West Virginia and Georgia have already done it too, so not just Democratic states. And it appears that every state but Wisconsin, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho will be considering it this year. So a good trend.
Eh, you have to vote sometime; if that had happened the day after the election, would be be discussing if the day of the special election was too soon?
Like, it sucks that dude showed his true colors before the election was over but too late for it to matter, but that's an acceptable price to pay to make sure more people can vote, IMO.
Now to get every state to mail a ballot to every voter maybe a month before the election.
not every state does that? jesus christ I just assumed that was the bare minimum
or do you mean real ballots you can cast right away and not just sample ballots to show voters what issues are being voted on?
Now to get every state to mail a ballot to every voter maybe a month before the election.
not every state does that? jesus christ I just assumed that was the bare minimum
or do you mean real ballots you can cast right away and not just sample ballots to show voters what issues are being voted on?
Wait, you get sample ballots in the mail? I have to find what's on the ballot on my own or wait to see the sample ballot available at the polls.
Now to get every state to mail a ballot to every voter maybe a month before the election.
not every state does that? jesus christ I just assumed that was the bare minimum
or do you mean real ballots you can cast right away and not just sample ballots to show voters what issues are being voted on?
Wait, you get sample ballots in the mail? I have to find what's on the ballot on my own or wait to see the sample ballot available at the polls.
I've considered trying to make a non-profit which sends out an info packet Ala what CA does. I fucking love it.
For those not aware, for every election we get at least one of two things:
A sample ballot, in every permutation possible (so it contains the Republican ballot for Republican primary, Democratic for Democratic, etc). It lists every person on the ballot for each thing you'll be voting for, and contains no fields which you won't be voting for. It also lists party or occupation, as the case may be, for each candidate. It also contains voter information, where your voting location is, etc.
In addition to this, if there are propositions on the ballot, you get a voter information guide (warning: PDF, link to the one from last year's election), which contains the name, summary, arguments for/against, rebuttals for/against, financial analysis by the legislature, and full text of the propositions.
For those not aware, for every election we get at least one of two things:
A sample ballot, in every permutation possible (so it contains the Republican ballot for Republican primary, Democratic for Democratic, etc). It lists every person on the ballot for each thing you'll be voting for, and contains no fields which you won't be voting for. It also lists party or occupation, as the case may be, for each candidate. It also contains voter information, where your voting location is, etc.
In addition to this, if there are propositions on the ballot, you get a voter information guide (warning: PDF, link to the one from last year's election), which contains the name, summary, arguments for/against, rebuttals for/against, financial analysis by the legislature, and full text of the propositions.
It's so great.
I wish Florida got this every time Florida Power shits out another deceptive Anti-solar bill. So far, voters are holding the line for solar well.
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Now to get every state to mail a ballot to every voter maybe a month before the election.
not every state does that? jesus christ I just assumed that was the bare minimum
or do you mean real ballots you can cast right away and not just sample ballots to show voters what issues are being voted on?
I meant an actual ballot you can fill out and mail back, but a sample would be great as well.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
Gianforte shows that even if you have early mail in voting it's super important to be able to change your vote up to Election Day.
+7
Options
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Really? I thought states with mail in voting had higher participation. Washington or Oregon, I think. I will check when not on mobile.
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
Or a neighbor for that matter.
Election fraud is difficult with in person voting as it is because there are people witnessing each submitted ballot and other votes are difficult to send in in substantial numbers because what happens if the actual voters show up. That's not the case with mail in voting and the much larger window and insecure chain of custody means the process is much more vulnerable to tampering, especially by the people who are running the election
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
Or a neighbor for that matter.
Election fraud is difficult with in person voting as it is because there are people witnessing each submitted ballot and other votes are difficult to send in in substantial numbers because what happens if the actual voters show up. That's not the case with mail in voting and the much larger window and insecure chain of custody means the process is much more vulnerable to tampering, especially by the people who are running the election
Sounds like this should be easily demonstrable.
