Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by blazespin 3515 days ago
Exactly, more people counting is not a problem. It's actually a good thing. Why not get more people involved in the electoral process? It's beyond me why anyone would want to undermine this.

Plus, I don't get the mail in states. What's up with that? Why mess with a process that works?

2 comments

I live in a mail-in state (WA) and in my opinion it's a pretty great system. I got my ballot almost two weeks ago and just sent it in last week. I was able to fill it out when I had free time and drop it in a ballot box (there's one about 5 minutes from where I live by foot, and I could always just mail it in if I wanted to). Lining up to vote at the polls would've been a lot more time-consuming because I would have to line up and I would've had to write down all my votes anyway, then move them onto an official ballot.
I live in a mail-in state (WA) and in my opinion it's a pretty great system.

What mechanism, if any, is in place to prevent voters from being coerced or bribed to cast their vote a particular way? This is the traditional reason for using in-person voting rather than mailed ballots; if you can't show someone how you voted, they can't bribe or coerce you.

(Maybe the answer is "there is no mechanism", but increasing the ease of voting is considered more important than protecting the system from coercion and bribery. Not a tradeoff I would make, but I can see that some people would support that.)

> What mechanism, if any, is in place to prevent voters from being coerced or bribed to cast their vote a particular way?

If imcoerced into voting a particular way on my mail-in ballot, I can go to the polling place in Election Day and fill out a provisional ballot hat will be counted in place of my coerced ballot. Not perfect, but this year it allows me to vote even though I'm out of the state next week.

How many people know that? The Washington Secretary of State's FAQs don't mention coercion or bribery as reasons to receive a provisional or replacement ballot.[1][2] King County, with over 1/4 of the state's population, only mentions voting centers as an accessibility option.[3] And does the ballot tracker[4] show if a ballot is invalidated?

Every state has provisions for absentee voting, and 3/4 allow early voting in person.

[1] https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/general-election-faqs.aspx

[2] https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/faq_vote_by_mail.aspx

[3] http://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/elections/how-to-vote/ballot...

[4] https://info.kingcounty.gov/elections/ballottracker.aspx

I think you're guarding against different things. If you live in a society where there are (following historical patterns here) patriarchs coercing the votes of spouses and dependents you probably have a whole slew of other problems that make this particular one just part of a larger social reform that should happen anyway.
I'd say anywhere that people can literally have to choose between their job and their vote is not "working", which is why it needed messing with. Its hard for a lot of people to get to a specific location on any given day - there's no good reason today that a week in bed with the flu should prevent you from voting. Or that it should be harder to vote if you have three kids and no babysitter, or are on crutches, or work an irregular schedule at a minimum wage job.
> or work an irregular schedule at a minimum wage job

The law in California[0] guarantees you the right to vote even if you are scheduled that day. You can take up to two hours off the beginning or end of your shift to vote if necessary. For other states...[1]

[0]: CEC§14000 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=elec&g...

[1]: http://www.findlaw.com/voting-rights-law.html

There have been polling stations reported with multi hour queues. I'm pretty sure California does not guarantee you the right to vote in person, because it doesn't say you must be given as many hours as you need. But it's ok, because california allows vote by mail.