20 total posts
3 hours plus driving time
and it was worth every minute just to have the experience. I consider the early voting opportunity as a gift and nothing to gripe about. Poll tax indeed. That's a reach, IMO. Folks will complain about anything and everything. I'll bet there are people that, if you offered them a free Oreo cookie, they'd complain that it wasn't as good as a Sunshine Hydrox.
Those people would be correct.
They'd also be ungrateful.
On the other hand, there are people who do not have 3 hours. It could cost them there jobs, or a loss of income so that they could not afford food. Not a formal poll tax, per se, put a penalty to those with dire constraints on their time.
Then what would you propose?
Maybe they could leave their ballots on the porch for someone to pick up? There's always election day and the crowds would be much bigger if these alternatives were not allowed. No, not everyone can take advantage of them but those who do will make it slightly better for those who desire to wait. As I understand it, employers are required by law to allow their employees time to vote so they cannot be fired. This, of course, will be tougher for the self employed as they might lose some income.
I'm sure if the interest in voting continues at this level and causes logistics problems on election day, the voters in states who are unhappy will complain. Governors, fearful for their own jobs, will get their people to fix it.
We can all agree that making sufficient
equipment available to ensure a reasonable wait time would be prudent.
Early voting is also a big help
We've been voting here in Texas since 10/20. There's talk now of a federal law requiring each state to provide early voting to anyone who wants to do that. Providing early voting with long enough hours to accommodate people's work schedules would be a big help. It also cuts down on wait times considerably since the voting is being spread out over a period of weeks (I waited around 25 minutes on 10/24).
Enough equipment for the average...
...50% to 60% voter turnout or equipment for a 100% turnout even though that has never happened here? This particular election season has seen an unusually high turnout. Should someone have paid a little more attention to their crystal ball and prepared for it?
The states are responsible to provide proper material for
elections. But, I'm of the mind that the voter has considerable responsibility too. Yes, there will be inconveniences to many. Some won't get that 2nd cup of coffee in the morning and some won't get to laze in front of the TV as much as they'd like that day. That's too bad. Voting is a privilege and voters need to put some effort into preparing themselves for and making it to the polls. Those who don't try...or try hard enough...don't get to gripe about the outcome.
Do they get to gripe if
they have to make the choice between standing in line for 5 hours or going to work for 5 hours so they have enough money to buy food the next day?
I'm sure we would all agree they have a legitimate gripe.
Ok, so maybe we should pay them to vote??
I think some think that's already been happening.
No. Just make it less of a dire choice.
Just how many millions of people are known to be
in this "dire" situation and what would you propose to handle it?
Or they could get in line 5 hours before work
Could give them free breakfast. But, the good news might be
the wait will probably discourage most folks from trying to go through the line more than once.
Their spouse can't watch the kids until
back from their 2nd job.
So, would you advocate a system....
that accommodates a 100% voter turnout regardless of the various excuses a voter could claim interferes with their ability to vote? Should the system be completely hassle free for everyone?
A national day off would be nice.
They do that in some EU countries.
Also, weekend voting.
But I don't know how they handle work situations like hospital, fire stations, police, etc., that must b e manned 24/7.
Didn't Presidential election day used to be a holiday?
I seem to remember that from my childhood. Maybe I'm wrong. Here's a brief explanation why it's on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, as opposed to the weekend:
That was interesting...makes us look a bit lazy too.
We worry about a few hours when others have needed days. Shame on us.
It does seem to be getting more complicated
I have to think, inevitably, a few will fall through the cracks. For some it will be their own doing and others not. We can always find the exceptional case and label them as being disenfranchised. What about those suddenly taken ill? etc. A lot has been done to accommodate every situation and still there is a cry for those that are missed. Overall, in my state, the job has been done quite well. One thing to keep in mind when there are so many voting options is that there are more opportunities to abuse the process. A national voting day would be the ideal but I don't think it's workable. Early voting is helpful but I don't think it good to stretch the time much between the opening and closing of elections. I'm waiting for the time when something happens closer to election day that might cause a significant number of early voters to wish they could reconsider what they'd done...some revelation about a candidate, etc. That will eventually happen. An awful lot of emphasis was placed on voting early by supporters of one of the candidates this year. That, alone, could raise suspicions that they were trying to lock in the vote before some cat got out of the bag. I'd think a one or two week period from opening to closing should be sufficient to get the great majority to the polls considering we've been doing it fairly well in only one day up until recently.