You want to strengthen democracy? Get rid of elections.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

The idea that all votes must be cast on the same day, or at least that if you want to vote on other days you have to jump through extra hoops to do it, is a weird one.

Rather than having an election, declare October to be "election month". Turnout would rocket, voter suppression would be much, much harder, and the cost of keeping polling booths open would be a negligible fraction of the money already spent on electioneering.

[Little Star]

1. I like the idea.

[el_bryanto]

2. Or make election day a holiday

But this idea has merit - they would have to have fewer polling places I am guessing, and longer lists at each polling place?

Bryant

[truebluegreen]

3. Or vote by mail...

The Post Office can always find us (maybe that's why the pukes want to get rid of it ) so just mail everybody a pre-stamped ballot.

But I agree a single election day creates a bottleneck, and a problem for too many people.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

5. Voting by mail is still a hoop to jump through.

I think you'll see higher turnout if polling stations are kept open longer.

[truebluegreen]

8. Doesn't Oregon (or maybe Washington) already do this?

And I believe they have the highest turnout in the country.

I would automatically register everyone to vote (I don't know exactly how that process would work but I'm sure someone could figure out an efficient method) and mail everyone a ballot.

I don't see the hoop.

[Bluenorthwest]

26. Both Oregon and Washington vote by mail. Oregon has done so for a longer time.

nt

[truebluegreen]

36. Thought so. Thanks! nt

[Bluenorthwest]

15. Why would anyone want to go to a polling station? That is a hoop to jump through.

Vote by mail is the ultimate convenience. Ballot comes in the mail. You get about two weeks to complete it and return it by mail or to an elections office or other drop off site. I can drop your ballot off for you if you get the flu. What you propose is that rather than do that, people should have to go to a place they have to look up, find, get to,spend time in line, pass muster from opposition poll watchers, get a ballot moments prior to marking it and handing it over as soon as you are finished. This means less prep, less options, required travel, required interaction with others and an election that will cost much, much more while making it harder to vote rather than easier. In 2010 when 'no one voted' our turnout was in the top 5. Historically we are 6th most voting State, this is increasing constantly since vote by mail came to be.

[UTUSN]

4. Actually, one of the early Church's first "solutions" was to turn down 4-yr elections

The winning argument for lifetime popeship was that terms of 4 yrs would lead to perpetual electioneering.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. That's how we do it in Oregon, and in Washington. We vote by mail. We have about 2 weeks with our

ballots, we can send them or hand deliver them until the end of what the rest of you call 'Election Day'. No hoops. No lines to stand in. No poll workers, no id checks on voting day.
We get better than average turnout, especially midterm turn out. In 2010 we broke records and elected a bunch of Democrats while DU is still complaining about other places where apparently the turn out was dismal.
The general idea about voting here is that it should be easy to do. Obviously we have a 'paper trail' as well.The only 'electronic voting' done in Oregon involves a special program for people with disabilities which make it hard for them to mark a regular ballot. For them, elections officials come to them with i-Pads with a program that allows a ballot to be marked in various alternative ways, which the voters does. The i-Pad is then used to print up a 'regular ballot' identical to what others use, and no record of the vote is kept in the pad, it is a hard copy ballot just like the rest of us use.

[Nye Bevan]

10. Sounds like the perfect system.

I wish the rest of the country would do this.

[Bluenorthwest]

19. It is a very good system. No system is perfect all have flaws and weaknesses but this one works

so much better than most. When I saw those long lines in Florida and other States I felt so sorry for those people being made to do that. I had such great love for them for enduring the lines to cast a vote, but also great anger at those who made them do that. I can not fathom how that is acceptable to any American, in any Party.
The system in Oregon is made to make voting easier to get more people to take part. And it works.

[brooklynite]

35. Or, your Ward Leader, Union Head, Boss can pick up your paper ballot....

...fill it out for you and mail it in.

No system is perfect from fraud.

[truebluegreen]

37. So you're saying that being a Master Forger will be a job requirement

for all Ward Leaders, Union Heads and Bosses. Right?



FYI, when voting by this method, you have to sign a document--not the ballot itself--to confirm your identity and eligibility. Just as you have to sign in at a polling station. I don't see the difficulty.

[brooklynite]

38. You assume that vote fruad is limited to stealing votes...

...it also constitutes "helping people vote". Most jurisdictions have a specific ban against your Union Leader or Boss going into the polling place with you to make sure you vote the right way. Now, they just need me to sign a blank affidavit and then turn the ballot over.

[truebluegreen]

39. I don't assume that at all.

But whatever, dude. If you or anyone signs a blank affidavit he deserves whatever results.

edited to add: and yes, those oh-so-powerful thugs down at Union Hall are a huge (Hugh!) effing problem.

[Half-Century Man]

7. Election Day as a national holiday

That one has been tossed around for years. It's a good idea, so we probably won't do it.

[truebluegreen]

11. But even on national holidays people still have to work.

It would help, though. Even moving it to Saturday would help.

[Capt. Obvious]

13. Less people would vote if it were a holiday

People aren't going to miss a trip to the beach or wherever to vote.

If they don't vote now they're not voting because they get a day off.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. Here in Oregon, one can simply take one's ballot to the beach or wherever, vote there and drop it

off on the way home. No need to miss anything.

