Everyone must verify their identity via biometrics before casting a paper ballot. No electronic tabulators, period. For those in the military, their base of operations can support the proper equipment. For those living abroad, they can go to the United States embassy or consulate after requesting an appointment online. For those with medical issues preventing in person voting, an in-home/care facility appointment can be made with a doctor’s approval. Biometric signatures can be recorded at the next federal elections with two valid IDs proving US citizenship and two proof of current address documents. To accommodate the surge of in-person voting, voting should be open every day 2-4 weeks before election day. Also, a federal budget should be allocated to the states to encoruage more poll workers via transportation, meals, stipend, etc. No ballot received after polls close on election day will be counted, period. Therefore, an international/military/medical deadline will need to be earlier, 1-2 weeks before election day. For deadlines of tabulation, all votes for federal office must be reported within 24 hours. All recounts/challenges must be made within 24 hours after that, with final recounts done within 72 hours after polls close and adjudication of all legal challenges finished within two weeks (with strict exceptions). Florida’s model for vote tabulation should be encouraged but not imposed on states. This is the only way for the candidates, operators and public to be fully confident in the integrity of our elections.
I am actually proposing legislation in 100% opposition to this. The violations we saw under Pres. Obama (who set the foundations) and Pres. Biden (COVID policies, persecution of J6ers, and hundreds of other lawfare cases, including President Trump) is a strong reminder that you don’t want to be at the mercy of an anti-citizen government. We don’t want any kind of version of the vaccine passport or the Chinese Social Credit System - which has already made inroads in the U.S. and needs to be stopped.
Obama’s building of the 1 million + (1 million +!!) sq ft Utah Data Center (UDC), also known as the Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative Data Center in 2012 - leaves every American’s privacy violated. Actually every person foreign or national on US soil violated.
One of the most import policies to me that I will propose is that biometic ID be 100% voluntary forever more, with EASY and EQUAL alternatives (no penalty, offering the same services for which the ID is required) if a person does not wish to engage. At the moment, for example, in Colo, without a biometric ID you can not receive unemployment. And you can not get a guard card in Denver, required for many to work. So in both cases you are out money and livelihood if you do not comply to a biometric ID.
You are welcome to a biometric ID if that is your desire. Please, just do not impose that on your fellow citizens.
These are valid concerns @LibertyLisa. I simply don’t see how one avoids them in the future unless one wants to live off-grid as a hermit. Massive facial recognition is coming whether we like it or not. We need photographs to gain and renew fundamental IDs such as passports and driver’s licenses. Handing over these IDs to vote is essentially an outdated form of biometric identification and is more susceptible to fraud. So I say if we are heading in that direction we might as well make the most of it by making our elections as secure as possible. If you are to stop and reverse this transition you will need to go to the lengths that Theodore Kaczynski proposed, since the core issue is far deeper than government policy.
@SerpentineAwakening What would be your thoughts on utilizing block-chain authentication of the ballot? While I agree authentication of the voter is needed, a less drastic previous step could be authentication of the ballot. This idea is to prevent fraudulent printing and casting of ballots and allow for tracing of the official ballot through the entire process (printing, shipping, storage, distribution, deployment, casting, tallying, etc.)
I’ve contemplated this @TCreighton, and I have ended up with more questions than answers. Is it a government agency that develops this chain or the private sector? Does one need a code, a physical key and/or biometric data to access their ballot? If the ballot is actually filled out and tabulated on the Blockchain, how would there be access to an audit without breaching the very privacy it was meant to uphold? While quantum computing may bring another dimension into this that reveals a no-brainer solution, I think the age old paper ballot and hand count is not only the most reliable system we have but arguably more important perceived as the most reliable system we have. It’s just a question of how the individual voter gains access to this system. And I believe in-person (or in rare exceptions with an authorized agent) is the most secure, trusted and proven method while biometric signatures is the most convenient and secure gate of access.
We absolutely need integrity, transparency and fairness in elections.
How do you propose this biometric data be handled? If one has to provide biometric data to vote, how would that data confirmation work? Something like a signature verification??? Oh, so then, the only way to have this ‘biometric service’ would be to store it non-locally, like in some ‘cloud’???
Anything cloud stored is hackable. The idea that there is ANY security of cloud based data is simply ludicrous. History already shows us this.
Collecting bio-metric data to provide election integrity and security is not necessary. Not to mention the fact, the war over gathering biometric data from the world population is at an all time HIGH - we don’t need to make it easy for the Medical Industrial Complex to rule the world!
I know some may find my comments a massive jump from the topic, but data privacy is KEY to actual liberty.
