who lives in a battleground state have their vote weighted more than anyone else's? One man (or woman) one vote, I say.
Twice in recent memory the winner of the popular vote lost the presidential election.
I say this is a travesty.
Thoughts?

 

[ewomack]

I still don't understand why election day isn't a holiday.

(I mean, I think I actually do know, but if we want people to vote we should make time for them to vote - one day wouldn't do much damage).

 

[Jmhepworth]

We’ve voted by mail in Utah for some time now. I enjoy taking my time to vote, and looking things up when I’m not already decided.

As for eliminating the electoral college, I suggest reading or re-reading the Federalist Papers before advocating one way or the other. It wasn’t just about not really trusting the masses (although there was some of that). It was more about the republic, itself. These were a collection of 13 states voting on a president, not the citizens of the new nation voting on a president. If it makes sense to get rid of the electoral college, the same arguments could be made to get rid of the senate, another tool to protect states from the tyranny of democracy.

 

[gna]

While we're on the subject of voting, any thoughts about abolishing the Electoral College System?
Might have had it's usefulness 240 years ago, but in this day of electronic tabulation shouldn't each Americans' vote count equally? Why should someone who lives in a battleground state have their vote weighted more than anyone else's? One man (or woman) one vote, I say.
Twice in recent memory the winner of the popular vote lost the presidential election.
I say this is a travesty.
Thoughts?

Agreed. For a national office in a country with universal suffrage, we should have a national election. It may force candidates to try to appeal to the majority of voters, rather than a few in a few states.

 

[Nytrunner]

Thoughts?

My thoughts are more along the lines of keep the EC, but get rid of the winner-take-all policy

I think there's still some merit in the college seating since it allows low population states to have perhaps a bit more influence (other wise the 15 least populated states get overwridden by the population of San Diego, San Fran, and LA)

 

[dhbarr]

Agreed. For a national office in a country with universal suffrage, we should have a national election. It may force candidates to try to appeal to the majority of voters, rather than a few in a few states.

Absolutely, those hicks should just move to a city if they wanted their vote to matter. I'm sure the food and energy will come from somewhere. [ NOTE: this is entirely satirical ]

 

[boatgeek]

My thoughts are more along the lines of keep the EC, but get rid of the winner-take-all policy

I think there's still some merit in the college seating since it allows low population states to have perhaps a bit more influence (other wise the 15 least populated states get overwridden by the population of San Diego, San Fran, and LA)

Absolutely, those hicks should just move to a city if they wanted their vote to matter. I'm sure the food and energy will come from somewhere. [ NOTE: this is entirely satirical ]

I mean, it's not like any individual vote for President in most of those states actually makes that much difference anyway, whether that's me moving to WY or one of those fine rural folks moving to CA. If we dumped the Electoral College, all of those rural-urban divides would still exist, but there would be incentive for candidates to visit nearly every state (HI and AK are awfully far away) because they have some marginal votes to pick up. No presidential candidate comes to WA except for fundraising. The same is pretty much true of CA and NY. Sure, it's a bit harder to campaign in rural areas than cities because stuff is farther apart, but with decent planning a candidate could make a pretty effective road trip/barnstorming tour.

 

[kuririn]

The Electoral College was born out of compromise.
One faction of the founding fathers wanted Congress to elect the President.
The other faction wanted the President to be chosen by popular vote.
And so the Electoral College was cobbled together.
Reasons given against Congress choosing the President:
Too much opportunity for "good old boy" relationships and under the table deals to corrupt the process.
Reasons given against the popular vote:
18th century voters did not have the resources to make an informed decision.
A headstrong mob could steer the country astray.
A populist president could garner too much power.

In this day of electronic voting and mass information via the internet these reasons are moot.
People can be as informed as they want to be.
And in a true democracy everybody's vote should count equally.

As for the Senate, don't see how the reasons why the Electoral College is obsolete would apply to a bi-cameral legislature.
A two house legislature is an important part of the checks and balances on the abuse of power.

 

[Mike t]

They are all supposed to work for us.

 

[Rocketjunkie]

Removing the Electoral College requires a Constitutional amendment. However, removing the winner take all just requires Legislative action.

