US electoral system one of the worst in the world

[classical_hero]

Out of curiosity, how many polling stations are there near most people, and do you have to go to a specific one? I know there's usually about three within walking distance of my home, but in the UK, for instance, there's a shocking lack of them.

It is such a short distance to my polling station often we go as a family and take the dog with for the walk. The good thing for us that we know how to get to the polling station via the back entrance, so we don't have to bee annoyed by those how to vote cards at the front of every polling station.

 

[Arwon]

Australia doesn't use electronic voting in any meaningful way. I'd never heard of it being used at all (I don't think I've heard of anyone voting using anything other than a paper ballot; I voted from Istanbul in the last federal election and they mailed my paper ballot back rather than using some electronic system), but that wikipedia article seems to suggest it's used for deployed soldiers and on a trial basis at limited polling stations.

Also, the ballot instructions tend to be really simple, and you have a separate piece of paper for each thing you're voting for (which is really only ever a maximum of two at a time, unless there's a referendum).

Out of curiosity, how many polling stations are there near most people, and do you have to go to a specific one? I know there's usually about three within walking distance of my home, but in the UK, for instance, there's a shocking lack of them.

We have voting machines in the ACT for territory elections, but they are mostly used for pre-poll currently. They're pretty much mostly useful for reducing preferencing mistakes within the Hare-Clark system. Also of note is that the source code is published.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Australia doesn't use electronic voting in any meaningful way. I'd never heard of it being used at all (I don't think I've heard of anyone voting using anything other than a paper ballot; I voted from Istanbul in the last federal election and they mailed my paper ballot back rather than using some electronic system), but that wikipedia article seems to suggest it's used for deployed soldiers and on a trial basis at limited polling stations.

Also, the ballot instructions tend to be really simple, and you have a separate piece of paper for each thing you're voting for (which is really only ever a maximum of two at a time, unless there's a referendum).

Out of curiosity, how many polling stations are there near most people, and do you have to go to a specific one? I know there's usually about three within walking distance of my home, but in the UK, for instance, there's a shocking lack of them.

I can't seem to find how much of the US actually uses the electronic voting machines. I've never seen them when I voted.

We have to go to a specific polling location.

For a city of 50,000+ there seems to be many more now than when I voted there 18 years ago. (waited in line for an hour and a half to vote). I could have walked to the polling station then but it would have taken an hour or so. But with the polling station locations now, most people are within a 15 minute walk.

http://www.cityoflacrosse.org/index.aspx?NID=105
(map available)

The last place I voted was in a city of 15,000+ (more suburban and spread out). There was only 2 locations (3 wards) so many were not within most people's walking distance. The whole process of finding which ward I lived in, registering to vote (since I hadn't voted in over 4 years), and actually voting took only about 10 minutes.

http://www.cityofonalaska.com/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={705A0A76-A8DA-4DB0-9F65-FA065FB0EB9B}
(again, map available)

Voting in a small village or township (if living in the country) there is just one place to vote, usually at a town hall.

Counting the votes can take just a couple hours in some places and in other places the counting goes well past midnight, and up to 5 or 6 AM I've heard. In those places I think the counting process needs to be sped up somehow, and if they just can't get enough volunteers/workers to do it then automating it makes sense.

 

[dutchfire]

So we should not be "following the lead" of those above us on the 'democracy index'?

Some of the nations that use electronic voting (with rank on the democracy index):

1 Norway
6 Australia
7 Switzerland
8 Canada
9 Finland
10 Netherlands
12 Ireland
14 Germany
18 United Kingdom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_examples

The Netherlands does not use electronic voting

 

[Evie]

Switzerland doesn't really use e-voting. There have been a few pilot projects for cantonal elections/votes, but nothing large scale.

Ditto Canada. All my voting to date has involved paper ballots.

 

[ori]

ditto Germany (for the most parts). There have been some attempts at introducing voting machines - but those that were ever officially approved have all sorts of problems - including not fitting sufficient choices to actually hold elections given today's political landscape, so its all paper for pretty much everything bar a very few local elections...

 

[Grendeldef]

So we should not be "following the lead" of those above us on the 'democracy index'?

9 Finland

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_examples

Electronic voting is not in use in Finland.

It was tried in 3 (out of ~350) local communities in 2008 local elections but it was so flawed that the current view is 'wait & see'. Later the court ruled that elections in those 3 communities have to be held again.

Illustrated instructions for voting in Finland in English.

http://www.vaalit.fi/17098.htm

G

 

[dutchfire]

Sooooooooo
Let's update the list

So we should not be "following the lead" of those above us on the 'democracy index'?

Some of the nations that use electronic voting (with rank on the democracy index):

1 Norway
6 Australia
7 Switzerland
8 Canada
9 Finland
10 Netherlands
12 Ireland
14 Germany
18 United Kingdom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_examples

 

[ori]

yeah apparently there were some of these machines in use in the 2005 federal elections in Germany - a practice ruled unconstitutional by our constitutional court in 2009. They essentially required that any voting machine would have to provide a paper trail so that the voter could verify the actual vote cast and the voting public could verify the vote count afterwards. No such machines are currently approved.

