Please critique my proposed policy to ensure an honest vote

[candycorn]

Trump and the GOP were late to the “stolen election“ party. The last three democrats to lose a presidential election claimed they were robbed of their respective elections.

Kerry claimed he was robbed?
Gore claimed he was robbed?
I really doubt Hilary claimed she was robbed. She said the Russians interfered. I don't recall her saying she was "robbed".

 

[Foxfyre]

The audits showed there was no sizable voter fraud.
Even Spanky said there was no sizable voter fraud. You obviously don't want to believe it. So oh well.

The audits also showed that there was no way to determine what votes were fraudulent or which ones were not in some, maybe many, cases. A mail in ballot separated from the signature on the envelope that was the case in many states cannot be verified as to who sent in the ballot. That plus many other situations--poll watchers not allowed back in after the count was stopped in all swing states at pretty much the same time and then resumed; windows covered so the poll watchers couldn't even watch through the windows, etc. Too many suspicious things.

Maybe there wasn't enough fraud to swing the election but we'll never know. What we do know is that enough Americans believe there was significant cheating is sufficient to re-establish a system in which the electorate has confidence that the vote is honest. Both parties, all Americans, should want that.

Election Integrity: 61% Say Issue Is Very Important

Preventing cheating in elections is a priority for voters, who expect the issue to be important in next month’s midterm elections.

www.rasmussenreports.com

 

[candycorn]

Maybe. Or maybe not. While Clinton never got a majority of the vote, I don't think his elections were fraudulent. McCain was such a boring and for many unattractive candidate, and Sarah Palin's inexperience didn't help him, I am pretty sure Obama won fair and square. There may have been some hanky panky in the 2016 election, but I am confident Trump won. But I do believe there are enough unscrupulous political operatives to deliberately cheat and do so now and I want a system that makes it exceedingly difficult for them to do so.

The only people who would object to such a system has to be people want them to be able to cheat.

 

[candycorn]

The audits also showed that there was no way to determine what votes were fraudulent or which ones were not in some, maybe many, cases. A mail in ballot separated from the signature on the envelope that was the case in many states cannot be verified as to who sent in the ballot. That plus many other situations--poll watchers not allowed back in after the count was stopped in all swing states at pretty much the same time and then resumed; windows covered so the poll watchers couldn't even watch through the windows, etc. Too many suspicious things.

Maybe there wasn't enough fraud to swing the election but we'll never know. What we do know is that enough Americans believe there was significant cheating is sufficient to re-establish a system in which the electorate has confidence that the vote is honest. Both parties, all Americans, should want that.

Election Integrity: 61% Say Issue Is Very Important

Preventing cheating in elections is a priority for voters, who expect the issue to be important in next month’s midterm elections.

www.rasmussenreports.com

Oh we know.
You just don't want to accept that your God lost.

If you don't have confidence in our elections...you'll either get over it or you won't. Nobody else will care.

 

[candycorn]

While I agree, many people still have to work holiday or not. There's no coherent argument against early voting. There's no coherent argument against verified mail in voting (ballots by request to address on registration file).

Inversely, there's no argument against valid IDs, if those states provide free IDs and easy access to obtain them.
Inversely, there's no argument against signature verification on mail in or in person ballot against the registration on file.
Inversely, there's no real argument against and easy to do mail in re-registration requirement every several years with notice.

That and like 14% of the states conduct every election through mail-in ballots to every registered voter and nobody has ever said that their elected officials were illegitimate.

 

[bripat9643]

While I agree, many people still have to work holiday or not. There's no coherent argument against early voting. There's no coherent argument against verified mail in voting (ballots by request to address on registration file).

Inversely, there's no argument against valid IDs, if those states provide free IDs and easy access to obtain them.
Inversely, there's no argument against signature verification on mail in or in person ballot against the registration on file.
Inversely, there's no real argument against and easy to do mail in re-registration requirement every several years with notice.

Have the election on a weekend. Everyone has to have at least one day off each week. Change the law so that employers cannot ask you to work all day on election day.

There's no argument for having mail-in ballots.

 

[bripat9643]

That and like 14% of the states conduct every election through mail-in ballots to every registered voter and nobody has ever said that their elected officials were illegitimate.

That's not true. Colorado was a red state until they started voting by mail.