Washington, Oregon, and Colorado hold all elections by mail-in ballot. Colorado only switched a few years ago so I don't know if any hard data is available, but for Washington and Oregon I know that voter participation increased dramatically for all elections and propositions, and they have regular audits to ensure that the registered voter list is kept up-to-date and clear of duplicate registrations, deceased individuals, etc., and from what I've seen, they have no larger instances of voter fraud than other states. And to be clear, voter fraud is a very rare crime to begin with.
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
Or a neighbor for that matter.
Election fraud is difficult with in person voting as it is because there are people witnessing each submitted ballot and other votes are difficult to send in in substantial numbers because what happens if the actual voters show up. That's not the case with mail in voting and the much larger window and insecure chain of custody means the process is much more vulnerable to tampering, especially by the people who are running the election
Sounds like this should be easily demonstrable.
Washington, Oregon, and Colorado hold all elections by mail-in ballot. Colorado only switched a few years ago so I don't know if any hard data is available, but for Washington and Oregon I know that voter participation increased dramatically for all elections and propositions, and they have regular audits to ensure that the registered voter list is kept up-to-date and clear of duplicate registrations, deceased individuals, etc., and from what I've seen, they have no larger instances of voter fraud than other states. And to be clear, voter fraud is a very rare crime to begin with.
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
Or a neighbor for that matter.
Election fraud is difficult with in person voting as it is because there are people witnessing each submitted ballot and other votes are difficult to send in in substantial numbers because what happens if the actual voters show up. That's not the case with mail in voting and the much larger window and insecure chain of custody means the process is much more vulnerable to tampering, especially by the people who are running the election
It is. I have had my ballot invalidated because my signature was shit before. Everything I wanted to win won by considerable margins that election so I didn't bother to certify in person.
West Virginia and Georgia have already done it too, so not just Democratic states. And it appears that every state but Wisconsin, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho will be considering it this year. So a good trend.
Yeah like the Dakotas
Especially North Dakota
The only state that doesn't require registration to vote?
West Virginia and Georgia have already done it too, so not just Democratic states. And it appears that every state but Wisconsin, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho will be considering it this year. So a good trend.
Louisiana does do the next best thing in encouraging you to register to vote, and allowing you to do it whenever you go to the DMV as well. I would certainly prefer it to be automatic, but it's not a terrible place to be either compared to RI. Sadly there are people in state government that really hate that even this much is possible. I forget who exactly, but someone in a position to make it hard.
Pennsylvania does that too, which is nice. But some large percentage of Philadelphians, specifically, never get a driver's license. So the biggest blue bastion in the state doesn't benefit from DMV registration on nearly the level that the boonies where everyone drives does. It's another thing that feels like a nod toward universal registration that doesn't actually address the underlying issue.
West Virginia and Georgia have already done it too, so not just Democratic states. And it appears that every state but Wisconsin, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho will be considering it this year. So a good trend.
Louisiana does do the next best thing in encouraging you to register to vote, and allowing you to do it whenever you go to the DMV as well. I would certainly prefer it to be automatic, but it's not a terrible place to be either compared to RI. Sadly there are people in state government that really hate that even this much is possible. I forget who exactly, but someone in a position to make it hard.
Pennsylvania does that too, which is nice. But some large percentage of Philadelphians, specifically, never get a driver's license. So the biggest blue bastion in the state doesn't benefit from DMV registration on nearly the level that the boonies where everyone drives does. It's another thing that feels like a nod toward universal registration that doesn't actually address the underlying issue.
The idea that civic engagement goes hand in hand with vehicle ownership, however, is the most American thing in the world. We all know those ridesharing public transit riding inner city liberals aren't real Americans because they don't have cars, anyway!
Oh and we're also going to restrict early voting and limit polling places and move the polling places we do have a mile away from anything and not have mail in ballots
Boy a car would make all that easier wouldn't it, sucks to be an American without one. Should have thought of buying a car before getting pretensions about civic engagement!
(Sorry if I sound bitter, that's just because I am)
West Virginia and Georgia have already done it too, so not just Democratic states. And it appears that every state but Wisconsin, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho will be considering it this year. So a good trend.
