David Frum: America's voting system is a disgrace

[Winehole23]

When the polls close in most other democracies, the results are known almost instantly. Ballots are usually counted accurately and rapidly, and nobody disputes the result. Complaints of voter fraud are rare; complaints of voter suppression are rarer still.

The kind of battle we are seeing in Florida -- where Democrats and Republicans will go to court over whether early voting (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-early-voting-confusion-florida-20121104,0,2912372.story?track=rss) should span 14 days or eight -- simply does not happen in Germany, Canada, Britain or France. The ballot uncertainty that convulsed the nation after Florida's vote in 2000 could not happen in Mexico or Brazil.


Almost everywhere else, elections are run by impartial voting agencies. In France, elections are the responsibility of the Ministry of the Interior, which establishes places and hours of voting, prints ballots (France still uses paper) and counts the votes. In Germany, an independent federal returning officer oversees a complex state and federal voting system. In Canada, federal elections are managed by a specialized agency, Elections Canada. Mexico, emerging from a sad history of electoral manipulation, created in the 1990s a respected independent agency, the Federal Electoral Institute. Brazil has nationwide electronic voting, producing instantaneous, uncontested results.

(http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/02/opinion/obama-vision-for-america/index.html)No voting system is perfect. Britain has faced allegations of chronic fraud (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1271457/General-Election-2010-Postal-vote-fraud-amid-fears-bogus-voters-swing-election.html)in absentee balloting. As I write, Lithuanian politics are convulsed by allegations (http://news.yahoo.com/lithuania-president-vetoes-coalition-vote-fraud-row-155559483--business.html)of vote buying by one of its political parties.



But here's what doesn't happen in other democracies:



Politicians of one party do not set voting schedules to favor their side and harm the other. Politicians do not move around voting places to gain advantages for themselves or to disadvantage their opponents. In fact, in almost no other country do politicians have any say in the administration of elections at all.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/opinion/frum-election-chaos/index.html

[Winehole23]

In every other democracy, the vote is the means by which the people choose between the competing political parties -- not one more weapon by which the parties compete.


The United States is an exceptional nation, but it is not always exceptional for good. The American voting system too is an exception: It is the most error-prone, the most susceptible to fraud, the most vulnerable to unfairness and one of the least technologically sophisticated on earth. After the 2000 fiasco, Americans resolved to do better. Isn't it past time to make good on that resolution?

[LnGrrrR]

I agree with most of what Frum says, except for the electronic voting bit. Given that America's election is probably the most important in the world, the amount of people wanting to disrupt the voting system in one way or another is probably far too large for security experts to deal with at this time. (Also, making things electronic would likely make it easier to change massive amounts of votes quickly.)

That said, I haven't done any research on electronic voting companies or their products, so it could be that their security is airtight. (I doubt it though.)

[Clipper Nation]

Electronic voting is too easy to rig... the only foolproof system is paper ballots and public vote counting...

[Winehole23]

with a paper audit trail security issues could be mooted, more or less.


One thing that Friedman doesn't say is that this all wouldn't be such a problem if voting machines produced voter-verified paper audit trails of their actions. That is, after you vote, the machine could print out a paper record of your vote, move it into position in front of a plastic widow so you could verify the vote, and then move it along into a locked audit-box. Virtually every other kind of digital tabulating device does this, from EEGs to ATMs to cash-registers. The technology is trivial. And it would give us the ability to verify, after the fact, whether the votes had been correctly counted and transmitted from each machine.http://boingboing.net/2012/11/06/ohio-gop-secretary-of-state-or.html

[coyotes_geek]

with a paper audit trail security issues could be mooted, more or less.

http://boingboing.net/2012/11/06/ohio-gop-secretary-of-state-or.html

Yep. I hate those machines we have in Travis County.

[SnakeBoy]

Strange to see posters who always argue against voter id laws and claim there is no voter fraud now agreeing that there is too much fraud and we should be more like other democracies, all of which require proof of identity in order to vote.

[Winehole23]

concern about voting machines and local officials fiddling with voting regs and procedures is hardly co-terminous with being worried about sub-marginal issues like voter impersonation.

