permaculture playing cards*
The moose likes Meaningless Drivel and the fly likes My voting experience Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


Win a copy of Android Security Essentials Live Lessons this week in the Android forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Other » Meaningless Drivel
Bookmark "My voting experience" Watch "My voting experience" New topic
Author

My voting experience

frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
With all the news about fake voter registrations, you would think they would check your ID before they let you vote. Think again, at least for Florida. No one checked my ID (althought they checked the box indicating they checked my ID) and when I challenged the clerk at the poll site and called the fraud phone number, no one even knew the State law. although its clearly and simply spelled out...
Warren Dew
blacksmith
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 04, 2004
Posts: 1332
    
    2
So what did they say at the fraud phone number?

People were offering their IDs where I voted, unlike in prior elections; I have no idea whether they would have been asked for. The clerk gave the driver's licenses a pretty cursory glance, though they looked at one lady's passport pretty carefully.

Didn't it used to be the case that one could be a citizen without an ID?
Ernest Friedman-Hill
author and iconoclast
Marshal

Joined: Jul 08, 2003
Posts: 24183
    
  34

Ain't no law that says you have to show an ID.


[Jess in Action][AskingGoodQuestions]
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Warren Dew:
So what did they say at the fraud phone number?

People were offering their IDs where I voted, unlike in prior elections; I have no idea whether they would have been asked for. The clerk gave the driver's licenses a pretty cursory glance, though they looked at one lady's passport pretty carefully.

Didn't it used to be the case that one could be a citizen without an ID?


On my first call to the toll free fraud phone number, after I told my story, the lady said, "Didn't I just to speak to you?" (I had not) indicating that my incident was not unqiue... She then suggested I contact the local superviosr of elections for my county. That number seemed to be swamped at first since I got a busy signal, then on the second attempt I was put on hold for an inordinate amount of time so I tried the fraud number again. I got a much younger girl who seemed to think it was perfectly fine that I was not asked for an ID. After I emphatically replied that Florida law required an ID or an afidavit she put me on hold while she checked with her superiors. Then she came back and confidently told me I was wrong. My God, the poll clerk and the fraud people don't even know the most basic and simple aspects of Florida voting law


Regarding citizenship and ID; yes of course one can be a citizen without having ID. However, no one is having their citizenship challenged and that is not the issue. The issue is the integrity of the entire voting process. Not taking even rudimentary steps to prevent fraud disenfranchises the honest voters who have their votes negated by the fraudulent people who vote multiple times.

I might also add that citizenship also does not require registering to vote; so perhaps we should not even require voter registration?
[ November 02, 2004: Message edited by: herb slocomb ]
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Ernest Friedman-Hill:
Ain't no law that says you have to show an ID.


Under Florida Law, you must show an ID or sign an affidavit(as mentioned previously). I was asked for neither. The affidadvit requirement seems a sad joke and no deterrent at all to those most likely to commit fraud. Any one concerned with the integrity of the process should be appalled considering the widely reported fraud in voter registration in Florida and other swing States such as Ohio.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0101/ch0101.htm

Notice the part about Voter Responsibilties (?!) in the statute;

"Each registered voter in this state should:

...

4. Bring proper identification to the polling station. "
[ November 02, 2004: Message edited by: herb slocomb ]
Ernest Friedman-Hill
author and iconoclast
Marshal

Joined: Jul 08, 2003
Posts: 24183
    
  34

Didn't you sign the book, and/or a card? That's your affadavit. Should have a sentence on there about you being the person you say.

Now, if you didn't sign anything, then I'd say you've got a case there.
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Ernest Friedman-Hill:
Didn't you sign the book, and/or a card? That's your affadavit. Should have a sentence on there about you being the person you say.

Now, if you didn't sign anything, then I'd say you've got a case there.


I didn't sign my voter registration card; I did the sign the book. However my signature in the book seemed not to be to establish my identity ( a separate issue the lawyers would argue), but to establish that whoever this person was on the voter role, he had voted already. They had actual separate brightly printed pink forms there to serve as the affidavits. Anyway, the statute clearly states the requirement for : "a current and valid picture identification". The way the local (and the NY Times) newspapers reported the legal requirements, you need an ID or you must sign the affidavit. I did neither. Still, I think they were not quite so accurate on reading the statute tonight. But we can all read for ourselves what the law is at the url mentioned earlier; no need for lawyers....
[ November 02, 2004: Message edited by: herb slocomb ]
Jim Yingst
Wanderer
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 30, 2000
Posts: 18671
[herb]: The way the local (and the NY Times) newspapers reported the legal requirements, you need an ID or you must sign the affidavit. I did neither. Still, I think they were not quite so accurate on reading the statute tonight

You're saying you think the summary by the local and NYT papers is inaccurate? How so? Seems OK to me. The section you quoted earlier about "voter responsibilities" (101.031) is irrelevant. It says "should", it doesn't spell out the consequences of noncompliance, and subsequent text says
NOTE TO VOTER: Failure to perform any of these responsibilities does not prohibit a voter from voting.