Louisiana does do the next best thing in encouraging you to register to vote, and allowing you to do it whenever you go to the DMV as well. I would certainly prefer it to be automatic, but it's not a terrible place to be either compared to RI. Sadly there are people in state government that really hate that even this much is possible. I forget who exactly, but someone in a position to make it hard.
Pennsylvania does that too, which is nice. But some large percentage of Philadelphians, specifically, never get a driver's license. So the biggest blue bastion in the state doesn't benefit from DMV registration on nearly the level that the boonies where everyone drives does. It's another thing that feels like a nod toward universal registration that doesn't actually address the underlying issue.
Just gonna point out that every state that doesn't have same day registration is supposed to allow registration at the DMV because of Bill Clinton among others. So it isn't like Louisiana is special or it's some state plot against Philadelphians...though I find it funny that Bush 1 vetoed this legislation that is actually helpful to his party's rural base. Though I suppose the GOP would just rather have less people voting overall.
West Virginia and Georgia have already done it too, so not just Democratic states. And it appears that every state but Wisconsin, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho will be considering it this year. So a good trend.
Louisiana does do the next best thing in encouraging you to register to vote, and allowing you to do it whenever you go to the DMV as well. I would certainly prefer it to be automatic, but it's not a terrible place to be either compared to RI. Sadly there are people in state government that really hate that even this much is possible. I forget who exactly, but someone in a position to make it hard.
Pennsylvania does that too, which is nice. But some large percentage of Philadelphians, specifically, never get a driver's license. So the biggest blue bastion in the state doesn't benefit from DMV registration on nearly the level that the boonies where everyone drives does. It's another thing that feels like a nod toward universal registration that doesn't actually address the underlying issue.
Just gonna point out that every state that doesn't have same day registration is supposed to allow registration at the DMV because of Bill Clinton among others. So it isn't like Louisiana is special or it's some state plot against Philadelphians...though I find it funny that Bush 1 vetoed this legislation that is actually helpful to his party's rural base. Though I suppose the GOP would just rather have less people voting overall.
Especially the ones who think amendments are invalid.
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
Or a neighbor for that matter.
Election fraud is difficult with in person voting as it is because there are people witnessing each submitted ballot and other votes are difficult to send in in substantial numbers because what happens if the actual voters show up. That's not the case with mail in voting and the much larger window and insecure chain of custody means the process is much more vulnerable to tampering, especially by the people who are running the election
...by the people who would be committing election fraud. I'm mostly talking about election fraud.
Election fraud = The tampering of elections by those running the election
Voter fraud = People voting when they are ineligible to do so or otherwise fraudulently.
when I was working the door of a bar in a reasonably midsized town in VA (pop'n ~25-30k), a ton of the black patrons didn't have actual driver's licenses, though quite a few had at least state ID of a couple forms. and this was in a place where people actually like and use cars, and parking isn't regressively expensive. I can only imagine how few minorities have drivers licenses or other state ID that a lot of white middle class folk take for granted in an urban setting where cars are an abstraction rather than a near-necessity
By "equivalent" here I mean basically any government office, though I'm not sure about paying state taxes (for states with an income tax). DMV is just the one most people interact with first.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
West Virginia and Georgia have already done it too, so not just Democratic states. And it appears that every state but Wisconsin, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho will be considering it this year. So a good trend.
Louisiana does do the next best thing in encouraging you to register to vote, and allowing you to do it whenever you go to the DMV as well. I would certainly prefer it to be automatic, but it's not a terrible place to be either compared to RI. Sadly there are people in state government that really hate that even this much is possible. I forget who exactly, but someone in a position to make it hard.
Pennsylvania does that too, which is nice. But some large percentage of Philadelphians, specifically, never get a driver's license. So the biggest blue bastion in the state doesn't benefit from DMV registration on nearly the level that the boonies where everyone drives does. It's another thing that feels like a nod toward universal registration that doesn't actually address the underlying issue.
The idea that civic engagement goes hand in hand with vehicle ownership, however, is the most American thing in the world. We all know those ridesharing public transit riding inner city liberals aren't real Americans because they don't have cars, anyway!
