Why so many problems with registration and voting process?

[Tribun]

I today again have read stories how many problems there are with voter registration and the actual voting process, and that it could spell serious problems on election day.
An example

Now I wonder...how the fuck is that possible in such a developed country? I mean, the leading nation of the world has trouble to organise their most important election?

Call me ignorant, because in Germany we actually don't have any of that, it's alien to us. Here the state automatically REMINDS you that you can vote on a certain day, sending you a reminder with the mail. Also we mostly (experiments with machines were disappointing) only rely on the best voting method: make an X in the circle beside what you want to vote.

So why do they have so much trouble in the U.S.?

[CaiusWickersham]

Because it seems voter registration has become a game for the political parties. We saw it start up in 2000 and this is just the latest iteration. It's an important election and there is a lot at stake, so I can understand the desire to make sure everything is on the up and up. This, however, is ridiculous. The timing is atrocious and like every bureaucracy, it takes a lot of time for paper pushers to compare notes and gets things straightened out. I'm going to be a presiding judge for my voting district on the elections and I get to be right in the middle of this muck.

[charlemagne]

Why not at least make every adult person of US citizenship a registered voter automatically? This whole voter registration seems so ridicously antiquated, just like that weird elector gremium.

[Phantasee]

Why not at least make every adult person of US citizenship a registered voter automatically? This whole voter registration seems so ridicously antiquated, just like that weird elector gremium.

Because that would make sense, and stuff. I mean, the government already knows whether you're a convicted felon or not, so they would be able to toss out those registrations easy.

I wonder why they don't. I think in Canada it's tied to your income taxes, if you've filed them they know when you can vote (there's a box to check). I hadn't filed mine ever so I wasn't registered for this election.

Of course, once you're registered in Canada you're pretty much set, they send you a card telling you where you can vote next election.

[General Zod]

Because that would make sense, and stuff. I mean, the government already knows whether you're a convicted felon or not, so they would be able to toss out those registrations easy.

The funny thing is some things like being able to vote as a convicted felon is dependent from state to state. In Colorado it doesn't matter if you're convicted as long as you've served your sentence. I'd imagine having the same standards in every state would help things a lot.

[charlemagne]

Of course, once you're registered in Canada you're pretty much set, they send you a card telling you where you can vote next election.

Same in Germany, but you don't even have to have turned in income tax or something like that - the registration of address office knows where you live and how old you are, so there's all the data you need.

[Guardsman Bass]

Voter registration in the United States was originally to be difficult and exclusive on purpose during the Progressive Era, for two reasons. The first was to break the back of the political machines in the big cities, which would do favors and the like for votes from frequently illiterate new Americans and the like, and which not infrequently involved voting fraud. The second was to help set up requirements to disenfranchise black voters without actually banning their right to vote.

They've done a number of refinements to it over the years (the "Motor Voters" law back in the early 1990s, where people could get registered to vote when they registered their cars was a big step), but there seems to be resistance to just having the government do it, particularly from the Republicans, who generally have little to gain from efforts to expand registration to most new voters (most of their voters tend to get registered anyways). I've noticed some fearmongering about illegal aliens voting too, as of late.

[The Yosemite Bear]

because people don't want youth and people who rent or who are homeless to vote. They want to keep it for the landowners. Illegal, yes, now thanks to a few post civil war amendments, and a supreme court judgement or two. I guess it's the latest incarnation of our old friend "Jim Crow".

[Guardsman Bass]

because people don't want youth and people who rent or who are homeless to vote. They want to keep it for the landowners. Illegal, yes, now thanks to a few post civil war amendments, and a supreme court judgement or two. I guess it's the latest incarnation of our old friend "Jim Crow".

I think the idea was that they wanted "enlightened, legal" voters (meaning they didn't want a bunch of blacks and immigrants voting).

Not surprisingly, voter participation in the system dropped significantly after this kind of stuff was widely implemented.