(3) Nothing in this section shall give rise to a legal cause of action.
The only real rule in this section is that the list of "voter responsibilities" is supposed to be posted at the voting place. The actual text of these responsibilities (in 101.031, "Voter Responsibilities") is not binding. The binding stuff is in other sections.

A more relevant section is 101.043, which essentially reduces to: voters must provide (a) a valid photo ID and (b) an ID with a signature, and they must sign the registry with a signature which matches the one on the ID. Failure to do this means they need to either sign an affadavit, or in some cases they may be able to enter a provisional ballot (without affadavit). Sounds like the newspaper summaries are reasonably accurate here, aside from glossing over provisional ballots.

Either way though, it does seem as if the process at least in your district was seriously flawed. I hope this isn't too widespread.

[herb]: I didn't sign my voter registration card; I did the sign the book. However my signature in the book seemed not to be to establish my identity ( a separate issue the lawyers would argue), but to establish that whoever this person was on the voter role, he had voted already.

From 101.043 it seems that signing the registry is supposed to corroborate your identity (as well as that you didn't vote previously), but they're supposed to compare your signature to the one on your ID, as well compare your appearance to your photo ID. So yeah, they seriously dropped the ball here.

For comparison, Colorado seems to have a more lenient authentication process (no required photo or signature corroboration), but it's actually followed. They wouldn't accept my Arizona driver's license (which I should have replaced by now, but I'm lazy) but they did accept a recent bill from the power company showing my name and address. I suppose an imposter could have gotten hold of something like this and impersonated me - but the problem would have been detected when I (the real me) showed up later to vote. I think they could then have tracked down the imposter's vote and removed it from the count.

Anyway, sorry to hear of your experience, Herb. I hope it's not the norm...
[ November 02, 2004: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

"I'm not back." - Bill Harding, Twister
Arjun Shastry
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 1874
Can anybody explain quickly the election process,how is President of USA is selected?
Thanks



MH
Jim Yingst
Wanderer
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 30, 2000
Posts: 18671
Nicholas, we've been removing most political commentary from this forum for some time now. No matter how innocuous it may be at first, we just end up arguing about it. This particular thread is unique; although it's clearly about the election, it appears to be completely independent of the question of who will win / should win / did win / should have won etc. So far. I'm hoping it can survive, but to do so I think we need to keep discussion of the actual parties and candidates out of this thread (not to mention the rest of the forum). We'll know the outcome soon anyway - err, I hope, maybe... :roll:
sylvia greene
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jun 23, 2004
Posts: 40
These things used to happen in India.
Surprisingly they have started happening in US as well.
I think the world is catching on us.
Jim Yingst
Wanderer
Sheriff

Joined: Jan 30, 2000
Posts: 18671
Arjun- umm, while that's not necessarily political, it's also unreleated to Herb's topic. And to discuss it here would just increase our chances of someone getting too exited about something and forcing the thread to be closed. So I'll just suggest that your best bet is to Google the phrase "electoral college" - you'll get many, many discussions of the US system. This one looks good, but there are many others to choose from. Hope that helps...
[ November 03, 2004: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]
Helen Thomas
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jan 13, 2004
Posts: 1759
A system of compulsory voting as in Australia would get rid of the fraudster votes. Florida seems ripe for this change.

If a voter doesn't support any candidate they have the option of voting for No Candidate.
[ November 03, 2004: Message edited by: Helen Thomas ]

Le Cafe Mouse - Helen's musings on the web - Java Skills and Thrills
"God who creates and is nature is very difficult to understand, but he is not arbitrary or malicious." OR "God does not play dice." - Einstein
Joe King
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 02, 2003
Posts: 820
It seems that there is a need for clarity in the method of electing. One option would be to set election law at the federal level i.e. so that all states have the same standards for elections.
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Jim Yingst:
[b][herb]:


...
From 101.043 it seems that signing the registry is supposed to corroborate your identity (as well as that you didn't vote previously), but they're supposed to compare your signature to the one on your ID, as well compare your appearance to your photo ID. So yeah, they seriously dropped the ball here.
...
Anyway, sorry to hear of your experience, Herb. I hope it's not the norm...