I don’t think your comments are a jump at all, @MelanieWise. And your concerns about data security are incredibly important given this is a fundamental constitutional right we’re discussing. That’s why I’d have a system like our phones, where the biometric data is stored locally. The difference is the scanners I propose wouldn’t have any ability to access the internet. All data, including biometrics, biographical, proof of citizenship and residence would only be stored on a central device (also unable to connect to the internet) unique for each polling locations and every scanner would be connected to it via wired LAN network. Any software update would require a full backup to an identical device beforehand and stored for record keeping. If one changes polling locations, they will have to undergo the registration process there. How to update voting rolls to remove duplicate ballots? A report on updated ballots can offloaded via external drive every evening after registration closes (no biometric data or even proof of citizenship and residence, simple unique biographic data that is publically available). This would then be uploaded to the relevant municipal, county and statewide database, much like our current system. Except this would all be done via delivered external drives, not over the internet. The morning before polls open the data set would then be uploaded via external drive back into the central node, removing all datasets not on the updated list. So if a person casted multiple ballots on the same day, that would be flagged since the system would show two votes for the same biographical data set when uploaded to the central system. And if they tried to vote multiple days the next polling station would have their information wiped, and if they did try to reregister there they’d be flagged with the updated voting cast list. Now can these devices storing information be hacked locally? Could there be shenanigans switching out external drives? Yes. No system that we know of can be both full-proof secure and completely anonymous. But the system I have in mind would not upload biometric nor proof of citizenship and residence onto the Internet, not in any form whatsoever. Fingerprint and especially facial data is stored all over the internet, with and without our knowledge. One can be judicious in keeping fingerprint data to oneself but facial data one would need to live like a hermit in order to prevent that. By hermit I mean one would not be able to obtain proper ID to vote, travel outside the country, drive an automobile, etc.
I am not looking to do anything more than validate the authenticity of the ballot with the block-chain. I am not looking to associate the voter with it, although that could be done if associated at the time the ballot and the voter are brought together. When the ballot and voter are united, the ballot can be “activated” without collecting any voter biometrics. This would keep unused ballots from becoming potential fraudulent votes.
The Florida Lottery system, I believe, authenticates and activates tickets nearly on demand. If someone were to steal tickets not activated at retail, they are useless. Even if activated and stolen, the stolen ticket can be determined voided.
I suggest the same security with ballots. This would not be intrusive to the voter and would further ensure accuracy and security of the voting process.
I think some more needs to be added to your idea.for election and voting integrity.
To safeguard the integrity of federal elections and restore public trust in the electoral process, I propose the following decisive actions, to be implemented on January 20, 2025:
Eliminate Electronic Voting Machines : As an expert in cybersecurity, I can attest to the vulnerabilities inherent in current electronic voting systems. Voting machines, particularly those used in federal elections, are susceptible to hacking, tampering, and other forms of cyber manipulation. I strongly recommend the complete elimination of electronic voting machines at the federal level. Instead, implement a secure, paper-based voting system. Each paper ballot should feature a watermark and be tied to blockchain technology to ensure verifiable, tamper-proof authentication. Encouraging states and local jurisdictions to adopt similar practices will further bolster national election security.
Strict ID Requirements for Federal Elections : Implement mandatory, federally recognized identification for all voters in federal elections. This ID must be verified at the time of registration and again at the polling station to prevent voter fraud and ensure that only eligible U.S. citizens participate. To facilitate this, create a secure, national voter ID system that complies with privacy standards while ensuring every eligible citizen has access to the proper identification.
Absentee Voting Restrictions : Limit absentee voting to only military personnel and U.S. citizens with disabilities, ensuring that their ballots are handled securely with the highest level of scrutiny. Absentee ballots should be verified with a secure ID system, and the process must include strict chain-of-custody measures to prevent tampering or fraudulent activities.
Ban Mail-In Voting for the General Population : Stop the widespread use of mail-in voting, which has introduced significant vulnerabilities into the electoral process. The expansion of mail-in voting has made it easier for fraudulent activities to occur, from vote harvesting to ballot tampering. Eliminating mail-in ballots for the general population ensures greater control over the integrity of the process. Voting should take place in person with strict verification measures, except for military and disabled citizens who qualify for absentee voting.
Voting Transparency and Accountability : Implement new standards of transparency for federal elections. These measures should include public audits of all ballots, with independent oversight to ensure that election results are free from any interference. Publish all election audits and results in a transparent, secure federal database that allows U.S. citizens to verify the integrity of the election process without compromising voter privacy.
End the Use of Corporate and Special Interest Money in Elections : To restore true democracy, end the influence of corporate lobbyists, PACs, and special interest groups in federal elections. Cap individual contributions to $2,000 per person and limit campaign spending on advertisements across media, including television, print, and social media. This will ensure that elections are focused on candidates’ ideas and qualifications rather than their financial backing, creating a more level playing field for all candidates.