 

[Zeus-cat]

... As for the Senate, don't see how the reasons why the Electoral College is obsolete would apply to a bi-cameral legislature.
A two house legislature is an important part of the checks and balances on the abuse of power.

And the House and Senate do different things. The House is not a bigger version of the Senate.

 

[lakeroadster]

The Electoral College was born out of compromise.
One faction of the founding fathers wanted Congress to elect the President.
The other faction wanted the President to be chosen by popular vote.
And so the Electoral College was cobbled together.
Reasons given against Congress choosing the President:
Too much opportunity for "good old boy" relationships and under the table deals to corrupt the process.
Reasons given against the popular vote:
18th century voters did not have the resources to make an informed decision.
A headstrong mob could steer the country astray.
A populist president could garner too much power.

In this day of electronic voting and mass information via the internet these reasons are moot.
People can be as informed as they want to be.
And in a true democracy everybody's vote should count equally.

As for the Senate, don't see how the reasons why the Electoral College is obsolete would apply to a bi-cameral legislature.
A two house legislature is an important part of the checks and balances on the abuse of power.

In a country where many folks voting don't even know what USA stands for... everybody's vote counting equally is scary. IMO... there should be some sort of "qualifications testing" done. It's truly scary out there.

 

[boatgeek]

Removing the Electoral College requires a Constitutional amendment. However, removing the winner take all just requires Legislative action.

Strictly speaking, removing the Electoral College is possible without an amendment. The Constitution allows states to award their electoral votes any way they wish, as decided by the state legislature. That's why Maine and Nebraska aren't winner take all but everywhere else is. A state could decide to award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. A bunch of states have signed on to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to do just that, but they need to get to 270 electoral votes for the agreement to take effect.

In a country where many folks voting don't even know what USA stands for... everybody's vote counting equally is scary. IMO... there should be some sort of "qualifications testing" done. It's truly scary out there.

The history of qualifications testing for voting is long and fraught, not to mention unconstitutional. As much as I'd like voters to be informed, I'm not excited about literacy tests either.

 

[Buckeye]

Boatgeek nailed it.
More in depth explanation here:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...a-were-counted-so-late/ar-BB1aHdRP?li=BBnb7KzExcerpt:
"Take Pennsylvania. The Republican-controlled legislature refused to change state law to allow county election officials to start processing mail-in ballots until 7 a.m. on Election Day. That left local election officials with mountains of absentee ballots to process and count on top of the in-person vote cast on Tuesday. "

Kind of ironic since POTUS is saying that any votes counted after Nov. 3 shouldn't be included.
Or was that the plan?

The Democrat majority supreme court of Pennsylvania extended the voting by 3 days. These states that are milking the system and dragging their feet (PA, WI, MI, NC) are the ones that "paused" counting and then magically brought in big numbers for Sleepy the next day. Hmmm.

 

[gna]

Strictly speaking, removing the Electoral College is possible without an amendment. The Constitution allows states to award their electoral votes any way they wish, as decided by the state legislature. That's why Maine and Nebraska aren't winner take all but everywhere else is. A state could decide to award their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. A bunch of states have signed on to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact to do just that, but they need to get to 270 electoral votes for the agreement to take effect.

The history of qualifications testing for voting is long and fraught, not to mention unconstitutional. As much as I'd like voters to be informed, I'm not excited about literacy tests either.

 

[gna]

The Democrat majority supreme court of Pennsylvania extended the voting by 3 days. These states that are milking the system and dragging their feet (PA, WI, MI, NC) are the ones that "paused" counting and then magically brought in big numbers for Sleepy the next day. Hmmm.

Not quite. Votes must be postmarked by election day. The extension is to allow ballots to be mailed. They can't magically make votes appear after the fact. Other states allow this; the ruling depends on technicalities of the law.

 

[PXR5]

I dropped my ballot in a drop box a couple weeks ago. Sometimes it feels like a waste of time, but it's the only real power we have.

Voting is not a waste of time IMHO.
If a few thousand folks said that, a race can change. Our governor won by 2000 votes.
Many folks in other countries, especially through out history would have loved the opportunity to vote

Thanks for voting this year