Papers

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

I still think internet based voting would solve a multitude of problems, including the enormous cost of current elections. The feds could run their elections on their servers, states on theirs, and locals on theirs. They could even have different registration and address requirements this way.

Those w/o computers/internet could do so at the public library or other public buildings with access.

That way we could have fraud on a truly massive scale.

If you can't make the effort to get your ass to a poling place, your vote shouldn't count.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

That way we could have fraud on a truly massive scale.

If you can't make the effort to get your ass to a poling place, your vote shouldn't count.

I guess you vote your corporate shares in person at every annual and special meeting of shareholders. Well, I'm not so lucky as having a schedule that allows me to make those arrangements, so I vote my shares over the internet with a username/pin.

I would be willing to bet the global corps that are doing this have tested against fraud, otherwise a takeover of the corps would be easy.

I'm assuming you're saying the same about all US citizens overseas: if they can't get their asses to the polling places, then your vote shouldn't count. Seems like a pretty good slap in the face to the military and diplomatic corps.

[pjorourke]

CT, for most companies, in reality the only votes that count are the institutional shares which typically control enough votes to pass or kill most shareholder votes.A well run company knows where these votes stand before the proxy is even sent out.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

I'm assuming you're saying the same about all US citizens overseas: if they can't get their asses to the polling places, then your vote shouldn't count. Seems like a pretty good slap in the face to the military and diplomatic corps.

They have to make the effort to get an absentee ballot, fill it out and send it back. Thats enough effort.

I'm not sure we need elections decided by someone sitting on their couch who during a commercial break from Oprah, decides to vote instead of buying something they don't need on ebay. Effective democracy requires an informed an motivated electorate.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

They have to make the effort to get an absentee ballot, fill it out and send it back. Thats enough effort.

.

Some people efforts are concentrated in just making a living. Voting should not require some running of the land mine test IMHO. One person one vote, remember?

Originally Posted by pjorourke

. Effective democracy requires an informed an motivated electorate.

Are you saying we do not have an ''Effective democracy'' or that only those that pass the ''Effective democracy'' test should be able to vote?

[pjorourke]

Lets just say that elections are more important than who wins American Idol or Dancing with the Stars and thus ought to take a bit more commitment for participating.

[atlcomedy]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

They have to make the effort to get an absentee ballot, fill it out and send it back. Thats enough effort.

I'm not sure we need elections decided by someone sitting on their couch who during a commercial break from Oprah, decides to vote instead of buying something they don't need on ebay. Effective democracy requires an informed an motivated electorate.

Now if they were watching Fox News and when it went to commercial & they could vote from the couch...now that would be ok (he said with sarcasm)

Originally Posted by pjorourke

Lets just say that elections are more important than who wins American Idol or Dancing with the Stars and thus ought to take a bit more commitment for participating.

I disagree a citizen needs to show "commitment" to participate.

The primary priority ought to be to ensure the integrity of the election. Beyond that the next priority ought to be efficiency for the voter. That could encompass everything from ensuring balloting stations are appropriately staffed to early polling stations to in the future evaluating technology that would allow us to securely vote online.

Voting should be easy.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

a) Now if they were watching Fox News and when it went to commercial & they could vote from the couch...now that would be ok (he said with sarcasm)



b) I disagree a citizen needs to show "commitment" to participate.

The primary priority ought to be to ensure the integrity of the election. Beyond that the next priority ought to be efficiency for the voter. That could encompass everything from ensuring balloting stations are appropriately staffed to early polling stations to in the future evaluating technology that would allow us to securely vote online.

Voting should be easy.

a) No.

b) I think we need to go back to requiring "land holding" as a condition of voting.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

b) I think we need to go back to requiring "land holding" as a condition of voting.

So, if I stand at the voting booth with a clod of dirt in my hand....

[Black Sedan]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

b) I think we need to go back to requiring "land holding" as a condition of voting.

I'm fervently opposed to poll taxes, voter literacy tests, photo ID requirements, and property ownership requirements.

In my view, voter registration itself is a disenfranchising measure. It's a compromise measure between completely open voting (such as you get inked when you vote, and therefore no opportunity for early voting or absentee) Note that in several states, same-day voter registration is allowed, and I find that a more preferable compromise. In Texas, it's required to be properly registered 30 days ahead.

I find it deplorable that the Patriot act instituted a government issue ID requirement to participate in private financial transactions, such as opening a bank account.

[atlcomedy]

I'm pretty sure PJ was kidding...

that said, what type of controls do you suggest on voting if any?

registration is the process that ensures residency and you are not part of a class (felons) that has given up that right.

under your "just show up" program, what if any, documentation do you need to provide to prove your bonafides?

Originally Posted by Black Sedan

I'm fervently opposed to poll taxes, voter literacy tests, photo ID requirements, and property ownership requirements.

In my view, voter registration itself is a disenfranchising measure. It's a compromise measure between completely open voting (such as you get inked when you vote, and therefore no opportunity for early voting or absentee) Note that in several states, same-day voter registration is allowed, and I find that a more preferable compromise. In Texas, it's required to be properly registered 30 days ahead.

I find it deplorable that the Patriot act instituted a government issue ID requirement to participate in private financial transactions, such as opening a bank account.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

So, if I stand at the voting booth with a clod of dirt in my hand....

Well its better than holding something else in your hand.

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by WTF

No chit, 24 Hour fitness has this ID system.

The problem with allot of this is that the poorer and less educated the more likely you will not go through the means to get the proper ID to vote. Well some see this as a problem, other love this fact.

Why is more likely the poor or less educated will go through with getting an ID to vote if they are going through the trouble to register? Makes no sense to me.

How is it a "Nazi" concept to ask people to have sufficient ID to vote? I have to show my drivers license to vote.

And no, only citizens of the United States and district residents should be allowed to vote.

[atlcomedy]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Why is more likely the poor or less educated will go through with getting an ID to vote if they are going through the trouble to register? Makes no sense to me.

.

I think you misread WTF's point. He asserts the poor or less educated are less likely to take steps necessary to ensure they are able to vote.

He's correct. I think very few disagree with this.

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

I think you misread WTF's point. He asserts the poor or less educated are less likely to take steps necessary to ensure they are able to vote.

He's correct. I think very few disagree with this.

Oh, ok, then yes, I agree. I think THEY are less likely to get themselves registered on their own, but there are many civil groups that are registering people in mass. But in the end, I think they poor and uneducated are less likely to go vote even if they are registered.