[MannyIsGod]

We still use paper ballots here in NM. They are scanned in (like scantron tests) but they are also kept for storage. You actually place it in the scantron machine yourself. Cool system actually.

Its sad when NM does something better than the rest of the nation, TBH.

[DarrinS]

Strange to see posters who always argue against voter id laws and claim there is no voter fraud now agreeing that there is too much fraud and we should be more like other democracies, all of which require proof of identity in order to vote.

this

[ElNono]

Strange to see posters who always argue against voter id laws and claim there is no voter fraud now agreeing that there is too much fraud and we should be more like other democracies, all of which require proof of identity in order to vote.

What forum you got that one from?

[Wild Cobra]

Strange to see posters who always argue against voter id laws and claim there is no voter fraud now agreeing that there is too much fraud and we should be more like other democracies, all of which require proof of identity in order to vote.
They are too blind to see their own hypocrisy.

[ElNono]

I would argue that what the OP actually is saying is that the paranoia over a non-issue like voter fraud can cripple the system.

[101A]

Yeah, whatever.

America is different.

Of course we're inefficient; most of those countries have citizens that manage to show up, AND present ID to vote; we're, apparently, a whole lot dumber and vastly less capable than they are.

[101A]

SnakeBoy got the topic started before I could.

[DarrinS]

I would argue that what the OP actually is saying is that the paranoia over a non-issue like voter fraud can cripple the system.

Eliminate opportunities for fraud and there won't be any paranoia. I don't know what system everyone would agree upon.

[DarrinS]

Yeah, whatever.

America is different.

Of course we're inefficient; most of those countries have citizens that manage to show up, AND present ID to vote; we're, apparently, a whole lot dumber and vastly less capable than they are.


Doesn't Canada require ID? Racist pigs.

[ElNono]

Eliminate opportunities for fraud and there won't be any paranoia. I don't know what system everyone would agree upon.

I don't particularly have a problem with voter ID. I definitely have a problem with trying to install a brand new voter ID system 8 months before the election.

Change the law next January and mandate ID nationwide. That way you have about 2 years to get everyone up and running on it.

[MannyIsGod]

Eliminate opportunities for fraud and there won't be any paranoia. I don't know what system everyone would agree upon.

LOL yeah because PARANOIA is rational.

[boutons_deux]

Electronic voting with paper trail, AND a paper receipt to the voter.

If America had any pride left, it would be horribly ashamed of its corrupt, ramshackle, abuse-prone voting "system".

Voter ID doesn't prevent COUNTING FRAUD.

[coyotes_geek]

I don't particularly have a problem with voter ID. I definitely have a problem with trying to install a brand new voter ID system 8 months before the election.

Change the law next January and mandate ID nationwide. That way you have about 2 years to get everyone up and running on it.

Sounds reasonable. Once you get past the details of how to make sure everyone has an opportunity to get an ID, free of charge, I really don't see a legitimate arguement to be against a voter ID law.

[ElNono]

Sounds reasonable. Once you get past the details of how to make sure everyone has an opportunity to get an ID, free of charge, I really don't see a legitimate arguement to be against a voter ID law.

Exactly. And by making it federal, you avoid certain states to try to set their own "special" rules (ie: allowing only certain IDs but not others). That's how it works on those other countries listed in the OP.

[Winehole23]

They are too blind to see their own hypocrisy.SnakeBoy's strawman has either obscured the words on the page, or you're blind to them.

[Wild Cobra]

Call it what you want WH, I don't care. I agree with how I interpreted his words. How did you interpret them?

[boutons_deux]

"states to try to set their own "special" rules"

FL prevents ex-felons from voting for several years after prison.

[boutons_deux]

When USA tried to have a national ID card, people killed it.

SS card is effectively a national ID.

[DarrinS]

LOL yeah because PARANOIA is rational.


Do you lock your doors? If so, why?

[boutons_deux]

something like 20% of eligible voters don't have an ID. so the problem is not "marginal" and easily, cheaply fixed.