[CmdrWilkens]

Alternatively its mostly a question of scale, identity, and spread. How would anyone go about registereing every adult who is eligible automatically? Sure it sounds great but HOW? DO use use Social Security information? That's great but you will probably miss a large number of folks who were not properly entered in the system, whose data has not been changed to reflect life changes...and SSNs give no proff of residency in any given state and district in terms of local elections.

You could use motor vehicle, library, identification, or any other government document registration but again not all of those records are consistent or provide proof of residency in a given district.

So I will again ask the question HOW would you go about universal voter registration?

[Lusankya]

Alternatively its mostly a question of scale, identity, and spread. How would anyone go about registereing every adult who is eligible automatically? Sure it sounds great but HOW? DO use use Social Security information? That's great but you will probably miss a large number of folks who were not properly entered in the system, whose data has not been changed to reflect life changes...and SSNs give no proff of residency in any given state and district in terms of local elections.

You could use motor vehicle, library, identification, or any other government document registration but again not all of those records are consistent or provide proof of residency in a given district.

So I will again ask the question HOW would you go about universal voter registration?

Dude, in Australia voting is compulsory, so everyone's enrolled to vote. They just send you a card when you turn 18, and you send it back, and voila! You're enrolled to vote. When you move, they send you a thing that you can send back to say you've changed your address. If you don't respond, they send you another one... and another... and then when the election's coming up they send more forms to every house just to make sure, and even send people around to knock on everyone's door to make sure everyone's enrolled.

I don't know how they do this. For all I know it's magic. But I'm damned sick of every time any kind of reform is mentioned, some American jumps up and says "waaah! It can't work!" without actually bothering to consider that other countries do it and it works just fine.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

So I will again ask the question HOW would you go about universal voter registration?

I'm not sure of the details, but doesn't the Selective Service manage to do most of this kind of stuff already, at least for the male population?

[charlemagne]

So I will again ask the question HOW would you go about universal voter registration?

Yeah, I guess it's easier when, like in Germany, there's a registration of address office where pretty much everyone is, uhm, registered. It's the office also responsible for giving out ID cards and passports, and since it's the law to have either one of those, you can't really slip through. It's totally independent from tax, health insurance or driving license offices, too.

So yes, I see your point. It's easier to think of than to do when there's no such "grid" in place.

[Tribun]

I got this from electoral-vote, and want to hear your opinion:

Challenges Could Disenfranchise Millions of Voters

The Help America Vote Act, passed after the 2000 debacle in Florida, mandates that states have a statewide data base of eligible voters to help people vote and to prevent fraud. However, these data bases are full of minor errors and hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of voters may be disenfranchised as a result. To make this clear, consider the five newly registered voters listed below on the left. The data for the same people (matched by social security number) appears in the drivers license data base below on the right.

(Example)

Unless very carefully programmed, the software might reject all these new voters on the grounds of suspected fraud because the data don't agree. Could the software be made smart enough to do "fuzzy matching?" Of course, but only if the people writing it were instructed to do so. In addition, in many states criminals have recently been purged from the rolls--along with everybody else with the same name as any criminal. But there is much dispute as to which crimes disqualify one, what about people who have served their time, and people who have been pardoned? Even if the laws are clear, which they generally aren't, the data bases are so riddled with errors and the clerical personnel so ill-trained, that the whole issue of voter registration could be a time bomb that explodes on election day.

There have already been numerous lawsuits filed by the state Republican Parties challenging thousands of newly registered voters, most of whom are Democrats. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled yesterday against a GOP lawsuit trying to disqualify 200,000 new voters in Ohio whose voter registration data does not agree with other state data bases (like the examples above). In a Montana case, case a federal judge ruled that the Republicans had filed the case "with the express intent to disenfranchise voters." In some cases it is the Democrats going to court to prevent a (usually Republican) secretary of state from purging eligible voters. In other words, attempting to disenfranchise voters has become just another campaign tactic. It is virtually always the Republicans trying to purge (new) voters because so the new voters are so heavily weighted towards the Democrats. If they can eliminate 100,000 voters, they will probably get rid of 80,000 Democrats and 20,000 Republicans, which is clearly worth the effort.