Oh and we're also going to restrict early voting and limit polling places and move the polling places we do have a mile away from anything and not have mail in ballots
Boy a car would make all that easier wouldn't it, sucks to be an American without one. Should have thought of buying a car before getting pretensions about civic engagement!
(Sorry if I sound bitter, that's just because I am)
I don't know how other places do it, but here you need to go to the DMV to get any form of state issued ID which tends to be required for more than it should be these days. Of course, they have had to close a bunch of DMV offices in New Orleans over the last few budget crisis. Oddly, all the locations in the city proper were closed. The locations were moved to the suburbs where, coincidentally, the rich white people live. It's funny how that worked out.
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
Or a neighbor for that matter.
Election fraud is difficult with in person voting as it is because there are people witnessing each submitted ballot and other votes are difficult to send in in substantial numbers because what happens if the actual voters show up. That's not the case with mail in voting and the much larger window and insecure chain of custody means the process is much more vulnerable to tampering, especially by the people who are running the election
...by the people who would be committing election fraud. I'm mostly talking about election fraud.
Election fraud = The tampering of elections by those running the election
Voter fraud = People voting when they are ineligible to do so or otherwise fraudulently.
Our elections are mainly handled by two groups.
Elderly ladies who take vote counting super seriously and would probably sooner die than betray their duty. Its a hard, thankless job, counting ballots.
Computer systems run by and created by uncaring oligarchs who could already order any level of corruption they wished on an utterly trivial level.
Do we have any science for any of these claims or just feelings?
Turnout effect research generally showing no positive turnout effect in elections (except special elections): WaPoDenver Post Academic research 12
On vulnerability to election fraud the evidence is what is done now to combat traditional election fraud. The measures that take place - where the ballot box is sealed and displayed in plain sight and is monitored by members of both campaigns and neutral (volunteer and law enforcement) individuals and has a strict chain of custody is all designed to combat election fraud. The break in chain of custody, ballot box security and elimination of much of the risk in introducing extra ballots to the tally means its on its face less secure. It also makes voter fraud easier (see this story from March of a CO former GOP chairman committing voter fraud by mail) but I am more concerned with systematic fraud by the party in power.
According to the 2012 Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project report:
Having tens of millions of ballots being transmitted and marked without strict chain-of-custody procedures creates risks that simply do not exist with any form of in-person voting, whether on Election Day or in early-voting settings.
Reports of absentee ballot fraud have piled up in every election. In 2000, the New York Times reported extensively on how Republicans used partisan absentee manipulation to help swing the election to George W. Bush in Florida.
A 2005 report the Commission on Federal Election Reform also concluded, “Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.”
However, studies have proven that few actual voters are engaged in any kind of fraud at a level that could swing an election. Instead, election insiders constitute the greater threat.
The right-wing Heritage Foundation compiled a recent report on election fraud conviction cases, attempting to prove allegations of widespread minority "voter fraud" in order to bolster its promotion of voter ID laws.
Ironically, while the report found a scattering of such fraud, it also listed far more serious crimes by elections insiders utilizing absentee ballots to rig elections.
1) Kris Kobach, the most dangerous man in America on this matter who is not Jeff Sessions, is running for Governor of Kansas. Hopefully Brownback drags him down enough to not win.
2) Gov. Cooper called for a special session to draw new maps in response to the court rulings making the previous districting effort invalid. The NC legislature has decided to end that session without doing anything, which I believe means the courts will draw the new maps.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
In Mass we get the sample ballot/voter guide but we don't really do mail in ballots.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
Or a neighbor for that matter.
Election fraud is difficult with in person voting as it is because there are people witnessing each submitted ballot and other votes are difficult to send in in substantial numbers because what happens if the actual voters show up. That's not the case with mail in voting and the much larger window and insecure chain of custody means the process is much more vulnerable to tampering, especially by the people who are running the election
Sounds like this should be easily demonstrable.