Election Security Oversight : Establish a national, bipartisan election security task force to oversee the security of the election process at both federal and state levels. This task force would have the authority to conduct security assessments of election infrastructure, investigate potential breaches, and recommend legal and procedural reforms to ensure future elections are free from foreign or domestic interference.
Paper Ballots for Recounts : Require that all recounts in federal elections be conducted using paper ballots. The physical ballots should be stored securely for a period of no less than five years, allowing for transparency and review if recounts or election disputes arise. A secure chain of custody for these ballots must be maintained, with independent auditors ensuring the integrity of the recount process.
Campaign Finance and Media Influence : Impose strict limits on the cost of advertising for political candidates. Enforce rules that regulate the amount candidates can spend on television, print, and digital advertising. Additionally, monitor the involvement of internet influencers and content creators to ensure they are not disproportionately swaying election outcomes through paid endorsements or unregulated promotion.
Term Limits and Candidate Qualifications : Impose term limits on all federally elected officials to ensure fresh leadership and prevent the entrenchment of career politicians. Candidates for federal office must also pass a high-level security clearance, pay all government obligations on time, and demonstrate a deep understanding of U.S. history and the Constitution through mandatory testing. These measures ensure that those in leadership are fit to represent the nation and act in its best interest.
Ah okay I see your point @TCreighton. I think that’d mostly be applicable to some kind of ballot drop off/mail in. If someone records their biometrics in person, whether first time registering then voting or simply voting, we could tabulate the amount of check ins compared to ballots counted. And if there is a discrepancy, it could then be narrowed down to the polling location without actually knowing which ballot belonged to whom (assuming all ballots casted were randomized in terms of order after polls close and before tabulation). If you were to activate a ballot with a Blockchain code, I imagine there would be some way, even if ridiculously complicated, time-consuming, theoretical, etc. to trace that ballot back to the voter. Blockchain might actually be as if not more secure than paper ballots (I’m skeptical, but there’s a reasonable argument to be made), but I highly doubt the public would PERCEIVE that system as being more secure because voting machines already have a nasty stigma to them and much of the public will not be able to significantly differentiate between the two to the point of full confidence.
@vm204 is that a canned response you’re spamming unique proposals with 
@SerpentineAwakening, There are several things in your reply that I find troubling, but I will start with - Handing over these (photographic) IDs to vote is essentially an outdated form of biometric identification.
My answer: Not in the least.
What I am trying to avoid: As of Jan 2024 there were 70,882 surveillance cameras in NYC; now, 10 months later, there are sure to be more. When I give you a photo ID, I am not scanned and recognized by the more than 537,000 cameras monitoring city populations of 48.9 million people, giving an average ratio of 11 cameras per 1,000 people in US cities.
You have my biometric ID, and you know each and every camera I walk by.
Talk about a violation of privacy. (There are many who have come to believe Ted Kaczynski was prescient in his predictions, albeit wrong in his actions.)
CCTV surveillance in the most populated cities in the United States
What I find troubling in your response is your general acceptance that “Massive facial recognition is coming whether we like it or not.”
Again, I say, Absolutely not.
It is here, yes, but by no means does it need to stay here. If it is in the rest of the world it does not mean it needs to stay in the United States.
By this reckoning, the Red Wave we just experienced would have never happened last week. It DID happen b.c millions upon millions of Americans refused to believe we were defeated and that the New World Order, the Democrats, the elites who lie ad nauseam are here “whether we like it or not.”
We are never done/down/overcome until we give up.
Also true here. Biometric ID is not a subject to be given up. Keeping it at bay is way too vital to the essentiality of being human.
How often are we Americans the first? Most often. We get rid of it here, other countries will follow, just like the contagions we have started in the past.
Lead by example, my friend. Lead by example. It’s what won Trump the presidency.
@LibertyLisa When you go to renew your driver’s license, passport and any other photographic ID, a picture of your face is taken and it is uploaded to the internet, government and/or private servers. That updated photo is enough information for facial recognition to identify you in the vast majority of instances. If you don’t want ID to vote, that’s one thing. But if you want ID to vote then you are feeding this system, whether you intend to or not. I am not a fan of cameras everywhere and Ted was a genius when it came to human nature in my opinion. All I’m saying is adding biometric verification isn’t adding much more into the system than photo IDs in the grand scheme of things. That’s why I brought up Ted in the first place: if you’re that concerned about it then you better dig much deeper than biometric vs plastic/paper IDs, or any voting regulation for that matter.