Bill would require paper receipts for electronic voting terminals

[pinkpops]

On Sen Boxer's bill -
http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/story/7935394p-8872738c.html


"This is totally unreasonable," said Mischelle Townsend, registrar of voters for Riverside County, one of the largest counties in the United States to rely on touch-screens. Adding printers to 4,250 machines would cost at least $2 million, Townsend said, and the county would spend $600,000 each year on paper and printing.

So Mischelle Townsend thinks it is "reasonable" for voters to have to dump their votes into a black hole? What is unreasonable is that people who know so little about the subject are spending public money in the first place.

[Virgil]

1. Maybe they should shop at Walmart

"the county would spend $600,000 each year on paper and printing."

It sounds like they should shop at Wal-Mart instead of the graft-laden suppliers that would quote that price. Paper isn't but about $1 a pound and they could use dot-matrix printers. The person that said this is a fool or a paid stooge that is ignoring the arguement that there should not only be any fraud, there should be no reason for the appearance of a fraud. You get a receipt for bubblegum at the grocery store. We should have receipts for our votes. It is not hard to understand, and the PTB are upset at having a hard time obfuscating this simplicity.

[Cleita]

10. Riverside County is very Repuke.

It's a basic accounting procedures to have a source document and for it to be recorded by a double entry method. This way mistakes can be found and cheating discouraged. There is not a single supermarket chain, department store chain or bank that would record their money transactions as the touch screen voting machines record our votes. Even Diebold ATMs produce receipts and a journal tape. Do you think they are fools? These election officials should be investigated if they object.

Either they need a course in basic accounting to see the error of their ways, or they need to be removed from the job.

[1971]

2. THE question: What price Democracy?

People have given up their lives for American Democracy.
$2 million is a pittance when compared to that.
Besides, how many residents in California, Ms Townsend? $2 million divided by the number of citizens equals a bargain if you ask me.
I've heard it said before here on DU: why aren't the voting machine companies jumping at the chance to bill their customers for voting machine printers? Could it be because they don't want to eliminate fraud in the ballot booth? Some third world nations have better election procedures than the US. That is unconscionable.

[ithacan]

11. Dictatorship would be much cheaper!!!

Just think of the millions and millions that would be saved by just cancelling all elections!!!

These people are unbelievable.

[HFishbine]

3. Receipts or Paper Ballots?

A receipt, you take with you. You deposit a paper ballot in a locked ballot box to serve as an auditable record should their be questions about the machine results.

[1971]

5. They don't have the lingo down, but

they do understand the concept. It would be instructive to the public if they'd make it clear that it is a voter verified paper ballot, and how it will be implemented.

[PaDUer]

17. Goes to show you

the intellect of who's running things and anything can be pulled over them even a call to dump those ballots in the trash because of whatever...

[madfloridian]

4. I thought the printers were built in the machines.

Just needed to be activated? Maybe I am not well-informed?

[Andy_Stephenson]

6. 4,250 thermal printers $1,423.750

recurring costs $55,00017
installing drivers $265,625
17 cases thermal paper $5,865


protecting the integrity of the vote...Priceless

[glitch]

7. Bravo Senator Boxer! in combo with Russ Holt

And by 11/04 too. I bet it doesn't pass, but it will be interesting to see who votes against it. Well, not that interesting. But it will be interesting to see if any dems vote against it.

Better late than never!

[rasputin1952]

8. I know this is redundant.....

but if EVERY machine Diebold makes has a paper trail, from ATM' to grocery registers, WHY ARE THEY FIGHTING THIS?

The American people will pay to ensure that their ballots are counted correctly; this will NOT happen because Diebold, (or the others) say we can trust them.

If Banks, retail stores, and everybody else that deals in cash/credit cards doesn't trust these people(tell me who DOESN"T give you a receipt)?; WHY THE HELL SHOULD VOTERS?

Terminate the contracts, demand the money spent returned to the Treasury, and let's go back to punchcards/levers!

These people suck, and what they are attempting to do, borders on treason!

:grr:

edited: spelling

[pinkpops]

9. Why are they fighting this?

Good question.
Stubborn?
crooked?
To many people, having paper indicates that the new machines offer no particular advantage. I mean, we started with paper ballots, and here we are with paper again, except we spent all this money for computers.

[JohnGideon]

12. What Keeps Getting Lost

is that Diebold and Sequoia have made deals with other counties and states to provide the printers for free if/when they are required. This cost issue is another red-herring to scare the voters and tax payers. It's important to get that word out to your legislators and officials.

[GreenPartyVoter]

13. It's not just the paper trail, though that is indeed important

We really do need to look inside the machines' codes for accountability purposes.

[Eric J in MN]

18. HR 2239 says the software code needs to be public

"(i) No voting system shall at any time contain or use undisclosed software. Any voting system containing or using software shall disclose the source code of that software to the Commission, and the Commission shall make that source code available for inspection upon request to any citizen."

[Cleita]

14. Senator Barbara Boxer is the best.

I would rather see her run for first woman President instead of Hillary Clinton.

[Eric J in MN]

15. Why do we need 2 bills in the Senate? Sen. Bob Graham has

Why do we need 2 bills in the Senate? Senator Bob Graham has already referred S1980, a Senate version of Rep. Rush Holt's HR2239, to committee.

Will Boxer's bill do something better than Holt's?

Why doesn't Boxer just cosponsor S1980?

[Cleita]

16. Probably because many Californians have been

writing Senator Boxer about our concerns. Graham isn't one of our senators. Maybe if you look at both bills, there might be obvious differences or omissions and Barbara could be covering what her constituents want.

[ldf]

19. i think the bill should go even farther...

as i sent in emails to both my senators, clinton and schumer,

stating that,

with all the information coming out about the possibility of fraud and foul play with the electronic voting machines, a bill should be proposed that unequivocally states that ANY PERSON involved IN ANY WAY in the misrepresentation of the will of the voter, whether someone one of power issuing the directive, or the worker implementing the directive, should be charged with treason, with punishment up to and including capital punishment.

it may be higher ups that come up with the idea, but the computer software programers, and the inside people handling the voting results, are the ones that have to make it work. they need to be extremely afraid to do the dirty work for the bosses.

like it would happen, but a few emails suggesting such can't hurt.