 

[Lisa558]

The audits also showed that there was no way to determine what votes were fraudulent or which ones were not in some, maybe many, cases. A mail in ballot separated from the signature on the envelope that was the case in many states cannot be verified as to who sent in the ballot. That plus many other situations--poll watchers not allowed back in after the count was stopped in all swing states at pretty much the same time and then resumed; windows covered so the poll watchers couldn't even watch through the windows, etc. Too many suspicious things.

Maybe there wasn't enough fraud to swing the election but we'll never know. What we do know is that enough Americans believe there was significant cheating is sufficient to re-establish a system in which the electorate has confidence that the vote is honest. Both parties, all Americans, should want that.

Election Integrity: 61% Say Issue Is Very Important

Preventing cheating in elections is a priority for voters, who expect the issue to be important in next month’s midterm elections.

www.rasmussenreports.com

I say that the more consequential fraud was NOT on Election Night and Next-Day Halts, but on the media coordination with Dems to spread lies about Trump and suppress news that would make Biden look bad.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'd exclude primaries. Not every voter is either a (D) or (R). And none should be forced to be. For those that are, they shouldn't face any hurdle independents aren't required to face.

Most people do list a political party though. I register Republican so I can vote in our primary elections but I consider myself an independent until the Republican Party develops a backbone and demonstrates strength of their convictions. That's one thing I admire about Donald Trump. Sometimes rude, crude, obnoxious, petulant, and some mean tweets that are all off putting, but by golly he demonstrated strength of his convictions. He is the FIRST President of my lifetime who actually did his best to accomplish his campaign promises and that resulted in some amazing accomplishments.

So voting in the primary should be sufficient to keep a person's voter registration current. Those who don't or can't vote in the primary can still do so in the general election.

 

[Lisa558]

Not a bad concept there.

What’s wrong with having “Election Week” (to spread out the crowds), and employers required to grant a 4-hour paid absence to vote?

Nursing homes.

It was already stated that elderly (or disabled) people unable to get to the polls, or for whom the physical stress of standing on a long lane would be too difficult, would be eligible for mail ballots. That’s a big difference from allowing EVERYONE to do so.

 

[Foxfyre]

I say that the more consequential fraud was NOT on Election Night and Next-Day Halts, but on the media coordination with Dems to spread lies about Trump and suppress news that would make Biden look bad.

That was a big part of it, but we have had smear tactics used by both parties for a very long time now. It's just only the last 15 years or so we have had a media that is all in as a propaganda machine for Democrats and that no longer makes any effort to be honest or thorough in reporting the news.

 

[Foxfyre]

Not a bad concept there.

Nursing homes.

Certainly there should be provisions for absentee ballots. But my proposed policy would require that those ballots go only to properly verified and registered voters, and the signature on them should be notarized to ensure that the person returning the ballot is the person authorized to do so. Otherwise some unscrupulous person or persons might fill out and send in absentee ballots for everybody in a nursing home.

 

[Foxfyre]

If you are talking about ballots in Pennsylvania that were mailed in by voters without their secrecy envelopes, you can be comforted. After the primaries, where they were counted, Pennsylvania's Supreme Court ruled in response to lawsuits from Trump and the RNC that mailed in ballots that lacked their secrecy envelopes would not be counted in the general election and they were not. That disenfranchised roughly 100,000 Pennsylvania mail-in voters and as we all know, that decision hurt Democrats more than Republicans which was the actual reason Trump and the RNC brought those suits. No one ever presented any evidence of widespread voter fraud in Pennsylvania, real or attempted, before or after the election. The purpose of secrecy envelopes are to provide a physical separation between a voter's identifying information and the actual votes cast when votes were counted in public polling locations. You may recall that voting is supposed to be secret. No one is supposed to know how any specific person voted. Ballots using secrecy envelopes have to be separated from identifying information but that is done AFTER the voter's identities are validated. In modern systems, ballots are counted electronically or optically in centralized secure locations and the ballots remain anonymous due simply to the isolation and speed with which they are processed.

The loss of confidence of some citizens in the integrity of our voting system is almost ENTIRELY due to the lies and falsehoods put out by Donald Trump and his proxies before and after the election. There was no widespread voter fraud anywhere in the nation and Trump undertook his Big Lie campaign to enable his attempted overthrow of the vote in case it should turn out as he was repeatedly informed it would, with the election of Joe Biden.

No. The loss of confidence of MANY citizens is almost ENTIRELY due to unexplainable incidents in the voting process in 2020 that destroyed voter confidence in the system. Why would you WANT ballots that could be fraudulent ballots counted? How do you justify that as an American and citizen?

 

[Lisa558]

That was a big part of it, but we have had smear tactics used by both parties for a very long time now. It's just only the last 15 years or so we have had a media that is all in as a propaganda machine for Democrats and that no longer makes any effort to be honest or thorough in reporting the news.

I know. Pick a topic and take a look at Google. You can look through page after page before you find a link to an article that doesn’t support the leftist narrative.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Maybe. Or maybe not. While Clinton never got a majority of the vote, I don't think his elections were fraudulent. McCain was such a boring and for many unattractive candidate, and Sarah Palin's inexperience didn't help him, I am pretty sure Obama won fair and square. There may have been some hanky panky in the 2016 election, but I am confident Trump won. But I do believe there are enough unscrupulous political operatives to deliberately cheat and do so now and I want a system that makes it exceedingly difficult for them to do so.

The only people who would object to such a system has to be people want them to be able to cheat.

Biden even admitted Obama was put into office by fraud

 

[task0778]

Decades ago there was cheating and hanky panky in elections, but never did we have an electorate as suspicious and convinced of malfeasance or as fearful that elections can be stolen as we have now. Without faith that elections are fair and honest, it is unlikely that our constitutional republic will survive.

So I propose what I believe is a system/policy that, if implemented, will ensure roughly 99.9% honest and fair elections. Do you agree? If not please state your reason why it would be bad policy.

PHOTO ID:
Any person who is unable to secure a certified Driver's License w/photo or other valid photo ID may provide proof of citizenship and residence and apply for a free photo ID in the city or county where the person resides.

REGISTRATION:
All U.S. citizens who are not felons and who are sufficiently mentally competent to register to vote via their own intentional effort should go to the city or county clerk's office where they reside and:
1. Provide certified photo ID, proof of citizenship, proof of home residency, proof of age.
2. Anyone who moves out of his/her precinct must re-register in order to be allowed to vote.
3. Voter registration must be done 2 to 6 weeks prior to the election so that the person can be added to the official voter rolls.
4. Any person not voting in either the primary or general election in any given election year will be dropped from the voter rolls and must re-register to vote.
5. Some provision will be made for those who otherwise qualify but cannot physically go to the city or county clerk's office to register but the registration must be taken by a person with the city or county clerk's office.
5. Anyone falsifying his/her voter registration or knowingly accepting or creating fake registrations is subject to prosecution for a felony offense and, if convicted, will be subject to fine and/or imprisonment.

ELECTIONS:
1. All persons physically able must go to the polls in their assigned precinct personally and present positive certified photo ID and certify under oath that they live at the address shown on their voter registration. Early voting if allowed in any state may not exceed ten days prior to election day and must include all safeguards in place on election day.
2. Those who must or need to vote absentee will apply for an absentee ballot with a signed and notarized application.
3. The completed absentee ballot must be delivered to the precinct polling location no later than the close of the polls on election day. No ballots will be accepted from any source after the polls close. Every absentee ballot should be able to be matched with a notarized application for the ballot. No person having been issued an absentee ballot may vote by any means other than that absentee ballot.
4. Anyone voting in somebody else's name or hindering the timely delivery of absentee ballots to the polling place or discouraging or hindering people's ability to get to the polls will be subject to prosecution for a felony with penalties fines and/or imprisonment.
5. Only properly registered persons living within the United States and/or its territories are eligible to vote.

COUNTING THE VOTE:
1. All interested parties must be allowed to have representatives present and able to observe the counting process. Those representatives must be allowed to remain until the counting is completed and will be given a certified document verifying what the final count is.
2. All ballots will be via paper ballots and hand counted. Counting will continue without interruption, even if people have to be replaced, until all ballots are counted and the results provided to the city or county officials as well as to the poll watchers.

Recognizing that for every rule, there can be necessary exceptions for truly valid reasons such as natural disasters or whatever, the above should insure that never again will any person have to wonder whether an election was stolen.

My take, FWIW:

If you can't or won't get a photo-id then you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Even if it's just an ID card that shows you're a resident in a city and state, no ID should mean no vote. I would require the ID cards to be free of charge, and I would have teams going to nursing homes and the like to create ID cards for the infirm.

Remember the stories a few years back when Obama was the prez, where people who could not do their own paperwork for SSI or taxes could be declared ineligible to own a gun? And in some cases it was alleged that their guns were confiscated if they had any? Well, same deal with voting, if you can't manage your own affairs without assistance then you shouldn't be voting either. I would assume that every gov't assistance program has a place where the individual is declared to be mentally capable of making their own decisions, and the Medicare/Medicaid payments ought to reflect that. Cuz somebody has to sign the paperwork, and if it wasn't the individual involved then that person shouldn't be voting or have anyone vote for her/him. So, if the gov't says you need special care then you ought not to be voting, and I don't care who you are.

I would require every citizen above the age of 18 to file a tax return whether you owe anything or not. That's one way to ensure dead people don't vote. No return? No vote. And no federal aid either. Who are you and where do you live? This can be more than just improving election integrity, it can also assist in reducing gov't fraud, waste, and abuse. Hey, we're gonna have 87,000 new IRS agents, right? Well put their asses to work.

Before I retired, I used to be a database software designer/developer/analyst/tester for the USAF. Every USAF base or installation around the world was connected up to central database in Texas for all personnel data and actions. Well, we oughta have a similar national database that connects state databases that checks for duplicate IDs and changes, where somebody moved from X location to Y. Every database from the IRS to SSA to Medicare/Medicaid to every other federal agency that tracks US citizens for any gov't program ought to be interfaced to make sure people ain't voting more than once and also that they ain't dead. I don't care if it's only 10 people, do it anyway. And BTW, I think that happens for a lot more than 10 instances. It's doable, folks. Costly maybe, but doable. Do you want election integrity or not?

 

[Foxfyre]

Ah, here we go (had to find the thread again).

Sorry I didn't have time to amplify earlier, but here goes -

I am a "credentialed security expert", I look at this issue the same way as if I'd been called into a corporation to deal with a hack or a data breach.

First thing I do is assess, and determine what kind of security you already have in place. (there are formal levels and protocols for compliance and etc)

Then I figure out how the hack happened, what vulnerability exactly was being exploited, and how it was exploited and for what reason. Detective work.

Then I start earning my money, by creating a plan that will actually work, to meet both the stated need and the actual need as I understand it

And finally, with the approval of the board we implement the new plan, and then we TEST it, exhaustively, with red teams and a dozen other ways.

So for instance - one of the key and most successful concepts in corporate security is "two factor authentication". If you're a bank or a hospital or a government agency, maybe you need to identify someone and be "absolutely certain" they are who they say they are. The banks, use the debit card - and the two factors there are that you a) have to be in physical possession of the card, and b) have to know the PIN.

That, is not perfect. It's "better than nothing", but it's not perfect. For example a criminal could steal someone's wallet and then force them to reveal the PIN. To get any better security-wise, the unnameable agencies use things like biometrics - fingerprints, retina scans, things that "only you" can possess. And, that's not perfect either (the process can be compromised during enrollment), but it's a LOT better. Maybe we move from 90% confidence to 99% confidence, with biometrics.

In the case of voting, the system has to be enabling and permissive, just like bank cards, but it also has to be secure - "at least as" secure as a bank card. Right?

Our primary interests are:

1. Ensuring that we know who's voting
2. Ensuring they're eligible to vote
3. Making sure they don't vote twice

It SOUNDS pretty simple, right?

So, the idea of two factor authentication CAN be implemented in a reliable way with mail in ballots. Switzerland has been doing it for years. You get a PIN when you register, and then they send you a postcard when it's time to vote, with a magic code on it. When you vote, you have to enter both the PIN and the code, in addition to answering some personal questions and some you selected at the time of enrollment. This system has worked well for 30 years. (Switzerland has other problems, they got hacked on the back end at one point, but the back end of all this is a whole separate discussion - that would be the counting piece and the Dominion piece and how we handle all that).

We definitely don't want to allow every Tom Dick and Harry to drop absentee ballots into a box, that's just stupid.

Anyway, if you'd like to continue the discussion at this level we could talk about the counting part for a while too.

