What Say You?
What about Australia’s compulsory voting rule? I read a few weeks ago that the penalty Down Under for not voting in any election is AUS$50.
If this were implemented here, the penalty could be, say, $250 of our money....14% of the population made decisions for the other 86%. Scary, huh?
This is one of the unavoidable mathematical problems of a democracy. As it stands, this problem only involves two viable candidates. Imagine what would happen if there were three, four, or five such candidates. Hooray for diversity of choice and all that, but it also means that each candidate would actually need a smaller percentage of the vote to win elections. Even if near total voter turnout could be achieved, any winning candidate would assume power based upon the votes of an unavoidably mathematical minority.
Fortunately, the Founding Fathers understood these problems and established a Republic instead of a true democracy.
Posted by K
10/27/2004 at 11:15 AM
I say make it as difficult as it needs to be!
Require a reasonable amount of information, enough to do a conclusive confirmation of voter identity and eligibility. Have a national database (but not an unlimited one) so that states can check for multi-state registrations. Require state-issued ID at the voting place. Make absentee ballots more limited, and double-checked.
Why make it easier to vote? I argue that it should be harder! If a person is too incompetent to completely and correctly fill out a voter registration form, then I would argue that they are too incompetent to vote! People have 4 FREAKING YEARS in between presidential elections - if they waited until it was too late to register, then TOUGH LUCK.
If people do not wish to vote, that’s also fine with me. Not everyone will have that much of an interest in their government (although they should), but if they don’t wish to vote in the first place, they most likely won’t be able to make an informed vote anyway.
I’d rather have 10 informed votes for Kerry than 1 uninformed vote for Bush.
Posted by chublogga
10/27/2004 at 12:00 PM
Make it easier to vote? HELL NO! Motor Voter BS, and the Liberal Loonies registering every welfare queen and homeless bum they can dredge up really pisses me off. A national ID card could be problematic, but since there is no GUARANTEED ‘right’ to vote in the Constitution, limiting the vote to ONLY those who pay taxes would be a damn good start. Old saw, but now more true than ever; those who rob Peter to pay Paul, will ALWAYS have Paul’s vote.
Yes, a national ID system is part of the solution, regretably. Terrorism and it’s handmaiden, Voter Fraud, have made in necessary. When you can vote in every state in ever precinct if you have the money to fly or drive there, we need to know who citizens are, and if they are registered to vote somewhere else. I also propose voter receipts that they can take with them if the so choose. Sure, go electronic but back it up with two paper ballots with identical numbers on them, and offer a third for the voter to take with them. We would then have an audit trail for fraud. Count electronicly, recount the generated paper ballots, and compare. There would have to be laws to govern the differences in the automatic paper ballot recount and the electronic total, and there would have to be a time limit on all procedures, but by all means, let’s modernize the vote so we can track fraud. Voter Fraud in a time of war against terrorism, IS TERRORISM.
Oh, and by the way, shoot fake voters. SHOOT THEM.....it’s treason.
Voting isn’t another govt. “entitlement”. It’s a privledge and a responsibilty, and it’s hight time that people start treating it as such.
By that-moonbats- I mean being an informed voter-not just about the issues but about little things like where your polling place is, or checking your “ballot” before it gets recorded. It also means taking responsibilty for your mistakes. If you didn’t get registered in time, or forgot to re-register after you got married or moved, or didn’t bother finding out where you were supposed to vote BEFORE election day, or didn’t double check your ballot, blame yor own fool self, not “voter disenfranchisement.”
Btw-As an election Judge I’m partiallly here to help you. If you need help but don’t ask and then screw-up don’t blame me or the system for your ignorance.
I’m tellin’ ya, I #$%^@*% the democrats!!
Barb*exasperated election judge*Posted by Annoying Little Twerp
10/27/2004 at 08:56 PM
Use anonymous biometrics (e.g. thumbprints) instead of a national ID card.
When the voter goes to the polling place (or submits a absentee ballot), after verifying registration, biometric information is submitted anonymously. If the software/hardware/network exists to check the biometrics against other voters in real time, the voter is checked to make sure that they have not already voted in the current election. If the hardware is not fast enough, then biometric info is only used to deal with provisional ballots after the polls close. This at least has the chance of measureing multiple voting, provides an evidence trail for convictions, and potentially keeps fraudulent ballots out of the polls.
For felons, the biometric could be checked against law enforcement data bases.
For non-citizens, the biometric database from elections if kept. When someone applies for citizenship, if there is evidence of illegal voting, the citizenship application is rejected.
At the very least, a method like this would provide some deterrent to voter fraud. If the biometric information is not coupled to names and addresses, it should not be particularly useful for governmental abuse.
Posted by Spiney Widgmo
10/27/2004 at 09:03 PM
Require:
Positive ID when registering.
Proof of citizenship when registering.
Proof of residence when registering.
Cancellation of registration at former residence when re-registering at a new location.
Positive ID when showing up at the polls on election day.Jail time for anyone who commits fraud or votes in more than one place.
Just my opinion.
