Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on On the Secret Ballot

1

Given the quality of the candidates for office, who'd want everyone to know who they'd voted for? As soon as some elected screws up, those who voted for them would have that scarlet letter on their breasts. And in this single-party city/state, if everyone knew you'd voted for someone on the dark side at some point, you'd be discriminated against in employment, receiving services, in court, etc. Secrecy in the polling booth (well, you know what I mean) still serves the same purpose it did in England in the 1800's: it protects voters from retribution by those in charge.

Posted by plebe | March 9, 2007 1:07 PM
2

I'm sure many people would love to be able to sell their votes to the highest bidder.

Posted by LukeB | March 9, 2007 1:07 PM
3

The Electoral College is the first anachronism that should be eliminated from our voting system.

Posted by Timebomb | March 9, 2007 1:11 PM
4

The Electoral College is the first anachronism that should be eliminated from our voting system.

Posted by Timebomb | March 9, 2007 1:11 PM
5

And what about all the wives who tell their overbearing husbands they're voting for McCain when they secretly intend to vote for Hillary?

Posted by flamingbanjo | March 9, 2007 1:12 PM
6

Removing secrecy would be a disaster for anyone with a contrary opinion in a one-party area, e.g. a conservative in Seattle proper, or a liberal in rural Utah.

Although those people are obviously far from always right, I'd think that that kind of independent thought is pretty healthy for an otherwise stale intellectual environment.

Posted by MHD | March 9, 2007 1:55 PM
7

There was a pastor who tried to kick out his Kerry-voting parishioners, not to mention all the Catholic bishops who have been trying to deny communion to pro-choice politicians. What would they do to voters who support pro-choicers?

Posted by keshmeshi | March 9, 2007 2:03 PM
8

Yeah, I'll flesh out LukeB's argument a little here: one of the things that prevents vote buying is that there's no way to guarantee that the buyers got what they paid for. If we get rid of the secret ballot that line of defense goes away.

There are other ways to protect the process. Creating a national standard for voting rights that included a paper trail would be a good first step.

Posted by John Lilburne | March 9, 2007 2:18 PM
9

Good points, JL.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 9, 2007 2:21 PM
10

fortune 500 companies would totally require their employees to vote rethuglican if there was no secret ballot. it would be a total mess. did the stranger relocate to communist Russia all of a sudden?!?

Posted by war pigs | March 9, 2007 2:22 PM
11

I think a good system would be electronic voting that spits out a receipt (w/o personal information), and you can go online after the election, punch in your receipt # and verify your ballot was tabulated correctly.

Posted by him | March 9, 2007 3:06 PM
12

i'm convinced. public voting would not work. it's a bad idea. sorry.

Posted by charles mudede | March 9, 2007 4:02 PM
13

What prevents vote buying with absentee ballots? You just get your ballot in the mail, sign it like a blank check, and sell it to the highest bidder. They fill it in and mail it, and they know they got what they paid for.

Look at fund raising and vote totals. What's the most a real train wreck of a campaign spends per vote? Five bucks? Rarely that much, if ever. Who would bother selling a vote for five bucks?

I think it would be a breath of fresh air for the Roman Catholic church to punish those who vote pro choice. Who do they think they're fooling? A God they don't believe in? A church they don't believe in? Are they there for the lovely candles and pretty stained glass?

Charles is right. Transparency.

But first, states with half the electoral votes need to commit to giving all their votes to the winner of the popular vote. Once we neuter the electoral college, then get some sunshine in voting.

Posted by elenchos | March 9, 2007 5:17 PM
14

I would love to know who people voted for. That I could mock any Aaron Dixon or Lyndon Laroche supports I know.

And damn elenchos thats a good idea, I wonder how much I cloud get for my Viaduct ballot. hmmmm...

Posted by Giffy | March 9, 2007 6:03 PM
15

No to changing the secret ballot, but yes to instant runoff voting.

Posted by Some Jerk | March 9, 2007 7:36 PM
16

Anyone who is afraid of retribution based on who they vote for is a pussy. If someone doesn't like how I've voted then I say bring it on sucka.

Posted by Billy's Sauce | March 10, 2007 10:53 AM
17

Hi Jim. You letter i received. Thanks! Photos is GREAT!!!!

Posted by Slim | March 20, 2007 6:03 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).