To the editor: California can completely make voting each simpler and sooner — however with a much less convoluted strategy than columnist Mark Z. Barabak suggests (“California can have both easy voting and quicker election results. Here’s how,” March 22).
First, set a transparent, agency customary: All mail-in ballots have to be obtained by election day. No grey areas, no prolonged uncertainty. Voters who wait till the final minute can nonetheless take part — by dropping off their ballots in individual at designated polling websites on election day. That preserves entry whereas restoring well timed outcomes.
Second, strengthen confidence and pace by encouraging in-person voting with voter ID. Verifying id on the level of voting eliminates the gradual, error-prone technique of signature matching after the very fact. The consequence: ballots validated immediately, counts finalized sooner and better public belief within the consequence.
Effectivity and integrity aren’t competing objectives. With easy guidelines like these, California can — and will — ship each.
Brian Suckow, Palo Alto
..
To the editor: A simple repair presents itself to alleviate the vast majority of our voting returns woes: Take away the restrictions on early launch of voting outcomes accompanied with adequate notification that these usually are not official outcomes. Sure, we should test each final signature, however we shouldn’t be compelled to attend as much as a month to know outcomes. Save the lengthy waits for the tight races; the vast majority of outcomes are shortly obvious.
John C. Nelson, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: James Rainey’s article concerning the mess within the gubernatorial race recommends ranked-choice voting as a approach out (“Rank choice voting could have saved Democrats from their governor’s race mess,” March 20). The system described is definitely instant-runoff voting, the worst of a number of ranked-choice alternate options. It throws votes away, elevating grave constitutional issues.
By the character of its algorithm, it fails to seek out the bulk winner and infrequently results in paradoxical outcomes. Furthermore, by requiring centralized tallying, it tremendously slows the vote-counting course of. Partial (e.g. precinct) counts do nothing however mislead voters and candidates as to the doubtless consequence.
In distinction, Condorcet voting, aka immediate round-robin, pairs candidates face to face and finds the candidate who defeats all others. It’s additionally a lot less complicated and may be achieved by hand if obligatory or most popular.
Karen A. Wyle, Bloomington, Ind.