Although I stated my case fitfully and inartfully, I was confident that reasonable people could pick up on the issues here after having access to the wording of the statute. I'm not so confident that my experience was very unique given my experiece with the fraud line and poll clerk. Most likely everyone manning the fraud phone lines and working the polls received standardized training and instructions on this matter, yet none were aware of the requirements both Jim and I noted.

After the 2000 election, there really was no excuse for not having a statewide database of voter eligibility and really no good excuse for not having a national database given the awareness of nearly 45,000 dual registered voters in Florida and New York alone (some thousands in Ohio and Florida also) along with alarming anecdotal evidence of double voting in both Sates.
KR Campbell
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 26, 2004
Posts: 124
Originally posted by herb slocomb:


Notice the part about Voter Responsibilties (?!) in the statute;

"Each registered voter in this state should:

...

4. Bring proper identification to the polling station. "

[ November 02, 2004: Message edited by: herb slocomb ]


Purely with regard to this quote; does it not mean that you should be able to provide ID, not that they are required to check it?
Warren Dew
blacksmith
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 04, 2004
Posts: 1332
    
    2
KR Campbell:

Purely with regard to this quote; does it not mean that you should be able to provide ID, not that they are required to check it?

From Herb's link:

101.043 Identification required at polls.

... The clerk or inspector shall require each elector, upon entering the polling place, to present a current and valid picture identification as provided in s. 97.0535(3)(a). If the picture identification does not contain the signature of the voter, an additional identification that provides the voter's signature shall be required.
Ray Marsh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jan 12, 2000
Posts: 458
I always have the same "young" ladies working at my polling place.

They invariably try to get me to sign on my wife's line! They cover the signature, but that's it.


Anxiety does not empty tomorrow of its sorrows, but only empties today of its strength. – Charles Spurgeon
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Jesse Torres:
I voted in Illinois and had the same experience. The poll workers didn't ask me for any identification. Furthermore, they didn't even verify my signature.

It troubles me that anyone, registered or not, can easily cast a ballot without showing proper documentation.



We've got 4 years to try to fix this...
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
I was not asked for ID. I was asked to sign.


Associate Instructor - Hofstra University
Amazon Top 750 reviewer - Blog - Unresolved References - Book Review Blog
Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
I had to show a signed voter registration ID and I had to sign something. Presumably they compared the two signatures.
Mark Spritzler
ranger
Sheriff

Joined: Feb 05, 2001
Posts: 17249
    
    6

We were surprised too that there is no asking for IDs. At one point the poll worker wanted me to sign the lign above my wife's which was for another person. My name was under her name. I had to say it twice to the person that I needed to sign the line below my wife. The worker finally saw that I was right.

Mark


Perfect World Programming, LLC - Two Laptop Bag - Tube Organizer
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way FAQ
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by Arjun Shastry:
Can anybody explain quickly the election process,how is President of USA is selected?
Thanks




The process is done through the electoral college. A person doesn't actually vote for the president but rather for electors who vote for the president but it ends up being the same thing (it is extremely rare that an elector doesn't vote for their candidate... in some states it is a criminal act). Each state is assigned a number of electors which is the sum of the number of Senators and representatives that state has. This means that a state can have no fewer than 3 electoral votes (2 Senators plus one Congressman). States with more population will have more electoral votes because they have more Congressmen. It is a winner take all vote in each state. Whoever wins the state gets ALL the electoral votes in that state. You need 270 electoral votes to win.

You will notice that the system works in such a way that a person could win the election even if they get less votes. Example - imagine 5 states each with 3 electoral votes. Each state has 10 people living in it. Candidate A wins 2 states 10-0. He loses the other three states 6-4. Candidate A will have gained 32 votes but only 6 electoral votes. Candidate B will have gained only 18 votes but will win with 9 electoral votes.

This has happened a few times in our history, the last time in 2000.
Hussein O'Baghdadi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 20, 2003
Posts: 40
Thanks for greate explaination.
I have a question :
in US and France, the actual ruler is the president, in UK, Spain and Italy the actual ruler is the prime minister.
what is the difference between each approach (advantages or disadvantages).
thanks.
Peter Rooke
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 21, 2004
Posts: 801

Nothing to do with American politics this, but its funny so - A few years back a monkey mascot from the local football (round ball) team was elected major in town. Monkey Major. What is it with Hartlepool and monkeys?

It�s all started again - with the current regional assembly referendum. The 'No' campaign has a big inflatable white elephant. In answer to this the yes side, despite government advice against, dressed up in rat costumes. After the local press ridiculed this, the government (on the yes side) has stopped commenting on the issue. A yes campaign spokesman explained 'The other side started it with their elephant'.