[Capt. Obvious]

21. Then there's no need for a holiday

if everyone votes by mail.

That would never happen though.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. It happens here every election. Everyone votes by mail. Also in Washington.

Each State makes election rules for that State. I assume the States who like having long lines and polling guards and ID checks would not vote by mail because it would increase voter participation and that is what they oppose, voters voting.

[Capt. Obvious]

27. I know

The states with R controlled houses would never allow vote by mail.

And some D states do love polling stations.

Either way - national voting by mail for the executive will never happen.

[Half-Century Man]

24. Non-paid holiday unless.....

Non-paid holiday unless show proof from polling place.

[RC]

9. All voting must be done on hand countable, paper ballots.

Except for the ballot scanners, all voting machines must be made illegal. The software and firmware for the ballot scanners will be open to anyone that wants to look at it and not be the secret intellectual property of any entity.
Election districts can NOT be defined by political partisans, i.e., state legislators. Except for large bodies of water and state boundaries, all voting districts must be reasonable square or rectangle and be defined by the number of people living in them. Gerrymandering must be made illegal.
Secret, unaccounted for money must be removed from the election campaign. Corporations, being business, not being real persons, cannot contribute to any election campaign. Only real people, on the record, can contribute to election campaigns.

[truebluegreen]

14. + a bazillion

On all counts, especially for countable paper ballots....one wonders if the recent race in South Carolina (Colbert-Busch v Sanford) would have looked any different if they hadn't used 100% unverifiable electronic voting machines.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

16. I would say exactly the reverse - electronic voting is better and more secure, if implemented well.

Remember the paper trail in Florida in 2000? See how well that worked?

It's impossible to implement any voting system such that it can't be tampered with, electronically or on paper.

But it's really not hard to implement an electronic voting system such that it's provably impossible to tamper with it *without it being easy to find out that you've done so*. And there's no way to do that on paper.

[Bluenorthwest]

23. Got any shred of support for any of your assertions? You want electronic voting and polling places.

Electronic voting has been shown to be tamper easy. And of course there is no way to prove it. I keep copies of my ballot.
Your method would never ever pass here. But elections are made by the States, so you could advocate for your favorite methods in your State, perhaps the best way is to have each voter whisper their choices into the ear of a Republican and let the Republican keep a tally....

[Donald Ian Rankin]

30. Well, I can tell you how to do it, if that's sufficient...

Give each voter a randomly-generated public and private key. Publish public keys on the electoral roll, and publish a list of hashes of combinations of keys and who that hashed vote was for, and a list of the combined hashes of people who didn't vote.
As well as their normal votes, let voters cast "obfuscation votes", which talley one vote for each candidate on the list, each with a different private key, if they choose.

By using my private key, I can confirm that my vote has been cast for the candidate I chose (or for nobody). And by comparing the number of hashes to the electoral roll, you can check that no votes have been added.

No-one without my private key can find out who my vote was cast for (so if the system is rigged, you do lose the secrecy of the ballot, but not the ability to verify the voting). And even if I reveal a private key I have that matches a vote I cast, no-one can check that it wasn't from an obfuscatory universal vote.

[RC]

28. Computer can be made to output any results wanted, regardless of input.

Without a hand marked paper ballot, there is absolutely no way to be sure the electronic vote reflects the will of the voter.
Recounts using electronic votes are worthless. For security and accuracy, they need to be backed up by the hand marked, paper ballot anyway, so why not eliminate the extra step, expense and uncertainty of electronic voting?
Florida? That was a butterfly ballot. Where are they used today? I'm betting they are not.

This is what is used today. Both machine and hand countable.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

31. Ballot boxes can be lost or stuffed.

See my #30 for a better system, which disproves many of your claims.

[RC]

32. Too complicated.

Complications makes stuff harder to understand and therefore easier to obfuscate and defeat.
Any grade school kid can understand a simple paper ballot. The same cannot be said of any electronic voting. Many adults have trouble.
BTY where is the voter verified paper trail with your system? Any computer system can be made to output anything you want, regardless of input. hash marks or not. To most people, computer are black boxes. Put something in, magic happens, get something out. However, there is no magic. Only strings of easily manipulated 1's and 0's and hordes of corrupt people wanting to control the output.

BTY, I have been playing with computers since the Apple 2 and the IBM 5150 PC Personal Computer from 1981. With computer related and ITS jobs since then, till my retirement 2 years ago.
What's your expertise?

[Capt. Obvious]

12. We should have an Intelligent Designer pick our leaders

Would solve everything.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

18. Well, you win the "Better stalking skills than reading comprehension" award... N.T.

[Capt. Obvious]

22. You win the Graham4Anything award

Enjoy

[SQUEE]

17. Sentence people to the office via lottery.

And automatically disqualify anyone that actually campaigns for office.
It is said that power corrupts.... I think it is more a case of power attracting the corruptible.

[RC]

29. You seem to have a good point --

I think it is more a case of power attracting the corruptible.

It is hard to argue with that.

[brooklynite]

33. How does moving voting to October save money on electioneering?

Candidates will just start campaigning a month earlier.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

34. It doesn't, I think you may have misunderstood the OP. N.T.