
California voters to get mail-in ballots for 2020 election - hhs
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-california/california-voters-to-get-mail-in-ballots-for-2020-election-governor-idUSKBN22K2T3
======
Xavdidtheshadow
This is important not only for the Presidential election (which is mostly a
foregone thing anyway), but is a big boon to all the down-ballot races. Folks
will have time to research other choices at home.

More than that, main-in ballots go a long way towards reducing voter
disenfranchisement. No need to wait in long lines (way easier if you've got a
job that allows that!) or take time off work on a Tuesday.

Honestly, there's no good excuse for all states not following suit.

~~~
holler
> Folks will have time to research other choices at home.

How does this have any relationship whatsoever to the way in which the vote is
cast?

People can already research to their hearts content without mail-in-voting.

~~~
fossuser
Assuming you're asking in good faith it's a lot easier with mail in voting
because when you get the ballot you can see all the names and search each
category before choosing.

It's easier than also having to find out what is on the ballot, searching, and
then remembering each person when you go.

I usually spend a couple hours at home voting and searching before sending the
mail in, something that would be a lot harder to do effectively if I had to go
in person.

~~~
holler
I understand what you're saying, but why not just mail people the ballot
information ahead of time without actually casting votes? Let them pencil it
in and bring it with them?

~~~
phailhaus
If you're already mailing people the ballot information, what do you gain by
asking them to then come in person to the polling station? It's an objectively
simpler user experience. You're asking a lot of people to research ahead of
time, make their decision, save that decision for election day, and then make
time in their busy workday to go wait in line to vote.

------
stereolambda
Just yesterday a plan for a mail-in election was scrapped in Poland. It was an
extremely rushed thing (the voting was to happen this Sunday), but from what I
understand, the plan was to at least have designated mailboxes. This would
allow to somewhat track what happens with the ballots. A giant post service's
delivery operation was stopped at the last moment. I haven't seen the concerns
about secrecy of voting, and voting for other people in your house, properly
addressed. Now the ruling party promises work on "better regulations" before
the actual presidential election.

I'm really curious how Americans will handle all this.

Generally, I'm very skeptical about all cute ideas that complicate voting and
may introduce doubts about its legitimacy. The whole point of a vote is that
the elected people have a strong title to whatever prerogatives they have.

~~~
fossuser
California has had mail in voting for years.

This is just extending it to everyone by default.

~~~
stereolambda
This (partial mail-in voting) also has been available in many European
countries, but you had to qualify e.g. with a physical disability. I think
when there is fewer of such votes, it can be easier to ensure that they are
legitimate and pay attention to the procedures. You know to expect only a few
of them, for example.

I've also heard about postal voting in Britain producing many problems when
there were wider experiments with it[1].

[1]
[https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/apr/05/politics.localgov...](https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/apr/05/politics.localgovernment)

~~~
jlmorton
Well, California had 8.5 million mail-in ballots in the last national
election, 65% of the total. Mail-in voting in California was available to
everyone even before this, not just to people meeting special criteria.

This just makes it the default.

~~~
stereolambda
I was interested about the source, and apparently you can check these numbers
here[1]. I don't say that this solves the problems for me, but an interesting
statistic nonetheless. Seems like another example of American politics being
very different.

[1] [https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/historical-
absentee/](https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/historical-absentee/)

~~~
atomi
It's California in this case but not every state allows this. Some states, for
example, will make you wait in long lines in the middle of a global pandemic
just to vote.

------
leotravis10
This is a important step, assuming if the US Postal Service doesn't get gutted
before it happens.

A major RNC donor is poised to become the next Postmaster General of the USPS
and it's part of the current administration's plan to surely gut/privatize the
USPS and suppress mail-in votes. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-
republican-fundra...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-republican-
fundraiser-and-trump-ally-to-be-named-postmaster-general-giving-president-new-
influence-over-postal-service-officials-
say/2020/05/06/25cde93c-8fd4-11ea-8df0-ee33c3f5b0d6_story.html)

