Thesis

In John Fund’s reflection, the Department of Investigation went through a procedure to see how easy it was to commit voter fraud. The DOI had sent out agents to show up at 63 polling places all who “pretended to be voters who should have been turned away by election officials; the agents assumed names of individuals who had died or moved out of town, or who were sitting in jail. 61 instances, or 97 percent of the time, the testers were allowed to vote.” (Fund, pg 353) After gathering this evidence that voter fraud was possible and way easier than it seemed, they published a report which accused the city’s Board of Elections voting

American citizens shall be able to make use of all technology available to digitally track their vote for the president of the United States.

Voter ID Laws, now present in some form or another in thirty states, require individuals to show government-issued identification in order to cast a ballot on Election Day. The debate over the need for such laws has never been more important. Voter ID laws were brought to the forefront of American politics in the most recent presidential election as a result of President Elect Donald Trump’s insistence that the election process in America is riddled with wide-spread voter fraud. His claims of a “rigged election” were printed, broadcast, and proliferated through social media for the majority of his campaign. Such claims, if factual, should certainly be immediately rectified. The United States is built on the integrity of its election process and maintaining that integrity is paramount. The issue at hand is: Are these claims of widespread voter fraud fact or fiction? The key driver in the debate over Voter ID laws is whether or not such laws are intended to prevent voter fraud or whether the laws themselves are a form of government-endorsed fraud intended to suppress the vote of specific populations. The fact remains that neither the President Elect nor the states implementing Voter ID laws have been able to produce evidence of election rigging or widespread voter fraud. As such, without evidence of the need for the supposed protection from fraud that these laws are intended to provide, we can only conclude that such laws are not

The voting process in America appears straightforward, but it is a very complex, complicated system. The Electoral College is America’s current voting system. The Electoral College still serves its intended purpose, but with increasing political activity among Americans it has caused a need to reform this process. Research suggests that the Electoral College system should be amended because it poorly illustrates democracy, is outdated and the majority of Americans are in favor of abolishing the system.

“legal precision” about what is constituted a vote. In due course, the candidates, nor the

Elections, if only due to their colossal size, are difficult to measure. The 2000 presidential election Florida recount exemplifies the issues associated with vote counting and the often unsuccessful implementation of technology to remedy a centuries old process. Technology in the election process is often accompanied by great skepticism, and blunders are not uncommon—see Mitt Romney’s

The election of 2000 between Al Gore and George H. W. Bush was not a legitimate election because although Bush had won the popular vote, Gore had won the electoral vote. When it came down to the competition for Florida’s 25 electoral votes, it was awarded to Bush. However, senior citizens in Palm Beach County claimed that the ballot was misleading and they think they voted for the wrong person. This caught the eye of Gore’s campaign team and they asked for a recount of votes in Florida since the Bush had only been .03% ahead of Gore in this state. The punch card ballots themselves were unreliable because they would cause dimples in the papers instead of holes and the machine they ran through would occasionally close the flaps that had once

For several decades, the American people have been skeptical if their votes count due to the uncertainty of various voting methods. The election process is marred with dissatisfaction and inaccuracy in governmental elections. Voting means a lot to citizens because it is what gets the people’s voices heard. There are voters that are uncertain of trusting the candidates that will make their laws and regulations, however, they still have the power to vote them out from office. But when different types of voting equipment have problems those issues affect all voters. There are ways of voting that can sometimes fail, and the discovery of fraud in the voting process can make people question the election results. The right to vote is what many Americans believe is the most essential part of being an American in a democratic nation. To keep the American citizens’, trust the voting operation system must work properly and establish that the people’s votes are counted. The American election administration is facing the new generation of technology that is designed for voting. The management of hardware and software can be a great challenge for many upcoming elections throughout the years ahead. Today, there are several methods of counting votes with equipment that are used for the election system. The voting methods are Direct-Recording Electronic (DRE), Optical Scan Paper

The U.S Constitution gives the states considerable latitude in the way of conducting elections. The American citizens have many opportunities to vote. However, a turnout in American elections has dramatically decreased over the past several decades. In order to address this issue, majority of states have allowed absentee voting reforms. These convenient reforms are thought to increase the voter turnout in the elections, as well as to reduce administrative costs.

J.J Strossmayer who holds a P.H.D in law research found that empty and invalid ballot papers (defined as blank or spoiled votes) are one of the biggest problems of the countries that have a compulsory voting. During Brazil’s 1990 elections voter turnout was 76.57%, but 40% of the votes were deemed invalid. (Mackerras & Mcallister 1999) (Evidence: Statistics) In Ecuador’s 2006 elections 40% votes were

In this essay, I would like to discuss the major obstacles to voting, recent changes to overcome voting barriers and the political influence of changed rules. Low turnout in the U.S. reflects that there are obstacles for people to voting and changes to overcome these obstacles may also bring new problems to different social groups. I will elaborate on these aspects in the following parts.

Chads are perforated and held onto by 3 spots, but often only 1 or 2 of these spots comes undone cleanly which is known as a hanging chad. This analog manner of literally “punching” votes can be very ambiguous when read by a machine. Erik Nilsson calls these machines antiques and rightfully so, these machines have no place in polling places.

But, as of today there is no solid way of knowing if someone is or is not trying to sneak in more than one ballot. “I don’t know if anybody knows how prevalent it is, because the only time you find out is when somebody gets caught.” (Guzman, 1) And the statistics of that happening is .00000013 percent or 26 out of every 197 million cases. Because there are multiple techniques that can and have been used time after time again. Although this is the case there has been some attempt to prevent it. Voter ID law are one example, but it is far from the perfect solution. First, it prevents only one type of voter’s fraud, voter impersonation. And, second, the voter’s ID laws has been ruled as discrimination; so the rule is not enforced everywhere and the public can vote without

Being an adept of advanced modern technologies, I disagree with the author about considering communication technologies a danger to American democracy. Accepting or not, we live in a fast developing world where digital technologies have become essential in order to ensure a better life. Accordingly, e-voting represents an accommodation of the society to the digital world and makes citizen more responsible for their actions. By pressing the button on the digital screen to express a political preference, the citizen assumes responsibilities. Therefore, citizens have to press the button that indicates their political preferences and nothing else. Citizens should not overthink computer security since the government has enough resources to ensure

No ballots can be misplaced and there is no need for poll workers to help a voter out by looking over the voters shoulder, then making changes where necessary (Voting Technology Project). People are looking to protect their privacy and make sure that there vote is one of the votes that really count. The problem is that it is not safe to have a paper or receipt type thing printed out for a voter, this type of thing could lead to a wide spread buying of votes by the separate sides. Buying votes is obviously something neither side wants to see happen.