Oregon's Wonderful Voting Experiment

while the rest of us were really wondering if our vote counted. It's almost foolproof, because of the paper trail. Every vote can be authenticated. Unlike what we have now, relying on Diebold, or other Republican corporations. And, seeing how we can't seem to get anything changed over the interests of the corporations, let's put our trust in McSame. We can trust him, I'm sure!

but I'll address your other points as well. Before I do so, I would like to point out that I don't think this is a perfect system, far from it. But I do think its worth our review, especially given how successful it has been.

1) Experiment - I called it an experiment because it isn't widely used outside of Oregon. I'm borrowing from Justice Steven's analogy because I do think the states offer the ability to experiment like this and see how it works.

2) Turnout - I'll admit, the data here is inconclusive. In 1998 they had I think 59% turnout and followed that in a presidential year with 68%. In 2004 they had 87%, third highest in the country. I'll admit to a correlation bias here, but its certainly encouraging.

3) Voter fraud - The 2005 Carter-Baker study seemed to indicate that the signature verification system worked well to prevent voter fraud. It isn't fool proof, but most cases were caught from what I read. I have a hard time believing this is less secure than me walking into your polling station and voting when I don't have to provide ID.

4) Vote selling - I have a hard time believing this is an issue, but I can't disprove it either, I would think if vote selling were occurring on any significant basis, it would garner more attention.

5) This seems to be a red herring. How am I intimidated in the privacy of my own home? If my spouse or family is the culprit, they will initimidate me whether I fill out the ballot at home or in the booth. If that really is an issue, do it at Subway.

6) Scanners - There is still a paper trail in this case, which has been the primary indictment of the electronic machines.

7) This seems to be a straw man at best. Do you have any evidence of vote tampering? The study I cited above made no reference to it as an issue.

8) this is a repeat of 2

The Slater article is an interesting read, but mostly repeats some of your arguments. The voter stratification thread is interesting, but not wholly convincing. His indictment of VBM suffers from the same correlation bias he attributes on the turnout argument. Do poor people vote less because of mail in balloting or because they feel less empowered?

Slater's indictment of voter roll purging lacks support. He gives no indication that this takes place in Oregon, other than lumping them in with other states alleged to purge voter rolls. Denver is the only empirical example he provides. I agree with his construct regarding voter purging for infrequent votes. If I'm registered, I have the right to vote under the NVRA. My registration should never be purged without cause. Not voting in 2007 shouldn't be one.

While I won't claim that Oregon's VBM approach is perfect, it has some compelling points. The best of all worlds will be when we can vote online, but that unfortunately has some obstacles to becoming consistent and effective.

First of all, let me say up front that after my early voting experience and observations recently, I am far from convinced that North Carolina's voter registration/verification system is even adequate, much less sound and efficient.

Be that as it may, these arguments against VBM:

Third Voter fraud? Most people don't even know what that is.
"Voter Fraud" is really "voter impersonation", i.e someone poses as another person in order to cast their ballot. It is a felony. Oregon has signature verification (however good that might be).

Fourth, with Vote By Mail, elections are wide open to the risk of VOTE SELLING . With VBM, the voter can easily sign the ballot and turn it over to a collaborator for a fee.

are in direct conflict with opinions Project Vote used when decrying the use of voter caging to identify potentially fraudulent votes:

Last, but certainly not least, the ballot security programs conducted by Republican entities are in response to alleged problems with voter fraud. Yet, no significant problems with voter fraud exist. Voter fraud, where it is found involves tactics such as the misdirection of absentee ballots, voter intimidation tactics at polling places, or vote buying. It is far from common and it is not the province of one party. More importantly, voter fraud in which an individual voter votes more than once, the type of fraud voter caging operations are designed to catch, are extremely rare. Cases in which a voter is registered in two different jurisdictions are more likely to be the result of failure to cancel an old registration than an intent to vote twice. Mass challenges coupled with media campaigns alleging widespread voter fraud may serve a political agenda, but they are of questionable value in ensuring election integrity.

And as far as this is concerned:

Eighth, the claim of higher voter turnout is based on incomplete data.

I can tell you with a great deal of confidence that many of the folks who endured the unbelievably inept voter verification process recently will not try to early vote again for some time, meaning they will have to dash home from work and stand in long lines at their designated polling place on election day. Which also means that a lot of them just won't do it.

Thats one thing I was curious about. Evidently they they were polling people who dropped off ballots in person yesterday? That seems like it opens up a whole set of issues about quality of the set of people you're polling. What about all the people who mailed theirs in ages ago?

Really don't take my word on VBM. I've posted some valuable links in my other comments up the thread, or you can do your own research.

I developed my opinion on VBM opinion from reading what was written by experts like Dr. Corry and Michael Slater and also from work with other voting activists in other states.

Next, let me disclose that I often communicate with some very good voting activists from Oregon who like their system, but are mortified at the idea of how poorly many other states would impliment it. Their fear is that some of us would discredit a system that seems to work well for them. They spent 10 years gradually implimenting the system and there is more to it than just getting your ballot in the mail every year.

Imagine Florida going to VBM, when in 2004 tens of thousands of absentee ballots went "missing".

I can't imagine NC having Vote By Mail, as crooked as politics are here. (Not saying we don't have fine representatives).

Each of the 50 states are unique in how they run elections. Some states have partisan secretary of states and partisan election directors running their elections. Ohio and Florida are an example. In Florida election directors actually run for office.

Ohio's SOS was the State Party Chair of the republican party in 2004. That isn't allowed in NC.

There will always be problems in elections, even in NC. Our biggest problem right now is voter rolls - we still are issuing provisional ballots. Many voters don't update their registration if they move for example. We still get reports that people registered at the DMV and aren't on the rolls! I know people who have voted for years who don't know that their registration does not follow them wherever they go.

Vote By Mail won't help that problem.

For people who just LOVE the idea of vote by mail, you have the option of requesting to be a permanent absentee by mail voter in NC if that is what you really want to do.