 

[Bamspeedy]

The Netherlands does not use electronic voting

I stand corrected. They had them at one time but no longer use them.

Not because proof of voter fraud happened but because of the potential for voter fraud*. Sounds like the argument used by opposite sides for the voter ID laws.....

*The case of the candidate himself being a poll worker and manipulating the results is a poor reflection on the choosing of poll workers, not on the machine because he could have manipulated paper ballots as well.

 

[ori]

voter ID I don't think will find many opponents on the European side (with pretty much everyone having government issued ID anyways) - of course attempting to enforce voter ID and then not making it essentially trouble free to get such ID is another story altogether and probably one of the major reasons that it is an issue in the US is that some of the ID laws were (felt to be) written in a way as to ensure that certain groups of eligible voters would have more difficulty voting than others.

 

[dutchfire]

Not having an ID with you at any time can get you a fine up to €2500 here anyway, doesn't it? Which makes requiring it at the poll station seem reasonable.

 

[ori]

Actually in Germany it is up to €5000 for not owning a valid ID - you don't have to carry it though - but that still makes ID at the voting booth a minor hassle since every eligible voter has an ID and will be able to provide one at the voting booth.

 

[Borachio]

Voting pilots have taken place in May 2006,[56] June 2004,[57] May 2003,[58] May 2002, and May 2000.

In 2000, the London Mayoral and Assembly elections were counted using an optical scan voting system with software provided by DRS plc of Milton Keynes. In 2004, the London Mayoral, Assembly and European Parliamentary elections were scanned and processed using optical character recognition from the same company. Both elections required some editing of the ballot design to facilitate electronic tabulation, though they differed only slightly from the previous 'mark with an X' style ballots

I don't think this counts as the UK having an electronic voting system. I've not heard of any plans to use it elsewhere in England. Though, undoubtedly, Scotland will do so, just to show how great modern they are.

 

[dutchfire]

Just waiting for our resident Nores and Irish now

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Not having an ID with you at any time can get you a fine up to €2500 here anyway, doesn't it? Which makes requiring it at the poll station seem reasonable.

Don't you have 24 hours to produce one if you don't have it on you?

 

[dutchfire]

My "here" in that case is Ori's "here", not your "here".
I think the Dutch fine is lower, right? Only ~€50 and you can only be asked for it if there is a reason for it (that is, if you broke some other law). Though I'm not really sure on this.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Me neither. Before drivers license became those handy little credit card sized cards I never carried an ID since I am prone to losing stuff. I always figured it would be cheaper to pay the fine if they stop me than lose the license and having to get a new one.

I didn't even notice the €2500 figure, or I'd have figured you meant Ori's here

 

[innonimatu]

What business could anyone in Wisconson possibly have telling us here in Missouri how to run our elections? We're a sovereign State just like they are and do not need their meddling in our elections.

Can't let this one pass: none of those is a sovereign state.

So we should not be "following the lead" of those above us on the 'democracy index'?

Some of the nations that use electronic voting (with rank on the democracy index):

1 Norway
6 Australia
7 Switzerland
8 Canada
9 Finland
10 Netherlands
12 Ireland
14 Germany
18 United Kingdom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_examples

Germany famously prohibited any kind of electronic vote recently. So did the dutch, I believe. And they based their decision on the soundest and most relevant of arguments: elections must be verifiable by the average voter, not the province of experts. Electronic voting systems will always be a monopoly of experts: even of the code is open source the average voter cannot (nor can, arguably, any single person) verify every aspect of an electronic system. This undermines the confidence which is essential for a working electoral system

This raises a political problem which people are happily ignoring but will one day blow on their faces: if a popular candidate with dedicated followers were to claim that he had been been robbed, who could prove otherwise? With almost everyone incapable of verifying the system, it would become a nasty issue of faith...

Not so with paper ballots, where each candidate is free to have one observed accompany the whole process, and the process is all easily understood and followed.

 

[Ayatollah So]

From the OP's cited article:

On Oct. 23, WGHP FOX8 in Greensboro, N.C., had several reports that President Barrack Obama's name came up when Gov. Mitt Romney was selected by voters casting their ballot electronically. [...] Spokesman Chris Rigall [...] compared the error to an incorrect input on a touch phone or an airport kiosk.

"Any touch screen device can have instances in which the interface is not accurately aligned with your touch," he said. "When we talk about calibration, that's it."

What a truly shabby excuse. This is not a Droid phone we're talking about, something made for and sought by tech geeks. Work the damn bugs out before the thing goes into granny's voting booth. It's got to be user friendly to the max, or fuhgedaboudit.

Which is better for democracy (as in the concept of rule by the people), a powerless head of state who is not elected with all the power in the hand of hundreds of representative from across the country, or an Emperor-President with significant actual power

A Scot I know once stated that he's glad of the monarchy, because it sucks the worship away from an actually powerful position like the PM. I see his point.

This raises a political problem which people are happily ignoring but will one day blow on their faces: if a popular candidate with dedicated followers were to claim that he had been been robbed, who could prove otherwise? With almost everyone incapable of verifying the system, it would become a nasty issue of faith...

Having a verifiable count/recount method is indeed critical.