Deanna Martin, writing for the Indianapolis Star, has an article about a voting bill moving through the legislature. The bill has two main provisions: voting centers and “no-excuse” absentee voting.
The voting center provision would allow any county to opt for using these voting centers. Basically, they are polling places where anyone in the county can vote, regardless of the precinct in which they live. You go to the center, get the ballot appropriate for your precinct, and vote. There was a test run of these centers in Tippecanoe County where I live. There were some kinks in the implementation that need to be worked out, but I liked the concept. I was downtown working and voted for one of the centers there instead of having to go back to the south side of town to cast my vote.
I guess I’m a little cautious about absentee voting. Actually, my main concern is less about not physically going to the polling place and more about casting one’s vote earlier than the majority of citizens. Elections are essentially a snapshot of the will of the electorate at a given point in time. A longer voting season results in voters casting their ballots based on different sets of information. The early voters don’t have information available to the later voters, and the later voters may have forgotten the information that heavily influenced the early voters. I guess this highlights the difficulty of trying to capture the “will of the people” more than anything else.
Of course, I suppose it should go without saying that allowing “no excuse” absentee voting flies in the face of the Voter ID requirement for in-person voting. Lots more potential for fraud with absentee voting.
With electronic voting it seems absolutely ridiculous that you can’t vote at any precinct you wish. In Fort Wayne anyone can vote early at the downtown election board office regardless of your precinct. I definitely support the idea of voting centers….
I like the idea of voting centers but have heard suggestions that they would *replace* the precinct places with a fewer number of larger voting centers. I think this would do *way* more to deter voters than a voter ID would. At least in Indy, people without cars can typically walk to their local precinct – if they have to take a bus, it’s going to seriously put a crimp on voting (amount of time, cost of bus, etc.).
I believe the fewer voting sites the less chance for fraud.
Yeah, reducing the number of precincts (which I understand to be the point of voting centers) concerns me quite a bit. I like that my local precinct is only three blocks from where I live, and – unlike township offices – I think this is an old idea that still makes a lot of sense today. It should be really easy to vote.
I wouldn’t mind having the option of *also* voting downtown – but living in Indy, I in no way want to wait in line with 100,000 other people who are *also* trying to vote downtown.
Ok, actually read the article and yes, it indeed implies that this will save costs due to fewer polling places. I repeat my caution above… this has a huge potential for deterring voters.
I agree with Glenn, absentee balloting is much more vulnerable to fraud, or improper election activities like buying votes, compared with voting at a polling place. I’m not so bothered by people voting a little early if they prefer, but I’d like to ensure that (a) the person identified as the voter actually filled out the ballot, and (b) nobody else was able to review their vote.
Same here – polling place is four blocks from my house. I work from home and don’t drive. With our oh-so-lovely transportation system, it would take a MINIMUM of 2-hours out of my workday to take a bus downtown, walk to the polling center, vote (assuming little to no line), walk back to the bus stop, wait for a bus, and take it back home. Not to mention the $3 for the round-trip bus-fare. I’m young (relatively) and healthy and can face that trip – what about the 80-something lady across the street?
We need to be making voting *easier* not more restrictive.
Brenda,
I agree. I think we should keep the precinct voting system but allow voters to vote at ANY precinct…
Lisa,
I think it cuts both ways. Fewer polling places means fewer sites at which fraud can potentially take place, but it also means that the magnitude of achievable fraud is larger.
Admittedly, my point is mitigated by the fact that voting machinery we do use is so craptacular that it lacks even the most fundamental input validation checks. For instance, thanks to those paragons of American laissez-faire capitalism, Diebold and Election Systems and Software, we have such election failures as the following:
Negative sixteen thousand votes. No doubt Republicans are still guffawing and slapping each other on the back over that one.
Yup–it’s this sort of respect for the fundamental mechanisms of democracy that makes America great.
Several of these comments mention reducing fraud. Has there ever been a proven case of voter fraud in Indiana?
No James, I don’t think there ever has been a proven voter fraud case in Indiana, and that’s the point I guess. It makes no sense for the legislature to scream “voter fraud!” in passing a voter ID law for in-person voting, while passing a law that expands at least the potential for fraud with respect to absentee voting.
Re: Voter fraud
I’m not particularly active in my inner-city neighborhood, yet the people at the voting place still seem to know who I am and ask after my neighbors.
Actually, that fact touches on an “intangible” of local voting places – the “community interaction” of voting. There is almost a “festive” air in our polling place as people take the opportunity to introduce themselves and chat about the neighborhood. I swear some of the older generation gets dressed up to go vote.