News Real Election Reform: Every Vote Counts

[LowlyPion]

The identical flaw exists in the paper ballot system. The state hires the counters, the state controls the ballot boxes after they're filled out...

Yes. But why make it so they can computerize an effort to defraud?

If they have to work harder at cheating, so much the better.

 

[Hurkyl]

Yes. But why make it so they can computerize an effort to defraud?

Obviously nobody is suggesting any voting scheme whose intent is to allow computerized fraud.

If they have to work harder at cheating, so much the better.

I'm going to assume you meant to say: "it is harder to cheat the paper ballot system". Would you care to offer any actual evidence of this, beyond computerphobia?

 

[turbo]

Yes. But why make it so they can computerize an effort to defraud?

If they have to work harder at cheating, so much the better.

Exactly! The nay-sayers equate voter fraud with election fraud, which is ridiculous. The effects of voters filing fraudulent ballots are minuscule compared to the highly leveraged effects that can come from hackers and political insiders perpetrating election fraud. Throw in voter intimidations (threats of arrests or loss of students' parents' tax deductions), voter caging (purging voters because their various public records don't match EXACTLY), and voter slowdowns/disenfranchisement (by simply understaffing and under-supplying polling places in minority neighborhoods), and it is quite apparent that election fraud is many orders of magnitude a larger problem than fraudulent voting. We have to quash the former, and guard against the latter.

Voting is a fundamental right of US citizens, and we should do everything in our power to make certain that everybody gets the opportunity to do so. Right now, the GOP is concentrating its efforts on preventing people from voting.

 

[russ_watters]

Oprah's recent experience voting with the touch screen. You just need to watch the last 45 seconds. I have had the same thing happen at self check outs at the grocery store and Home depot. I press finish and the damn thing just sits there doing nothing.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6603

Should we call it Faith based voting??

So she screwed up and the machine gave her a chance to correct her error. I'm not seeing a problem here.

Look, whether paper or electronic, no voting system can be completely idiot proof. But at least with a machine, you get a chance to correct your error. With most types of paper ballots, if you screw up, you'll never know it.

 

[turbo]

So she screwed up and the machine gave her a chance to correct her error. I'm not seeing a problem here.

People (especially the elderly, or people with visual impairments) may NOT have been able to detect the vote-flipping, and assumed the machine recorded the vote they made. That is a problem.

 

[russ_watters]

The most fundamental flaw and you refuse to face it.

The State provides the machines.

The State hires the programmers.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That's just paranoid, irrational conspiracy theory. And that's not including the logical flaw others pointed out about the ease of fraud in paper ballots.

 

[russ_watters]

Voting is a fundamental right of US citizens, and we should do everything in our power to make certain that everybody gets the opportunity to do so. Right now, the GOP is concentrating its efforts on preventing people from voting.

You are advocating a system that guarantees that a decent fraction of votes will not be counted and you accuse Republicans of not wanting to make sure everyone gets to vote? Jeez, that's rediculous.

 

[russ_watters]

People (especially the elderly, or people with visual impairments) may NOT have been able to detect the vote-flipping, and assumed the machine recorded the vote they made. That is a problem.

Clearly. Those same elderly may also not have punched out their chads correctly in Florida. Like I said, there is no way for a system to be completely idiot proof, but at least with electronic ballots you get a cross check before you leave the booth. With a paper ballot, you won't ever have any idea if you voted correctly.

 

[russ_watters]

Here's the problem with take-home paper ballots in living color:

A new statewide database of registered voters contains as many as 77,000 dead people on its rolls, and as many as 2,600 of them have cast votes from the grave, according to a Poughkeepsie Journal computer-assisted analysis.

One Bronx address was listed as the home for as many as 191 registered voters who had died.

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=137

 

[LowlyPion]

Here's the problem with take-home paper ballots in living color: http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=137

I'm not talking about take home ballots. I'm talking about voting places. In the precincts it's a bit harder to get the dead to come into vote.

 

[turbo]

You are advocating a system that guarantees that a decent fraction of votes will not be counted and you accuse Republicans of not wanting to make sure everyone gets to vote? Jeez, that's rediculous.

It is not ridiculous, Russ and you know it. The GOP is pushing "exact match" cross-checks on voters to slow down the lines and disenfranchise voters who might not have a middle initial in one database, but do have one in another. THAT is ridiculous, and it is happening. Voter caging lists to disenfranchise people whose homes have gone through foreclosure, Secretaries of State telling college kids that if they vote where they reside (college town) they will lose scholarship eligibility or their parents will no longer be able to claim them as dependents with the IRS, minority neighborhoods flooded with fliers claiming that if people have parking tickets or outstanding warrants, they will be arrested if they try to vote. Then there were fliers (presumably from the VA state government) claiming that to deal with the projected over-crowding at the polls, Republicans would vote on Nov. 4th and Democrats and Independents could vote on Nov. 5th. There is more, and if you pay attention to political sites, you know that voter suppression is real, and that it is almost exclusively done by the GOP.