Washington, Oregon, and Colorado hold all elections by mail-in ballot. Colorado only switched a few years ago so I don't know if any hard data is available, but for Washington and Oregon I know that voter participation increased dramatically for all elections and propositions, and they have regular audits to ensure that the registered voter list is kept up-to-date and clear of duplicate registrations, deceased individuals, etc., and from what I've seen, they have no larger instances of voter fraud than other states. And to be clear, voter fraud is a very rare crime to begin with.
Washington's turnout is still nothing special
Oregon's is very high though
I'm not sure what the cause of that disparity is
here are Washington numbers (statewide mail-in voting went into effect in July 2012):
Not gonna lie, my heart feel a bit when I heard about Kobach. I want to believe he'll lose, but the republican mojo in Kansas is just so strong.
The good part about this is that the election is over a year from now. There's a lot that's going to happen in the meantime and given his closeness to the Trump administration, there exists the chance that he could burnt by that.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
This could go on a lot of threads but it's worth mentioning here; the administration is dropping most civil rights enforcement including voting rights.
Posts
Because of course. Goddamnit.
I know it's contrary to popular opinion, but I think there is value to having votes not be long before the election.
I mean, just consider the guy who assaulted a reporter on election day - no impact, in no small part because so many people had already voted.
you can always drop them off day of. more people might hold their ballots till later because of Gianforte.
Like, it sucks that dude showed his true colors before the election was over but too late for it to matter, but that's an acceptable price to pay to make sure more people can vote, IMO.
not every state does that? jesus christ I just assumed that was the bare minimum
or do you mean real ballots you can cast right away and not just sample ballots to show voters what issues are being voted on?
Wait, you get sample ballots in the mail? I have to find what's on the ballot on my own or wait to see the sample ballot available at the polls.
I've considered trying to make a non-profit which sends out an info packet Ala what CA does. I fucking love it.
A sample ballot, in every permutation possible (so it contains the Republican ballot for Republican primary, Democratic for Democratic, etc). It lists every person on the ballot for each thing you'll be voting for, and contains no fields which you won't be voting for. It also lists party or occupation, as the case may be, for each candidate. It also contains voter information, where your voting location is, etc.
In addition to this, if there are propositions on the ballot, you get a voter information guide (warning: PDF, link to the one from last year's election), which contains the name, summary, arguments for/against, rebuttals for/against, financial analysis by the legislature, and full text of the propositions.
It's so great.
I wish Florida got this every time Florida Power shits out another deceptive Anti-solar bill. So far, voters are holding the line for solar well.
I'm not a big fan of mail in ballot because it hasn't actually been shown in increase turnout and it leaves the election much more open to election fraud (and voter fraud but I'm less concerned with that). Given the current geopolitical environment and the state of our democracy I don't think that can be dismissed as unrealistic.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I meant an actual ballot you can fill out and mail back, but a sample would be great as well.
Really? I thought states with mail in voting had higher participation. Washington or Oregon, I think. I will check when not on mobile.
Yeah, my main concern with mail in voting is basically the question "What's stopping one person in the household from grabbing all the ballots and filling them in for themselves?"
Sure, it may not happen a lot, but it will happen more often than one person collecting all of their families ballots at the polls and voting for them.
Or a neighbor for that matter.
Election fraud is difficult with in person voting as it is because there are people witnessing each submitted ballot and other votes are difficult to send in in substantial numbers because what happens if the actual voters show up. That's not the case with mail in voting and the much larger window and insecure chain of custody means the process is much more vulnerable to tampering, especially by the people who are running the election
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Sounds like this should be easily demonstrable.
Washington, Oregon, and Colorado hold all elections by mail-in ballot. Colorado only switched a few years ago so I don't know if any hard data is available, but for Washington and Oregon I know that voter participation increased dramatically for all elections and propositions, and they have regular audits to ensure that the registered voter list is kept up-to-date and clear of duplicate registrations, deceased individuals, etc., and from what I've seen, they have no larger instances of voter fraud than other states. And to be clear, voter fraud is a very rare crime to begin with.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I found this news article by the Washington post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/0-000002-percent-of-all-the-ballots-cast-in-the-2016-election-were-fraudulent/
Four documented cases of voter fraud in the 2016 election...