Another source of controversy is a group called ACORN that is registering voters. John McCain said in the third debate that its fraudulent registration practices threatens our very democracy. It is indeed likely that some ACORN workers have registered nonexistent voters--because the registrars are paid for each voter registered. However, voter registration fraud is not voter fraud since the fictitious voter won't show up to vote because he doesn't exist. The Republican governor of Florida, Charlie Crist, has said that ACORN is not really a problem.

If the government would do a better job of registering voters, private groups like ACORN would not be needed. However, voter registration has always been a partisan battleground. After the Civil War, the Democratic-controlled legislatures in many southern states enacted poll taxes to discourage the newly freed slaves from voting. Another common tactic used by the Democrats then was to introduce some gigantic hurdle to voting--such as a test on the state constitution that even lawyers couldn't pass--and then exempt anyone whose grandfather was a registered voter, which conveniently got most whites (but few blacks) out of having to pass the test. Nowadays it is the Republicans who are fighting all attempts, like motor-voter laws, to make it easier to register, because such laws predominately help poor people and they tend to vote Democratic. The NY Times has an editorial on this subject today.

While ACORN has gotten a lot of publicity lately because McCain and Palin keep talking about it, voter registration fraud is bipartisan. Here is a story in today's LA Times about a Republican group engaging in similar tactics. While there is no data on who is doing the fraud and why, anecdotal evidence suggests Democratic fraud is bottom up (individual registrars making up names to earn a few more dollars) whereas Republican fraud is top down (campaign officials doing it to win elections), but the subject remains controversial.

I guess they now know they can't win honestly, so they now use every dirty trick. Do you think they could actually even get away with it, because for me it smells strongly like vote fraud.

[Guardsman Bass]

Alternatively its mostly a question of scale, identity, and spread. How would anyone go about registereing every adult who is eligible automatically? Sure it sounds great but HOW? DO use use Social Security information? That's great but you will probably miss a large number of folks who were not properly entered in the system, whose data has not been changed to reflect life changes...and SSNs give no proff of residency in any given state and district in terms of local elections.

You could use motor vehicle, library, identification, or any other government document registration but again not all of those records are consistent or provide proof of residency in a given district.

So I will again ask the question HOW would you go about universal voter registration?

Switch to Same-Day Registration at the polling place, and require that either the federal government issue a picture ID card that lists your citizenship status on it, or require that states all create and issue a form of picture ID that lists your citizenship status (and I'm talking about something that everyone who is a resident in the state can use, not just Drivers' Licenses). Then have people also bring some form of Proof of Residency to their voting station, and you're set.

[The Yosemite Bear]

So I will again ask the question HOW would you go about universal voter registration?

I'm not sure of the details, but doesn't the Selective Service manage to do most of this kind of stuff already, at least for the male population?

yeah when I was in high school they were thick as flies trying to get us to join as soon as we graduated, I found not sight nor sound of anyone from the voter's registar around campus, and the one teacher who took the time to show the seniors what the various props really ment and registered some of us in her Poli-Sci class got kicked out because of complaints from certain parents. (which was bad since she wasn't showing any bias, just trying to show us how to think for our selves, oh wait the socratic method is incredably anti-authority biased.)

[TC Pilot]

yeah when I was in high school they were thick as flies trying to get us to join as soon as we graduated, I found not sight nor sound of anyone from the voter's registar around campus, and the one teacher who took the time to show the seniors what the various props really ment and registered some of us in her Poli-Sci class got kicked out because of complaints from certain parents. (which was bad since she wasn't showing any bias, just trying to show us how to think for our selves, oh wait the socratic method is incredably anti-authority biased.)

The Selective Service isn't the same as recruiters. It's mandatory (failure usually results in jail time or a huge fine), but you have to enroll at your own volition.

