SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A federal judge recently ruled that banning photos of ballots was unconstitutional:
The ruling clears the way for New Hampshire voters to post their ballot selfies during the first-in-the-nation presidential primaries early next year.
New Hampshire's ban went into effect September 2014 and made it illegal for anyone to post a photo of a marked ballot and share it on social media. The violation was punishable by a fine of up to $1,000.
[...] Mashable's Juana Summers adds that the judge found "there was no evidence that vote-buying or voter coercion were current problems in New Hampshire."
This seems like an interesting legal question, with good arguments on both sides:
- For the ban: If a photograph of a marked ballot is taken from the voting booth, then the voter can verify their vote with an interested third party, including those that would seek to purchase or coerce their vote.
- Against the ban: Such a photograph is protected free speech, and thus cannot be legally banned.
What do Soylentils think about this?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 25 2015, @02:08AM
> Other than that, there hasn't been a single scandal about vote by mail. You still need to supply documentation to get on the voter roles,
I've posted this story before. Here it is again.
A girl I grew up with married a fox news 'fan.' In fact, he actually worked on the Kerry 'swiftboat' campaign and they got invited to (and attended) one of Bush inaugural balls for his efforts. She's not particularly political, just uncritically goes along to get along. Although I did have to tell her to quit forwarding me the raving looney chain-emails that circulate among people like that.
They live in San Francisco where voting republican will not make an iota of difference in presidential election results. But her family lives in Ohio. So they registered to vote by mail in Ohio at the address of one of her family members. When she told me about it, I showed her their names on the voter registration rolls for Ohio (which are public record) and she freaked out because all it takes is for someone to put two and two together and now they are facing felony charges. Lucky for her, no one is looking for republican voter fraud unlike the dedicated campaigns to find voter fraud related to the democratic party.
Now, that's not coercion (well she basically votes the way her husband tells her to) but it is a straight up example of fraud that was made 1000x easier by mail-in ballots.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday August 25 2015, @03:49AM
but it is a straight up example of fraud that was made 1000x easier by mail-in ballots.
Ohio does not have Vote by Mail. They have absentee ballots, which can be sent by mail, but that is NOT
the same thing, and EVERY state has absentee ballots.
So its not the same thing as vote by mail, where ALL ballots are mailed out every in-state voter.
If you are out of state, (not in Washington), you have to vote absentee, you can't use the normal vote
by mail.
If they were not legal residents of Ohio when they applied for the absentee ballot, then shame on Ohio,
for allowing them to register.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 25 2015, @04:28AM
> they have absentee ballots, which can be sent by mail, but that is NOT the same thing,
You seem really invested in splitting hairs. Its a difference of degree, not kind. The exact same exploit works in either case.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 25 2015, @08:30AM
So why even bother banning people from posting selfies of themselves voting? Why reduce freedoms for zero real gain? It's clear that no idiot is coercing those selfie idiots to be idiots, they're being idiots of their own free will.
All you have to do is make it legal to wiretap without consent people who are trying to coerce your vote and make sure that those who do coerce go to jail for a long enough time.
That way you make bosses etc more nervous about trying such shit.
In fact the real pros in power just coerce those that continue to make gerrymandering easier. It's only the stupid amateurs who try to _force_ people to vote a certain way.
As for getting paid to vote, perhaps its unethical but I find it hard to feel much outrage against people who sell their vote willingly if it's their own vote to sell (e.g. they're not voting on behalf of anyone else but themselves, they're not representing other interests but their own). To me they're stupid if they sell their vote for too cheap.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 25 2015, @11:04AM
Why reduce freedoms for zero real gain?
Whether there is gain or not, that doesn't affect the constitutionality of banning such pictures. That is, it's still a violation of the first amendment.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 25 2015, @06:15PM
You are right, it is the photo that is the problem, not the posting of the photo.
But posting it makes it really easy to prove that they took the photo.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday August 25 2015, @07:14PM
You seem really invested in splitting hairs. Its a difference of degree, not kind. The exact same exploit works in either case.
No it doesn't.
Because states with All Mail ballots will not send ballots out of state except to APO/FPO/DPO (military) addresses.
Its not 1929 any more. Computerized systems weed out a great deal of out dated information, such as people moving
out of state, or simply from one town to another. These computerized checks happen in all states, but are especially effective in
vote by mail states.
Oregon's Secretary of state says [washingtonmonthly.com]:
What about fraud? Coercion? Stolen ballots? Other election mischief? After hundreds of millions of ballots cast, the actual incidents in Oregon- and then, only of individual voter fraud — can be counted on two hands.
They've been voting by mail since 2000.
Washington's Secretary of state says:
Contrary to allegations made by opponents to vote-by-mail, there have been no substantiated reports of voter coercion, such as a domineering spouse or a corrupt nursing home employee. It DOESN'T happen.
Allegations of Fraud
The most common criticism of voting by mail
is that it provides greater opportunity for fraud.
While this makes for interesting headlines, it
rarely proves to be true. Claims that elections
conducted through the mail have increased risk
over elections conducted at polls do not take into
account the levels of security implemented in
jurisdictions that vote heavily by mail.
States that have limited mail voting often lack
the security measures that ensure that the
person registered to vote was the person who
voted the ballot. Because these states lack a
structured security system to handle volumes of
mail ballots, journalists are frequently unaware
of the extensive security measures that are in
place in states deliberately structured for mail
voting. Critics often assume that absentee ballots
are simply accepted and counted, and are
often unaware of the crucial element that each
signature is examined against the signature on
file.
Following the 2004 General Election and the
subsequent gubernatorial recounts, both political
parties spent a combined total of $6.5 million
contesting the election and attempting to prove
that fraud occurred during the course of the
election. Despite the numerous problems with the
election cited by the judge, none were directly
linked to voting by mail
.
Contrary to allegations made by opponents to
vote-by-mail, there have been no substantiated
reports of voter coercion, such as a domineering
spouse or a corrupt nursing home employee.
Voters always have the option of coming to the
county elections department to cast their ballots.
Implementation of the statewide voter registration
database in 2006 has helped to ensure that only
those people eligible to vote receive ballots.
The voter registration database is screened daily for
duplicate registrations, monthly for deceased
voters, and quarterly for felons. The screenings
for duplicate registrations are especially important
since they contribute to the perception of voting
fraud and the assumption that people are voting
multiple ballots. In 2006:
• 39,814 duplicate voter registrations were
identified and cancelled accordingly;
• 40,105 registrations of deceased voters
were identified and cancelled accordingly;
• 4,500 registrations of convicted felons
were identified and cancelled accordingly;
and
• 91,954 active and inactive voter
registrations were cancelled for a variety of
reasons, including:
upon the voter’s request;
the voter moved and failed to
reregister;
the voter moved out of state; or
the voter had been on inactive
status for more than two federal
elections, a time period established
in federal law.
Conclusion
Voting by mail increases turnout, simplifies the
elections process, and promotes an informed
citizenry. But above all else, the people of
Washington strongly support it.
http://www.sos.wa.gov/documentvault/WashingtonStatesVotebyMailExperienceOctober2007-2066.pdf [wa.gov]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 25 2015, @08:51AM
Now, that's not coercion (well she basically votes the way her husband tells her to) but it is a straight up example of fraud that was made 1000x easier by mail-in ballots.
It also makes it easier for innocent people to vote. Are you suggesting we take it away merely because it's abused in some cases?