No method of voting can guarantee that everybody will be allowed to cast a ballot, but we can make things better.

I ask you now to explain your claim that "You are advocating a system that guarantees that a decent fraction of votes will not be counted..." What the hell?

 

[Hurkyl]

Huh? What the heck does any of that rant have to do with the topic of this thread?

 

[Moonbear]

People (especially the elderly, or people with visual impairments) may NOT have been able to detect the vote-flipping, and assumed the machine recorded the vote they made. That is a problem.

I don't know what voting machines you've used, but here, the electronic machines DO have a paper record. You can watch it printing for every vote you make. If you change your vote, it prints the change. Just instead of using a mound of paper like paper ballots use, it records it all on a roll the size of adding machine tape. Much better than worrying about a punch card losing holes by rough handling...yes, I've voted with the punch ballots, and that was my worry. I knew I punched all the holes completely, checked and double checked that even, but that doesn't mean one of those chads couldn't get knocked out after I voted, without my knowledge, just by being jammed into a box with the other ballots, and invalidate my vote. I've also voted with those arrow ballots, and am not convinced they are a good idea either...they seemed very backward to me when I used them. It's the same fear as students have on multiple choice scantron style exams...if you change your vote, are you SURE you erased well enough for it to record the correct vote? They've also had issues with those and how well the arrows lined up with the candidates' names, where it became ambiguous which line went to which candidate. Old-fashioned doesn't mean error-proof. But, heck, I cut my voting teeth on those ancient voting booths with levers to flip and your vote isn't recorded until you pull the curtain handle...looked like something from the Wizard of Oz! Talk about not being sure if your vote counted! I think if you flipped too many levers by accident in one category (the ones where you could choose multiple people for local government offices, for example), it didn't count any, and you'd never know you did it.

I was actually happier with the touch screen polls than I expected to be when I finally got to use them. There are plenty of opportunities to go back and change your mind, check your votes, etc. And all the buttons were HUGE. Oh, and if you really are visually impaired and couldn't read those GIANT buttons on the screen, there were options to get a ballot with headphones to read the choices to you, or have someone assist you, so you could make selections even if you couldn't read the screen or push the buttons.

None of that really has anything to do with election reform though. That's technical details. I'm more concerned about the general process...electoral votes, funding, etc.

 

[turbo]

Huh? What the heck does any of that rant have to do with the topic of this thread?

Voting is a right that every citizen over 18 has. The GOP is doing its level best to deter voters in democratic districts, especially in battleground states. Part of reforming our electoral system is making these types of voter-disenfranchisement illegal, and prosecuting wrong-doers.

There are third-world countries with more secure and open elections than we have in the US. We deserve better.

 

[Moonbear]

Voting is a right that every citizen over 18 has. The GOP is doing its level best to deter voters in democratic districts, especially in battleground states. Part of reforming our electoral system is making these types of voter-disenfranchisement illegal, and prosecuting wrong-doers.

What about the early voting by now dead people? The Democratic blogs are BRAGGING about one case of that, where a woman on her death bed cast an early ballot...with the help of her daughter (they don't say how much help) and then died...so even though she is dead before election day, her vote is going to count this year? Sounds highly illegal to me!

 

[Hurkyl]

Voting is a right that every citizen over 18 has. The GOP is doing its level best to deter voters in democratic districts, especially in battleground states. Part of reforming our electoral system is making these types of voter-disenfranchisement illegal, and prosecuting wrong-doers.

What does any of this (true or not) have to do with the design of voting booths?

 

[turbo]

I don't know what voting machines you've used, but here, the electronic machines DO have a paper record.

There are a lot of states using voting machines that cannot and do not produce a paper record. That's got to change, and we've got to get to a simpler, verifiable method of voting country-wide. IMO, the method has to result in permanent records that can be reviewed after the fact.

 

[turbo]

What does any of this (true or not) have to do with the design of voting booths?

The design of voting booths? Where did you get that?

 

[LowlyPion]

What about the early voting by now dead people? The Democratic blogs are BRAGGING about one case of that, where a woman on her death bed cast an early ballot...with the help of her daughter (they don't say how much help) and then died...so even though she is dead before election day, her vote is going to count this year? Sounds highly illegal to me!