Placing legal penalties for failing to register to vote at the same time would probably help raise voter registration significantly, though it still varies state by state (North Dakota allows walk-in registration, in Illinois it took maybe five minutes to fill out a form). Of course, if voter turnout actually went up signficantly (to European levels), the current system of polling stations would be utterly swamped and completly unprepared to service that large a number.

[charlemagne]

Of course, if voter turnout actually went up signficantly (to European levels), the current system of polling stations would be utterly swamped and completly unprepared to service that large a number.

Sometimes, when following the whole procedure from the outside, I just think that maybe the UN should send in election observers and monitor the whole thing

[Elfdart]

Why not at least make every adult person of US citizenship a registered voter automatically? This whole voter registration seems so ridicously antiquated, just like that weird elector gremium.

Because simple and fair rules make cheating more difficult, and Americans believe in the ideals of Gorgeous George:

Win if you can; lose if you must...

...BUT ALWAYS CHEAT!

[Uraniun235]

There's been one state with awesome voting for the past ten years: Oregon and its vote-by-mail system. No bullshit over having to somehow find time to vote, no lines at polling stations, no having to run buses out to old people and cripples so that they can get to the polling station, less expensive elections, simple optical scan technology, signature verification, no photo ID required at registration. Hell, if you're an old codger that demands the "civic experience" of filling out a ballot in a booth in a government building, you can drive to the county and they'll have a booth for coots like you. Even the homeless can vote. I hear Washington (except for two counties) has also transitioned to vote-by-mail.

Get over your fixation on polling stations and come join us. It's easier to run elections this way.

[Eframepilot]

There are problems with voting because all of the states handle voting separately. Many states have very few problems, but others have unusual or archaic laws and voting methods that cause difficulties. And of course the Republicans try to game the system by using these rules to suppress turnout.

[SirNitram]

This is probably relevent.. Link

Charges of potential vote fraud volleyed by Republicans, including Sen. John McCain himself, are out of proportion to reality, according to election experts.

The concerns – raised by the Republican National Committee in daily conference calls with reporters, as well as by McCain himself in Wednesday's debate – focus on the nonprofit group Acorn, whose nationwide voter registration efforts have garnered apparently fraudulent registration cards, some for fictional characters like "Mickey Mouse."

Acorn, whose registration efforts generally target poor neighborhoods, "is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy," McCain claimed last night, citing Sen. Barack Obama's ties to the group.

Obama reportedly worked with Acorn when he ran a Chicago-area voter registration drive shortly after graduating from law school, and conducted leadership training with the group. During the primaries, Obama's campaign paid an Acorn-affiliated group $800,000 for get-out-the-vote efforts, which reportedly did not include voter registration. The group's political arm has endorsed Obama's candidacy.

But McCain's voter fraud worries – about Acorn or anyone else – are unsupported by the facts, said experts on election fraud, who recall similar concerns being raised in several previous elections, despite a near-total absence of cases.

"There's no evidence that any of these invalid registrations lead to any invalid votes," said David Becker, project director of the "Make Voting Work" initiative for the Pew Charitable Trusts.

Becker should know: he was a lawyer for the Bush administration until 2005, in the Justice Department's voting rights section, which was part of the administration's aggressive anti-vote-fraud effort.

"The Justice Department really made prosecution of voter fraud of this sort a big priority in the first half of this decade, and they really didn't come up with anything," he said.

"We're chasing these ghosts of voter fraud, like chickens without a head," said Lorraine Minnite, a political science professor at Barnard College in New York who has researched voter fraud and fraud claims for most of the past decade. "I think it's completely overblown, I think it's meant to be a distraction."

"This stuff does not threaten the outcome of the election," said Minnite. "How many illegal ballots have been cast by people who are fraudulently registered to vote? By my count, it's zero. I just don't know of any, I've been looking for years for this stuff."

Vote Tampering and Fraud Sees Seven or Eight Convictions a Year, Says Expert

For all types of vote tampering and fraud, including vote buying, Minnite says the Justice Department has averaged seven or eight convictions a year.