In Washington at least you have to sign the ballot, and the signature is checked against your registration one (at least according to https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faq_vote_by_mail.aspx)
Yeah like the Dakotas
Especially North Dakota
The only state that doesn't require registration to vote?
Pennsylvania does that too, which is nice. But some large percentage of Philadelphians, specifically, never get a driver's license. So the biggest blue bastion in the state doesn't benefit from DMV registration on nearly the level that the boonies where everyone drives does. It's another thing that feels like a nod toward universal registration that doesn't actually address the underlying issue.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
The idea that civic engagement goes hand in hand with vehicle ownership, however, is the most American thing in the world. We all know those ridesharing public transit riding inner city liberals aren't real Americans because they don't have cars, anyway!
Oh and we're also going to restrict early voting and limit polling places and move the polling places we do have a mile away from anything and not have mail in ballots
Boy a car would make all that easier wouldn't it, sucks to be an American without one. Should have thought of buying a car before getting pretensions about civic engagement!
(Sorry if I sound bitter, that's just because I am)
NNID: Hakkekage
Just gonna point out that every state that doesn't have same day registration is supposed to allow registration at the DMV because of Bill Clinton among others. So it isn't like Louisiana is special or it's some state plot against Philadelphians...though I find it funny that Bush 1 vetoed this legislation that is actually helpful to his party's rural base. Though I suppose the GOP would just rather have less people voting overall.
Especially the ones who think amendments are invalid.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
...by the people who would be committing election fraud. I'm mostly talking about election fraud.
Election fraud = The tampering of elections by those running the election
Voter fraud = People voting when they are ineligible to do so or otherwise fraudulently.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Most of them are triggered by interacting with the DMV or equivalent.
I don't know how other places do it, but here you need to go to the DMV to get any form of state issued ID which tends to be required for more than it should be these days. Of course, they have had to close a bunch of DMV offices in New Orleans over the last few budget crisis. Oddly, all the locations in the city proper were closed. The locations were moved to the suburbs where, coincidentally, the rich white people live. It's funny how that worked out.
Our elections are mainly handled by two groups.
Elderly ladies who take vote counting super seriously and would probably sooner die than betray their duty. Its a hard, thankless job, counting ballots.
Computer systems run by and created by uncaring oligarchs who could already order any level of corruption they wished on an utterly trivial level.
So all mail ballots doesn't change anything.
Turnout effect research generally showing no positive turnout effect in elections (except special elections): WaPo Denver Post Academic research 1 2
On vulnerability to election fraud the evidence is what is done now to combat traditional election fraud. The measures that take place - where the ballot box is sealed and displayed in plain sight and is monitored by members of both campaigns and neutral (volunteer and law enforcement) individuals and has a strict chain of custody is all designed to combat election fraud. The break in chain of custody, ballot box security and elimination of much of the risk in introducing extra ballots to the tally means its on its face less secure. It also makes voter fraud easier (see this story from March of a CO former GOP chairman committing voter fraud by mail) but I am more concerned with systematic fraud by the party in power.
From the National Election Defense
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
It's how I got most of my info for local elections while living in Maine.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
1) Kris Kobach, the most dangerous man in America on this matter who is not Jeff Sessions, is running for Governor of Kansas. Hopefully Brownback drags him down enough to not win.
2) Gov. Cooper called for a special session to draw new maps in response to the court rulings making the previous districting effort invalid. The NC legislature has decided to end that session without doing anything, which I believe means the courts will draw the new maps.
Washington's turnout is still nothing special
Oregon's is very high though
I'm not sure what the cause of that disparity is
here are Washington numbers (statewide mail-in voting went into effect in July 2012):
https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/voter-participation.aspx
mail-in voting didn't have a significant impact on our participation rates (though I'm still generally in favor of it because it's cheaper and easier)
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
The good part about this is that the election is over a year from now. There's a lot that's going to happen in the meantime and given his closeness to the Trump administration, there exists the chance that he could burnt by that.
https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-administration-rolls-back-civil-rights-efforts-federal-government?utm_campaign=sprout&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_content=1497528723