Regards Pete
Joe King
Ranch Hand

Joined: Sep 02, 2003
Posts: 820
Originally posted by Hussein Baghdadi:
Thanks for greate explaination.
I have a question :
in US and France, the actual ruler is the president, in UK, Spain and Italy the actual ruler is the prime minister.
what is the difference between each approach (advantages or disadvantages).
thanks.


The main difference is that when you have a prime minister then the roles of head of state and head of government are separated. In the US they are held by the same person. France isn't exactly the same as the US - they have a president and a prime minister, but unlike countries like Italy, the French president has quite a lot of power. In France the president normally deals with international policies while the prime minister deals with domestic issues.

The advantage of having a separate head of state to head of government means that the head of government is limited in how much power they can amass - the head of state and head of government can act to balance out each other and stop one person becoming two powerful. In many countries that have this system the head of state often has a fairly long term, normally quite long if they have little power. The extreme of this is the UK with a head of state having a life long term. The advantage of this is that the head of state can act as an impartial figure who can advise the head of government.

There are also disadvantages to this approach. If the head of state and head of government don't agree on something then the process of taking action can be slowed down.
fred rosenberger
lowercase baba
Bartender

Joined: Oct 02, 2003
Posts: 11170
    
  16

...set election law at the federal level i.e. so that all states have the same standards for elections.

you're about to start a huge debate here on state's rights, and what the federal govenment has the right to do under the constitution.


There are only two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors
Peter Rooke
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 21, 2004
Posts: 801

The monkeys better - he was independent of the party politics.

I quite like to UK policical system, we have had time to learn how to get it right. But we have just signed a European Union Constitution (with France, Italy and others) - not sure what this means .

'The morale of the story is ...not to let it happen' George Orwell, talking about his book 'Nineteen Eighty Four'.
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Although it is true that the President has a lot of power in the US, that power can be greatly constrained by the Legislature. The Legislature makes all laws and controls the budget. The President may want to do something but unless the legislature gives their apporval it is almost impossible for the President to proceed (the president does have access to some discretionary funds but this is limited). The courts interpret the law especially in light of the US Constitution.

So the legislature passes a law, the president then decided whether to enact the law, and the courts decide whether the law is legal. For example, the legislature could pass legislation allowing the police to search anywhere they want. The President could then sign it into law. But the courts would throw it out because it violates the US Constitution which outlaws warrantless searches.

When the party the president is a member of controls both houses of the legislature, obviously the president can get more done. When the legislature is controlled by a different party then the president would likely be more constrained in his actions.
Varun Khanna
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 30, 2002
Posts: 1400
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:

A person doesn't actually vote for the president but rather for electors who vote for the president but it ends up being the same thing


So one stupid question,
What options do you guys see while making a vote?
- Just the name of three candidates (or their parties) contesting for the President's post or Name of all the electors or something else?
[ November 04, 2004: Message edited by: K Varun ]

- Varun
kayal cox
Ranch Hand

Joined: Aug 19, 2004
Posts: 376
I think Varun is referring to the options listed on the ballot paper.
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by K Varun:
So one stupid question,
What options do you guys see while making a vote?


Not a stupid question at all. On my ballot I saw:

in tiny little print:
The electors for

and then in big print:
George W. Bush

If you don't have good eye sight you wouldn't even notice "the electors for".

I should add that there were more than three candidates on the ballot for president. I think there were about 10.
[ November 04, 2004: Message edited by: Thomas Paul ]
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by Jesse Torres:
On which section of the ballot?


I'm not sure I understand the question. In NY we vote on machines with little levers that you press down. Think of it as a mechanical spreadsheet. The columns represent the various offices, president, senator, state supreme court, assemblmen, etc. The rows are the various political parties, GOP, Dems, Independence, Libertarian, etc.

The first row is GOP and the first column is president. That box had a little eagle and the words as I described above.
Michael Matola
whippersnapper
Ranch Hand

Joined: Mar 25, 2001
Posts: 1746
    
    2
What options do you guys see while making a vote?

Go to publius.org and enter my name and city:

First name: Michael
Last name: Matola
City: Northville

To see a web page mockup of the ballot I saw when voting.

The actual ballot had some additional options, for example, voting a straight ticket in the partisan races (for example, just vote "Green party" as a whole to vote for the Green party candidate in each race), and the ability to write in candidates in some (all?) races.
 
permaculture playing cards
 
subject: My voting experience
 
Similar Threads
Checkbox
Doubt regarding Threads found in K&B OCP Java 6 Practice Exams Book
Checked Exceptions???
session id : how does server identifies?
Radio Validator