Despite the experts' opinions, a McCain-Palin campaign spokesman reiterated that their concern was real. In cases like absentee voting, "there's no way of knowing whether [voters] are who they say they are," said the spokesman, who declined to be identified.

So far, one case of alleged vote fraud has been reported in this election: On Sept. 30, an Ohio man reportedly attempted to vote using the state's early-voting process, who registered under a fake address, according to the New York Post. However, the state's bipartisan election board was downplaying concerns over such fraud, according to the paper.

Acorn has defended its efforts by pointing out that it has reported "almost all" of the bogus cards itself, and noting that McCain had supported the group's efforts in other areas in the past. "Repeating a lie doesn't make it true," read a statement the group released last night in response to McCain's attack, "and the McCain campaign has resorted to the worst type of deceptions in regards to Acorn."

And while the RNC has labeled Acorn a "quasi-criminal group," not all Republicans share their party's concern. Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, whom McCain once reportedly considered as a running mate, told a reporter recently that he wasn't worried by Acorn's registration efforts in his state.

Even the non-partisan truth-in-politics Web site FactCheck.org called foul on McCain's alleged possible conspiracy, noting that a Republican prosecutor handling a key Acorn registration fraud case has said there's no evidence indicating the group was involved in vote fraud.

"This scheme was not intended to permit illegal voting," said King County, Wash. Prosecutor Dan Satterberg in a 2007 statement, after a federal-state investigation found seven Acorn workers had submitted over 1,700 bogus voter registration forms.

So there you have it: Even people tasked with trying to find the fake votes and with the resources of a politicized DOJ desperately trying to prove it, nada. Can we have a real issue now?

[Adrian Laguna]

The Selective Service isn't the same as recruiters. It's mandatory (failure usually results in jail time or a huge fine), but you have to enroll at your own volition.

No you don't, I never did anything to enroll for the Selective Service. One day they just sent me a letter informing me that I was enrolled.

[Chris OFarrell]

Alternatively its mostly a question of scale, identity, and spread. How would anyone go about registereing every adult who is eligible automatically? Sure it sounds great but HOW? DO use use Social Security information? That's great but you will probably miss a large number of folks who were not properly entered in the system, whose data has not been changed to reflect life changes...and SSNs give no proff of residency in any given state and district in terms of local elections.

You could use motor vehicle, library, identification, or any other government document registration but again not all of those records are consistent or provide proof of residency in a given district.

So I will again ask the question HOW would you go about universal voter registration?

Dude, in Australia voting is compulsory, so everyone's enrolled to vote. They just send you a card when you turn 18, and you send it back, and voila! You're enrolled to vote. When you move, they send you a thing that you can send back to say you've changed your address. If you don't respond, they send you another one... and another... and then when the election's coming up they send more forms to every house just to make sure, and even send people around to knock on everyone's door to make sure everyone's enrolled.

I don't know how they do this. For all I know it's magic. But I'm damned sick of every time any kind of reform is mentioned, some American jumps up and says "waaah! It can't work!" without actually bothering to consider that other countries do it and it works just fine.

Funny thing, in the Byelection just held for my seat in NSW yesterday, we got a recorded phone call in the morning reminding us that there is an importaint election today from the hours of X and Y, that there is a $25 fine if you don't show up and the nearest ballot box is at Z. We also got a single pamphlet in the mail on monday.

Of course Australia also has the Australian Electoral Commission, an *utterly independent* Federal body who are responsible for organizing elections on Local, State and Federal levels, counting votes and dealing with any problems, registering voters and so on.

The US for some insane reason has NOTHING like that which makes me just shake my head.

[Stark]

It's not like the AEC is entirely effective, however; the parties can still bypass the spirit of the law with their retarded touting how-to-vote cards at places of voting, which they could probably stop if all parties weren't happy to get idiots to follow the pretty piece of paper instead of thinking.

Of course, it's way better than the bizarrely broken American system, but doubtless Americans will simply say 'IT'S WORKED FOR A HUNDRED YEARS' and decide that means it can't be improved.