Repug counting fraud would still be available, like OH 2004.

[DarrinS]

something like 20% of eligible voters don't have an ID. so the problem is not "marginal" and easily, cheaply fixed.



That is complete bullshit.

[Th'Pusher]

Do you lock your doors? If so, why?
Because there is strong evidence that you are more likely to be burgled if you leave your doors unlocked.

[boutons_deux]

That is complete bullshit.

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_voter_identification/

http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/info-01-2012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html

etc, etc.

[MannyIsGod]

Locking a door is being paranoid?

[DarrinS]

Locking a door is being paranoid?

No one would break in just because the opportunity is there. Try it out. Leave your iPad in an unlocked car.

[Wild Cobra]

No one would break in just because the opportunity is there. Try it out. Leave your iPad in an unlocked car.
Worse yet.

Leave it visible in a locked car and get a window broken too.

[coyotes_geek]

something like 20% of eligible voters don't have an ID. so the problem is not "marginal" and easily, cheaply fixed.

Repug counting fraud would still be available, like OH 2004.


That is complete bullshit.


http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_voter_identification/

http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/info-01-2012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html

etc, etc.

From your link....


As many as 10% of eligible voters do not have, and will not get, the documents required by strict voter ID laws.

lol boutons

[Th'Pusher]

No one would break in just because the opportunity is there. Try it out. Leave your iPad in an unlocked car.
There is evidence that leaving valuables in an unlocked car results in higher rates of theft. There is minimal evidence of the type of voter impersonation fraud that would be resolved by requiring voter ID.

[ElNono]

No one would break in just because the opportunity is there. Try it out. Leave your iPad in an unlocked car.

Do you get robbed all day every day? Why not if the opportunity is there?

[ElNono]

Do you run over puppies all the time? Why not if the opportunity is there?

[MannyIsGod]

Darrin I don't think you understand what you type.

[DarrinS]

There is evidence that leaving valuables in an unlocked car results in higher rates of theft. There is minimal evidence of the type of voter impersonation fraud that would be resolved by requiring voter ID.

What evidence would there be?

[DarrinS]

Do you run over puppies all the time? Why not if the opportunity is there?

There's no motivation to run over puppies.

[DarrinS]

Stop asking for ID to purchase alcohol and cigarettes. Just ask people if they are old enough -- problem solved.

[DarrinS]

I guess millions of minorities without ID can't drink or smoke. Oh well.

[ChumpDumper]

There's no motivation to run over puppies.Prove it.

[ElNono]

There's no motivation to run over puppies.

Are you saying puppies never get run over? Why not if the opportunity is there?

:sleep

[Th'Pusher]

What evidence would there be?
Accessibility is a key factor in buglary target selection.

[DarrinS]

Accessibility is a key factor in buglary target selection.

I agree.

What evidence would there be if I voted with my registration card and voted again with a friend's registration card?

[ElNono]

What evidence would there be if I voted with my registration card and voted again with a friend's registration card?

There would be more votes than registrations?

[ChumpDumper]

I agree.

What evidence would there be if I voted with my registration card and voted again with a friend's registration card?Did you conspire with your friend to vote the way he wanted or did you steal from your friend?

[Th'Pusher]

I agree.

What evidence would there be if I voted with my registration card and voted again with a friend's registration card?

Ah, so you have to disenfranchise 10% of the voting population in order to prove that in person voter fraud is a problem?

[Sense]

I'll just drop this here


QdpGd74DrBM

[ElNono]

I'll just drop this here


QdpGd74DrBM

Easily solvable by just requiring an ID, tbh

[SnakeBoy]

SnakeBoy's strawman has either obscured the words on the page, or you're blind to them.

What's the strawman? I said I find it strange you now think our system is fraudulent when you've made countless arguments that it is not. And that you think we should adopt a system like other democracies all of which require voter id, something you consider to be voter suppression. I find it strange, that's all.

[boutons_deux]

complete difference between fraudulent voting (on a scale to throw an election) and fraudulent vote counting (easy to steal an election, like OH 2004/Ken Blackwell)