Voting: Could the system be any more stuffed?

[balthazarr]

Just got back from voting in the council elections. Apart from the fact I think compulsory voting is ridiculous... I wanted to rant about the incredible inefficiency and the huge potential for errors in our current system...

:
Last election, I received a letter from the Electoral Commission asking me to please explain (in a stat dec) why I didn't vote.

The election before that, I received a letter asking me to explain why I had committed fraud, and voted three times. :

I wrote back to them advising that I did vote - both times only once, and if their system wasn't flawed, they would know that.

Eg:
* They require NO ID when crossing you off the roll, so anyone can say they are anyone else.
* The typeface used on the roll books is tiny, and it's very easy for them to rule a line through the wrong name (the person above or below your name).
* You have to vote in your local area, otherwise fill out a special form and put in an 'absentee' vote, etc.

These problems can all be solved easily and simply... the roll is already computerised, just stick a couple of computers there - they ask for your id, put in your name and suburb, tick a box and it's done. Most polling places are schools, so there are already computers in place.

That would also allow you to vote at any polling booth, because they don't have phonebook-sized roll books, but a central database. Not to mention saving bucket loads of paper/ink/money in printing costs alone (which we as taxpayers all pay for).

I understand the concerns on electronic voting - just look at Diebold in the US for example - but surely nobody can object to an electronic roll?

[deathlucky]

this is why i don't vote i never enrolled as far as the gov knows i live 300km away in nsw.

here comes the flaming. oh and i will complain about the gov if i don't like them because i didnt vote for them. i can see this thread being shut down real quick these sort of ones always do

[Bucknaked]

Originally Posted by deathlucky

this is why i don't vote i never enrolled as far as the gov knows i live 300km away in nsw.

When I was 18 and attending TAFE, our teacher told us it was compulsory to enroll. So I enrolled to vote. Found out later that it's not compulsory to enroll, only compulsory to vote once your enrolled. I hate that teacher.

[FGII-XR6]

it is compulsory to enrol, the AEC send people door to door before federal elections to check enrolments and you can be fined for failing to enrol ( but the rarely do it the just give you a form to get enroled)

Originally Posted by TXR

When I was 18 and attending TAFE, our teacher told us it was compulsory to enroll. So I enrolled to vote. Found out later that it's not compulsory to enroll, only compulsory to vote once your enrolled. I hate that teacher.

[Yellow_Festiva]

The fact we are still using pencil and paper is beyond me.

We use secure online facilities to move hundreds of thousands of dollars without blinking an eye, yet need to line up, talk to a person sitting behind a folding table who then opens a folder and looks for your name...

Then there are all those disposable cardboard booths, as well as all the people needed to 'help you' with your vote...

What a waste, and what a joke.

Oh... and 'voting' is not compulsory... lining up to get your name ticked off is..

[FordACE]

I totally agree with the op and Yellow Festiva. We have the facilities, technology and security systems online to undertake banking yet we still persist with paper and pen for voting. It's the biggest joke ever. With all the paper and printing funds they waste, this money could easily be spent on designing and implementing an online voting system. I cannot see any reason against it, apart from the elderly not knowing how to use an online system. But they can easily have someone assist them as they currently do anyway.

[balthazarr]

Originally Posted by FordACE

I totally agree with the op and Yellow Festiva. We have the facilities, technology and security systems online to undertake banking yet we still persist with paper and pen for voting. It's the biggest joke ever. With all the paper and printing funds they waste, this money could easily be spent on designing and implementing an online voting system. I cannot see any reason against it, apart from the elderly not knowing how to use an online system. But they can easily have someone assist them as they currently do anyway.

I think they should implement the same system they have in France (I think)...
There, you can register your intent to vote online... the EC then sends you a one-use password that you use to log in with on the day, proving you voted, and ensuring you can only vote once.

[Daymoe]

I wish it was like America where you don't have to vote. Or at least was online.

[RJO89]

To all of us, and probably the entire population, that makes sense. But there would be a huuuuuge amount of work that would have to go into a system like that, especially if they do it for the national voting. Plus, you then have to factor in people that don't have internet access, albeit not a large percentage of the population, but there are still people that don't have it.