~~~
hadtodoit
HN is about one step away from becoming reddit with this type of baseless
speculation. There is no indication this administration wants to suppress
votes, the president has explicitly said he wants to institute voter ID's to
protect the security of our elections, but you're going to take the word of a
WP reporter who've perverted every statement he has ever made? The opposition
is suspiciously against voter ID by the way.

~~~
sundaeofshock
Donald Trump is a pathological liar; I am skeptical of every word that comes
out of his mouth.

He has also come out against mail-in voting since he feels it will destroy GOP
chances at the ballot box. So yes, I do believe Trump is more concerned about
voter suppression then election security.

[https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/trump-says-gop-
would-n...](https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/trump-says-gop-would-never-
win-again-if-democrats-voting-provisions-made-it-into-stimulus-bill/)

------
tree3
California already has mail-in ballots, FYI. All this order does is send them
to all registered voters instead of just those who requested a mail-in ballot.

------
wbronitsky
This thread has two or three very vocal, antagonistic and ignorant actors
using lazy rhetorical tactics to agitate, deflect and confuse what is a very
straightforward topic: mail in voter fraud doesn’t exist and aggressive
attempts to say it does are a part of a large, discriminatory and frankly old
set of tactics of voter intimidation. These posters offer no evidence of the
fraud they are FUDing up because there is none.

------
nodesocket
We can just pencil in a California Biden win now.

~~~
winstonewert
Perhaps, but we already could.

------
tgafpc2
Until Team Trump starts recruiting 'thousands of volunteers' to assist voters.

------
holler
Yikes. How are they determining if a resident moved away from CA? What about
if they're dead? What about if they're voting for another relative, friend, or
neighbor that isn't paying attention?

It seems that without voter ID, this is destined for fraud.

~~~
birken
When you mail in your ballot you sign it, and the signature is checked to
verify it is yours. If you vote for your friend or neighbor, then you need to
steal their ballot and forge their signature. You also need them to not notice
that they didn't get a ballot and not report it missing/stolen. The rest of
the questions apply equally to in-person voting, which are all figured out.

Voter fraud also almost never happens because the person committing the fraud
is taking enormous risk for literally zero gain. People aren't stupid. Most
people don't even vote anyways, why are they going to go to all this effort to
commit fraud.

~~~
nodesocket
> signature is checked to verify it is yours

Are you sure? That doesn’t seem right. How are they verifying it?

~~~
birken
With voter ID, how do poll workers verify the person on the ID is you?

The answer is the same. They look at it. This isn't rocket science.

~~~
Alupis
A government issued ID complete with matching home address and picture is a
LOT more difficult to fake than just some scribbling on a piece of paper. Even
better - swiping the card and running the data on the magstrip on the back and
comparing to what the government has on that ID is almost impossible to forge.

Who didn't forge their parent's signature in grade school once in a while?
It's trivial to fake signatures - particularly since most people aren't
trained Graphologists.

Heck, my local grocery store requires me to swipe my government issued ID just
to prove my age to buy some beer... they scan your government issued ID to get
into some bars and clubs even... but we won't allow that at the voting booth?

~~~
triceratops
> Who didn't forge their parent's signature in grade school once in a while?

True. But a malicious actor would need to forge hundreds or thousands of
signatures convincingly. And firstly get their hands on the signature
database.

~~~
Alupis
Or just make up signatures that have the person's name in them.

I highly, highly doubt and am very skeptical of this supposed signature
database and how well it can verify a person's signature. It just sounds like
hocus pocus to me.

~~~
triceratops
> I highly, highly doubt and am very skeptical of this supposed signature
> database

Why? California DMV has your signature on file when you get a driver's
license.

> how well it can verify a person's signature.

I think people do that, not software.

~~~
Alupis
> California DMV has your signature on file when you get a driver's license.

They make you sign on a small digital screen that barely registers your pen
movements. The one on my license looks like a 3 year old drew some scribbles
on it. It definitely doesn't resemble my pen-and-paper signature and I can't
be alone in that.

> I think people do that, not software.

How can they get through 15-30 million ballots in anything resembling a timely
manner? This entire thing sounds made up it's so absurd.

