Re: Absentee voters

[Paul E Condon <pecondon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

With open-ballot voting there would be a possibility of voters selling
their vote. Should we also have a market in votes with open bidding,
and payment ( via PayPal, perhaps )? Should income from vote sale be
taxed, like income from gambling? Should it be a matter of public record
who paid for a vote? Interesting... ;-)

On Sun, Mar 18, 2007 at 11:54:25AM -0600, Evan Daniel Ravitz wrote:
> 
> Perhaps we should give voters the choice of secret-ballot voting with 
> all it's problems, or OPEN-ballot voting, which could eliminate most 
> fraud by keeping a record of the voter, timestamp etc. like with 
> credit card transactions. This would also permit voting by internet or 
> phone. All open-ballot votes could be published on govt websites to 
> reveal any problems, and to let anyone use their own software to check 
> the announced vote totals.
> 
> I recall a survey that showed some 2/3 of voters didn't care who knew 
> how they voted.
> 
> Evan
> 
>                    http://Vote.org
>          Taking the "mock" out of democracy!
>    Evan Ravitz, founder (303)440-6838 evan@xxxxxxxx
> "Fool's gold exists because there is real gold." -Rumi
> also: http://Vote.org/photos  http://Vote.org/paradise
> 
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007, R. Mercuri wrote:
> 
> >Ralph --
> >
> >I was not trying to be arrogant, I was just making a statement of fact.
> >
> >Here is another statement of fact -- the following sentence is an enigma:
> >
> >>The most appropriate voting method is the one where we can match a living
> >>breathing eligible citizen with an anonymous ballot.
> >
> >If one matches a living breathing eligible citizen with an anonymous 
> >ballot, the ballot is no longer anonymous. That is indeed the enigma of 
> >the voting problem, which is unresolvable. Anonymous voting is the reason 
> >for many of the problems you have described, but the reasons for anonymous 
> >voting currently outweigh the need to eliminate it (though some feel it 
> >should be eliminated, I am not among them). Some countries do not have 
> >anonymous voting -- in the UK, all ballots are numbered, and an election 
> >officer can later bring your ballot to you and ask you to validate it. I 
> >do not believe that this is something we want to encourage in the USA 
> >(especially in a climate where federal prosecutors are losing their jobs 
> >because it is not in lock-step with the executive branch's position).
> >
> >In general, this email dialogue has been mixing apples and oranges and 
> >pears and mangoes, and this is causing the problem we are having in 
> >communicating. Here are some examples: problems related to aspects of 
> >voting (such as absenteeism, anonymity) are not the same as considering 
> >the lack of effective procedures for that aspect; problems with the status 
> >quo in elections are directly rooted in the laws and customs that keep 
> >that status quo in force and need to be addressed by changing those laws 
> >and customs; and the way to eliminate problems with election fraud is not 
> >to make it harder to vote, but rather to make it harder to commit election 
> >fraud.
> >
> >For example, the NJ procedure for permanent absentees does send out an 
> >"are you there" message to permanent absentees, and there's a form that 
> >has to be returned each year (yes, it could be fradulated, but this would 
> >be a felony). NJ may be unique in sending out a sample ballot to ALL 
> >registered voters for all municipal elections and primaries. It is also 
> >illegal for the post office to deliver that sample ballot if the person no 
> >longer resides at that location. The post office must return the sample 
> >ballot to the county, who marks the registrant in the book. If the post 
> >office is corrupt and returns ballots improperly, and the people shows up 
> >to vote (or tries to register as an absentee), they will be required to 
> >demonstrate proof of residence, but they can still vote. Blah, blah, blah, 
> >etc. Procedures.
> >
> >The devil is in the details. If you have no effective procedures for 
> >making sure that dead people or non-residents are not continuing to vote, 
> >then you can be sure that they will be voting in the precincts as well as 
> >by absentee. As well, if the laws regarding buying votes or coercion are 
> >not properly enforced, then such things as "voting parties" may occur. As 
> >I said, I vote absentee. I know how I voted, I know that nobody bought or 
> >sold my vote or changed it up to the point when my ballot was cast, I know 
> >my vote was cast securely and anonymously, and I have strong reason to 
> >believe that it will be hand-counted in the event of a recount. 
> >Unfortunately, I have NONE of these assurances if I vote in my precinct. 
> >Yes, it would be great to have even MORE assurances (such as ones that 
> >confirm that my vote did not disappear) but I am not willing to give up my 
> >anonymous ballot in order to gain those assurances, so at the point of 
> >casting my ballot I must trust the procedures and laws and expect that 
> >they will be enforced.
> >
> >It is the responsibility of your citizens to make sure that your absentees 
> >have the same confidence in your absentee system as I do here in New 
> >Jersey. Cleaning up the corruption through prosecution of any corrupt 
> >election officials would be the first step. Changing the laws would be the 
> >second step. Making sure that the procedures adequately address the 
> >intention of the laws would be the third step. All of these steps can (and 
> >should) be worked on in parallel.
> >
> >I hope you all can recognize that I am not shrugging off your concerns or 
> >complaints. What I am saying, though, is that you need to define where 
> >these problems fall (procedures, laws, customs, politics, etc.), and then 
> >address them appropriately, rather than just fling up your hands and say 
> >that "since there are problems with absentee ballots we should get rid of 
> >absentee ballots." You must differentiate what the sources of the problems 
> >are first, which is what I am not seeing in the emails from your group 
> >yet. If you go back through all of this exchange and separate out the 
> >issues and identify the different sources of the various problems, I think 
> >that will help put the direction for the solutions into focus.
> >
> >I regret that I am quite busy, so I will not have time to further dialogue 
> >here, but I encourage you all to continue the discussion and do feel free 
> >to keep me on the cc list of this thread.
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Rebecca Mercuri.
> >
> 

-- 
Paul E Condon           
pecondon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx