D.C. Insurance Dept. Denies Birth Control Coverage Meddling
Controversy Over Rhee Now to Include Sex, Congress
Report: CCDC Split From UDC Is "Critical To Success"
Same-Sex Marriage Foes Have Few Options on Hill
Overheard in D.C.: Careful What You Wish For
The D.C. Council voted today to give preliminary approval to a bill that would allow District of Columbia voters to cast early ballots and to register and vote on Election Day. The Post has more on the story.
The bill, introduced by Ward 3's Mary Cheh, still needs to be voted on a second time, but unanimous approval today means it'll likely pass.
We're all for making it easier for D.C. residents to vote, even if those votes don't count toward representation in Congress. The Post's story cites some critics concerned about an increased potential for voter fraud, and while our faith in the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics is by no means high, there really is no evidence to suggest that removing impediments to casting a ballot leads to fraud. Key to Cheh's bill is the inclusion of provisions that will force the BOEE to implement a verifiable paper trail, a reform that is long overdue.
But perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the bill is buried at the bottom of the story:
There is a provision in her legislation calling for a study on whether the city should implement "automatic registration." That means anyone who is eligible to vote would be automatically registered, which Cheh said is common in European democracies.A move like this would make the District the most progressive municipality in the country when it comes to voter registration. I, for one, would love to see this study go forward.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
"there really is no evidence to suggest that removing impediments to casting a ballot leads to fraud. Key to Cheh's bill is the inclusion of provisions that will force the BOEE to implement a verifiable paper trail, a reform that is long overdue."
OK, so there is no evidence that removing barriers to voting increases fraud. Agreed.
However, there is also no evidence that the lack of a "verifiable paper trail" leads to manipulation of the actual votes cast.
Unless you are one of those who actualy believe that a secret conspiracy of Karl Rove, the Ohio Secretary of State and the voting machine companies conspired to re-elect George Bush against the wishes of the American people. And if you are one of those people, may I suggest either: a) checking yourself into a mental institution for treatment for paranoid delusions, or b) taking a bus to NYC so you can stand outside of Ground Zero and rant about how the same secret cabal also conspired to concoct the entire 9-11 tragedy.
Automatic registration would put ACORN (and everyone else) out of the voter registration business, meaning that conspiracy theorists would have to come up with new delusions about the organization.
Hillvada, there's plenty of evidence that things go wrong in vote counting, as we found out in last year's primary. Paper trails aren't just about preventing fraud. They're about not having the central process of democracy happen inside an unauditable black box that we somehow believe is infallible.
Which primary is that? Were charges filed? Did any official investigating body every issue a conclusion that the actual vote was manipulated?
In other words, where is the proof.
By the way, for most of the 20th Century voting was conducted in most cities, including DC, without any sort of paper trail. The old "lever machines" still in use in a few cities, had no paper trail. You hit the lever and gears turned. Then the machine was opened up and the numbers were counted. Could gears be rigged? Could vote counters be bought off? How did the American Republic ever survive...
By the way, if you had the means, why would you manipulate voting machines? The return on the investment and the return on the risk is simply too low, especially with our system of separation of powers. Why not use your skills to manipulate ATM machines, or slot machines, or the computers that process bank transactions? Do you think Michael Milken or Bernie Madoff ever seriously considered putting their criminal skills to use manipulating voting machines?
Imagine how upset you would be if you rigged the Presidential election in favor of George W Bush, hoping against hope, for your dream of limited government and reduced spending to become a reality...or if you rigged the election in favor of Obama hoping for a government-run health care system, gay marriage, or even the closure of Guantanamo Bay.
Economists have long argued that voting is, strictly speaking, and irrational activity. The cost of casting the ballot far outweighs any expected utility gained from an individual vote. Imagine what they would say about the cost of trying to rig an election vs. the expected utility you would gain from a given candidate's victory, even if that victory could be assured (which would require manipulating votes in many states, etc).
To put it more simply, voter fraud is not a big problem for the exact same reasons that voting machine fraud is not a big problem.
cynicism, thy name is hillvada.