You're against letting a dying vote count?

You would then be in favor of holding aside the vote from all service people in Iraq and Afghanistan pending proof of their survival until election day?

 

[Hurkyl]

The design of voting booths? Where did you get that?

Three pages discussing the pros and cons of various mechanisms for casting, counting, and managing votes.

 

[Evo]

I think we need to define "election reform". It seems we have too many different ideas floating around.

 

[turbo]

You're against letting a dying vote count?

You would then be in favor of holding aside the vote from all service people in Iraq and Afghanistan pending proof of their survival until election day?

It's not just an idle question. I voted early via absentee ballot. What happens if I get hit by a truck tomorrow? Is my ballot invalidated?

I certainly don't advocate registering voters from cemeteries, but if early voting is allowed, and a registered person votes and subsequently dies, why should their vote be invalidated?

 

[Hurkyl]

I certainly don't advocate registering voters from cemeteries, but if early voting is allowed, and a registered person votes and subsequently dies, why should their vote be invalidated?

Similarly, why should their vote be valid?

 

[Moonbear]

You're against letting a dying vote count?

You would then be in favor of holding aside the vote from all service people in Iraq and Afghanistan pending proof of their survival until election day?

Yes and yes. Dead people should NOT be allowed to vote. I'm really against this whole early voting nonsense, because it just seems to favor abuse. National elections should all be on the same day. People are already abusing it, trying to sway elections by claiming there's already a leader. It's bad enough that elections on the west coast are influenced by earlier returns coming in on east coast voting; having a week or more of early voting while last minute details are still coming in on both parties is insane!

 

[Evo]

They aren't reporting who the early votes are for, to my knowledge. We will have to wait until after the election for that. Unless I have really missed something.

What I can't believe is that a national election, and how ballots are prepared and printed vary widely. How can we not have a single, uniform ballot?

 

[Moonbear]

They aren't reporting who the early votes are for, to my knowledge. We will have to wait until after the election for that. Unless I have really missed something.

Really? You haven't been getting the news of how far ahead Obama is already? It might just be exit polling...actually, I'm sure it must be...but that's not how it's being reported. The media is making it sound like Obama already has the election in the bag in several states. Maybe it's because I'm in a state unlikely to vote for Obama and they're trying to motivate McCain's supporters to the polls?

What I can't believe is that a national election, and how ballots are prepared and printed vary widely. How can we not have a single, uniform ballot?

Now, that aspect I can agree is an issue. While voting is a state's rights issues, it's unfortunate that it doesn't fall under the same category as other things that affect people across state lines to have some sort of uniform act to ensure everyone gets the same sort of ballot, especially if some are known to be more prone to errors than others.

 

[turbo]

They aren't reporting who the early votes are for, to my knowledge. We will have to wait until after the election for that. Unless I have really missed something.

What I can't believe is that a national election, and how ballots are prepared and printed vary widely. How can we not have a single, uniform ballot?

The early-vote projection is probably based on WHO is voting. In many districts, working-class black voters have taken advantage of early voting because they may not have hours to spare waiting in line on election day.

And you're right-on about the lack of a uniform national ballot. A ballot that is well-designed, simple, and unambiguous would have prevented all that "butterfly-ballot" crap in 2000 that gave Pat Buchanan thousands of votes from elderly Jews. In addition, challenges to the election results could be handled in a more uniform manner if the ballots were the same everywhere.

 

[Evo]

I don't listen to reports of who the media think people are voting for. Especially with Obama, we know how skewed the exit polls have been in the primaries. Like the article I posted said, Obama supporters are more enthusiastic and more likely to seek out the exit poll takers than someone voting for McCain, and that can really skew numbers.

 

[Moonbear]

I don't listen to reports of who the media think people are voting for. Especially with Obama, we know how skewed the exit polls have been in the primaries. Like the article I posted said, Obama supporters are more enthusiastic and more likely to seek out the exit poll takers than someone voting for McCain, and that can really skew numbers.

True, but it doesn't mean there aren't plenty of other people who ARE listening to it. I've found it hard to avoid, actually. Though, as I keep reminding people, if polls were accurate, John Kerry would have been president the last four years.

 

[Evo]

True, but it doesn't mean there aren't plenty of other people who ARE listening to it. I've found it hard to avoid, actually. Though, as I keep reminding people, if polls were accurate, John Kerry would have been president the last four years.

I wonder though, does saying Obama is ahead in the polls help or hurt Obama? I think it would hurt him by riling up McCain supporters to get out and vote and make someone that would have voted for Obama decide his vote isn't needed.