[balthazarr]

Originally Posted by RJO89

To all of us, and probably the entire population, that makes sense. But there would be a huuuuuge amount of work that would have to go into a system like that, especially if they do it for the national voting. Plus, you then have to factor in people that don't have internet access, albeit not a large percentage of the population, but there are still people that don't have it.

That's why online voting is only applicable to those that register for it... if you don't register, you vote in the usual way.

But 'the usual way' should still be modernised... at the very least the roll should be electronic, and they should require photo ID.

[FordACE]

Originally Posted by balthazarr

That's why online voting is only applicable to those that register for it... if you don't register, you vote in the usual way.

But 'the usual way' should still be modernised... at the very least the roll should be electronic, and they should require photo ID.

100% spot on. Why are they not making the effort? You can do your tax online, how hard can it be to vote online or electronically.

[Ducati888]

Whilst compulory voting can't be seen as being democratic, the US voluntary system is very flawed. It's OK to be apathetic about the country you live in and the people controlling it - just turn up and get your name ticked off then go home.

The US system, on the other hand, allows you to just stay home. That means that only the nutbag groups who attend mass organisations (the blind followers) and who get told how to vote go en masse and vote, and the non aligned, non nutbag, regular individuals (the unwashed masses) who don't vote because they are too busy, too apathetic or it's just raining and they don't want to go outside - don't wind up getting as well represented.

Ever noticed the bias toward religious nutbag groups, ce and gun toting groups in the US polls? They are all nutbags but vote en masse as a unified group. That is how you skew reality and how you suppress the stupid fools who just 'can't be bothered'.

It's imperative that doesn't happen here - we are just as dumb, but if everyone votes, then the nutbag groups can't get over-represented.

[fangq]

Originally Posted by Ducati888

Whilst compulory voting can't be seen as being democratic, the US voluntary system is very flawed. It's OK to be apathetic about the country you live in and the people controlling it - just turn up and get your name ticked off then go home.

The US system, on the other hand, allows you to just stay home. That means that only the nutbag groups who attend mass organisations (the blind followers) and who get told how to vote go en masse and vote, and the non aligned, non nutbag, regular individuals (the unwashed masses) who don't vote because they are too busy, too apathetic or it's just raining and they don't want to go outside - don't wind up getting as well represented.

Ever noticed the bias toward religious nutbag groups, ce and gun toting groups in the US polls? They are all nutbags but vote en masse as a unified group. That is how you skew reality and how you suppress the stupid fools who just 'can't be bothered'.

It's imperative that doesn't happen here - we are just as dumb, but if everyone votes, then the nutbag groups can't get over-represented.

One of the problems that I have with compulsory voting is that the political parties have very sophisticated polling/statistical sytems that allow them to quantify safe/marginal seats.

This often leads to the chasing of marginal seats with pork barreling and often down right stupid policies.

cheers
Steve

[balthazarr]

Originally Posted by fangq

One of the problems that I have with compulsory voting is that the political parties have very sophisticated polling/statistical sytems that allow them to quantify safe/marginal seats.

This often leads to the chasing of marginal seats with pork barreling and often down right stupid policies.

cheers
Steve

Even though I am against compulsory voting, I can see some benefits. I disagree with your analysis...

Without compulsory voting, not only do the pollies have to convince you to vote for them, they have to convince you to vote, period.

It's hard to convince people of anything with a moderate stance.

Of course, the far-right nutjobs and far-left loonies, will vote in droves - so policies tend to be skewed towards the far right/left.

[Spanrz]

Hahaha.
I go through this every time I vote. I am an Aussie (born and bred), wife is a Yank. They methodology that my wife goes under, is that she is still an American Citizen (Aus resident), however she "wanted" to vote in this years US elections, but when it comes to signing to the Aus way of life, I get the "I don't want to be forced to vote / fined for not voting".

As I have said to her many times, you aren't forced to vote, simply get your name ticked off. You can vote informal if you wish (or fake a ballot vote).

But, she is half a world away and wants to vote in the US elections, however the country she is in, her ideals that she won't sign to Aus way of life simply is "not being forced to vote".

How do you gauge how a country is run (simply the biggest job on the planet as some say), where 20%-50% of the voting population actuall cast a valid vote.
I mean, some areas of smaller populations, a whole state had 6,000 voters, 3,00 for this party, 3,000 for that party.
In a state where there is a few million voters, come on......(pre-selection)

Never the twain shall meet......:

[Force6]

I say keep the inefficient pencil and paper voting, because each election I get paid ~$400 to sit around marking names off!

