One question i had was: The concept of early voting was to help people save time. They ended up having immensely long lines outside election stations. Why the waste of time and resources?

Yes, it didn’t help that early voters had to contend with too few polling stations and too short hours Even funnier and ironic was when FL’s Republican Governor extended early voting hours and a Florida Republican said that Crist “just blew Florida for John McCain.”

That reminds me, with a little tsunami of guilt, that I haven’t done your last tag yet I really need to stop dragging my feet.

What do you have in NYC? Not a touch screen then?

The showing the finger part was funny
An audit trail is defined as either a paper or an electronic trail. Given issues like vote flipping by EVMs and that unlike double-entry bookkeeping, there is no internal reconciliation possible here, electronic reconciliation is meaningless. One needs a paper trail so the voter can sign off that his vote has been recorded as per his intention. Then, at least in close elections, audit the paper trail (as this NYT op-ed suggests) to ensure that EVM vote totals match the paper trail.

On whether people, who do not understand much of the issues, really should bother to vote, I have a somewhat controversial stand so we shall just have to disagree.

You say: “If we start disallowing people from voting..”. I should clarify that I did not say they should not be allowed to vote. That implies the agency of the state. I said whether they should vote (or bother to vote). Subtle difference but one that modifies what I said substantially.

On your last paragraph, I must reiterate I did not suggest homeless people’s intelligence stood in the way but just that if proof of address wasn’t an essential requirement, they could vote. In that respect, the address requirement is an arbitrary and ‘unequalising’ requirement.

Few homeless people are born homeless; even fewer are voluntarily homeless. This means that most are in the ‘system’ in one way or another and can establish their identity (assuming all political will is not spent to ensure disenfranchisement).

Through work done with British charities that help homeless people, I have had some exposure to the issues homeless people face. Red tape aside, some refuse to be housed, and others find it difficult to find permanent or gainful employment. The third sector does a lot – at least in the UK – to ensure the homeless do not fall off the political radar. In the UK, the homeless can register to vote by making a declaration of local connection to an area. So systemically there are several avenues.

Thanks.

We will agree to disagree then
US laws require an address proof and a declration will not suffice. That said, I am sure there are ways homeless people can find to vote even in the US, but if the procedure is cumbersome/ lengthy or requires enough advance planning, someone who lives on a daily wage is likely to give up

Hmm. I do not know how you concluded that I said homeless people should not vote. The bit in the bracket refers to the second part ‘proof of address’ which is what may prevent homeless people from voting. The issues bit is separate.

I said: people, whose capabilities do not stretch to putting together two pieces of ID, probably should not vote. So it is not about having a fixed abode but about having enough brain cells to understand issues (and to cobble together two pieces of paper) none of which has any relationship – and I did not imply one – with the fixed abode bit. In addition, I said that if proof of address wasn’t required, homeless people could easily vote. Now I am still trying to figure out how you concluded that I said homeless people should not vote.

I was only responding to this part of your comment:
“What do they understand of what they are voting for after all? People who do not understand issues are the most easily confused and most easily influenced.”

Incidentally, the issues with homeless people not being able to vote (or get a proof of identity) have nothing to do with their intelligence, but are more about procedural issues/ practical difficulties/ red-tape and so on..

In some counties, it is computerized, but not in all But the computerized ones have their issues too – many machines don’t have a paper trail, sometimes (I don’t how often this happens, hopefully rarely) they flip your vote to the other candidate (i.e. if you voted for X, your vote will register for Y), and of course, just when you need them, their touch screens break down and you have to use paper after all..