US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies • Hacker News Board

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#231

Post by natch » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 6:53 PM UTC

karatestomp wrote: post #31

natch wrote: post #19

Off topic since this is about senators, but to nip a possible related thread in the bud, an important reason why remote voting for citizens is a bad idea is that it can enable massive scale vote manipulation through schemes to buy or otherwise influence votes. In the privacy of one's home, outside a controlled voting booth, the problem is exacerbated, counterintuitively. A voter at home or in another uncontrolled set…

Has this happened with members of the military or in states that already allow vote-by-mail? If not, why not?

It’s hard to know. And that’s pretty much the problem.

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#232

Post by karatestomp » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 6:54 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #225

karatestomp wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find any evidence of this with a search. Was this a joke? I can't tell.

It's not that they are fraudulent, but that people are voting as someone who may have the same name as them. The 6k article was probably a decade ago. This is a 2k article more recently. Maybe that's progess? https://www.phillyvoice.com/6abc-reports-it-found-dead-peopl...

That article doesn't appear to support 2k fraudulent votes, and may not even support a much smaller number. I gather a news organization put together a story claiming 2k maybe-fraudulent votes, then were asked to provide some examples for the election commission to look into, selected 20, those 20 were investigated, and zero were found to be related to election fraud.

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#233

Post by idontwantit » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 6:55 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #208

idontwantit wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voter ID laws are often used to disenfranchise poorer voters by creating bureaucracy mazes or DMV-like conditions to stop voters from acquiring the necessary credentials. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/chal... Anecdotally, as someone who was living in poverty before I got into this line of work, I did not have a state-issued ID and did not have time to waste or even the inclination to get one…

I'm genuinely curious. How did you handle identifying yourself to the police? Also, was this when you could still get a greyhound bus ticket without photo ID? Where you ever asked for ID when cashing or writing a check? It seems like ID is required for EVERYTHING these days, so I'm interested in some of these points.

> How did you handle identifying yourself to the police?

I never had the opportunity to find out

> Also, was this when you could still get a greyhound bus ticket without photo ID?

No clue

> Where you ever asked for ID when cashing or writing a check?

I don't really remember, didn't have much opportunity to cash checks anyway

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#234

Post by api » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 6:57 PM UTC

kfrzcode wrote: post #200

api wrote: post #163

I am deeply concerned about the security of any online voting system for anyone. It can be done securely, but I have zero confidence in the IT ability of our government to actually achieve security. The past record of pathetic electronic voting machine security speaks to this.

How can it be done securely? Just curious about the updated models

Secure cryptography, paper trail, and 2FA would be a start. So far most US voting machines have been laughably pathetic, like security on par with a mom and pop store and their MS Access database.

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#235

Post by triceratops » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 6:58 PM UTC

bargl wrote: post #187

alasdair_ wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Everything on the news looks ironic I was born and grew up in Scotland. I remember the first time I watched Fox News after moving to the states - for almost fifteen minutes I genuinely thought I was watching some (honestly pretty funny) satire.

I get really frustrated when people only mention Fox News and not CNN/MSNBC in the same sentence. There are people on Fox who are good, I.E. Chris Wallace. I mean he's my only example, but Jon Stewart did a skit with him and the quote that got me was, "how many times have you seen your show on my show?" It was a nod to the fact that Chris Wallace does actual news not opinion pieces. I'd actually say he's better and l…

This is prime r/enlightenedcentrism material.

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#236

Post by natch » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 6:59 PM UTC

runako wrote: post #66

malandrew wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not, but mainly due to scale. The number of people who vote remotely is so few that the amount of fraud you can get through without being detected makes it not worth the effort.

Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington and Utah conduct their elections entirely by mail. This covers perhaps 10+ million registered voters. At what level would you consider the scale sufficient for these effects to appear?

It all depends on the cultural context. In a place where people fiercely guard and take pride in their right to a secret ballot (such as many parts of the US) it’s not likely to be a problem. In fledgling democracies it’s more likely. So it would be foolish to pin it down to a single level.

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#237

Post by triceratops » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 6:59 PM UTC

kyleblarson wrote: post #134

jagged-chisel wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You were. Satire marketed as news.

As if CNN, MSNBC are any different.

r/enlightenedcentrism

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#238

Post by a_wild_dandan » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 7:02 PM UTC

bobthepanda wrote: post #51

Uehreka wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t need to be a power-grab (“We’re taking over the election to make sure it’s done right”). In all likelihood it would be some sort of funding incentive (“If you resolve to do vote-by-mail, we’ll give you the money to hire people and buy equipment to do it, and even throw in some money for infrastructure as a cherry on top”).

The problem with this approach is that it leaves a patchwork solution and still leaves the most disenfranchised out of the running, because ideology trumps free money. See: ACA Medicare expansion.

Perfect isn't the enemy of good. Let's use the patchwork solution on our journey to a better one. (As long as it's actually an improvement!)

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#239

Post by karatestomp » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 7:02 PM UTC

natch wrote: post #231

karatestomp wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has this happened with members of the military or in states that already allow vote-by-mail? If not, why not?

It’s hard to know. And that’s pretty much the problem.

Surely investigations or monitoring have been conducted, I'd expect, in some cases, by folks belonging to A Certain Party that tends to oppose making voting easier and so would have strong motivations to turn up problems and, particularly, actual voter fraud, then make those findings very well and widely known. Have the officials performing those complained of inadequate tools or transparency to spot voter fraud?

I'd very much expect so, if it is hard to know and that's pretty much the problem. So perhaps they have.

Re: US Senators Introduce Resolution to Allow Remote Voting During Emergencies

#240

Post by triceratops » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 7:03 PM UTC

buckminster wrote: post #171

madhadron wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Washington and Oregon only have remote voting. It works extremely well, is less open to voter suppression and tampering, and lets you sit down and research what you're voting for in comfort. A ballot is mailed to you, you fill it out, seal it up, and mail it back or put it in one of the many ballot drop boxes. Electronic voting? Absolutely not. But it's hard to have cyberwarfare campaigns against paper trails.

Sure you don't have cyberwarfare, but you do have old-fashioned vote selling and coercion. Postal voting denies many women a free vote.

> Postal voting denies many women a free vote.

How many? Is it more than the number of people who can't vote in person on election day due to work or inability to travel to voting places? If it's not, vote-by-mail still wins in aggregate. If it is, then it sounds like there's a serious domestic abuse issue in the broader society that needs to be addressed.