[SB076]

Originally Posted by Force6

I say keep the inefficient pencil and paper voting, because each election I get paid ~$400 to sit around marking names off!

So your responsible for marking balthazarr name off three times

Obviously from the replies in this thread there are flaws in the system, therefore it needs to be rectified and I cant see why we cant vote over the internet. Think of the lost productivity, or loss of time that could have been spent enjoying life rather than standing in a queue having everyone give you a how to vote card, then throwing them all out and finally ticking or numbering some boxes

[LTDHO]

The vote by mail is worse, as they now know who votes for who, no longer private.

[Daymoe]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

The vote by mail is worse, as they now know who votes for who, no longer private.

Thats not so bad, it means you can now accept bribes to vote for someone, and they can check it. Everyone wins, you get money and they get votes .

[mik]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

The vote by mail is worse, as they now know who votes for who, no longer private.

yeah melb north was postal, i wonder if who voted for who will be going in their database?

[FGII-XR6]

to those who say they don't vote you have no right to complain about what happens if you are too lazy or ignorant to vote.
in the us there is no compulsory voting and a president can be elected by 10 or 15% of the population if there is a poor voter turnout . thats hardly a democratic decision

[deathlucky]

Originally Posted by au3xr6

to those who say they don't vote you have no right to complain about what happens if you are too lazy or ignorant to vote.

we have every right to complain we don't vote because there isn't a party worth voting for they will all screw you in the end the only people who don't have a right to complain are the ones that voted for that party

[StookEB]

I know everyone is entitled to there own oppinion but I find some of the arguments above quite pathetic.

If you DONT vote you CANT complain about anything politically. I'll never understand why some citizens never register, dont you like Australia???

ALSO the cost to convert to a computerised system would be huge. The public will then complain why this money was wasted and not spent on something like public infastructure.

Some people need to stop complaining about the government and realise how good we have it here in Australia!!!

[IDT]

Originally Posted by EArulz

I know everyone is entitled to there own oppinion but I find some of the arguments above quite pathetic.

If you DONT vote you CANT complain about anything politically. I'll never understand why some citizens never register, dont you like Australia???

ALSO the cost to convert to a computerised system would be huge. The public will then complain why this money was wasted and not spent on something like public infastructure.

Some people need to stop complaining about the government and realise how good we have it here in Australia!!!

Well said,

As for voting online??? is there a reliable carrier in this country that could guarantee all servers are up and running on Poll Day? As ironic as it sounds, what are the levels of computer literacy in the voting population, most of our employees at work openly admit that they couldn't switch on a computer and you want them to vote on one? Can those who still failed to vote say "oh sorry my PC broke that day".

For those who don't vote and don't want your vote to count, I find it strange that you would then want an opinion on most topics in this forum from P Plater laws to Eco legislation.

[balthazarr]

Originally Posted by EArulz

I know everyone is entitled to there own oppinion but I find some of the arguments above quite pathetic.

If you DONT vote you CANT complain about anything politically. I'll never understand why some citizens never register, dont you like Australia???

ALSO the cost to convert to a computerised system would be huge. The public will then complain why this money was wasted and not spent on something like public infastructure.

How would the cost to convert be huge when it's already computerised? Anyone can go into their local AEC office and search the roll - on a computer.

Some people need to stop complaining about the government and realise how good we have it here in Australia!!!

'All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.'
Yes, we generally have it good. But in certain respects, we are lagging behind the rest of the developed world... if people don't complain and politicise certain issues, nothing will ever improve or, worse, will deteriorate.

[troppo]

Originally Posted by EArulz

I know everyone is entitled to there own oppinion but I find some of the arguments above quite pathetic.

If you DONT vote you CANT complain about anything politically. I'll never understand why some citizens never register, dont you like Australia???

ALSO the cost to convert to a computerised system would be huge. The public will then complain why this money was wasted and not spent on something like public infastructure.

Some people need to stop complaining about the government and realise how good we have it here in Australia!!!

I think that is a rather simplistic view of a complex problem.

