Precisely! I think electronic voting records are wrong. We should use paper ballots, and Counting them electronically with something simple and robust like Optical scan works really well. Let the statisticians run some Audits and we can be really confident. My state does that. Oregon.
Which, when you think about it, kinda presents a similar problem to public vote records. (People can be incentivized financially or coerced via threat to vote a certain way.)
So far, that has not been the experience in Oregon. First, doing that is a Felony with teeth.
Second, the system has a way for the voter to get around coersion. They can submit their vote, and fail to do a valid signature, or even just do it correctly.
Once they have voted, they can contact elections, have that vote invalidated, and or request another ballot to vote correctly. If they want to, they can do that in person, at the elections office, and or tell their story.
It's hard to coerce tons of people, which is needed to impact an election. And those who take part are all at real risk for hard time.
The actual is much different. People will gather to vote together. Our family does this, and will often have open door times. Young people have come to do it and learn about stuff. People tend to take it seriously. The votes differ, and that's OK. Democracy. (and the ones in the minority can totally gloat, should it turn out they made the right call. All good.)
So, we get the voter guides out, make sure people understand, and they, themselves cast their votes, whatever those votes are, we seal them all up and either mail, or take them to the drop box, or elections office.
Most people I know take a while to vote. They have the ballot, and work through it as they have time.