Switzerland

Yes. If the person shows up physically, we have a wide choice of a NUMBER of very reliable authentication methods. In person voting is definitely preferred.

But let's talk about "other ways". We know people will demand them. Mail-in, and computer. And combinations thereof.

I don't know if you're aware, but Microsoft (Windows) is requiring every machine to have a TPM as of next year. TPM is 'trusted platform module', it's basically a chip with a number in it, which you activate when you first install your Windows (and I'm sure Apple is doing the same thing for Mac's). With the TPM your machine can be uniquely identified, to the exclusion of all others.

So then, the reason mail is unreliable is because the signature is the only method of authentication. If we ADD to that a computer code, the method becomes much more reliable. (That:s what they do in Switzerland, mail plus computer). The computer code becomes our "second factor" for authentication. Which would at least put us up into the high 90's for confidence.

We should also consider registration (enrollment), which is problematic in many states because they take direct feeds from the drivers' license systems. Just because a person gets a driver's license doesn't mean they're eligible to vote. But for instance in California, voter registration is automatic at the time you get your drivers' license. So that business has to stop, that's a serious vulnerability and that interface has to be carefully scrutinized and controlled.

Everybody doesn't have a computer. Everybody doesn't use Microsoft. I'm sure a lot of security experts are consulted in how best to commit fraud in various things as well as in how to avoid committing fraud. One of my specialities was to recognize lax policies in businesses that encouraged employee theft and suggestions to shore up those weaknesses.

And as far as Switzerland goes, it has a land area approximating Minnesota, a population approximating New York City. It has a parliament system that ensures a certain number of seats for each registered political party and parliament chooses seven councilors who carry out the will of Parliament and in turn rotate the 'presidency' among themselves as the titular head of state. Therefore their President has far less authority/power than ours. And Switzerland also has one of the most homogenous populations in the world. There is no way to compare their system with ours or use them as a suggested guide for us.

And I don't care how secure Microsoft may make their computers. I know enough about what programmers to do to know that programmers can make a system do pretty much whatever they want it to do.

 

[Foxfyre]

Biden even admitted Obama was put into office by fraud

Well given Biden's unreliability with the truth about much of anything, I wouldn't consider that actual 'evidence.' But whether or not that is true, I don't think many people think he didn't actually win his elections. Nevertheless, a substantial majority of Americans believe there has been significant fraud in our elections and 61% of Americans say the issue of election integrity is very important. Elected representatives who actually represent the people instead of themselves take serious note of that.

Election Integrity: 61% Say Issue Is Very Important

Preventing cheating in elections is a priority for voters, who expect the issue to be important in next month’s midterm elections.

www.rasmussenreports.com

Again, I cannot help but believe those who are strongly arguing against election reform and as fool proof as system as possible WANT there to be ability to cheat. And they go ad hominem, try to pick fights, throw in all kinds of nonsensical garbage and engage in flaming in an effort to derail the discussion. Quite telling actually.

I do appreciate those who have legitimate concerns about the proposed policy in the OP and/or think some other direction is preferable. Multiple heads looking for solutions usually produce fewer errors and complications than just one.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I fear that there are more insane government school grads than are in that calculation.

Living, voting minorities hate democrats, but the Party makes up those losses the Tammany Hall way

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Well given Biden's unreliability with the truth about much of anything, I wouldn't consider that actual 'evidence.' But whether or not that is true, I don't think many people think he didn't actually win his elections. Nevertheless, a substantial majority of Americans believe there has been significant fraud in our elections and 61% of Americans say the issue of election integrity is very important. Elected representatives who actually represent the people instead of themselves take serious note of that.

Election Integrity: 61% Say Issue Is Very Important

Preventing cheating in elections is a priority for voters, who expect the issue to be important in next month’s midterm elections.

www.rasmussenreports.com

Again, I cannot help but believe those who are strongly arguing against election reform and as fool proof as system as possible WANT there to be ability to cheat. And they go ad hominem, try to pick fights, throw in all kinds of nonsensical garbage and engage in flaming in an effort to derail the discussion. Quite telling actually.

I do appreciate those who have legitimate concerns about the proposed policy in the OP and/or think some other direction is preferable. Multiple heads looking for solutions usually produce fewer errors and complications than just one.

Thew DNC IS ON RECORD that even an accurate voter database is an EXISTENTIAL THREAT