|
Members of military must waive secret ballots
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DaveSZ |
America is becoming less and less recognizable imo.
| quote: |
Members of the military will be allowed to vote this year by faxing or e-mailing their ballots - after waiving their right to a secret ballot. Beyond this fundamentally undemocratic requirement, the Electronic Transmission Service, as it's known, has far too many problems to make it reliable, starting with the political partisanship of the contractor running it. The Defense Department is making matters worse by withholding basic information about the service, and should suspend it immediately.
The Defense Department is encouraging soldiers to use absentee ballots or fax votes directly to local officials, when possible. But it also provides an alternative: Omega Technologies, a private contractor, will accept soldiers' faxed and e-mailed ballots on a toll-free line, and then send them to the appropriate local elections office. Handling ballots is always sensitive, but especially so when, as in this program, they are not secret. An obvious concern is that votes for a particular candidate could be reported lost in transit, or altered.
Omega Technologies is not an acceptable choice to run the program. Its chief executive, Patricia Williams, has donated $6,600 in this election cycle to the National Republican Congressional Committee, and serves on the committee's Business Advisory Council. And while everything about the conduct of elections should be open to public scrutiny, Omega is far too secretive. In an interview, Ms. Williams refused to say who would handle military votes, and whether they could engage in partisan politics. "I will not allow the public to invade the privacy of the employees of Omega," she said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/03/opinion/03fri2.html
|
|
|
|
| Q5echo |
the concern for manipulation is valid i suppose but artcles spin is completely unfounded and paranoid IMO.
the military has introduced new streamlined and varied means of voting for its servicemembers. in addition to that they have given them more oppurtunities for the many different duty sations that exist all over the world that don't have certain infastuctures that might not support the regular absentee ballot methods. they include regular absentee, special absentee, Email, faxed ballot (described) and write in absentee. the military presents and encourages all these methods to the service member and doesn't care which one you do as long as you do one of them. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
the concern for manipulation is valid i suppose but artcles spin is completely unfounded and paranoid IMO.
the military has introduced new streamlined and varied means of voting for its servicemembers. in addition to that they have given them more oppurtunities for the many different duty sations that exist all over the world that don't have certain infastuctures that might not support the regular absentee ballot methods. they include regular absentee, special absentee, Email, faxed ballot (described) and write in absentee. the military presents and encourages all these methods to the service member and doesn't care which one you do as long as you do one of them. |
I agree that there's a little spin within the article, though I believe the major theme of the article is troubling. Our votes need to be held secret at all times, and this lends to some very real possible holes in that concept.
I dunno, with all the bruhaha goin' around with missing ballots, the glitches arising with the new touch screens, and the steadfast refusal of those companies like Diebold to produce paper voter verifications (even though their ATM machines easily do so), we really need to be more diligent in maintaining our votes being held in the upmost confidential level. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
i don't understand the big deal of this 'problem' of a secret ballot as the op-ed member mentions.
Even if the ballot is secret, one can see if it says "Kerry" or "Bush" and throughout which ever one he is partial too - infact it is easier to do so, because the ballots are secret and you never know who voted for who...:rolleyes: |
|
|
| D-res |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
i don't understand the big deal of this 'problem' of a secret ballot as the op-ed member mentions.
Even if the ballot is secret, one can see if it says "Kerry" or "Bush" and throughout which ever one he is partial too - infact it is easier to do so, because the ballots are secret and you never know who voted for who...:rolleyes: |
i agree completely....:disbelief |
|
|
| jrbuddha |
If they need to use this method its their own fault. Its not like the election is announced one day and you have a week to vote. They know the election is coming so the military member needs to have his request for absentee ballot out in time.
Its good they have a system like this set up, although i do see the flaws in it. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
yea, but there are flaws in every electorial process.
This op-ed seems to discrinate against the process the military choses, probably in hopes of having the military not vote - most likely for his own political beliefs and reasons.
That would be one of the biggest disenfranchisements in all time, but hye if the military votes republican there must be a way to stop them from voting.:conf: :rolleyes: |
|
|
|
|