People who don't vote have just as much right as anyone else to have an an opinion or view on any given issue...the problem starts when neither party shares your view. Sure, you can vote for the greenies or an independant, BUT since we have a two party preferred system, what happens is your so-called 'valuable' vote is sold to the highest bidder in a preference deal, thus rendering your view worthless. Is it fair then, that one should be forced to cast a vote while knowing it will eventually support the opposing view? I consider abstinance both a form of protest and a means of retaining some small degree of integrity, in that no matter which team of clowns gets in, I didn't help put them there.

As for dollars, I would prefer to see the money spent on overhauling the system rather than spent (wasted) on political advertising in the lead up to an election. I'd imagine one election free of advertising would save more than enough to update the system.

While we don't have it too bad in Australia, it's far from good. The system itself is the major problem. The way the two party system works is that whichever party gains the most seats on a national scale gets the nod. This means any party which does not field a candidate in every electorate is already at a major disadvantage and nigh on impossible for them to win Federal Govt. The chances of an independant getting the job of PM are significantly slimmer again. Indeed, the only way this outcome would be possible would be if every electorate in the country decided to boycott the parties and vote in independants in every electorate...a fanciful notion and possible on paper but the reality is very different.

Then there is the nature of politics, a game which appears to attract only the most unscrupulous of the bottom feeders. Even thieves have too much honour to get into politics. Any potential MP with a scrap of integrity is soon weeded out by those already in the system in order to maintain the status quo. Pollies know they have the best job in the world...what other job allows you to behave like a 5yo with ADD and tourettes AND get paid large sums of money for doing so...and they will go quite a long way to protect that vested interest. Anyone who even looks like rocking the boat soon finds themselves out on their ear a'la Pauline Hanson. She was an idiot, but she shook the place up and got crucified for it.

Sadly, the only way I can see to fix the problem is a complete overhaul of the system itself and sacking every existing politician and replacing them with people with scruples....about as likely as an independant getting the job of PM.

[xtremerus]

Originally Posted by troppo

I think that is a rather simplistic view of a complex problem.

People who don't vote have just as much right as anyone else to have an an opinion or view on any given issue...the problem starts when neither party shares your view. Sure, you can vote for the greenies or an independant, BUT since we have a two party preferred system, what happens is your so-called 'valuable' vote is sold to the highest bidder in a preference deal, thus rendering your view worthless. Is it fair then, that one should be forced to cast a vote while knowing it will eventually support the opposing view? I consider abstinance both a form of protest and a means of retaining some small degree of integrity, in that no matter which team of clowns gets in, I didn't help put them there.

Your vote is only "sold to the highest bidder in a preference deal, thus rendering your view worthless", if you let them. In the Senate 'tablecloth' ballot paper if you cross a party above the line, it is accepted that you go along with their preference deal. Apparently most [95%?] do it this way.
Take the time and vote below the line, and it goes the way you what it to go. With compulsory voting this will always happen, as some voters just go through the motions to get their name crossed off, and the political parties play their silly games.
I always vote below the line on the Senate 'tablecloth'

[troppo]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

Your vote is only "sold to the highest bidder in a preference deal, thus rendering your view worthless", if you let them. In the Senate 'tablecloth' ballot paper if you cross a party above the line, it is accepted that you go along with their preference deal. Apparently most [95%?] do it this way.
Take the time and vote below the line, and it goes the way you what it to go. With compulsory voting this will always happen, as some voters just go through the motions to get their name crossed off, and the political parties play their silly games.
I always vote below the line on the Senate 'tablecloth'

While that is true, the end result is almost the same. The two party preferred system means the nominee with the least amount of votes is eliminated each round until only two remain. Generally, those two are the ALP and Liberals (because most voters are sheep), so even if you put them as the last two in order of preference, the odds are better than average that one will still get your vote.

[FGII-XR6]

this is true only for those too stupid to allocate their own preferences a preference deal in the house of reps is only the order they appear in the how to vote ticket. if you allocate the way you want to the preference deal is short circuited

Originally Posted by xtremerus

Your vote is only "sold to the highest bidder in a preference deal, thus rendering your view worthless",

[TadKa]

Electronic voting would ruin Election night. Rather than sitting around getting drunk watching Ray Martin describe how with 2% of the votes counted it's a bit too early to tell. It would just be 6pm polls close 6.01 the new prime minister is... that would suck.
Or is that just me?